Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;EyeEatWheaties, post: 1163168, member: 26972&quot;]This is a favorite subject for me. I hope that some coin image standards are soon accepted or practiced or suggested .&nbsp; As DSLR&#039;s come down in price and files get larger, computers get faster.&nbsp; we will see more threads like this one.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Please keep in mind that I am a newbie collector, but I learn super fast and question things that don&#039;t make sense to me.&nbsp; <b>This post will entirely be my opinion and should be valued at what you are paying for it.&nbsp;&nbsp; or a grain of salt, something to think about, or the gospel. take your choice <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />&nbsp; </b></p><p><br /></p><p>BTW-&nbsp; first!&nbsp;&nbsp; I am stoked that you are shooting from your computer!&nbsp; Yes!&nbsp; That is awesome!</p><p><br /></p><p>Okay for sake of discussion/clarity, lets stay in the MS 63-68 category without including color for now..&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>IMO Imaging/portrayal of a Certified coin should be directly tied to the grade.&nbsp; In other words.....&nbsp; Numerical Grades are determined by: Nicks and dings, luster, strike strength and the overall opinion of eye appeal.</p><p><br /></p><p>I found this on the popular easy to read aboutcoins.com website</p><p><br /></p><p><b>(MS-63)</b>&nbsp; - Uncirculated, but with contact marks and nicks, slightly impaired luster, overall basically appealing appearance. Strike is average to weak.</p><p><b>(MS-65)</b>&nbsp; - Uncirculated with strong luster, very few contact marks, excellent eye appeal. Strike is above average.</p><p><b>(MS-68)</b>&nbsp; - Uncirculated with perfect luster, no visible contact marks to the naked eye, exceptional eye appeal. Strike is sharp and attractive.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The problem presents itself when each of those grading criteria are not weighted equally.&nbsp;&nbsp; However as you get higher in the MS scale, certain characteristics, again IMO!&nbsp; should stand out.</p><p><br /></p><p>Let me put it this way.&nbsp; A MS66 and up coin is highly lusterous in hand. To shoot a lusterous coin in diffused/muted/matte portrayal is an insult to the coin!&nbsp; lol. Harshly, I feel it misrepresents one of the main attributes that gave the coin it&#039;s grade. </p><p><br /></p><p>Shooting diffused also tends to hide nicks and dings.&nbsp;&nbsp; On the other hand, heavily contrasted images shot with direct single/dual lighting will grossly exaggerate nicks and dings and may not be pleasant to look at 20x+ on a monitor.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now with that said,&nbsp; the artistry of what the image is to be used for is going to be/should be considered.&nbsp; How does the owner of the coin want others to see the coin?&nbsp; IMO&nbsp; finding a balance of the main 4 grading criteria. marks, luster, details and eye appeal is the ideal image for MS coins.</p><p><br /></p><p>In the OP&#039;s image....&nbsp;&nbsp; The coin should have &quot;hot spots&quot; IMO&nbsp; the coin is reflective in hand, is it not?&nbsp;&nbsp; Contrast,&nbsp; the image is excellent however it to me again, seems lifeless for a 66, nothing jumps at me on first glance.&nbsp; High grade coins are obvious in hand.&nbsp; Shoot in a way that makes your images of high grade coins attention getting!?</p><p><br /></p><p>Iekgwin - has been posting some gorgeous images lately here on CT.&nbsp; He scales his images down from their original size and there is nothing wrong with that at all!&nbsp; He knows that many will interpret the high resolution image unfairly.&nbsp; errrrrr..&nbsp; off on a tangent..... resolution is a separate subject.</p><p><br /></p><p>Okay.&nbsp; Lastly.&nbsp; These big Auction house p me off!&nbsp;&nbsp; They have the wherefore all to shoot coins exactly the same way each time. they can white balance.&nbsp; OR&nbsp; do they know this and purposely post high resolution images that are more artsy than technically correct?</p><p><br /></p><p>If I see one more 67RD copper coin that looks to have a modern satin finish on it I am going to scream!&nbsp; <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie11" alt=":rolleyes:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />&nbsp; lol&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I have posted this a couple times - it is also in more detail on the front page in a thread by lehigh ( i miss his posts btw) </p><p><br /></p><p>I think Heritage images look nicer, but mine are much more accurate even though the the contrast (shadowing) is exaggerated from the use of direct lighting.&nbsp; I wanted to capture the luster of this 67RD coin first.</p><p><br /></p><p>Heritage:</p><p><img src="http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z242/papasteeze/Coins/f417030c.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Mine:</p><p><img src="http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z242/papasteeze/Coins/fb7bf3a5.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><b>Direct and blunt comments/counterpoints etc (or support)&nbsp; about my above opinions are encouraged!</b>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in