Let's see your newest acquisitions!

Just won this guy on eBay. I love the golden color of the obv (assuming it isn't the lighting that caused the coloring) and the subtle blue and purple above the Monticello on the rev. Won it for 3.95 + 1.99 for shipping.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I must be the slowest typist in the world. I see you've read my mind. What's at issue here is a simple 2-dimensional design problem: not enough "negative space" and the coins float in isolation; too much negative space and they feel cluttered or claustrophobic. It's the same principle for laying out items in a magazine spread, or paintings in a gallery, or windows on a wall...

 

I just traded for this:

 

Although this probably isn't what was initially intended to be posted in this thread, here's some seldom-seen numismatic literature I was able to grab for half of what it's truly worth...

It only took 10 months, but I finally found the 3rd Ed, and for nothing less than a bargain! Now I can quit headin' to the shop each time I need to attribute (which is quite often, I might add)! :hail:

I'm kind of curious to see if there's any difference in photo-quality from the 3rd to the 4th Ed... I've heard a mix of opinions!



Just try to find this book (especially w/ the original dust cover)! Just try! :yes:

-Brian

 

Oval_man, I took your advice and made a 2nd version with the coins a bit larger. My gut reaction is I like the larger subject images, but I think I need a bit more blackspace.

 

I'll probably be the only one who thinks so, but I still like the original layout as opposed the the new one. To my eye the new one just looks crowded.

 

I don't think it looks more crowded, but I like the older one. The older shows off more details and I like details. Unless of course, my coin get graded details, then I don't.

 

I think you're asking yourself the right questions and that a "split the difference" goal is a good one to have. The problem you're facing is that, while black is a nice complement to the copper color, it's also very powerful, particularly on the computer screen (as opposed to a painted or printed surface). I like version #3 and might go between that and #1 (as you're already thinking); in any case, I might add a bit more space on the margins (as with a book page) than between each pair of coin images. This will give the eye a place to rest (which is why book pages have margins!) and allow you to the keep the coin pairs a bit more closely spaced.

 

Oval_Man, I tried a white background and it was a tiny bit stark, but very clean looking. Then I tried a cream background, and I think this is closing in on perfection. The lighter backgrounds do have the advantage of being less wasteful of ink when printing. Funny that when I was building the lighter versions they reminded me of those fancy white acrylic Capital brand holders that were heavily used in the 1960's and 1970's.

 

Is this the newest acquisitions thread or WingedLiberty's personal thread?

 

I was going to suggest you try backing off the black a bit to a 90-95% gray, but thought you were sold on it! On the other hand, the white background looks like no-man's-land (on the screen). You might have a few versions: several for online, one for printing, etc. As you probably know, neutrals will work best. And your Capital holder reference is funny!

I'm guilty also of abetting your thread-hogging.

Squeezing in one final thought: if you wanted to get serious, you might try photographing (or looking online for) neutral surfaces (such as linen for a light tone, slate for dark, etc.) to serve as a background for your coins. This is commonly used in graphic design to avoid the very kinds of "blankness" one gets with simple screen colors and tones.

 

I have to say I agree with Robec on this. The second set seems a little busy I enjoyed the first set you did. I did like the white one with the exception it was very bright lol but it made your coins pop out which I enjoyed. I think you should find a different background other than the normal black or white. Make it your WL and let's start a new thread with this to follow your project.

 

PR-70UCam
all silver Roosevelt Dimes are MS+ Proof Silver are 1 of the most over looked US minted coins
plus it was below $25.00 with S/H :thumb:

 

It has been WL's personal thread for several weeks/months.

 

Jello - nice PF70!

 

The last two raw Lincoln's from my last submission. I was surprised both were graded with the RD designation. A little spottier than I hoped for, but for the price they are well worth it.

The first 1961 is PR65RD and the second is PR66RD.

 

Bob, love the newps. Those '61s come in about every shade possible! I can't believe how many of them have toned in a pleasing way! :hail:

 

My most recent purchase (just purchased it today)... Hadn't broke into the 1700's today... great looking coin.. great price.. couldn't resist.

 

Looks like a Tom Deck coin. I ordered a couple from him today also. Nice pickup.

 

Thanks Mark! I love Tom's site... very informative.... very well photographed coins, and the prices seem very reasonable. I have bought quite a few coins from him. He is a great guy! Would recommend his site to ANY copper collector!.
This 1798 puts me at a total of 17 Large coppers.... love them!