Opinions on My Photographing *Now with better Pics !!*

GrimReaper

My better set of pics on second page torwards bottom !!

TexasNationals

64

AUandAG

Is it really that dull looking? If so then it's been overdipped.

bob

GrimReaper

Don't know sellers pics , I'm hoping not !!

AUandAG

It it's got great luster I'd give it a nice MS64 and if the luster is off the charts or PL
or even DMPL (that might be a scan and not a pic) then maybe a shot at 65.

good luck,
bob

Patches

The pictures look like scans...if so, MS-65. If they're from a camera, dull and lifeless as already stated

DennisH

Great strike.
Looks very frosty.
solid MS64.

MercCrazy

You guys are generous. 63+.

WTCG

MS63. An MS64 is not out of the question.

There is absolutely no chance this coin will carry a PL or DMPL designation. If this coin is a 65 like someone believes then I've got a deal of raw MS65 dollars available to sell and I'll even knock a few dollars off the going 65 prices.

DieClash

<< <i>Great strike.
Looks very frosty.
solid MS64. >>



You said it. The "Frosty" was the first thing on my mind. I don't know how the graders grade, but I'm curious how the rim ding on the Rev. might play into the grade. Other than that I'd say 64 for sure.

Cheers!



Kirk

icsoccer

64

TennesseeDave

Those look like a scan. I think it will look much better in hand and should grade MS-65. Nice coin.

GrimReaper

I'm thinking scans are washing out the coin , I hope it looks better in hand which I think it should .

metalmeister

64 IMHO

HighRelief

I see a 64 and I like the frosty coating

lordmarcovan

Probably scans.

I'd say 64 with a possible shot at 65, personally.

BigAl

65, Appears to only have some frost breaks on the cheak, no hits. Looks to have full mint luster assuming the pic is a scan. Of course the image could be photoshopped

LanceNewmanOCC

.
.
100% scanned, no doubt

63+ to 64 at pcgs , maybe 64-65 ngc, maybe 67-68 at pci or nci whatever one of those other services is called
.
.
nice frosty looking $45-75 coin

i won't quote exactly without great images or seeing the item in-hand
.
.

TwoSides2aCoin

The subject coin should be sent in for grading and protection. This will almost always add value when it comes time to sell.

Just sayin'.
MS 63+ what's up with the rim of the coin ?

golfer72

<< <i>The subject coin should be sent in for grading and protection. This will almost always add value when it comes time to sell.

Just sayin'.
MS 63+ what's up with the rim of the coin ? >>

Any increase in "value" by slabbing this coin would be eaten up in grading fees and shipping. its not worth submitting.

GrimReaper

Also added these pics up at top of post . She's got some very nice fields with light chatter and they are pretty reflective !! Just kinda hard for me to capture as I can't do photos very well . Gonna try and change my lighting a little tom. Rim looks like a bag hit to me .

LanceNewmanOCC

.
.
your camera skills are good it is your lighting that is beating your images up
.
.
try some "reveal" bulbs

or if you have a nice camera, adjust the white balance
.
.

GrimReaper

So is it still about the same grade ?? Working on getting some more pics . Just curious guys .

AUandAG

Well, WTCG says it's no way a PL or DMPL but I stand by my original post!

bob

TorinoCobra71

<< <i>Well, WTCG says it's no way a PL or DMPL but I stand by my original post!

bob >>




Its not anywhere near a PL/DMPL

IT IS an MS65.....

relicsncoins

Looks like an average 64 to me.

coindeuce

If it actually displays flashy luster and no frost breaks in the obverse portrait, it will make 64+ or 65.

Rollerman

A little light chatter, but the fields are nice. 1879s Morgans come pretty nice as a group. I'd say this one would go 64+...based on the images provided.
Pete

GrimReaper

Got some more pics coming after work tonight !!

JeffinMich

Looks like it might make 65. Nice coin.

robkool

MS64... And frosty.

oakcoin

looks like the concensus is 64 with a shot at 65.

stealer

Geesh what happened to the whole crowd that graded the 1902 as MS63 when it went MS65+ at PCGS?

It looks MS63+ at best IMO. Lots of chatter on the cheek.

GrimReaper

I agree the general consensus is 64/65 coin . Now I'm just honing my photos and hopefully I'm getting it staightened out little by little . These pics are about the best I can do !! Am i getting anywhere or do I need to do/try ??



Some better lighting !!



These were taken outside !!



Just a couple more Obv. shots , playing with light and camers position !!

djdilliodon

MS 64 and semi PL.

stealer

Still looks 63 with a shot at 64 but not enough mirror to go PL.

astrorat

MS-63

BryceM

Details and focus are sharp enough, but these photos demonstrate almost no luster. Either they just don't have any (dipped), or your light source is very diffuse. A couple of point-source lights striking the coin at an angle will improve the look nicely.

ambro51

I 'adjusted' one of your images to how I thought your coin may look. contrast, saturation and brightness tweaks

GrimReaper

<< <i>I 'adjusted' one of your images to how I thought your coin may look. contrast, saturation and brightness tweaks

>>



Ambro51 ,

That is damn near a perfect match , of the coin !!



<< <i>Details and focus are sharp enough, but these photos demonstrate almost no luster. Either they just don't have any (dipped), or your light source is very diffuse. A couple of point-source lights striking the coin at an angle will improve the look nicely. >>






BryceM ,

I'm gonna try to get a little different setup with the angled lighting !! Right now I'm holding the camera freehand with no stand and that's a pain in the arse . Also thinking of building me a black box to position the coins I photograph in . Has anyone ever done such a thing ??