A recent post on the 'Game' thread saw me show a denarius of Septimius Severus that I thought had a lot of detail on the reverse figure. Being a tad bored today, I got out some 'toys' I had not used for a long time and tried to look at the reverse figure a bit more closely. The toy was the 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar normal lens that came on my very first 'serious' camera back in 1964. It was a good lens by 1964 standards but designed by people with pencils rather than computers. Because it was corrected to take sharp photos at long distances, I mounted it in reverse so the corrections would be better at a very close distance. This is the first shot made with that rig. It is a set of eight images, each with slightly different focus, combined with a freeware program I have used for many years CombineZ. The program evaluates each part of each images and uses the sharpest part of each in one composite image. Usually I use this for shots of coins tilted to show the edge and face of the coin but it can be useful for super macro. The lens was set to marked f/5.6 but the effective aperture was much smaller since the image was so far past 1:1. In the old days, I had to calculate and compensate for the exposure but the through the lens metering on current cameras make this a skill for dinosaurs. What I did have to decide was to use f/5.6 since I feared any smaller setting would degrade sharpness due to diffusion (an optical 'law' that can not be corrected out of lenses). Focus stacking allows creation of an image with the depth of field of a smaller aperture but the diffraction limits of a wider one. I will continue to play. Suggestions for subjects appreciated.
Wow @dougsmit. That's a great shot. Since I am one of the worse image takers (notice I won't even use the word photographer as a descriptor), I about followed a small portion of your write-up. I certainly cannot think of anything that could improve that image. Well done lad (I thought I throw in "lad" just because)
The sharpness of detail and tonality are amazing! The programs that I’ve seen on the ID Channel Forensic shows come to mind.
Those are impressive photos ! I've got a denarius of the same type with a reverse of slightly better style.
Great photos as always, @dougsmit! Yours are what I aspire mine to end up like. Time, money, and patience are not on my side for now.
Doug, your photos and insights never fail to inspire. I’ve made you all suffer some pretty awful photos of mine and I have promised myself, now that I’m working from home, that Once I’m done reorganizing my greek coins that I am gonna change my setup and get better pics. I’m almost done with that task and have just started testing ways to take better photos with my phone. Here’s a few recent photos of some coins that I’ve struggled to shoot in the past:
Although you lost me at mounting the lens in reverse, I love the resulting photo! Admittedly, envious of your skill in the ancient art of photography. The camera I usually use is a pea-sized CCD camera on a low end USB connected "microscope", I like the convenience of being able to see real-time the image at large scale on a monitor but not the best for image quality. Getting proper exposure requires tricking the camera with a paper strip that is cropped out. A Caracalla for no particular reason (Laodicea ad Mar / eastern mint? RIC 336 AD 198): Caracalla, AD, 198-217, AR denarius, AD 198 Obv: IMP CAE M AVR ANT AVG P TR P, laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right Rev: MINER VICTRIX, Minerva standing left, holding Victory and spear, shield to left and trophy to right.
Yes, AK, I do like the style on your coin. Actually it is easier to take great photos if you have great subjects. I am discovering that the highest grade coins are not necessarily the best for photographing. I have been selecting future victims for my macro work and discover some of the most promising are fourrees of coins with 'interesting corrosion. My next one, though, is a better than average Legionary (LEG III ITAL) from the Rome mint series of 193 AD. If anyone has a better one, please do show it. The selected section shows the head of the eagle with collar and the capricorn on the left standard. This is one of my better legionaries in both style and grade. Click to see larger. This time I only stacked four images and paid the price for being cheap since there is an unsharp area where the eagle's beak meets the field. Anotrher place it needs improvement is dusting off the coin before shooting. There is a tiny dust hair on the neck of the capricorn and a lighter one under the collar. I should have made more effort to color match the two. The macro is a bit red. This is a learning experience.
Absolutely amazing super macro shots. When I enlarge your photo I can see some areas that are perhaps tool marks of the artist? I was wondering if anyone has been able to see any patterns between dies using this method.. if you had die matched coins - I wonder if you would see such marks in the same spot? Or determining if the same tools were used by those creating the bust and those cutting the legends? **Just a new collector - so I am sure this has been something that has been studied forever.. but it just crossed my mind so thought I would ask.
That drives me crazy when that happens! I don't realize there is a spec or hair on a coin until I see it enlarged in Photoshop. Then it bugs me mercilessly. This is the only time I allow myself to doctor an image in Photoshop--I'll use the stamp tool to remove the offending object.
To further clarify my question (or muddy the waters more).. what about non-die linked coins, from the same mint, same time frame, with very similar styles? Could tool marks (and/or their patterns) found through super macro photography determine if the same celetor was the artist?
This is a question I have not heard previously. My first thoughts that there are so many variables including strike and die wear that this would require many coins from the dies to provide data and great care interpreting what was seen. It would be interesting to see what the right person could do with this idea. I'm doing this for fun. I wonder if there are any serious numismatists working in this way.
