• Your Biggest Coin Photography Frustrations?

Do you have any example images of the problems, or do you delete them?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'd love to see a finished shot taken with the setup- two lights above and one below the glass. I'm curious how all of that interreacts with the glass plate. When you position the glass plate, do you have a specific outcome in mind?

 

While cameras still perform this function, most consumers find such knowledge largely useless in the digital age of algorithms and instant review. It was invaluable during the film era when shooting 'blind," (I'm aging myself), but thankfully it's almost irrelevant now. Personally, when adjusting white balance, I find the variables introduced by using a grey card—such as its placement, angle, lighting, and card type—are unnecessary, even with coins. Grey cards can also fade over time due to exposure. It's quicker, simpler, and more precise to know the light's colour temperature and set the camera accordingly. In the OP, I mentioned sharing how professional photographers address problems, and this is a good example. Professionals aiming for accurate colour don't use lights with unknown or mixed colour temperatures.

 

Here is a "staight on shot" and an angle shot.



The coin does display this luster when you see it in person.



Here is another.





Part of the design on this piece is dark because the cartwheel luster takes over the automatic exposure.



I delete the really bad pictures with slab window reflection issues, but you can see some of it in the right corner of this photo of a Proof 1913 dime. You can get these in the middle of the picture, if you don't play with the light source.

 

Since my main focus is in toned coins, primarily copper, the ultimate goal is bringing out color. I would need to look through the photos to find them. I have some organization but with each coin I haven’t separated the axial type photos with the traditional style. One that I have on hand is a 1914 MPL. Overall I like the result. With the traditional setup I wasn’t able to pick up any of the green obverse or red on the reverse. One thing I had to do was to have a much thinner angle on the axial glass. I did manipulate it to several different position before the color was what I was looking for. The result wasn’t perfect, but for my needs I was happy.
First photo is the TrueView, 2nd is my traditional and bottom is the axial.

 

I am a novice at taking any kind of pictures. I have only had a smart phone for about a year and a half. I have a great many other issues in my life going on so photography in general takes a back seat. However, if I had to post one issue that drives me crazy it is this. I will do my best to have a light source that is not behind me. i will do my best to see that the coin is tilted at least a little so I should get a fair pic. I will take the picture and check my results. Picture looks fine. I post the picture and the bottom third is too dark. James

 

Can you post an example? It will be easier to determine the problem.

 

I can't say for sure what will post but will try 2 coin pics I know usually suffer this fate.

 

Yes. I move the lights to where color from another area shows. It usually will take 3-4 separate photos. Since the coin position hasn’t changed I can put two photos (more if you want) on separate layers in photoshop and “paint” in the area from the bottom layer onto the upper layer. After I get as much from the bottom layer as I need I merge the two layers to make one layer. Then I put that layer on top of another with color in a different area and do it over again. And so on.
Edit to add, I forgot to mention I put a layer mask on the top layer so what ever spot you paint over will show the layer below.

 

My new photography station and a discovery of something I was doing wrong in the manual photography settings yielded some dramatic improvments; much more in focus than they used to be.

The results are still subpar but much improved. The low-grade A2 follis actually shows way more detail in the picture than it does with the naked eye. I had to use a magnifier to ascertain what's up and down, it's that faint. It's also very dark.

A more competent macro photographer could have yielded much improvement on the silver coin. It has a silky, gunmetal grey old-cabinet tone, and the toning is much more consistent and pleasing than in the picture.

I get the photography terms mixed up. What's the 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 number - the f-stop? In all cases so far, 0.4. worked out the best. I have ISO at 80, the same as I use on people. The exposure was at factory norm on the silver but I had to bump it up for the very dark low-grade coins.

There's only about 2 or 3 times a year where I get unphotographed coins. It doesn't make a lot of sense to spend a bunch of money on my photography station. My Sony alpha 77 dSLR achieves pin-sharp detail for people, though I don't have a macro lens. I suppose if I could find a somewhat inexpensive used Minolta macro lens it might make sense to buy a macro tripod. My two tripods are useless for macro. (These are all Note ultra pics).

The Note usually produces too much grain when I use the auto mode but it does take quite passable pics of people; much better looking coloration than my macro pics.

The actual toning of the reverse of the quadrigatus is much like the obverse; silky, old-cabinet toning, and not the harsh dark highlights that the picture suggests. However, it's wayyy more in focus than ever before.

I'd also need some kind of lightbox. But I'm not good at DIY, and unless I bought a pre-made one from someone or bought an expensive, professional one, I'm in a pickle about that.

The background is a white piece of paper.