Opinions please on this image of a PL Morgan dollar (CAUTION: SPAM)

[James_OldeTowne]

SPAM DISCLAIMER: This is a coin I will be offering for sale, so please exit the thread NOW if you consider this SPAM!

 

Good, now for everyone else, your opinions please on the image of this 1898 Morgan dollar. Guess the grade if you'd like, but I'll mention it's designated "prooflike".

 

I specifically want to know what you think of my attempt to capture prooflike characteristics. There's a little sliver of glare on the reverse upper-left edge, but otherwise, color, white-balance, and luster are spot-on accurate. Also, your thoughts on the size and resolution of the image.

 

THANKS! Images below....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Hard Times]

Except for the ding/scratch on the cheek this looks like an incredible example. I just don't know how much off the TPG's give for that ding, otherwise is looks 65-66-ish?

 

Nice photos all the way.

 

HT

[cpm9ball]

I like fried SPAM sandwiches!

 

It seems that many of the PL & DPL Morgans take on a dull, drab appearance in photos, so this doesn't bother me at all. The size of your images takes the guesswork out of interpreting the details of the coin, and I wish more FleaBay sellers would use images like this.

 

I'm thinking it will grade MS64, but I'm just a blind man.

 

Chris

[bsshog40]

I agree with Chris. A nice looking Morgan, a few contacts and the scratch on the cheek. Probably no higher than 64.

[Coindude]

The thing I see.... since your images are so good, is that I think you might need another light. Both images, in the 6 o'clock area are a bit dark. But the images are extremely sharp. I like the color and it captures the coin very well. Of course, it looks like you captured all the faults as well. There appears to be a large scratch behind the head, and one in the field at the brow area. The lighting probably causes them to be more pronounced than they really are.

 

MS64, PL.

[blu62vette]

I think that image is very good. The only thing I would nitpick is get a little more light on the face and it will show more contrast on the coin making it more PL. PL's are real tough to image, your either go for a black and white pic or tilt it for the mirror and the coin is all white. I like the way you did it the best and it is how I do mine.

[blu62vette]

I am in the 64 crowd as well....

[HiHoAudio]

I'll go with MS63PL due to the two marks on the obverse. Maybe MS64PL if the grader has an affection for PL Morgans.

 

And I like the photos very much. Some would consider them a bit stark.

 

I consider them accurate with great details.

[kryptonitecomics]

I am also in the 64PL crowd and agree with what other have said about some lighting adjustment needed but overall a very good image.

[James_OldeTowne]

Extremely helpful comments so far!

 

With regard to lighting, please see if the area in question is what I have circled below.

 

[blu62vette]

Extremely helpful comments so far!

 

With regard to lighting, please see if the area in question is what I have circled below.

 

 

I see the glare as more a problem than those circles. The circle area show the depth of the mirror. You can tilt your lights down some and get rid of the darkness there.

[Coindude]

Those are exactly the areas I was speaking of. Although, Todd is absolutely correct about the contrast. If the lighting were the same all the way around then it would look perfect. I don't much care for the glare either, but you stated that right off the bat.

[coinman_23885]

Except for the ding/scratch on the cheek this looks like an incredible example. I just don't know how much off the TPG's give for that ding, otherwise is looks 65-66-ish?

 

Nice photos all the way.

 

HT

 

I had another date that has nice surfaces without any dings and it only ended up in a OH NGC MS64 slab.

[coinman_23885]

SPAM DISCLAIMER: This is a coin I will be offering for sale, so please exit the thread NOW if you consider this SPAM!

 

Good, now for everyone else, your opinions please on the image of this 1898 Morgan dollar. Guess the grade if you'd like, but I'll mention it's designated "prooflike".

 

I specifically want to know what you think of my attempt to capture prooflike characteristics. There's a little sliver of glare on the reverse upper-left edge, but otherwise, color, white-balance, and luster are spot-on accurate. Also, your thoughts on the size and resolution of the image.

 

THANKS! Images below....

 

MS64 PL

 

 

 

 

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

I love the contrast, and I think for the most part the lighting is quite good. How do you feel the photo captures the depth of the mirrors? That is my only concern - they look nice, but only moderately deep.

[messydesk]

Nice pics of what I'll say is 64PL. Try moving the 2:00 light to 3:00 and maybe diffusing it a little. That'll knock down the saturated parts of the cap and throw a little more light on the bottom of the coin.

[James_OldeTowne]

If anyone's keeping score, the grade is NGC MS-63 PL. It looks like many of you perceive it as a PQ coin for that grade, and naturally, that's what I thought myself when I bought it.

 

I have really learned a lot from this thread. Thanks, all!

[eggbone]

I agree with the above lighting comments, though IMHO, this is a very fine photo job.

As for the Morgan, I think the hits will limit it to a 63PL.