I tried both the Note 20 and the SLR today. I had tried the dSLR setting which had been successful on record labels, multiframe noise reduction, but taht didn't work. I also naturally forgot to turn it back to RAW and jpg after that; dumb that it doesn't do that automatically after MFNR goes off, so I didn't have the luxury on the didrachm of changing saturation in raw. I experimented with flash, length away from the coin, etc. I turned down the flash as far as it would go. I still have the problem of the images being rather fuzzy. I have a fairly fast lens, but it's not a macro lens. I also freehanded it. I have a tripod, but nowhere to set up a workstation for that setup. Coin photography is very frustrating. As you notice, I try to integrate the original tag into the picture, both for baked-in coin info and to remind myself where it came from. Both were various birthday or Christmas presents. The Hadrian actually has some more hair definition in real life, and is less blue. It's a dark brown with blue in the pits and subtle blue highlights. The coin itself is simultaneously partly semi-glossy and matte on the obverse, and mostly matte on the reverse. I'd grade it at decent Fine wear with rough surfaces. Like I said, the hair's more defined in person. The didrachm was shot in jpg only, so it wasn't as easy to fiddle around with the image. It took forever and a day to find the right resize ratio for the obverse. Bloomin' heck, the rose is upside down, after looking at vcoins . Oh well, I have all the original as-is sides. I save them as well. There's slow progression. These tries are less sucky than before.
I think they look pretty good. Helios looks a bit blurry, but the rest are crisp. I think you should try removing the background (or at least crop more closely). Once you remove the background it can be easier to "process" the images. For a free service (crop closely because max size for free download is 500pix) you can use remove.bg. I often just use the default free image software in Windows to correct for saturation, warmth, tint, exposure and light balance. Also, I like that you've included tags in your photos. I tend to do that when coins come with old collector tags I think are important: An AR "obol" (or "Ma'eh") from the Samaria Hoard with Jay Galst's tags: An Elvira Clain-Stefanelli tag with a Quntillus in front Some Thessalian bronze coins with BCD's tags:
Since it's not a macro lens, I had to hold the lens fairly far away. And when I would get close, the camera would cast a shadow on the item. At least I got some unphotographed ones photographed. I tried photographing some junk box S805 Heraclius', some of my first coins - from Allen Berman, but I had lacquered them, well not lacquered, it's some kind of oil that the coin store sold, so they're shiny and hard to photograph.
I have found using flash is a trade off with by SLR. On the plus side are greater depth definition and faster shutter speed. One the negative side is "flash effects" that change the coin's natural appearance that cannot be edited through Photoshop. Many a time I find myself sitting in front of the computer, coin in hand, and attempting to make the image look like it, with little success. Again, the type of metal you are photographing, say, a bright silver coin versus a dark bronze can determine the quality of the photo. I have found silver fairly easy to photograph, while patinated bronze can be a challenge. Generally, I try to photograph using the natural light coming through the skylight. However, that is not always possible, so I often switch the camera to automatic mode, which usually engages the flash. If you are using a SLR, I strongly recommend a x4 macro lens. A set of them, the screw-on type, can be purchased at a fairly moderate price, but you need to be sure to order the correct diameter, of course. For almost all of my photos I've used the x4 macro lens. Also, Photoshop has this useful feature called auto haze reduction that really sharpens an image. There's also an auto shake reduction that I use much less frequently, pretty much determined by the degree my hands are wobbly for a give day. Here's a photo that I took last year that I edited today using the shake reduction tool in Photoshop. The focus isn't perfect, but it is acceptable I think, especially for an amateur like me.
Yes, your photo is much better than mine. I've experimented with and without flash, and about every variable I could think of. The dslr shots without the flash were dreadful. The light just wasn't strong enough. When I take record label photos, multiframe noise reduction and no flash works fine, with a little brightening in photoshop. I also have the newest version of Paint Shop Pro. MFNR doesn't seem to allow flash photography. I won't get optimal effects until I get a lightbox, but I'm dreadful at building things.
Your photos are pretty good, actually. Here is your first photo that I edited with Photoshop haze reduction tool for the entire image, and shake reduction for the coin only. I don't know if the colors are true, but the overall definition is better.
Neat - a bit better! In real life, the blue is much less pronounced on the coin in hand. One can vaguely see it in front of Hadrian's face and it's more pronounced in the the picture's vivid blue spots. That might be a quirk of any flash photography. I bumped down the brightness on the DNG version. That's about all I did with it. I wonder if Photoshop CS5 has a shake reduction? I'll also have to look in Paint Shop Pro. The coin was photographed on the backside of a white CD sleeve. I'll certainly have to explore Photoshop a bit more, when I have more time. Sunday night is my busy night, getting ready for the week.
Yes, Photoshop has a shake reduction tool, which can be selected in automatic mode or manually. I've never reached absolute sharpness. Perhaps using a tripod would help, but that requires setting up a box, which, given my slovenly ways in retirement, probably won't happen.
Yeah, I guess I'd have to hire someone to build a box. I guess that would be much less daunting than my Technics SP 10 mkii turntable project. The prospect of packing and shipping, and the inflated lumber market (plinth) put me off.
I think you need 2 things to make a huge difference: 1) a copy stand I built one in about 20 minutes with two-by-fours. I still use it. You just need to rig it so you have a steady upright two-by-four that you can put a bolt through to hold the camera absolutely steady, facing down obviously. No need to raise and lower the camera, it's easier to use books to raise and lower the platform the coin is on. 2) An extension tube, which is a super cheap way to get macro that works well with coins. (Sometimes you lose the corners of the image, but who cares?) The image below is just a random example. Then you should get a nice high-res image where the coin fills the field of view, plus you don't need to hand-hold and so you don't need to use a flash. Those are your two main problems. (Even better if you can hook the camera up to your computer for remote release and a full-screen view of what your picture will look like.)
You must minimise camera shake in macro photography. It will reduce the processing you need to do. A tripod will do this best. If a tripod isn't available, just supporting the camera on some books may also work. If your camera allows a timer, that will also help to reduce the button shake.
Thanks. I do have one or two full size tripods. I'll have to look in the owner's manual, but i think there's a timer. In fact, I bought a third party super-duper detailed book about the camera. It's a Sony. The only bad things about Sony - the proprietary lenses (unless one gets a Minolta) and the goofy ARW raw. The camera's a little long in the tooth, 2012, so I don't want to spend too much on it. The $28 extender would be nifty. I mostly used it for radio transcription labels. The Shadow, and stuff like that.
I just started using my Dino-Lite camera connected to my computer and I'm still trying work the bugs out but, one thing I learned fast in not to use the cameras lights and go with natural lighting. The camera lights were generating to much glare, and I was getting crappy pictures. Attached is a picture of my 1865 seated dollar I took on Saturday. I'm still working on getting the correct lighting but, I'm getting close.
