EagleEye - blu62vette 1877 Indian showdown

EagleEye

Todd did an outstanding job with the Carnton coins. I saw how he does his images and took note. I haven't incorporated any of his procedures...yet. Anyway, here is his image of the Carnton 1877 MS-66RD :



And here is mine. I didn't do anything to the raw image except crop it into Todd's frame.



My own feeling is that Todd's is better. Mine looks a bit washed out, but Todd's is a bit dark. The die line through the S in STATES is visible on my image.

lusterlover

<< <i>Todd did an outstanding job with the Carnton coins. I saw how he does his images and took note. I haven't incorporated any of his procedures...yet. Anyway, here is his image of the Carnton 1877 MS-66RD :


My own feeling is that Todd's is better. Mine looks a bit washed out, but Todd's is a bit dark. The die line through the S in STATES is visible on my image. >>




I think you called it right. The perfect shot appears to be something in the middle of what you both came up with (both excellent photos by the way). You can't tell if it's a crusty red with nice skin or a lusterous red. Either way it's a win/win

BWRC

I like both of the shots,

Rick's shows the bright original red color of the coin. Todd's is a bit dark but shows the crisp detail and luster of the coin.

The best would be a combination of the two to get a more true glimpse of the actual coin.

Anyone attending the Long Beach show should stop by Rick's table and see our 1877 before it goes bye bye.

mkman123

blueccvettes pic is definitely better. Shows way more detail and the color is perfect.

soty27

<< <i>blueccvettes pic is definitely better. Shows way more detail and the color is perfect. >>



I would disagree, I saw the collection while at the fun show and when they say the coins are red they mean it.

blu62vette

<< <i>

<< <i>blueccvettes pic is definitely better. Shows way more detail and the color is perfect. >>



I would disagree, I saw the collection while at the fun show and when they say the coins are red they mean it. >>



So which image shows more red? People should come by my table and see the 8x10 of this coin. It is fantastic, much more color to it than viewing on a monitor.

EagleEye

I messed up blu62vette's moniker - fixed in the title.

soty27

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>blueccvettes pic is definitely better. Shows way more detail and the color is perfect. >>



I would disagree, I saw the collection while at the fun show and when they say the coins are red they mean it. >>



So which image shows more red? People should come by my table and see the 8x10 of this coin. It is fantastic, much more color to it than viewing on a monitor. >>




From the images on my monitor ricks shows more red but yours has more detail and lustre. I am also trying to compare images based off of my memory and that cant be a good thing Its an MS indian so I cant imagine your images would be far off todd as I think you do a great job of shooting MS copper

blu62vette

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>blueccvettes pic is definitely better. Shows way more detail and the color is perfect. >>



I would disagree, I saw the collection while at the fun show and when they say the coins are red they mean it. >>



So which image shows more red? People should come by my table and see the 8x10 of this coin. It is fantastic, much more color to it than viewing on a monitor. >>




From the images on my monitor ricks shows more red but yours has more detail and lustre. I am also trying to compare images based off of my memory and that cant be a good thing Its an MS indian so I cant imagine your images would be far off todd as I think you do a great job of shooting MS copper >>



Since you mention monitors.....I spent today shopping for one. Brought my laptop to the store with me and hooked it up to several monitors. Chaos. Some were yellow, some red, some just over saturated. When I hold up the 8x10 print to this screen (the laptop) it looks way better than my screen. I can only imagine how it looks on other people's monitors. I was at my former office a while back and someone wanted to see my website. Imagine a cheap office monitor and graphics. It was beyond awful. I had to go run and hide.

EagleEye

That is so true. Monitors are vastly different.

I don't know if this helps:
How to calibrate your monitor

BTW, Todd's imaging skills are A-#1. I feel that if I can get even close to his work, I'm doing good. I hope he doesen't think the OP was anything other than tring to get close to his expert work! Keep up the great work, Todd.

DennisH

They both look good. Rick is obviously a quick learner. But Todd's images have more saturation, texture, detail and 'life'. Without seeing the coin I don't know whose shots are more true to life, but since the date is 1877 (not 1860-64) I'm guessing that Todd's are. Rick's shots make the coin look brighter, cleaner and less 'spotty, and some folks will think that's better. But if that appearance isn't accurate then it isn't how you want the pictures to look.

And now I'm also worried about whether I have a sucky monitor or a good one.

DMWJR

I like everything about Todd's shot except that the image is looks more brown than the coin does in person. Also, there could be a little more cartwheel showing, but that is just my preference. Between the two photos though you can get a good idea of what the coin looks like in person.

renomedphys

I know this sounds obvious, but if the intention was to sell a coin like that, nothing could possibly substitute for seeing it in hand. Of course the photograph is nice. Heck, both are. And I think either would be more than adequate to get a potential buyer to that next requisite step.

breakdown

I am biased as Todd has photographed a good part of my collection but I think the strengths of his photos -- definition, tone, depth -- are rarely seen in others' photos (no offense to Rick, whose photo is credible if not as inspiring). I have albums of 8x10's of the photos Todd has taken for me and I can confirm that the monitor images pale in comparison.

EagleEye

Actually, the coin is not available. There are 3 people in line at $135K. It will be on display at Long Beach at my table.

frnklnlvr

Very nice!

Do all 1877's have the clash mark on the reverse?

EagleEye

Do all 1877's have the clash mark on the reverse?

Yes, there is only one reverse die.

HdHunter

Rick:
A beautiful specimen and I wish I had seen it in person. How many of the six 1877 MS66 Red PCGS graded IHC’s have you seen or handled? If I look at your Eagle Eye Photo Seal Population report, it appears 5 out of the 6 have received the Photo Seal, is that correct?

Photo Seal Population - 1877 MS RD IHC
MS:66
Pop 5

Does this grouping include Stewart Blay;s “Golden Princess”? Where does the current coin rank in the list behind Stewart Blay's Golden Princess?
Thanks,
Jonathan

STEWARTBLAYNUMIS

I dislike both images. Neither is true to the color and luster of the coin. Go see the coin in person.

BTW My "Golden Princess" is not photo sealed nor CAC'd . I don't give a flying hoot.

Stewart

ThePennyLady

I'm a big fan of both photographers, and before I found Todd, to me Rick's photos were the best I'd seen. And though this coin is a little redder in hand, I really like the way Todd captures the true toning, quality, depth, and details of this coin as well as each coin he photographs.

DIMEMAN

I like Penneylady's 77 better. Those RB's are beautiful!

dsessom

Todd's shot, with the levels and red boosted a touch.



Original:

clackamas

<< <i>I dislike both images. Neither is true to the color and luster of the coin. Go see the coin in person.

BTW My "Golden Princess" is not photo sealed nor CAC'd . I don't give a flying hoot.

Stewart >>



Stewart, you don't need to, everyone knows.

BillyGoatsGruff

It's all about contrast and lighting.... but at the end of the day, it's best to see the coin in hand.