Grade opinion? (1935 Walker)

Tell me about your lighting... I'm guessing you used some flourescent lighting in the first set (maybe mixed with halogen or incandescent), but no flourescent in the second set.

Second set of pics look great !

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

i agree, AU. nice walker!

 

Wow - what a difference. But those second set of pictures make the coin look really nice - nice coin! What did you do with the lighting?

 

Slider--AU58.

 

I agree AU-choice.

 

Pictures sure are important when trying to judge a coin when not in hand huh??

The differance in the 2 sets is amazing


I'll call it a nice slider

 

I agree with most of what has been stated - Id say AU53.

 

First photo was natural lighting. I had the coin on a table near a south facing window. The sun is still very low in the sky here in Alaska, so it wasn't direct sunlight. The camera is pointing straight down at the table and I angled the coin a little toward the window to get better lighting.

The second one is artificial lighting. I used a table lamp with a 3-way incandescent bulb on it's lowest setting, I think it was 30 watts. I arranged it so the bulb was pretty high up, maybe 18-24 inches above the coin. The camera was pointing straight down again. This time I angled the coin more so it was directly reflecting the light into the lens. Direct light, no filter.

I think that last part was key (aiming the reflection directly into the lens). I say that because I spent the previous 2 days playing with table lamps and trying to use different materials to tame the harsh light, but never aimed the reflection directly into the lens. The photos were all horrible. Worse than the first ones here.

I'm not good at photography and never have been. I've never been able to get the hang of lighting or composition. I guess I just don't have the art gene.