Proof Coin Photography

I would like to know which style of proof coin photography that most collectors prefer. The first method is to blast the coin with light and get an up close photo of the surfaces. This method shows colors very well but seems to mask hairlines and imperfections due to overexposure (see 1st photo). The second method is a more traditional method that shows the contrast between the fields and devices. This method basically hides the colors of the toning on the coin but gives you a better look at the surfaces and overall appearance of the coin (see second photo).



Please give your opinions for the method you prefer. Thanks!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

#2 shows imperfections better

 

The first almost looks washed-out...

 

I prefer the second.

 

I am in the minority here but I like to see the surfaces in this manner if I have to pick one. I would really prefer to see both as I think they both expose different aspects I would look for if the coin were in hand. I think method 2 can hide not just colors but also things like finger prints the surface.

Darryl

 

so, what does the coin really look like?

 

I prefer the second method.

 

It depends. If you look at straight on from any distance, it looks like photo number 2. If you look at it close up under a light source and turn the coin under the light, it looks like photo number 1. Therefore, the answer to your question is both.

 

How about on a brilliant proof rather than an Ultra Cameo. This is a 1955 Washington Quarter NGC PF68 with gorgeous toning. The first method brings out the beauty of the coin where as method 2 makes you want to sell it. What say you?

 

That being the case I always want to see photo 1 - - as that is what the coin looks like up close and sometimes you can be surprised what you find. Was discussing nickels over the last two days with a friend and he was shocked at some of the great looking old nickels he has found recently. Here is what I saw up close:



From a distance this 1958 nickle looks nice and bright AU/XF with two full steps and a couple partials. The die polishing really makes it look nice from a distance... Up close it would make me throw it back in the coin jar. Some of the best 2007 nickels I looked at without a loupe in my hand were really rough (over used dies) when I took pictures of them with the correct lighting.

 

I disagree - I can tell number 2 is a better representation of the coin IMO and I actually like the way the coin looks in the 2nd picture than in #1.

 

Mirror surfaces can hide things if you use method #2 I think for non-mirror surfaces I like #2 better. Just to clarify my last post

 

I rather like the combination of both photos together. Heritage does this for there high end coins whether proof or mint state. The close up photos with increased lighting show the colors better and the slab photo gives you a good idea of the overall appearance of the coin. Together they give you good information. Alone, either photo style can me misleading IMO.

 

I agree, both together give you the "whole picture" of the coin's condition, toning, and reflectivity. Now, alone...I still prefer method 2, but method 1 does have useful information to contribute.

 

I prefer Method 2. The surfaces are more visible and I like the cameo.

Method 1 would be OK if it was not overexposed so much. It looks like it is overexposed by 1 or 2 stops. If the coin was photo'ed using Method 1 at the correct exposure I bet the colors in the toning would be much more visible.

 

Give you that - I confused the issue a little what's new

But - the mirror surface condition of the first coin versus the Quarter are much different. Every time I shoot one with a deep mirror finish I feel like I am left with a picture that doesn't really tell the complete story. The flat surfaces almost look black against the deep cameo. With the quarter the surface will show post mint conditions better as a result of (for lack of a better word) speckling that has developed on the surface.

Like I said in my first post - for the 1st coin I think both help the viewer. For the qtr - the 2nd shot is fine and the 1st is too much light to be useful - IMO.

 

I turned down the brightness a little. Did it help at all?