| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 1,595 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
Okay guys, lets try this one out. My microscope takes crappy pictures, but by darkening the original slightly and adding arrows with a different program in a second pic, you have an accurate representation of the view through the loupe. Black arrows indicate solid metal, the the red arrow indicates dotted metal. I have it narrowed down to 2 in my own mind, but I'd like for you guys to weigh in, as it doesn't EXACTLY fit either one. Having said that, Mr Magoo could see the underlying 2 without his specs. So.....what is it? NOTE: I just reviewed the post, and the black arrow in the NW should be moved about 3/32" to the east.   Edited by Biker Coin Guy
04/12/2017 03:26 am
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
121 Posts |
I know this is coming, so I will head it off at the pass. I will post pics of the full obverse and reverse tomorrow evening, but it's late now and I'm calling it a night.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Sorry, I don't see a 2, but you're the expert on this.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
No offense intended - if this is an overdate, it's way too subtle for me. You guys carry on.  Edited by Coinfrog
04/12/2017 6:58 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
There is a lot of noise, and my microscope doesn't take the best pics. I enhanced the one photo, and blacked in what I am looking at on the other. I see an FS-302, and I think it looks as good as pics of examples in CPG or sn.net. If no one else can see what I'm seeing, I dunno, maybe I'll take up underwater basket weaving or something.  |
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
Evening BCG, been laying back, trying to learn something here. Here's what I see, then my thoughts:  The comparison to the five, no close match at all, date seems close. Is the ball chipped because of that closeness? I think I see "something" to the west of the lower hook, very faint, but...? Not quite as sure inside nor on west of upper curve. Tried my own noise limiter and other tweaks, looks like you already did most of those. Time for me to go popcorn...  Oh, what about the point at 11 o'clock on 1st 8? Seem to have seen that elsewhere?  Edited by Crazyb0
04/12/2017 11:38 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
Thanks for the feedback, CB. One of the things that I find extremely frustrating about my microscope, is that if has a "flattening effect" on dimension. Metal looks like shadows and vise versa. Having seen the coin both through the loupe and the microscope, I know which is what, which is one benefit you guys don't get from just looking at the pics on my posts. I'm gonna see if my bro will hook me up with his camera for a few pics. Oh, and the "comparison to the 5" reference; I'm not sure what "the 5" is....
|
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
Awaiting photos of full obverse/reverse before making any more comments.
|
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
The 5 refers to the shieldnickels.net site. Only one I have at the moment. Not rich enough to buy many resources at the moment.
About your scope, is it 2M (pixel) or 5? That seems to make a big difference for me, not so much noise and better "depth". Mines a cheepy too, $45 a year ago.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
CB, my microscope is a cheapy as well,but it sounds like you got the better deal. Mine supposedly has 4 "resolution settings" to choose from: 1.3M, 2M, 3M and 5M. The funny thing is though, the pics look exactly the same no matter which one you use.
|
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
BCG, the pix may look the same, but the amount of pixels within are different. I have found, when I use a higher resolution setting I can manipulate the photos better. These two examples, #1 is 5MP undoctored, #2 has been run through Photoshop's noise filter and some other tweeks. Still not best, was in a hurry, but I removed a lot of the noise pixels giving a smoother texture, making it easier to manipulate sharpness. The third pix is a 1.3MP left and 5 MP right, all they are is cropped to same size, both have same amount of noise un-doctored. Final conclusion, doesn't seem to matter on straight undoctored pix which resolution is used, still get noise. Back to the drawing board, play around some more.    |
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
Here are full pics. I got much better pics this time by using lamp light instead of the microscope's LEDs   |
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
Any better?  |
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
I left them the same color as the microscope took them, mostly because the features stood out that way. I did play around with the contrast, shadows and saturation in Windows Photos to make the appropriate areas stand out a little more. I played with the tint until it was "nickel" colored, but it didn't seem as clear that way. As you say, more pixels makes for a much clearer zoom, but not much use here where you have to resize to 300kb or less
|
|
Valued Member
United States
121 Posts |
Doesn't look like any of the overdates to me. Date position doesn't match and deformation of the ball doesn't match.
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 1,595 |
|
Posted 04/12/2017 4:55 pm
