taking pictures of coins

I'm mostly talking to x115 who I originally asked why he would have a set up like a Mark IIIDS if he wasn't a professional photographer.

If you have your equipment and you have a method of photography, go for it. Again, I was more just stating in general that you can do quite complex and nice numismatic photography with an affordable camera. More important are the tripod/copystand and the lighting.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think I paid $3800 for the Mark III 1DS used, $1600 for the 70-200 F2.8 Lens, and about $400 for the 580 EX II Speedlite. But I need a shorter lens to shoot coins. A 70-200 is way too long. But I do freelance for some Media Companies, but it is more of a hobby. I have not been doing it that long and I still have a lot to learn.

 

I agree ,it is way to much camera to shoot coins. but i have the camera so i use it. I do not use studio lighting I just set my coins on my desk and shoot. IMO coins are hard to photograph. especially proof coins. I prefer outdoor photography.

 

Cool. Well, your pics are nice, and it's a great hobby! I'm also a hobbyist. Nice work!

 

The quality boost you get from a better camera will show in the photos everything else being equal when you make 20x30" prints. What ruins most photos is a failure to find good light (don't just flop the thing down and shoot) and camera motion/vibration. This can be solved with expensive copy stands or a few scraps of wood screwed together like this:
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/coinphoto2011ez.html

Wood dampens vibration better than metal and a couple dollars worth of lumber can be every bit as rigid as a pro stand costing hundreds. Most of our coins are within a small range of sizes so it is a matter of building to fit our camera and needs.

The 70-200 is not too long but it does not focus close enough to do coins well. You will need to add an extension tube. Before I bought my 100mm macro, I used the cheaper 70-200 f/4 with good results. The image quality between the kit lens 18-55, the 'L' zoom 70-200 and the dedicated macro 100 will not be seen on photos used online in much reduced size but there is a difference in large prints that few people ever make. However, a properly supported, properly focused, properly lighted point and shoot will outperform an abused $6000 camera any day.

 

I have studio lighting, but I don't use it on coins. I just use my flash. I'm not trying to get my coins published. I don't think I will be mounting my camera on scrap lumber . plus my camera is heavy .
a pont and shoot is the way to go for most people. especially if they are not familiar with camera settings. white balance,aperture ,shutter speed, ISO, ECT....

for the things I do use my camera for it's perfect. and I like the fact it is full frame. mine has never been abused! it's a money maker ! but not from coins

 

this is with no special lighting or wood stand. could you imagine if I photographed it with my studio lighting. "no abuse here"

 

I don't think anyone would argue that the mac is a much better platform for artistic endeavors.

I use Apple's Aperture 2. It is impressive and will help with the final results. It does not have circle crop, so when I need to do that (usually for a client) I use Acorn to resize and crop.

As for equipment, start cheap. Upgrade as you get better, assuming you're interested and at least a little talented. A $300 set-up usually suffices for our purposes here. But it is a far cry from a DSL-R, macro lenses (at least 100mm, I use 180mm mostly) and copy stand.

By way of example, here's a coin sent to me for images from forum member I_Love_Silver. I love the look of this sorry thing. (CLICK FOR BIGGER IMAGES.)
Lance.

 

As always Lance, you have offered sound advice and gorgeous pictures. I would argue a bit that the Mac isn't really superior to a Window's PC for much of anything any more besides being impervious to viruses. In 1998 I would have agreed with you that the Mac was a powerhouse of graphic design and composition. As such, most newspapers, graphic designers, studios, etc. were trained on such machines...and because in those industries the "status quo" was set, that is the reason for their persistent use. Again, unless you are a professional ala Mark Goodman, I don't think your operating system matters or that a Mac is in any way superior in 2011.

As a disclosure, most of my time is spent on a PC running Linux, an oft-overlooked operating system that is free, stable, and can run a host of powerful open-source pieces of software. I would say in the "computer world" that Linux or Unix are the gold standard, and most of us "computer geeks" look a little disdainfully at the Micro-soft empire.

Nonetheless, I also want to put in a plug here for the open source editing software called "GNU Image Manipulation Program" or called "GIMP" for short. It is a powerful freeware software, with add-ons and plugins allowing you a LOT of artistic freedom and leeway. It has full contrast/brightness, levels, hue, and other post-processing capabilities. In addition, it has a nice sharpening tool, easy to use real-time rotation (in whatever degree you want, not just multiples of 90), and it has a circular crop and built in "layering" system for building up images. You can download it here (http://www.gimp.org/downloads/) and there are user manuals in many languages as well.

 

Lots of truth there, and great advice, brg5658. Nice tips about the freeware too.

I spent most of my professional life, since the late '70s, in LAN engineering and dealing with a wide number of workstations (interoperability was a big issue). I agree that PC's have done a lot of catching up with macs when it comes to creative arts. And you raise a good point about possible reasons for the perseverance of the mac.

Let's agree the end results can be achieved equally well. But it's my opinion that getting there is a lot easier on a mac even today, for reasons related to UI, app integration, and over all platform stability.

Regardless, it's nice to have choices.

This is actually a very appropriate topic for coin photography. Too many novices think the picture delivered by the camera is the final product, with the possible exception of manipulations to size, orientation, and cropping.

This is very wrong. The real work begins when you load the image onto your computer. Adjustments are almost always needed (for exposure, contrast, white balance, color, saturation, shadows, highlights, glare, sharpness, etc.).

This isn't cheating. The truth is cameras make their own programmed adjustments to images. It is the photographer's job to make the image as realistic as possible, generally (though maybe no always?).
Lance.

 

Great photo !

 

I crop my circle just using the elliptical selection under the photo preview. then I just use my IPHOTO program for the rest of the editing . but I will look into Apple's Aperture 2

 

http://www.cointalk.com/t194894/