I posted this a few months ago, but I really rushed the images. Here are some of what I hope are better photogs.........the issue is known to be 'mushy' on some strikes
Nice !! I have one of these and love the design. A totally different Liberty Obverse, and Philly Reverse. I just saw one that had this really dark purple toning around the edge. icky.
That might be one where I would use only one small (or somewhat distant) light to shoot it. It looks like two lights will fill in whatever shadows there might be on the low-relief design.
How true is the color to in-hand? Does it have exactly that shade, or is the color off a bit? I'll tell you why I ask after you respond.
In that case, that is an absolutely stunning example of what original gold should look like. For those who may be reading this thread but are unfamiliar with what I'm talking about: this is what we refer to as "green gold." You see it fairly often with Southern gold (especially Dahlonega, but sometimes Charlotte), less commonly on other mint's coinage. Basically, this coin is an alloy of primarily gold, copper, and silver. The gold content is tightly regulated, but the remainder can vary somewhat more. When there is a bit more copper than silver, you tend to get orangey or reddish surfaces. (An intentionally higher copper percentage gives pink or rose gold, such as the breast cancer awareness commem posted in another thread.). When there is a bit less copper and a bit more silver, you sometimes get this greenish hue. The silver and copper will tend to tone, whereas the gold doesn't - so the primary alloy will usually dominate the patina. When you see this greenish color, especially when combined with the very minor orange copper spots as seen on this coin, it attests to the fact that this coin is completely original. This is a very attractive coin, and a great example of the uncommon "green gold" look.
We didn't get anything here in Charleston, not even leaves in my yard. Everything was in Myrtle Beach and north of there, starting about a 2 hour drive north from here.
If memory serves me there is only two AF Nikkor 105 macros, both 2.8: your version and the earlier D, but thanks for clarifying. Did you stop it down for the new photos, and if so, what aperture did you use?
Hmmm.... I more often use ISO 400, f/5.6, and something in the range of 1/400 - 1/600s I find that too much light is just as much of a problem sometimes as not enough light.