| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 1,754 |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
88 Posts |
Hey guys, this is my first attemp on scanning in my own coins without using the sellers pics. Let me know if they are clear enought to get a proper grade. I basically want to see if the luster shows from the scan. I think this is au55...am I close, or back to the books?   Edited by Kempire
01/25/2011 11:59 am
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
I don't see any obvious wear on the scan that would keep it from reaching MS grades. Can you capture a photograph so we can see the luster?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
I called this AU 55 and then read your post. The lack of luster is bothersome. The coin looks to have been over dipped with so much luster missing.
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
88 Posts |
I am about to take a pictures with my camera, it will be a crappy picture, but there is lots of luster. I just tossed it in the scanner and that is how it came out. Shows lots of detail, but the luster is gone...in hand its beatiful...also, I put it up in vams, it looks like a VAM 4. date is far right, and there is a die chip on the first 8.. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Quote:
I basically want to see if the luster shows from the scan. Sorry to say but you are wasting your time, a scanner is not capable of imaging luster like a camera can. Scanners work fine for detail and that is about it. It is also worth noting that the vast majority of scanners are designed for imaging 2D objects(paper, photos, etc), not 3D objects like coins. |
|
Valued Member
Canada
88 Posts |
ok, here is a picture from my camera. Yes that is my wifes hair clip, and yes it was taken in my bathroom...LOL...anyway, I hope it shows you enough luster. I told you the pic wouldnt be great, I have a crappy camera. Thanks, Mike.   |
|
Valued Member
Canada
88 Posts |
hmm...for some reason the coin looks a yellowish color here. In hand it is not, very bright....
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
Based on the photo, I will say AU-55 detail Cleaned
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
Diffcult to say from the scans, but from what I can see I would grade it at AU-53.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
I do not see any thing that screams cleaning (it may be but I can't see anything that says its definitely cleaned from the pictures provided) to me so I think AU-55 is a good assessment for this coin. As far as luster in scans it just isn't going to happen with most scanners. I have seen one member on here use a scanner and his pictures looked great compared to most but he usually scanned gold coins but most I see do not show luster at all but are real good at showing details of the coin
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
88 Posts |
Holding it in my hand, and looking at it with a mag glass, I cannot see anything that says it was cleaned. There is no scratches, and the lusterlooks just like a slabbed Morgan, but, I am also just learning, so you could be right. Mike.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
As Bryan said, scanners do not represent luster. In fact, they do just the opposite - areas of greater luster tend to look darker in scans. The reason some members have mentioned the possibility of cleaning is the way the light plays on the neck and chin on the obverse, and the breast of the reverse. The have a "polished" look in that light.
The yellow look is just a matter of in-camera white balance; the coin undoubtedly doe not look like that.
I'm not prepared to be convinced this coin has been polished based on the images I see. The limitations of lighting and camera are capable of creating this effect as well. Too little evidence. AU55 works for me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
Surfaces look a bit polished to me
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 1,754 |
|
Posted 01/25/2011 3:30 pm
