Which photos do you like?

#1

_____________________________________________________________________

#2

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Gotta go with 1 myself. Shows some of the black toning better.

 

#1 seems like it shows the surface better.

 

I've gotta go with #1. I can see the coins are the same date and mintmark but the second photo makes it look like a different coin. #2 looks a wee bit more worn than #1. The toning shows better in the first photo and that is improving the details of the coin.

 

I gotta agree with the others, Pic 1 looks best to me. The details of the coin are easier to make out.

 

Top photos were taken with a camera, bottom photos were taken with a scanner....

 

It is the same coin. Top is great!

 

Now that you mention it the bottom pics do seem kinda washed out like other scanner pics I have seen

 

Alan , a tough choice but I agree with the others #1 .

 

Qualitatively similar. I think - as is the case with most circulated silver - the scanner pics are fairer to what you'd actually "see" in hand. I put "see" in quotes because you probably don't look at coins in-hand with lighting identical to how you image them, and your mind and previous knowledge of grading the issue are "postprocessing" somewhat for you.

 

?? So which do you like the better? Did you vote? Which is the better photo from a photographers point of view?

 

#1

 

@coinzip

I think you're all wrong! I like #3 the best.

Chris

 

#1

 

#2 looks like it's been dipped to long.

 

@TJ1952 IMO, mostly due to lighting (?) and equipment used. One member who knows lots about photography has yet to let us know which he likes better. Perhaps, he has not "postprocessed" both images yet.

 

That's an artifact of the structure and process of a scanner. They employ a line-form light passing over the subject - the whole width of the scanner surface is covered by a single "bulb" passing over the surface to be scanned, and the resulting image is not a point in time but a compsite of what amounts to a timelapse exposure where every aspect of the subject is only shown in its' optimally-lighted state. That "optimal" is defined by the scanning software, which is why two different scanners of similar resolution specs can return entirely different results when (mis-employed) used to scan something like a coin which covers only a small percentage of the scanned surface. They're more detail-accurate than most photographic images as a result, but not necessarily accurate for the subjective evaluation of surface since they're the equivalent of a planned, staged photo shoot.

 

I think number 1 is the clear winner.

 

Yes, I should have been more explicit. That's what I meant. The picture looks washed out, not actually dipped. Thanks for that clarification.