| Author |
 Replies: 27 / Views: 3,100 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3234 Posts |
Quote:
Nice. MS-62? CAC'd PCGS MS63 (some will say this has claims to 64; probably would see some like this in 64 holders) Edited by Prethen
02/06/2013 3:23 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
CAC'd PCGS MS63 (some will say this has claims to 64; probably would see some like this in 64 holders)
Not as silver, but as softer gold I'd be one of those who said it has claims on 64. Is that some serious die polishing I'm seeing through GOD and TRUST? |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Yeah, I can see 63 if the luster is stronger than what the pictures show. I really like the color.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3234 Posts |
Quote:
Yeah, I can see 63 if the luster is stronger than what the pictures show. I really like the color. Actually the surfaces exhibit excellent luster and even more interesting a hint of brilliance almost towards semi-PL (especially obverse). I'm a bit surprised that the photo didn't exhibit the luster as well as I thought it did. And, as you noted, I think the color is superb as it exhibits the perfect, original "skin" you'd want on old MS gold. Edited by Prethen
02/06/2013 5:27 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10038 Posts |
Wow Nathan - GREAT pics also.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
621 Posts |
That coin would be the centerpiece of my collection. an absolute beauty.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3234 Posts |
On the PCGS and NGC forums I've been soliciting blunt/candid comments on the quality of the photos. I figured that it's about time I take my photographic skills up a notch or two. I added a light for these. However, I've received a bunch of advice on those forums and I'll either reveal the results of how I put the advice to use here or on the photography forum here.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3234 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4132 Posts |
Can you tell us a bit more about your setup?
If your stand/tripod is really stable, there is no reason you shouldn't stick to ISO 100. You should only go with a higher ISO if you need faster shutter speeds for some reason or if your camera's native lowest ISO is not 100 (unlikely). If your setup is wobbly, then you might go with ISO 200 or 400 to get faster shutter speeds. Your camera seems to look pretty good at 400, so the extra noise is probably not a huge deal.
The biggest difference between these shots is focus. Some are simply not correctly focused on the coin - that's why that f/2.8 one looks so bad. Are you shooting tethered? If so, use the zoom function and manual focus. Autofocus tends to be pretty dodgy at macro distances. Once you've got the focus *perfect*, you can start worrying about other settings.
For aperture, use the minimum necessary to get the depth of field you need. It'll probably be about f/5.6. If the coin is very flat or you're willing to focus stack, and your lens can handle it, you can open wider. If you have a high relief coin, you might need to step down further to f/8 or maybe further (e.g. for ancients). If you use a smaller aperture than necessary you'll lose sharpness to diffraction.
With the ISO and aperture settled, just pick the shutter speed that gives you a correct exposure and you're set.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
50 Posts |
That is a beautiful coin.
|
|
Moderator
United States
16679 Posts |
Beautiful coin! Nothing like $20 worth of gold ;-)
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2311 Posts |
|
| |
Replies: 27 / Views: 3,100 |
First Page
Posted 02/06/2013 3:33 pm
