Decided to update some coin photos. One was too dark and others were too bright. These are much better then what they previously were. Constans (337 - 350 A.D.) Æ2 O: DN CONSTA-NS PF AVG, Pearl diademed, draped and and cuirassed bust left, holding globe in right hand. R: FEL TEMP RE-PARATIO, Helmeted soldier,spear in left hand, advancing right, head left; with his right hand he leads a small figure from a hut beneath a tree. (mint of Cyzicus), 4th offincia. SMKΔ 4.5g Julia Paula (219 - 220 A.D.) AR Denarius O: IVLIA PAVLA AVG, Draped bust right. R: CONCORDIA, Concordia seated left, patera in right, left elbow resting on arm of throne, star in left field. Rome 3.1g 18.3mm RSC 6a , RIC 211 MAXIMINUS ( 235 - 238 A.D) AR Denarius O: MAXIMINVS PIVS AVG GERM, Laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right. R: PAX AVGVSTI, Pax standing facing, head left, holding olive branch and transverse scepter. 20mm 3.1g Rome RIC 019 RSC 037
Great shots! My favorite is no doubt the Maximinus. Do you have the before pics, to see the comparison?
All beautiful examples, but that Maximinus has to be my favorite as well. Bold strike, nice centering, and it must not have seen hardly any circulation! May I ask why the reverse has a weaker strike on many ancients l've seen? More emphasis on the bust, so reverse dies were allowed to deteriorate? Curvature of the planchet? Something else?
In many cases the reverse die was not nearly as well executed as the portrait. If I were running the mint, I would put my best die cutters on portraits and the beginners on reverses. As the dies began to wear out, the mint would be more likely to get complaints from above if the emperor looked bad so I'd suspect the pressure to replace reverses was less. Dies that were used in the top position are known to have worn more quickly and produced fewer coins than the lower, anvil dies so the more precious portrait dies were generally used on the bottom. Finally, if a blank was too thin to provide enough metal to both sides of the design, the shallower reverse seems to show the problem worse. In extreme cases, there is a complete blank space opposite the head where the strike was too weak to push metal into both sides. Mat: Great improvement. New photos are cheaper than new coins but these really make the silvers look like great coins. I'm not sure what to suggest for the Constans but believ wiggling the coin and adjusting the lights for a few more trial and error sessions might improve it some more. That coin has a more challenging type of surface.
I agree ... man, those are some pretty smooth lookin' boots!! (good eye, Doug) Oh, sorry Mat => your photos are top-drawer (thanks for updating them ... man, I always love seeing other people's coins!!)
Exactly, thats part of the reason I did it too. As for the Constans, the original I took made the coin nearly black. Its a dark coin and I "think" it may have some Reno wax for its surfaces to boot. The whole coin has that glossy feel, even the fields. So various light angles didnt work. I was surprised how well this constans turned out.
I like the new photos. I am constantly in a struggle to standardize my photos and place them on the black background. I often deal with the image being to dark. Originally I think it was my monitor was too bright. Not sure. All I can say it is a real challenge to take real good pictures of ancient coins. I think on these three you have had a great deal of success. Kudos.
Dark pics can sometimes be tremendously improved by adjusting the luminosity curves. Any decent photo editor has the capability.