1900 P Barber Dime: How Large Should The Photo Be?

Thank you for the kind words. Your check's in the mail.

TonysPics, the larger photos here are about the correct size for grading and evaluation purposes. You generally want a coin size of no less than 500 pixels, preferably larger, for a clear evaluation.

You've obviously got a camera that's up to the task, so all that's needed now is some tweaking of lighting and camera settings. Using the pics here as an example, the lighting is a bit too concentrated, so there's always going to be a little bit washed out at 3:00 on the coin when you use this particular light. You'll be striking a balance between washing out as little as possible at 3:00, and keeping the exposure long enough to still show the details at 9:00 on the coin. If the exposure for these pics was (and I'm pulling a number out of my head), say, 1/80, the exact same setup with an exposure of 1/125 or 1/160 will probably be a better compromise between the two sides.

I don't want to get too deep into it here, because we've got a dedicated forum for this stuff and the thread wheezydogweerdsteev was so nice to link covers much of it. I will say, however, that I think you're only a little tweaking away from that dime looking like this one:

Oops.

Appropriate edits made.

SuperDave - I have no Barber dime expertise so maybe the answer to this question is obvious to some but not me... What is going on with the obverse of that 1892 you posted? Especially in the field just to the right of and under the chin? It almost looks a "negative" of the wreath from the reverse...? Is it just a reflection, a lamination error, product of my overactive imagination...? Also looks like some doubling beneath the first three characters of the date.

What he said.

That Barber was among the most heavily-clashed coins I'd ever seen. That said, my choice of lighting for the shot involved deliberately emphasizing the clashing, so it was even more prominent in the photos than it was in-hand.

Quite the cool little coin, that was.

In my opinion (and this is *only* an opinion), the reverse photo is the winner. It's a much more accurate depiction of the true luster of this wonderful coin. Both photos are detailed enough to show the technical grade, but the reverse seems more like the coin would actually look in-hand.

The new obverse photo has somehow obscured the luster. Maybe you are using too many light sources? To show cartwheel luster you basically need a point source of light, which can be a single halogen or incandescent bulb located well above the coin. An MS-65 uncirculated coin should show "hot" and "cold" (i.e., brighter and darker) areas caused by reflection and diffraction of the point-source lighting. If you have too many point sources the hot/cold contrasts are averaged out, giving a uniform (and unnatural) appearance.

Just my opinion!

Steev, it has no color. It's just a uniform shiny silver on the obverse. The reverse seems to have some slightly different shades of silver.

Dave
That is one great example of a Barber dime clashed obverse!

Thanks for showing