I decided to reshoot my Geta & Urbs Roma since they were old pics with old backgrounds. I wanted them to match with the rest of my coins in my gallery. I happen to like the new images more, better detailed even though the Geta doesnt show it's toning like the old photo did. These are also higher quality, if you want to click.
Nice new shots. Its hard for me to get a good shot of a coin that shows both detail and colorful toning too, it still looks pretty good, and I always like sandy's. A really good shot of that one.
Every coin has its own characteristics that make it easy or hard to shoot. The Geta looks hard. I'd suggest trying it again rotating the coins as to move the glare spots around to see if you can find a more natural looking direction. You might also try diffusing the light more or bouncing the light onto the coin less directionally. Each of these things causes as many problems as it cures so all I can do is try various things until something looks better. It would be nice to get the toning. The beauty of digital photography is that we can shoot 100 times and throw out the 99 losers without spending any money on film. The Wolf looks fine to me.
That's a scarcer wolf, with the control marks above. One of the "maybe in the future" subspecialties I had always considered was a collection of these reverses. I have suggested to my ancient coin club they have a photography night. Maybe Chris will become not so hopeless. Btw, is emerald green patina hard to photograph? A member is selling coins there, and a caracalla setertius that is gorgeous emerald green is calling my name pretty strongly. Anyone ever buy a coin just because of a patina?
Hard? You might say hardest. I fought the green shine so much that I posted a page on some of my early struggles: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/neroduppho.html Certainly I have bought coins because of their patina and, conversely, I sometimes select against a coin that is of moderate interest just because I don't think I will be able to photograph it. If there is anything that gives me more trouble than green it is shiny black since you have to decide whether you want to see detail or see blackness. Below are two coins each lighted three ways. None of the images really look 100% the way I would like but each is accurate if compared to the coin is some light. When we hold a coin in hand, we wiggle it until it looks best. Sometimes we walk into another room or turn on another light. Capturing these same maneuvers in one single picture can be a challenge when we start with certain coins. Photo night at a club is risky. Some one will bring a slabbed proof and wonder why I can't shoot it. http://www.pbase.com/dougsmit/image/96356068 http://www.pbase.com/dougsmit/image/96381181 For a reason I don't understand the CT software won't show the images in the intended size. Follow the above links to see them larger.
I can see why both would be tough to shoot. However, I can see how both are just gorgeous. I have a Nero that is black as night but shiny, so I imagine that one would be a nightmare. For the green one, does yours look this bright in hand? Most of the green ones I own and treasure have a deeper hint of green, and less yellowish green. I can very easily see how that would be from the light though. I really am a sucker for those coins, both the shiny black and shiny emerald green. After holding this sestertius in my hand, I can really see how some people could pay thousands for an even better one.
There are many shades and intensities of green. Light is nice. This photo is pretty close if the coin is viewed in strong light. Have you seen this one? http://www.acsearch.info/record.html?id=469525
Niiice, with a "nice" price to boot. I am more of a darker green fan, though. I like yours, or maybe even a touch darker green. I know I sound like a hypocrite, warning US collectors about premiums for toning, but drooling over these. At least our patinas take centuries to form, and cannot be replicated in a home oven.
I agree, I love patinas & will sometimes pay a small premium if it's nice enough. I especially like sandy patinas.
I would differentiate though between these patinas and "sandy" patina. A sandy patina is really only dirt still on the coin, with the resulting highlighting of the coin sticking through resulting in a pleasant appearance. Black and hard green patinas are a rare chemical reaction that changes the color of the underlying metal to a plasant color. While I like all of them, to me there is just inherent differences. A sandy patina is in theory reproducible, if you get the coin dirty again and just brush off the higher points. Black and hard green aren't reproducible, (though some do try with paints). Painted patina IS a concern with these. I may look like an idiot, but I actually sniff patina like this, then look at it under a higher power magnifier, (I use my 16/32x stereo microscope), to ensure its a true patina, and not paint.
It seem with glossy green, I have to choose how flat it looks, how much glare and/or how much detail I really want. The semis had little detail as it was, with that one and the first shot of Galerius, the Glare seems to look best compared with other pics I took like the 2nd shot of Galerius which is kind flat or bland looing. The FH shows allot of detail, but looks a little uglier/rougher than in hand. The Dupondius of A Pius took allot of trial and error to get a decent shot. I used angled morning sunlight to get that one.
Just talked to Ras & this Urbs is unknown out of 2500 he's referenced so far for Eric III so this coin will now be added. So thats two coins of mine that wil be in the book
