RWB

Note: If you want your vote to have greater influence, select only a few names.

John K should definitely be on the list! Heck, I'll gladly split whatever votes I get with John!

Possibly on a different list....

Coin World magazine is having a survey of the most influential living people in numismatics. Here is a link for those who want to participate. There are no awards or prizes -- not even an extra plate of steamed shrimp at an ANA convention. https://survey.alchemer.com/s3/5958295/Coin-Worlds-Most-Influential-People-in-Numismatics The list includes familiar and unfamiliar names, so follow the directions.

Hinkle - If you don't have one, buy a copy of the ANA grading guide. It will help you better assess the condition of your coins.

RE: "The lighting of proofs isn’t really much different from non proofs. You just have to keep the lights far enough back from the lens so as not to glare off of the mirrors. Below are three somewhat progressively more mirrored proofs I have photographed in the past couple months." Some use a black (or white) card around the lens how does that work? Also, what about older proofs were the entire surface is mirrored?

I asked to hear brg5658's views on this. Mark is 3,000 miles away. Different photographers might achieve excellent results through different means.

RE: "Having used the Canon 45mm TS lens, I must disagree most vociferously with Roger's protestations - it is a truly MAGNIFICENT tool, if you can find one." If you've ever spent years with a 4x5 view camera and superior lenses, the little 35mm tilt/shift lenses from Nikon and Canon are mostly "cute." There is no viable comparison in results.

So you feel it is more of an individual decision for non-portrait designs?That is: what lighting produces the most accurate and pleasing result....is that correct? (PS: That 1825 is a beauty !) Another question. Assuming the camera (CCD plane) is parallel to the coin, how can one best light a modern brilliant proof so that the field is dark (or light)? Also, what can be done about non-cameo proofs to get good results without erratic reflections off the relief? (Well -- that's 2 1/2 questions.....)

OK. Here's a relevant question for brg5658. When photographing a portrait light should usually come from the direction in which the subject is facing. Is there a similar rule of thumb (or some other body part) for eagles and figures on the reverse, or for geometric designs? (See the first post, coin photos in right column, center and bottom.)

None of your claims have any connection to reality. Next time you find something different, why not post it without your comments and let members tell you what they see? Also, two good, sharp obverse and reverse photos are a lot more helpful then a bunch of fuzzy pictures. It is an ordinary 1964 half that has been scraped with abrasive, possibly to clean off tarnish. It's only value is in the silver it contains.

Brad Adams - Can you tell us why you felt it might be a doubled die coin?

A typical circulated 1922 Peace dollar is worth a little under $19 in silver value. It would have no premium for collectors. They are very common.

Hmmmm...looks like a proof too!

A matrix is a complex device or design element mounted on the end of a punch. A punch is a rod or length of steel with anything from a flat or rounded, to a matrix on one end. A punch can be small and manually handled, or large enough to require mechanical aid to impress the design end. Collectors commonly think of a letter or digit punch. All of this seems to have come from printing and metalworking crafts.

Geeee....maybe we could try to do as well as the Brits !

Mark's photo of the 1917 dime is different, and that might be preferable to the NGC approach, but neither can capture luster because that is not possible in without stereo binocular imagery and the ability to make slight alterations in viewing angle. (A really good color hologram would work.)

RE Insider comments: "Sorry everyone, this photography "expert" does not wish for me to play anymore." Unfortunately, so far nothing in Insider's posts or photos demonstrates the in-depth knowledge and comprehension to qualify as an "expert." The posted photos are useful utilitarian images that meet certain needs - that is fine - but they lack the technical quality to have come from the hand of a photographic expert. But, it is probably incorrect to assume that Insider's posted photos were specifically made for "best quality." The text posts are almost entirely dogmatic and seem to reject basic optical science. Again, not what would come from expert knowledge. With Insider having withdrawn from the thread, I hope members will ask brg5658 relevant questions for improving their coin photos. Also, there seem to be some areas where his approach is clearer than Mark Goodman's.

IRS says: "The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency."

The NGC photos look good! No drama or exaggerated saturation. Luster is not something one would expect to capture in a static, monocular photo.

These discoveries are always fun to read about! Congratulations to David Perkins for submitting and describing the new variety. Minor error in the article: "Each obverse working die was started by impressing the portrait of Liberty using a master ‘hub die.’ " The central portrait was made using a "matrix" not a hub. A matrix is a large punch containing a single design element such as a portrait, eagle, wreath, inscription, etc. A hub has the complete design in relief, omitting only all or part of the date. Further there is no such critter as a "hub die" -- it is one or the other. (A hub is in relief, a die is incuse. A hub can be used to produce a working die.)

Ratzie33: You are conflating multiple pieces of information, resulting in a confused muddle. It appears you feel you know all the answers before posting photos, so there is really no meaningful way to help. Most members will try to communicate, but you must be willing to listen to suggestions of much more experienced collectors. The consequence is that some are frustrated with your posts, and you are therefore receiving fewer responses. If you want assistance, just ask. RWB

A Federal charter adds to the credibility of an organization.

The thread is, as noted by the OP, about improving photos. Could others (including me) please stick to that?

Yeah, something like that. Personally, I accept only the "perfect as it comes from the dies" definition.