A tale of two images...bust half

coinlieutenant

Recently had Mark photograph my old icon coin. Thought it would be worth discussing the differences between the Tru View shot and the Mark View. I will give my analysis later...

Mark View


Tru View

Cladiator

MarkView seems to show luster and metal flow better. Is that because of the size difference or no? Can you post the same size TrueView pic as the MarkView?

goose3

Mark's image blows the other one out of the water. The only thing that would improve it would be to have it set on a black background.

numisma

I like Mark's image better.

Russ

A fair comparison really requires images of the same size.

Russ, NCNE

Cladiator

<< <i>A fair comparison really requires images of the same size.

Russ, NCNE >>

This is what I'm saying...

Bochiman

It would also require the coin to be photoed the same way (ie...raw by both).
Mark is at a disadvantage due to the slab...and it still looks awesome!

RotatedRainbows

Truview seems to show more even color, the other one has some dark spots where the toning does not show like it probably is on the coin.

Connecticoin

Trueview tends to show color at the expense of luster. Mark G's photos seem to have a nice balance between the two.

holeinone1972

You are going to have to send me the coin so I can see it in hand.

Bear

Please enter me in your giveaway

contest of PCGS AU-58 1818 Bust Halves.

mgoodm3

This was a quick pic I shot last night and I didn't really get to tweak things much - a teaser sample image. My pic looks a little dark on the monitor I'm on right now. I would also like to improve the sharpness a little.

This coin is tough to light nicely as it is fairly reflective, took 3 lights to get this much color coverage, which is atypical.

seemyauction

Ok here are apples to apples with black as requested......







AL

Goober

Mark's view, though larger, does show better color as well as flaws. It also, correct me if I'm wrong (cuz I am a goober), shows a die break more clearly.

mgoodm3

The trueview is probably a little bright for my taste and a little too washed out (probably would look better at a larger size), but gets more color at that expense. The lack of plastic allows slightly higher angled lighting which is probably the main difference between the two. If you want luster bands, you have to give up a little color coverage on most coins (especially shiny ones like this).

MacCrimmon

<< <i>Mark's view, though larger, does show better color as well as flaws. It also, correct me if I'm wrong (cuz I am a goober), shows a die break more clearly. >>



I'll correct you...

You can't scale the TrueView image from what's shown to a larger size. That's not apples to apples.

In any event, that Bustie is an eyesore. Send it to me immediately amd I'll hide it at the back of my bank vault.

Cladiator

seemyauction,

That's not going to cut it. While your efforts are appreciated they don't work. Simply enlarging the TrueView pic has decreased, greatly, it's quality. What needs to happen is to take the original Large TrueView image and shrink it down to the same size as the MarkView. Or take the large MarkView and shrink it down to the size of the TrueView in the first post.

boiler78

Here is a side by side comparison with Marks image reduced to the trueview image size



Here is another comparison with the brightness on the trueview tweaked darker



I am a big fan of them trueview service and curiously most images seem to come out a little lighter than the coin in hand probably due in part to wrapping the coin back in plastic after the imaging has been completed. I would ask John to weigh in on which image more accurately depicts the coin in question?

Cladiator

Ok here are more accurate photos to compare the two of them...



Mark View



Tru View

Cladiator

With the last two posts that accurately compare the two images side by side I have to say that I do prefer the TrueView image over Marks image by far. In the larger version of the TrueView you can see the metal flow lines and luster just as good as in Marks large photo. Nothing against Mark, I think he's an excellent photographer. It's just my personal opinion.

BobGreene

It has always been my contention that True-view pics do not correctly depict what the coins actually look like in hand. This comparison convinces me that I'm right. The lighting used in the True-view pictures makes the coins look unrealisically bright.

FinallyHere

Knowing Mark and having imaged many coins myself I can almost gurantee Mark's image is more accurate in terms of the way the coin really looks in person. I also would bet he'd like to have another shot at this to try and illuminate it better, but in the end I really believe Mark's image is a more accurate portrayal of the coin as it is seen in hand. And, I think that's what we're all after right? I know that's what I try to capture and knowing Mark as I do and his passion for this, I'm quite certain his ultimate goal is to showcase the coin as it appears in hand. Nothing at all against Phil and tru-view, I just think the two images are going after different goals.

boiler78

Bob _ How can you make that statement before the coins owner tells us which image is the best representation of HIS coin in hand? You may very well be right about the outcome on this particular coin but I don't see how we can make any judgement without John's input. I have never seen this coin in person.

I will tell you that I have dozens of Trueview images that are very accurate. I'll go one step further. I think in most cases it takes at least two sets of images to accurately portray a coin.

Take this coin for example: This is a J1578 half eagle pattern struck in copper. These are trueview images of the same coin and they are both accurate! If you rotate this coin under a light it will look exactly like both these images depending on the light angle.

coinlieutenant

Clad,

Where did you get the large TruView? I didnt have it loaded on my server...therefore couldnt get it to you.

In regards to the photos, I have to say that knowing the real look of the coin in hand that Mark's image (at least on this coin) is far and away a more realistic look of the color and surfaces. This is one of a very few TruView images that I was not completely happy with as the colors were too bright in the picture. It made the coin look fake and IMO artificially toned.

Mark's image shows the "richness" and natural look of the color along with some of the luster that was missing from the Tru View. Mark can tell you that in hand this coin is very lustrous. It would be ideal to capture both, but physics are physics and Mark's image on this coin really show the true look of the coin.

TruView does this same thing on many occasions, especially proofs, so I dont want anyone to think I am putting down Phil. This was an exception, for what I think is an exceptional vivid and deeply toned coin with excellent luster.

I sent Mark 8 coins for various reasons. One other was due to my lack of satisfaction in TruView....and when that one is shot I will post it as well.

PCGS grades this coin AU55 btw...NGC and ANACS have both called it AU58. It is the prettiest AU bust half that I have ever encountered.

numisma

I will add that this particular coin (1818 half) looks better in hand.

coinlieutenant

It does look better in hand due to the great luster...but Marks image is the best I have seen.

JRocco

I get the sense that the TruView pic casts a small shadow around every device (take the stars for example) and this tends to give it the effect of having the devices outlined....
Just an observation.

billboat

Too nasty for words--send it to me and I will hide it away from the kiddies! Both pictures look very nice!

lkrarecoins

i'll take Markview for a hundred, Jim Great photography!!!