@Crazyb0 @Coinfrog @DEVLEC @Pokermandude Sorry for posting that many photos and I got carry away. My goal was to share a large sample of coin photos so we can learn of the one that PCGS tag as Questionable Colour. For sure, it's not an exact science and I guess PCGS will reject more to protect their reputation. On the other hand, we may have the same coin tag one way and then re-summit and been graded. Grading is still done by human and no "Scientific Method" as mentioned by @SsuperDdave
On the 48 coins posted, only 8 were tagged as Questionable Colour and they are: $1 1936 (I was suspicious of been rejected) $1 1954 (I was not sure) $1 1959 (I was very suspicious) $1 1973 (Didn't really know) 1c 1936 (very surprise of been rejected) 10c 1940 (was suspicious) 25c 1881 (2nd one only) (I was suspicious of the 1st one but it was graded and the 2nd was rejected) 25c 1952 (1st one only) (I was suspicious of the 2nd one but it was graded and the 1st was rejected)
One of the confluence people think many of my coins are AT is that my photo technic is very good to bring the real colour that even PCGS cannot show. I have a pro-level SLR (Nikon D800), use macro lens (Nikon 105mm f2.8), adjust white balance and make sure to have single source of light (one light only and rest of room completely dark). Will provide photo of my setup and photo compared with PCGS in next post.
@Alan I have to I take my hat off to "Alan" for pointing the 1c 1936, the 2nd 25c 1881 and 1st 25c 1952. I collect toned coins but was not expert enough to be suspicious of them.
@1947ML I agree that to really see real coin colour, it need to be in a dark room with a single light source. And even more difficult inside holder especially ICCS with its double layer.
@NumisCat Your profile picture, is it a 10c 1938 ? If so, I think I own it at some time.
Here are my setup for taking the coin photos. I am a photographer for over 40 years and it help me to get the colour right. But also been one of the few to show the toning at their best, it make all my coins (photos) been suspicious for many people.
I sue a tripod which allow to close down the lens to f22 which increase the depth of field. I even use remote trigger and mirror lock to minimize vibration.
Below are my photos compared with PCGS photos for the same coin. Since people are not used to see the coin colour at their best as even PCGS don't really do a great job. It make people wonder if they are real toning.
Even if I try to hide the colour as PCGS did, I am not sure I can even achieve it.
Here is an example of photo file directly coming from the camera. No modification, no cropping, full deep colour.
Often people, overexpose the image and the colour are washout (turn white) and we lose nice saturation. I bracket (3 photos at differences exposition) and sometime need to adjust exposure if the coin if too shinny or too dark. These take time which PCGS cannot do as a business making profit and grading million of coins. For me, it's a pleasure to take these images, and I get excited when I have a new batch to capture.
That 1973 dollar is the nickel dollar strike - there is absolutely no way that one was natural. Very cool and an excellent photograph (I would love that one in my collection), but definitely not natural toning.
Did they slab the silver maple leaf? That one looked like environmental alteration. The 1936 penny is definitely a victim of someone trying to remove the old fingerprints turned into black specs... the rainbow effect you see near the rim is classic photochemical alteration from acetone on a dipped mint state copper coin.
My second question - I know many of your coins were in ICCS flips - how did you fair with the cross grading? PCGS is tougher on marks on the devices, but they do account for eye-appeal.
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert Oppenheimer
Do you think some of your photos over-saturate the colors? Because one of things I was going to mention about possible naturally toned coins looking artificial would be the post-processing might be excessive. PCGS's TrueViews are pretty darn good. You mentioned you use one light source. Everything I've read (and tried) suggests the more light, the better. Just a few thoughts.
I have bought a couple coins from Hugues. And to be honest (please do not take this as an attack, as I am not attacking you), the pictures show toning at a much greater level than what you see in hand. In hand, you're usually in a well lit room or have some light coming through the windows. But for pictures (I've been getting into photography over the last few years), toning comes out a lot better when taken in a darker room with a single light source (kind of like Hugues' set up pictures above). And so I believe for that reason the toning may seem artificial to some. But in hand, from the two coins I bought, it is clear that it is natural.
Nice coins Hugues! I will be looking to potentially get some from you. Do you have them posted anywhere online?
Hugues, I've always been impressed by the photos of your coins. Any time I take a picture of my coins, I'm lucky if the date is clear; I'd never dream of getting the kind of detail and color you get with every shot. I've picked up a piece or two from you in the past and hope to do so again in the future.
Thanks for taking the time to better explain your views Hughes. I also have found a few dollars with very similar blues and red colours like some of your super ones.
I have also received a few with "questionable color" from PCGS...and a few others that look the same to me but they came back as 65's and 66's.. (thank God) ..so go figure..and they all came from the same collection..and were keep the same way..(I was told)
Maybe they had different graders doing so many at one time..
Most of mine were bought back in the 70's and 80's and many came from paper envelopes which were included with the clear open flips that the coins were sold in..Norweb envelopes were included and I should still have them somewhere..but most were not Norweb. The Norweb's had a deep greenish blue on many of his coins..
..and most were graded as gems of choice coins.. No ICCS then..
I'll pass them over to a few knowledgeable people and get some expert feedback..
That specific dollar came from a set I bought on ebay and still inside its plastic holder within the set book. So I am convince it's 100% natural toning.
For the silver maple leaf, yes PCGS slab it. In fact, except the 8 I mentioned previously, all the other 40 coins were slab by PCGS.
The silver maple leaf was still inside the plastic film when I bought it from ebay. They were few cut on the film and I suspect it's the cause of that toning. See image of the coin before I cut it from the film.
I was not aware of the 1c 1936 and was thinking it came from the paper roll. I have no experience with photochemical alteration and any alteration. That's what part of the reason I sent that lot to be certified and also I share on line so I can learn and have other learn at the same time. The 1c 1936 is part on my personal collection and was never for sale. Still keep it but would need to look at it more closely.
Surprisingly, PCGS overall grading was lower than ICCS. I will post in a separate topics listing the delta result I got. Some was -2, other were +2.5 but on average PCGS graded lower than ICCS. I even select coins I was open to get bump-up. I guess I need to get a course of PCGS grading. I heard they look at high-point contrary to ICCS focusing on the field. PCGS nor ICCS would higher me as a grader, that's for sure.
@NumisCat I don't do post-processing. Only crop and adjust highlight to remove holder plastic reflexion.
And most of the photos look the same as when I look at the coin through the viewfinder of the camera. My camera, the Nikon D800 and most SLR allow the photographer to see the object directly through the lens-mirror and prism within the viewfinder. This is direct image before taking the picture and without any digital influence. So most of my photos are really close to the real coins. But since it's a skill not widely available in our coins community, it may influence people thinking that most of my coins are AT (which few are as we learn from that lot).
The 1977 SILVER $1 photo I posted recently is directly the file from the camera without any change or any processing, not even cropping.
I even decrease the saturation on occasion because I feel people will think, it's not possible.
From my experience, single light is the best way to photograph and look at the coin. Toning appearance change from the angle you look at it. And if you add another source of light (which will have a different angle) it will burnt to white some of the main toning you were looking at. Even when I look at my coin, I do in a dark room with a single Halogen light from the celling. Then, it's very close of the photo I took. But if the coin is in an ICCS holder (2 layers of plastic), it will be difficult to get the same look compare to the photo I took before having the coin graded and slab.
For some coin, I cut the ICCS holder, take photo and then send back to be re-hold (I provide the previous holder). It may a big difference in the photo.
@Paulsz No worry Paul. I understand that and my previous post explain more about it. And I know that people may have difficulty to see the same toning from the coin in hand than from my photos. But the fact is, the photo is very close to reality but it's difficult to have everybody been able to look at toned coin the proper way as it's not easy. And in many case, the photo was taken before been slab which make impossible to see the same colour afterward.
I will have some on ebay under HuguesGervais ( ebay ID).
See 2 video taken from toned coin including the Maple Silver. And video is very difficult to modify and all my video are taken directly from the camera without any modification. I use the same setup for video than for photo. And photo look similar to image from the video which confirm to me that the photo really represent the coin colour and look.
CSYGGBmXY6A
q1WRXU1xeG8
*** Edited by Staff to add YouTube tags. [youtube][/youtube] Please use them in the future. We prefer embedded video. ***
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited. Contact Us | Advertise Here | Privacy Policy / Terms of Use
First Page
Posted 10/04/2017 5:15 pm
