Home› PCGS Set Registry Forum
Options

I took some clad quarter pictures.

AllCoinsRuleAllCoinsRule Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭✭
in PCGS Set Registry Forum
All are pcgs ms67.
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image

Comments

  • Options
    StupidStupid Posts: 558 ✭✭✭
    Nice job. Anytime I have tried to image clad coins, they end up looking terrible.
  • Options
    pontiacinfpontiacinf Posts: 8,915 ✭✭
    do you agree with the grades on all? I am not familiar with clad Washingtons
    but judging from the pics, which are great by the way, seems some have pronounced
    detail in washingtons hair curl over his ear and some are flat-I would think the
    step between 66-67 would deffinately involve some deffinition in that area, maybe
    I am wrong-seems like a main focal point though.

    your pics kick ass.
    image

    Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
  • Options
    pontiacinfpontiacinf Posts: 8,915 ✭✭


    << <i>Thanks. I like capturing the bright luster but I think some of these came out a little too bright, and on clad every single tiny flaw ends up showing brightly. If I did a guess the grade thread on some of these coins I bet I would get answers of ms64 and ms65. >>



    I apologize, seems you explained it here had I read on image
    image

    Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
  • Options
    perfectstrikeperfectstrike Posts: 677 ✭✭
    Couple of things to try. I've been playing with Kennedy's and its about the same. I use two lights and aim outside the slabs. There's plenty enough light to flood the coin. I haven't got too many MS67's so you may have to aim quite a ways outside. Try adjusting the angle between the coin surface and the vertical, you may be too direct as I see the light inside the clear holder ring on a couple. I also use a piece of glass at a 45 degree angle between the camera and the slab, cuts down on the glare.
    David
  • Options
    cladkingcladking Posts: 28,335 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The '82-P is spectacular and perhaps unimprovable.
    The '82-D is just simply superb but could probably be improved. (I've not seen better but I've seen cleaner and better made)
    The '90-D is pretty good.

    They're all nice looking.
    Tempus fugit.
  • Options
    cladkingcladking Posts: 28,335 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You can find '72-P's as clean as this one with a much better strike.
    Tempus fugit.
  • Options
    erwindocerwindoc Posts: 4,927 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • Options
    ambro51ambro51 Posts: 13,604 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Try shooting with lots less light ...available light as they say. Really study your view screen and you'll find a magic combination of one corner of your room. Light angle don't worry your camera on a stand or tripod can do amazing things with not so bright light.
  • Options
    BigRickBigRick Posts: 1,334
    They have a "silver" look to them.
    My Sets
  • Options
    ambro51ambro51 Posts: 13,604 ✭✭✭✭✭
    this is 'available light', which is the overhead shop lights. nothing overpowering.

    imageimage
  • Options
    DatentypeDatentype Posts: 1,677 ✭✭✭
    Jaime, those roll coins tend to be more matte finished and photograph better than the flashy mint set coins that reflect the light back - it depends what you are into. I know for a fact that 1992-p and 1989-p and possibly some of the others look much better in hand. The reason these are so very hard to find is that they are not really around in large quantities in bank wrapped rolls and almost all of the mint set coins have scrapes along the reverse on the breast feathers. Sometimes PCGS will let a little scrape go if the obverse is a 67+ or very solid.
Sign In or Register to comment.