GTG: 1925 Standing Liberty

spyglassdesign

Update: OG plastic was ms65+.

If you were grading this (I know in hand is always better), what would you grade it? It's currently in a lesser grading company's plastic and am considering whether to submit to our host to and what they might grade it at... I am still working on my camera and lighting techniques so it probably isn't obvious but it does do cartwheels on both sides.

Thanks!

MFeld

The coin looks AU details, cleaned.

7Jaguars

But has an attractiveness nonetheless. I would tend to call it Unc. details, cleaned.

No Headlights

Cleaned.

Windycity

Don't see the cleaning... looks like 66 FH to me.

LanceNewmanOCC

@Windycity said:
Don't see the cleaning... looks like 66 FH to me.

i can see how the images can make the coin look unwholesome but i'm in the straight-grade camp and APPEARS to be a boomer.

MFeld

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@Windycity said:
Don't see the cleaning... looks like 66 FH to me.

i can see how the images can make the coin look unwholesome but i'm in the straight-grade camp and APPEARS to be a boomer.

Better images would probably help, considerably.

Lostintranslation

I don't see any cleaning either. I say 65 FH.

291fifth

It has to be seen in-hand. The obverse photo looks MS, very frosty and well struck but the reverse looks dull and dipped.

marcmoish

It's a GTG, so I personally don't see it dull or dipped, so going with 66+ FH

Edited after seeing the new pictures, it can be anything I don't see a 66+ as viable any longer.

ricko

Pictures have glare and a slight blurriness... Might be a nice quarter... Cheers, RickO

MFeld

Perhaps I’m too biased by knowing that the coin is “in a lesser grading company's plastic”. But that, combined with the coin’s appearance, make me think several posters are way too optimistic.

2windy2fish

65FH!

jesbroken

Certainly not as accomplished with this series coin, so I'll not grade it other than to say I do not see a cleaning and feel it is MS. I believe it would be a beauty in hand.
Jim

spyglassdesign

@MFeld said:

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@Windycity said:
Don't see the cleaning... looks like 66 FH to me.

i can see how the images can make the coin look unwholesome but i'm in the straight-grade camp and APPEARS to be a boomer.

Better images would probably help, considerably.

Yeah this one is tough. I was trying all night to get better pics and lighting and clarity. The plastic was really doing it a disservice (it was scratched).

I say was because I decided to break it out. I'll try to get clearer pics today.

Thanks for playing!

Walkerfan

MS 63 FH

Love the light color.

telephoto1

Just because it isn't in an anointed service's holder doesn't automatically presuppose there is something wrong with the coin. Also with these pics you can't definitively tell what the surfaces truly look like in hand. Based solely on what I can see the coin looks FH and no worse than a 64 IMO but better pics might change that opinion up or down.

spyglassdesign

Let me know if these images help... I decided to take the risk and bust it out of the plastic so they hopefully are a bit clearer. And yes, @telephoto1 its always tough to make it look like it looks in hand... but hopefully these help a little.

I tried to get a couple different lighting angles on the reverse to better show how it reflects off the surfaces. It does do cartwheels front and back. And as some have speculated it is very attractive in hand, IMO. But ultimately it will depend on the grader that sees it. I cannot figure out why the coin looks so golden either. It does have a very slight golden tone to it but not as deep as my pictures imply. It's far more silvery.

Thanks again! I'll reveal what it's former grading was later tonight or tomorrow morning. Again I'm more interested in what PCGS might grade it at based on the best pictures I can do If you want to see a different angle of light or closer up of a part of the coin, just ask and I'll do my best!

LanceNewmanOCC

@MFeld said:
Perhaps I’m too biased by knowing that the coin is “in a lesser grading company's plastic”. But that, combined with the coin’s appearance, make me think several posters are way too optimistic.

ahh. i didn't even read that part. my brain will sometimes filter out a sentence or two above/below an image, which is why i so often do the:

.
.
.

if i had read that, it probably would have biased my opinion/comment as well.

LanceNewmanOCC

@spyglassdesign said:

.
i think all your efforts at numismotography and post-processing are actually pretty good but you may be being done in by a poor image taking device and/or settings. what are you using?

MFeld

@spyglassdesign said:
Let me know if these images help... I decided to take the risk and bust it out of the plastic so they hopefully are a bit clearer. And yes, @telephoto1 its always tough to make it look like it looks in hand... but hopefully these help a little.

I tried to get a couple different lighting angles on the reverse to better show how it reflects off the surfaces. It does do cartwheels front and back. And as some have speculated it is very attractive in hand, IMO. But ultimately it will depend on the grader that sees it. I cannot figure out why the coin looks so golden either. It does have a very slight golden tone to it but not as deep as my pictures imply. It's far more silvery.

Thanks again! I'll reveal what it's former grading was later tonight or tomorrow morning. Again I'm more interested in what PCGS might grade it at based on the best pictures I can do If you want to see a different angle of light or closer up of a part of the coin, just ask and I'll do my best!

The first of the two new reverse images makes it appear that there’s noticeable wear and/or cleaning on much of the upper left portion of the eagle’s left-facing wing.

pcgscacgold

It is really hard for me to determine surface condition from the coin. I will go with my first instinct and that is detailed, AU.

spyglassdesign

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@spyglassdesign said:

.
i think all your efforts at numismotography and post-processing are actually pretty good but you may be being done in by a poor image taking device and/or settings. what are you using?

Yeah this coin has been a rough one. I'm using a Canon eos rebel t8.

spyglassdesign

@MFeld said:

The first of the two new reverse images makes it appear that there’s noticeable wear and/or cleaning on much of the upper left portion of the eagle’s left-facing wing.

I see what you are saying in the Pic... Maybe a little too much post processing. Unfortunately it doesn't look that way in hand. The surfaces are reflective. The only slight discoloration I see in hand is on the 4th feather down from the top of his wing and it's very slight.

At any rate appreciate the feedback. I'm not sure what exactly is making this coin so tough for me to get shots that show its beauty (as I see it).

If I do get it graded it will be interesting to see what their images look like! Meanwhile I will keep practicing!

pcgscacgold

Since it was a GTG hopefully you post what was in the slab that the coin was in.

spyglassdesign

@pcgscacgold said:
Since it was a GTG hopefully you post what was in the slab that the coin was in.

I will tonight or tomorrow morning 👍

LanceNewmanOCC

@spyglassdesign said:

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@spyglassdesign said:

.
i think all your efforts at numismotography and post-processing are actually pretty good but you may be being done in by a poor image taking device and/or settings. what are you using?

Yeah this coin has been a rough one. I'm using a Canon eos rebel t8.

sounds like one of those gr8 dslr type cameras, so it can certainly put out better images than that. i cannot speak quite so much about the capacity of various lenses though and that could make a huge difference.

don't underestimate finding the reset button to get all settings back to factory. a good fail-safe.

keep moving the lights around and looking at the screen/viewfinder while you do it and take pics at various angles.

w/o having someone in-person that knows what they are doing, it can take a while to dial it all in.

step 1, take a pic of your setup and show it here.

spyglassdesign

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@spyglassdesign said:

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@spyglassdesign said:

.
i think all your efforts at numismotography and post-processing are actually pretty good but you may be being done in by a poor image taking device and/or settings. what are you using?

Yeah this coin has been a rough one. I'm using a Canon eos rebel t8.

sounds like one of those gr8 dslr type cameras, so it can certainly put out better images than that. i cannot speak quite so much about the capacity of various lenses though and that could make a huge difference.

don't underestimate finding the reset button to get all settings back to factory. a good fail-safe.

keep moving the lights around and looking at the screen/viewfinder while you do it and take pics at various angles.

w/o having someone in-person that knows what they are doing, it can take a while to dial it all in.

step 1, take a pic of your setup and show it here.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1082548/photography-update#latest

I posted an update on my other thread if you want to provide more feedback over there!

And yes I'm sure it's more to do with my skill with the camera itself than the camera.

LanceNewmanOCC

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@spyglassdesign said:

**here is a post **where i uploaded some images i took with my former nikon d90 with a sigma macro lens (a little better than average lens i think) and after MMMMMMMMMMMMUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHHH toil, i finally got all the angles, settings, etc in place and then i could just pump out quality images all the live-long day with one hand tied behind my back. it was really quite ridiculous how easy it is once you get everything where it needs to go.

i can still get some pretty decent pics from the iphone 6s when i try but it is not a dslr for sure.

TPRC

This is a curious one for me as I did not see any cleaning at first glance. Instead, I saw rub on the knee, which means that this coin could garner almost any grade. My initial reaction was 5FH but that knee rub could bring it down to almost anything. The following pics show less of a full head but also no wear on the knee. But I'll stick with 5FH.

coinkat

This really illustrates the difficulty in grading from an image. This creates the challenge of interpreting the image to determine and opine whether this could be a GEM. I don't know... and I would rather not offer an opinion based on just what I see

privatecoin

65

spyglassdesign

@TPRC said:
This is a curious one for me as I did not see > @coinkat said:
This really illustrates the difficulty in grading from an image. This creates the challenge of interpreting the image to determine and opine whether this could be a GEM. I don't know... and I would rather not offer an opinion based on just what I see

Not only grading from an image, but the challenges of imaging these in such a way that truly shows off its features (good bad or otherwise).

erwindoc

64FH

Stingray63

Would enjoy seeing that one in hand vs. image as it looks really nice to me.

WilliamF

If straight graded (and I think it is) I'll go with MS64- FH

spyglassdesign

The original was ms65+.

Will be curious to send it in but with pcgs backlog I may go with NGC this round. I'd rather not wait till my next birthday to get it back 😬

Based on what I can see in hand comparing to coin facts images, it looks 64-65 ish. Whether it has wear or not I'm not 100% sure. There's one spot of concern on the reverse but could just be a bag mark (I couldn't get itt o show in my photos).

Thanks for the feedback. I'll keep honing my photo skills till I can get better

spyglassdesign

Thanks to some tips from @robec and @LanceNewmanOCC and a few others, I have been able to clear up my photos a bit on this coin. Hopefully a little truer to form in hand than my earlier pics. I still haven't figured out why it looks so golden. It's a very subtle golden hue but my camera picks it up to the point it almost looks like a gold coin.

robec

@spyglassdesign said:
Thanks to some tips from @robec and @LanceNewmanOCC and a few others, I have been able to clear up my photos a bit on this coin. Hopefully a little truer to form in hand than my earlier pics. I still haven't figured out why it looks so golden. It's a very subtle golden hue but my camera picks it up to the point it almost looks like a gold coin.

There is a setting in the camera that allows you to lower the color saturation. That would lighten it some. What model Canon do you have?

asheland

64FH

spyglassdesign

@robec see my other photography thread. I was able to change the color setting from 5600 to I think it was 4600 gave me the better pictures I posted there.

robec

@spyglassdesign said:
@robec see my other photography thread. I was able to change the color setting from 5600 to I think it was 4600 gave me the better pictures I posted there.

Those numbers look like color temperature, not the actual color of the coin. It looks like you changed the light setting from Daylight (5500°) to warmer color temp.

I’ll send you a DM.

TPRC

When I saw the SEGS holder all I could think of was how difficult those are to crack. You almost need a bandsaw! And while I am not sure where you are from, PCGS is grading on site in Baltimore!

spyglassdesign

@TPRC said:
When I saw the SEGS holder all I could think of was how difficult those are to crack. You almost need a bandsaw! And while I am not sure where you are from, PCGS is grading on site in Baltimore!

Arizona do that one won't work for me but they do Vegas shows and long Beach. As for cracking it, it was easy. I'll show you the tool when I get home in a couple hours.

Namvet69

I think saturation might be interfering with a sharper focus on the surface of the coin. IMO. I think you can do better. Maybe selective focus will hit on the surface plane. Good luck. Peace Roy

spyglassdesign

@Namvet69 said:
I think saturation might be interfering with a sharper focus on the surface of the coin. IMO. I think you can do better. Maybe selective focus will hit on the surface plane. Good luck. Peace Roy

Thanks, and yes robec suggested the eos utility to control it on my computer and am now able to zoom in and fix the focus better. As far as saturation I think you are right there... I changed the white balance so far and that made a huge difference.

spyglassdesign

@TPRC said:
When I saw the SEGS holder all I could think of was how difficult those are to crack. You almost need a bandsaw! And while I am not sure where you are from, PCGS is grading on site in Baltimore!

These worked wonderfully. Had to crack it inside the fat edge lip but wasn't hard at all. Just squeeze and move and squeeze and move till it breaks apart.