Photoshopping Coin Photos

He usually took two pictures, not just one, and did so as a backup in case something happened to one of them. He knew what he wanted the picture to look like before he took it, and knew what it would take to get it. The glass plates were just the beginning, however. A huge amount of time was spent in the darkroom doing processing, adjusting exposure in certain zones of his photos to get the look he had in mind. He actually looked forward to the day when "electronic photos" would make all the processing steps much easier and faster.

Such it is with coins. If you know what you want something to look like and know what tools you have at your disposal to do it, you use them. Extended bit depth from raw images that enable localized exposure control can make up for not being able to light a certain part of the coin the way you want because of the behavior of the luster. Adjusting color saturation to match the coin in post-processing will avoid clipping color channels by doing it automatically in the camera. Advanced, multi-frequency filtering techniques can let you adjust the appearance of details and levels of the background.

Of course, if your picture is no good to begin with, you're just putting lipstick on a pig. If you know what you're doing with all the tools you have, you're a fool not to use them. If you think the automatic settings on a camera are always going to make it unnecessary to process further, then you're just a fool.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Well, I'd go with just "inexperienced".

The problem is, there's no line between adjustments to make the photo represent the coin's in-hand appearance and adjustments to... cast a flattering light on the coin's in-hand appearance. To do an honest job, you have to have a good eye, and be scrupulously honest with yourself. Wouldn't you agree?

 

I dunno. I've been at this photog thing for quite some time, and I know what I like, and I know what I wanna 'see'. Just makes it easier for me. I never use 'automatic' settings......

 

OK, maybe "fool" is a bit harsh in some cases.

I agree that you have to have a good eye and be honest with yourself if you want to do an honest job, but that is not constrained to how you use post-processing. You can be just as dishonest with lighting, exposure, and focus. We could all easily name at least one eBay seller that does that as their MO.

You also have to consider why you're shooting a particular coin. When it's for sales, you have an optimization problem -- maximize sales price while minimizing the chance for a return. When someone wants a 24"x36" poster of their favorite toned Oregon Trail to hang up, you try to avoid accentuating flaws with your lights, even hiding them if feasible.

The bottom line is that you need to know how to use all the tools available to you.

 

Which is a problem Ansel Adams never had.

 

Can't even imagine what a pain that would be to try and make something of that crazy size that someone wouldn't complain about

 

Wow, I know a couple professional photographers that might want to contact you on some pointers. They have some pretty high dollar software that I bet they really don't need. Lol

 

I know a professional photographer, he doesnt do much macro work. But he always post processes his work. Like anything the better the conditions during set up the less post processing needed. Macro photography such as for coins medals and tokens is about the most control-able of all photography. If you have to rely completely on post processing you are more of a computer geek than a photographer. And let's face it, we are more coin geeks than photographers (most of us anyway).

 

Nobody relies completely on post-processing. People that know what they're doing and know what it's for use post-processing as it was intended. I know coin photography quite well, and I know what post-processing is for. It's meant to finish the job you started in the camera, not to rescue it.

 

There was a seller whose pennies almost all had the same coppery tone and all shot at the same angle whether they had been cleaned, spotted or otherwise "off". His name indicated that he was a "key Date" promoter. I called him out on my feedback and I don't see him selling there anymore. I have seen his wares on HA.

 

I do my best to photograph my coins correctly.
That means I want the coin to look in the image the same as it looks in hand.
That will never happen because of the zoom factor.
A computer screen sized image has GOT to look different than the coin in hand.
But as long as I can look at the image and say, "I'd buy that coin based just on the image" I feel okay.

Of course that includes:
-- focus
-- size
-- lighting

WAY too many copper coins come out looking like dark circles.
All coins should be imaged with a black or dark gray background.
And NGC with their white inserts need to be imaged with something masking out the the insert as much as reasonably possible.

 

I agree with messydesk; tread lightly and no alterations. Minor adjustments to bring out the "true" characteristics of the coin are okay.

 

Copper is very touchy, especially when you're photographing it for someone else to view on their system so that they can make a purchase decision. So much of what someone thinks about copper is the color. If you're off just a little, chocolate brown can turn into a corroded pinkish brown or a verdigris riddled greenish brown. Undersaturation can give your coin that "dug" look, and oversaturation can make your coin look messed with. Get your white balance right, you say? Well, there are 4 other factors thwarting you there. First, the light in which you are used to looking at the coin may not be the same as what you're using to light the coin, so you aren't sure which color to trust. Second, that laptop display or monitor your using is most likely not correctly calibrated, meaning the color is off, making you see, for example, a pinkish coin and leading you to inadvertently make it greener when you correct it. The other two things working against you are at the other end of the sale. The buyer's display is also probably not calibrated and you have no idea what light they're using to view the coin they receive.

Control what you can here. Calibrate your display with a color calibration tool and be consistent with your photo and viewing lights. Verify white balance by shooting a white balance target and checking its histogram on your computer.

 

Here is something that will help with the focus. Get a CD holder, cut a slit in a black cloth and set the coin on top. By moving the background from the focal length the focus becomes much easier. I cannot take credit for this as someone on CT came up with this. Thank you whomever you are!!

 

Every single picture I take is edited in some way or another. Tweek the white balance, adjust the contrast, tone down the brightness, etc.

But, my guiding principle is always: make the picture look like the coin in hand. I'm trying to present the most honest, thorough picture of the coin. I want the picture to be perfect - but I also want to be able to convey exactly how the coin looks.

I'm not trying to take so-called "TrueViews" where they edit the picture so much that it turns out to be a glamorous beauty shot. I'm trying to show you exactly what my coin looks like.

 

Another analogy would be audio engineering. You can have world class microphones, preamps/consoles, the best AD/DA converters out there all being fed by the most talented musicians in a 3 million dollar acoustically treated space and there will still be post-processing applied 99% of the time in the mixing and mastering stages to convey the finest product to the end-listener.

Nowadays usually too much processing (ETA- See Wiki: Loudness War), but even in the early days the vast majority of those classic albums still had subtle equalization applied at a minimum to balance everything.

In numismatic photography and audio the same applies though- get it as good as you possibly can on the way in as the less post processing the better.

 

I think the answer depends on which image is closer to what the coin actually looks like, and, since only the poster knows, we have to trust the integrity of the poster. On this forum, that's fine. It's a little more tricky when buying online, though, isn't it? Then you're forced to rely on feedback from other buyers.

 

One of the most nefarious things in our entire hobby, particularly egregious with proof coins.

I'm glad the tide has turned away from those over time; a decade ago people wouldn't shut up about them.

 

Couldn't disagree more. Using anything except a white background doesn't allow the viewer to determine where the white balance stands, i.e. there is no point of reference.

 

I love coin photos as art. For me, I get immense satisfaction out of capturing the essence of the coin in the set up. Only cropping and sizing. Sure it might not be perfectly aligned or have just a tad too much white in an area or two...but that is the art. This one has a great die scratches or breaks on the reverse, especially from wheat stalk tip to wheat stalk tip through EPU...also some die gouges at 8 o'clock. Finally the obverse pic with the airtite with the blues, reds and whites and textures (even the fingerprints on the capsule)...i just love a great coin pic or 3...