Which Images do You like Better?

I like the top set best. The reverse on the 2nd set has too much reflection.

What's interesting is the 2nd set obverse really does not flatter the coin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You have a point; I was not contemplating how dense physics-fan's camera sensor was. The pixel pitch of a T3i means it's diffraction-limited at f/6.8 so the magnification for a Morgan (for instance) of 0.42x means your effective aperture at a set f/5.6 would be f/7.95, into diffraction for this sensor. Doesn't mean you should back off the aperture and stack shots; it just means you want to tread carefully and look at 100% crops in this setting range. Many lenses are enough sharper at f/8 than f/4 to offset any loss from diffraction.

And don't forget, we're talking about the last 5% of quality here. With an 18MP dSLR, you're radically downsizing images to post online, which adds apparent sharpness to the image as well. Look at the diffraction limit as a caution, not a hard stop.

 

Same here. It doesn't have the wear on the high points that an AU coin has but the roughness is highly distracting. There are many AU coins with more eye appeal.

 

Oh, yeah. Grade.

I see plain signs of circulation, moreso the nicks I consider unexplainable by Mint handling than obvious wear. After they leave the vicinity of the press, new coins have no chance to contact anything sharper than each other in a bag. When the small, sharp nicks add up, one must consider how they came to be. And consider: every day, many of us end up with coins from circulation which would very likely grade Mint State if submitted. A coin does not show wear the instant it's handled; no reason one can't last months in circulation (depending on how often it's handled) without showing too little wear to depict even in images of this quality.

AU58.

 

First set of images is better, except for the scuffy slab not being prepped for the photo. Second set is too contrasty and there is a lot of detail lost in the shadows. Shoot at an effective aperture that's at or near the peak performance for the lens. If you're at 1/800 second at ISO 400, set the ISO for 100 and the shutter will still be plenty fast at 1/200 sec.

Since it's your coin (I assume), 58PL?

 

@SuperDave , your absolutely correct. I'm one of those pixel peepers and go for perfection, even if others will never see. it. But your right about it being the last 5% of quality.

Are you the SsuperDdave over at coin community?

 

I prefer the top set as the contrast is more tolerable. I think it may grade MS63. These are tiny coins and enlarged to this extent makes tiny marks look like meteor craters. Very informative thread with a lot of interesting input from photographers. thanks!

 

Personally I'd grade it 58. But when the op said it wasn't au I made my pick.

 

No one else for bottom? k.

 

As excellent as your work already is, imagine its' quality if you were shooting a camera with EFSC.

I'm convinced that sensor size is in the process of making magnification near-irrelevant for coin imaging. 5000 vertical pixels is common on sensors now - you have one - and when factoring "monitor magnification" 1:1 on such a sensor is enough for all but the most minute details, certainly enough for date doubling and the like. Add the advantages of shooting RAW for postprocessing, and 2x optical begins seeming irrelevant.

And yes, I'm that SuperDave.

 

Top set - easy. Grade not so easy - MS for sure, but the pictures make the hits look worse than they might be. So I will swag a 64.

 

Oof, grade? maybe AU-68?

 

Yes it would be nice to have EFSC. Nikon included that on the D810, which was a bit out of my price range at $3000.00. For now I can get by with the D800E using mirror up and delayed exposure.

 

I like the top
even though it looks like she has a zit
i would say MS 64

 

Wow, really wasn't expecting the top set to dominate quite as heavily as it did. @robec did the bottom set years ago, and I thought they were great! I honestly expected this to be a bit closer.

As for the coin, NGC graded it 64PL. In hand, it is all there and fully deserves the grade (and the PL!). Since everyone is thinking AU (and only one person guessed PL), I guess I'm going to have to re-try this coin...

 

What are you seeing in the pictures that makes you think it is AU? I am biased because 1.) it is my coin, and 2.) I have it in hand and can clearly see it.

 

Me it was the contact marks especially on the cheek and what looked like just a touch of rub on the hair curls and the top of wings. A 58 if it was au tho looks like lots of luster

 

I circled in yellow (faintly, so as not to distract from the coin much) the areas where I thought there could have been friction that warranted 58 rather than 63, which was my MS guess. In green, however, is where I expected to see additional friction where there was none. These areas don't really show up in the second image, but I attributed that to the high contrast.