3 Leg Buffalo.. Final Photos

BNBAnalytics

I tried my best knowing the edge holders would provide a little difficulty.



bnb

SilverEagles92

The luster looks nonexistent in those photos.

BNBAnalytics

<< <i>The luster looks nonexistent in those photos. >>



Why do you always have something negative to say?

It kinda pisses me off.

bnb

SilverEagles92

Wow, really?

Don't want to start a flame war. Just stating a fact. You've said the coin is lustrous, yet I can't see it in these photos.

The sharpness is good, the detail is good, but you can't see the luster at all.

DorkGirl

STONE

Well, I think you nailed that one pretty well

sinin1

I like it


this is the NGC 58? I do not see the friction/rub keeping it from UNC, is it on the shoulder?

BNBAnalytics

<< <i>Wow, really?

Don't want to start a flame war. Just stating a fact. You've said the coin is lustrous, yet I can't see it in these photos.

The sharpness is good, the detail is good, but you can't see the luster at all. >>



I can see a good amount of luster just fine on this photo.

I took some more photos. I really thought this would be it.. But I guess there's always a critic for something..

So, I'll just keep tryin!

RYK

Nice photo. I recommend not cropping it so tightly.

BNBAnalytics

<< <i>I like it


this is the NGC 58? I do not see the friction/rub keeping it from UNC, is it on the shoulder? >>



The indian's cheek.

BNBAnalytics

I'm doing another right now to show this gentleman(Silver Eagle) what the difference is when I expose a 2 halogen light bulbs to 1.. The first picture is from 1 bulb.

Now, I will soon show him what two bulbs look like on the coin.

Just because the lighting is better, does that mean the coin has more luster?

No, it's just the way the photo is taken and in what lighting situation.

Coming in 10-15 min.

bnb

blu62vette

I think the pic is much sharper than the previous shots. I agree on cropping a little tight, would like to see the rims. Dont worry about the seeing the prongs, people get over that.

Now for criticism....maybe it should be a little brighter? That is your call, you have the coin in hand to compare. Ideally I would like to see some light above the indians heads and more light on the United States of America. This part is a real pain but helps buffalo images. Just keep shooting everything you can find, it takes lots of practice.

BNBAnalytics

blu62vette

<< <i> >>



On this one I would say put the lights on a couple books and get them up higher.

BNBAnalytics

<< <i>

<< <i> >>



On this one I would say put the lights on a couple books and get them up higher. >>



I am using a macro stand. They are very high. About 3 feet off the ground.

mdwoods

I like the first photo the best. I think it shows the detail and luster just fine.

blu62vette

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i> >>



On this one I would say put the lights on a couple books and get them up higher. >>



I am using a macro stand. They are very high. About 3 feet off the ground. >>



Ok can you tell me in relation to the coin (being height of zero) the height of the bottom of the lens, back of the camera, and the lights? Guesses are fine.

That lights seems harsh if it is 3 ft away, but I also dont use halogens so maybe they are that different.

illini420

Looks like a pretty nice nickel, still can't see the rub on it from the photos though.

As mentioned above, definitely don't crop it so close and let those prongs and the rim show.

Getting pretty good with that camera set up, keep it up.

BNBAnalytics

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i> >>



On this one I would say put the lights on a couple books and get them up higher. >>



I am using a macro stand. They are very high. About 3 feet off the ground. >>



Ok can you tell me in relation to the coin (being height of zero) the height of the bottom of the lens, back of the camera, and the lights? Guesses are fine.

That lights seems harsh if it is 3 ft away, but I also dont use halogens so maybe they are that different. >>



1.5 Feet approx from coin to bottom of lens, back of camera 1.7 approx, and lights 3.5 feet approx.

These were guesses and I don't have a measuring tool on me..

Does this help?

bnb

19Lyds

Personally, I like the original photograph which IMO shows some good reflectivity which can be interpreted as luster.

ricko

Nice coin, and I was happy with the first picture. Cheers, RickO

speety

IMO the first set of pics is just fine. I agree with RYK though, show the prongs and all of the rims, people will get over the prongs...

Nice coin

BNBAnalytics

3 Leg on Video (1/31/10)

sinin1

are you using any fancy bulbs? (GE REveal or other full-spectrum)

and what angle from coin are the lights placed?



your pictures are vastly improved over a month ago -


if you keep it up, and with the use of videos, you will be able to get a job
or part time contracting job doing photos and/or updating website for some of the national dealers in your area

what is missing in the industry is a person/method of showing the coin like you see it when people purchase

a small video clip could do that - slight rotation of coin with single point light source showing luster
and then focus on major problem area

also many of the national dealers are too burnt-out after the shows and long travel
and turn-over coins so quickly they do not have an effective presence on the internet


all you have to do is look at the listings on 'The Collectors Corner' to see this

and I guess I do not blame them - if they like their business model now

savoyspecial

if you dare click on the YouTube link, dont make the mistake i did and also click on this one in the right hand margin........you'll never get the 3 minutes 8 seconds of your life back

WinPitcher

One of my favorite coins.

You have a sweet one!


Steve

BNBAnalytics

<< <i>if you dare click on the YouTube link, dont make the mistake i did and also click on this one in the right hand margin........you'll never get the 3 minutes 8 seconds of your life back >>



Ah, Jun 09.. We change over time.

BNBAnalytics

<< <i>are you using any fancy bulbs? (GE REveal or other full-spectrum)

and what angle from coin are the lights placed?



your pictures are vastly improved over a month ago -


if you keep it up, and with the use of videos, you will be able to get a job
or part time contracting job doing photos and/or updating website for some of the national dealers in your area

what is missing in the industry is a person/method of showing the coin like you see it when people purchase

a small video clip could do that - slight rotation of coin with single point light source showing luster
and then focus on major problem area

also many of the national dealers are too burnt-out after the shows and long travel
and turn-over coins so quickly they do not have an effective presence on the internet


all you have to do is look at the listings on 'The Collectors Corner' to see this

and I guess I do not blame them - if they like their business model now >>



No fancy bulbs. Just two GE halogen lights. Thanks for your comments!

bnb

Shamika

Word to the wise: Luster is not at all typical for 3 legged Buffalo nickels due to extreme die erosion. I think what you're seeing is glossiness as opposed to luster.

I'm a bit surprised the nickel wasn't graded MS61. It looks MS all day long. And the first image looks great.

tahoe98

.....i agree with Christopher. i too think it should have gone a 61 at least! VERY nice buff!

BNBAnalytics

Thanks tahoe and Chris..

I wish I could let some of you hold it in your hands.. Aside from the finger print(Which is noticeable at certain angles and bright light), it's a very gorgeous coin..

I don't know if I'm seeing luster on it or gloss. I think I need to know what the difference is between the two.

Thanks though!

bnb

divecchia

A very nice example, it's a beauty...

Donato

bidask

thats a nice high grade one

Rollerman

My first reaction when viewing the first image was, "That baby was struck not long after that die was overpolished". Really a nice 3 legger and I can see the luster.
As far as the image goes, I like the first better than the 2nd, but something between the two would be perfect!
Pete

stinkinlincoln

Not a bad image. Nor a bad coin. Personally I never really became interested in this variety, but I still find them interesting.


The print kills it for me, (its a pet peev) but other wise, thats one of the nicer ones Ive seen in some time honestly.

goodmoney4badmoney

I am not a variety person, but the quality of the pictures and presentation is nice.

Butterbean

Is this the video click here, oh that must be another one .

The images are pretty good, but the cropping is too tight, and the upper part of the reverse seems a little out of focus.

crazyhounddog

The obverse of the 3 legger is one heck of a nice strike, love the coin

BNBAnalytics

<< <i>Is this the video click here, oh that must be another one .

The images are pretty good, but the cropping is too tight, and the upper part of the reverse seems a little out of focus. >>



I think it's against the new forum rules to post that kinda stuff man.. I know what you're trying to do, it's funny and all, but wrong place for that..

This is for coins.. If you want to post that to a comedy forum no prob.

Anyway, thanks for your advice anyways.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>Nice coin, and I was happy with the first picture. Cheers, RickO >>



Well, if we're resurrecting old threads...

here's one with big photos of the fingerprint in question....

Topdollarpaid

Thats a great coin and those are great pictures. A+

gyocomgd

I see no friction or flatness on the high points at all. I'm sure the graders see something when they give the coin a tilt, but I don't see it here.
As Shamika pointed out, the luster on the 3-legger is uniformly horrible, and this piece is no exception. There is no bloom or iridescence at all; you can TRY to make the coin possess some reflectivity, but it's a struggle. You can't create what isn't there. But it's OK, there is much else to praise about this coin than luster.

crazyhounddog

Super nice

silverpop

very nice nickel

sinin1

your pic doen't show the alledged fingerprint very well

are you sure it is there?

Catbert

<< <i>your pic doen't show the alledged fingerprint very well

are you sure it is there? >>



Is it on the Indian's temple?

illini420

<< <i>

<< <i>your pic doen't show the alledged fingerprint very well

are you sure it is there? >>



Is it on the Indian's temple? >>




Here's some videos of the coin pre and post NCS conservation which BNB posted... you can see the fingerprint or whatever it is that covers most of the indian's face in the videos (and in the pic in the first post):

Video #1

Video #2