Agree with the above. 5
[IMG] [IMG] [IMG] [IMG]
@ddddd I'm fine with whatever you want to do. I will chime in whenever I can or see that I can contribute something.
1999 Australia $2 [IMG]
Stunning coins. That MS66 last one posted if a head above the other 2. Congrats! I'm sure these will end up in a strong registry set.
My toning score on the 1708 Queen Anne shilling is a 3. @ddddd you may bring on the next poster. :cool:
Agree - the toning looks to be caused by applied heat. I don't think that coin would pass muster at a TPG.
It looks to be white metal or pewter from those images.
OK Paul: www.lenscrafters.com
Lol. Petulant.
I purchased this coin early 2016. My pics are below, and you can see the original slab photos from Heritage at this link. [IMG]
Ray, I was in no way judging your photos. I was making a general statement about the danger of axial-style images. In my opinion, you have done...
That Jeff Nickel is a 4 for me. @ddddd I have another ready to go if no one is up next. Let me know.
[IMG] [IMG]
That MS61 Morgan is at a 2 for me. It is just way too beat up - the rough surfaces detract from any toning.
No gaskets blown. I just try to be thorough and clear in what I write.
Ray, what do you mean by "pseudo-axial"? I know you are very exact in your description of photography methods (which I much appreciate) - but...
How the hell did you come to that conclusion? I said the images were AXIALLY LIT - that's a method of coin photography. I didn't say they aren't...
I didn’t say the images were juiced. I said they were axial and this massively exaggerates the colors. The images can definitely come out of the...
Those images are axially lit - and thus over-exaggerate the toning. My first thoughts were AT (artificially toned), but the toning on proofs...
Separate names with a comma.
