Photography: tilted coins

I was playing with making images of coins at an angle either to add a 3d look or to show an edge detail. Is it worth pursuing? I have great difficulty making the angle of both sides the same and believe they would look a lot better if the angles matched. Suggestions?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Get yourself a carpenter's square. Set the angle you want for the first photograph, then flip it over for the matching reverse angle.

 

I would say that producing angled shots of irregularly-shaped ancients is not all that bad, but for more modern coins, taking photos at an angle tends to hide potentially distracting marks that can affect grade and value.

Chris

 

this is just my opinion, but I feel like you could brand yourself with a new "3 Image" format, two of from and back, and one on the edge. I think it looks awesome.

 

I think they are spectacular pictures Doug! I reckon I could sell my coins for 30% more if they smiled at the camera the same way your coins do! 3D they certainly are and a great way to show depth of relief. superb.

 

I think it's perfect for showing relief and thickness on ancients.

 

I like the angle photos. I think the 3D look is a great idea. I would also take the standard front and back photos (along with the 3D photos).

 

Yeah, so everyone should post at least a dozen photos of each side of a coin. Right!

Chris

 

I think the point here is, this style of photography has no more a downside than any other format. Straight on photography isn't the only method for showing a coin's quality and detail.

 

I don't know where you come up with a dozen. It would only be 3 photos for each side. Left angle, right angle and straightforward. That would be a total of 6 photos for the whole coin.

 

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, but what Chris states about tilting coins is for the most part completely true. Coins tilted into the light to show the toning or proof like surfaces often have overlit fields that are nothing but glassy (blown out) reflections. These types of photos are completely known to hide hairlines, marks, and other surface problems, and overly emphasize color and glamorize coin surfaces. It takes but one or two looks at a few PCGS TrueView images (almost always shot with some tilt).

For example, this image is useless to determine surface marks, hairlines, etc.



I have taken thousands of coin photographs, and received hundreds of compliments on the quality of my images. A properly lit straight-on coin image is not the panacea of assessing a coin online with one set of images, but it is BY FAR the best image for such assessment. Not to take this down the ad hominem road, but I have never seen you post a photograph of a coin Doug (GDJMSP -- not the OP). And, in a few other threads I recall you (GDJMSP) actually touting the benefits of scanners over photographs for coins. Given that lack of real world experience in actually photographing coins, I have a hard time giving much clout to your opinions.

Yes, your assessment of toning and luster requiring tilting is true, as they are a function of reflection and refraction. But, that observation has nothing to do with Chris' assessment that marks and other problems on coins are more likely hidden in tilted images. If anything, it supports Chris' original comment -- as when coins are tilted to bring out their proof like surfaces or toning, you are by design hindering a photograph's ability to properly represent the other attributes of the coin -- like hairlines, tic/bag marks, etc.

 

I don't think Doug ever said the straight on photo should be eliminated. I think he was suggesting that the angle photos compliment the straight forward shot and could help detect hairlines, problems, etc.

I think it is only reasonable that more photos is a good thing, no?

 

With reference to cmp9ball's comment that "...taking photos at an angle tends to hide potentially distracting marks that can affect grade and value..." he said "...that is a myth."

I'm telling you it isn't a myth, and it is well known among people who actually take images of coins. Yes, there are exceptions, but in the vast majority of cases, tilting a coin hides problems. That's the argument to which I was responding.

I never said more pictures was a bad thing, I simply said that if you are going to have ONE image (which is the case most of the time for online coin images), then a straight-on image is the best representation of a coin. Period.

 

Doug, I've seen plenty of scans you have historically posted (none that I would call decent), but never any decent photographs. I have also read many threads here (even historical ones from before I joined these boards) where you tout that:

"Scanners can take pics every bit as good a camera. You just have to know how to do it." (in 2012).

"If you have a decent scanner you'll get good pics. And no massaging or picture editing is necessary other than cropping the image." (in 2010).

"And contrary to popular belief a scanner can show color and luster just as well as any camera. You just have to know how." (in 2009).

Either our definitions of "decent images" must differ wildly, or those statements are patently false (but, that's the neat thing about the truth, it remains to be the truth even when people don't believe it).

And, I don't disagree with your statement that "any picture can and will hide things", but I completely disagree with your follow up that "none of them are any better than the other." I think the thousands of PCGS TrueView glamour shot images I have seen are evidence enough that tilted coin images can hide a lot more than my personal thousands of straight-on images. I guess since you haven't collected since 2006, you might not be able to judge as you don't have any coins in hand to directly compare to their PCGS TrueView tilted images.