OTT Lighting For Coin Pics

[spy88]

Is the OTT light the best to use to get the closest to actual color out of a coin? Or is it halogen, flourescent, incandescent, morning sun, afternoon sun, some sort of combination?

 

Michael, MarkFeld, Lucy, MAULEMALL and CoinLes, you take good pics! What is YOUR method?

 

Lets hear how you do yours as I am willing to try anything to get the best I can.

 

David

[nwcs]

There are different philosophies on this. For the most part it's a moot topic when you set the white balance of your camera correctly. It'll auto-correct for the color distortion. I personally recommend 2 or 3 lower power incandescents because it isn't so bright it washes out the detail but it is bright enough to show color/skin and luster quite nicely. For example, this picture was taken with just 2 incandescent bulbs with the white balance properly set.

[CarlWohlforth]

I think some cameras are better than others at white balancing. Mine is not great.

 

I have an Ott light. I use it sometimes, mostly for red copper. I have two lamps with Reveal bulbs and use them for silver coins mostly. I also have a halogen lamp and other incandescent bulbs.

 

While both Ott and Reveal say they bring out the natural colors it seems the Ott light is too blue while the Reveal is too red.

 

[jom]

At Shylock's suggestion I use an OTT light. Without question it improved my pictures almost immediately. I use a Nikon 950 digital camera.

 

Incandecent lighting always gave a slight redness to my shots. Of course, since I'm fairly ignorant of cameras I didn't know too much about the White Balance at first. I still have trouble with it actually as I can never seem to find a good shot to set up to set the WB.

 

Halogen had the same problem as Incandecent as the color was a bit red.

 

OTT's made all the difference. See my site:

 

My Site

 

Here are also some threads here and at CU that might help:

 

Coin Photograph #1

 

CP #2

 

CP #3

 

CP #4

 

CP #5

 

Hope these help.

 

jom

[Oldtrader3]

Do a search of this site on the Ott Light. Mike King had some images posted and covered this subject at that time with in-depth discussions of Ott lights vis a vis flourescent, et cetera a couple months ago. BTW, the Ott light was developed to support blooming and filming of live flowers in Disney's Snow White.

[James_OldeTowne]

I've been re-imaging many inventory coins. Here are some examples taken with a single incandescent bulb. ALL of these images are 100% not enhanced in any way. Of course, I cropped and resized them to a standard size, but the coloration, focus, lighting, all are as-photographed. I did adjust the white-balance (WB) on my camera first, and of course, you must have the "macro" setting turned on for closeups.

 

1818/7 Bust half

 

1820/19 Bust half

 

1818 bust quarter

 

1863 IHC

 

1865 IIcent

You can see the glare off the slab in this one

 

1895 Barber half

Proof coinage can be a challenge, especially using a single-source light.

 

1927-S Peace dollar

 

1896 Morgan

 

What I'm trying to point out is that capturing color can be pretty accurate even with an incandescent bulb. I do have an OTT lamp, and plan to experiment with it soon as well.

 

James

[Hoot]

James - Are all of your coins raw? I ask because they look great without the glare of the plastic, of course. My greatest difficulty is controlling glare with encapsulated coins. And, no, I won't crack all of them out to photograph them!

 

Hoot

[spy88]

Thank you all for your excellent input and wonderful pictures. But none of you mentioned how close to the actual coin-in-hand looking at it vs the picture you took of it was/is true to what you see with the ole eyeballs. I have a Canon G2 with macro and white balance settings to play with, and have done SOME fiddling, but I so far, have yet to accurately depict the coin I am holding to the picture I took of it.

 

I know angle has a lot to do with reducing glare and can be used to hide certain undesireable aspects on the coin, but as far as reproducing the full range of toning or just the tinge of a tone coming on, I have been dismal at.

 

I guess it is back to try and try again until I find the correct camera settings, angles,and lighting. Practice makes perfect and there are no shortcuts to get there!

 

Thanks again, everyone!

 

David

[James_OldeTowne]

Hoot, the 1863 IHC and the 1865 IIcent were encapsulated (both by PCGS), and all the other coins are not certified. It makes a HUGE difference in imaging coins. I have never imaged an encapsulated coin where the image looked "right on" to the coin.

 

Oh, and YES, the images I posted are just like having the coins in-hand. They are very accurate. That goes both ways. Colors are right on, luster is pretty close, but with great enlargement, you see flaws in great detail as well.

 

James

[James_OldeTowne]

I realized that there's something I should follow up. It may sound like a rant - I apologize.

 

 

I mentioned that images of encapsulated coins, for me anyway, never really look "right". I haven't seen many images, other than heavily "enhanced" images, that looked right either of encapsulated coins.

 

But what I've realized over the last few years is that it's not just true of imaged coins. I've found that coins cracked out of slabs almost always look better in-hand than they did in the slab. I wonder if the plastic is really clear on today's slabs? Does it filter out certain colors or distort the view of the coin? Anyway, for me , it limits the "look" of a coin.

 

Except in instances where the capsule hid something wrong with the edge or rim of a coin, I don't recall ever being disappointed about a coin looking worse out of the slab.

 

I'm not suggesting everyone start cracking out their encapsulated coins. Nor does this apply necessarily to "generic" (blast white, etc) coins or modern coins. But I am saying that if you have an opportunity to view a really nice collection of coins raw (hint: such as our display at a coin show....), it might give you an appreciation for what special coins really look like. Two dealers that come to mind to are Julian Liedman and Tom Reynolds.

[shylock]

I swear by Ott lamps ever since buying a pair to do some imaging at the Sept 2002 LB show. They caught my eye because they looked easy to travel with so I was pleasantly surprised at what a great job they did. They don't tint or distort colors like every other light source I've tried, and I feel they help set a more accurate white balance. They're the only lights I can get decent images of brown copper with.

 

[RotatedRainbows]

I am with Shylock as I can get accurate photos of about any coin with two OTT lights.

 

 

 

 

 

[TomB]

Holy Smokes! You guys are terrific with the quality of your images! Shylock has to be the Grand Master of all imaging, simply amazing. As for jom's site, I now have it bookmarked so I can look at it at length when I have more time.

 

In general, I simply scan coins, but this is not very satisfactory. I have a digital camera but don't like it, so, when I shoot film I use an old, manual 35mm Canon SLR from the 1970s. For this I use a single regular indoor bulb but also have an 80A blue filter on the lens to get rid of the yellow-red overload. Diopters can also be mounted on the lens and, with these, I get close up images, using a 105mm lens, from about 10-12 inches away. The technology I use is probably too antiquated to help anyone, but I thought I'd share it just in case.

[jom]

I agree with James about the holders. I'm NOT entirely sure if they somehow obscure the real color but I know it effects the camera. NGC coins are especially troublesome because of the white slab. I still haven't figured a good way to cancel that out. The next time I do some shots I'm just going to cover up the slab with black paper or something. Using the camera electronics just doesn't seem to work for me...

 

Also the slabs reflect light and glare into the camera. I get my best color when I tilt the slab slightly. Much of the time however the best tilt is also the angle which gives the most glare. Argh!

 

On the other hand, slabs are useful for tilting too. If I had to do that with a raw coin it might be kind of difficult...

 

jom

[James_OldeTowne]

This coin is a good example of what Jom's talking about. It's an 1861 Seated half in an ANACS slab. CLICK HERE for the jumbo image.

 

This image was taken under the EXACT same conditions as the raw coins above. The raw coins look "spot on" to the coin in-hand. But the ANACS coin looks "yellow", and even the white holder surrounding the coin is "yellow".

 

Our strict company policy is to provide images that are not enhanced in any way. I probably could adjust the settings to compensate. The point is that the glare, or something about the "clear" plastic of the capsule seems to trick my camera and skew the colors.

 

In the exact same imaging session, I photographed this coin. CLICK HERE for the jumbo image. THIS coin is just about as close as you could get to the real thing without being there! The color on my monitor matches up perfectly. The coin is raw. It just seems like, from this evidence, the capsule does something that messes up the color.

 

If anyone has any suggestions, other than manipulating the images of the encapsulated coins, I'd really appreciate it. But so far, I find it easier, and frankly more enjoyable, to photograph raw coins.

 

James

[jom]

I'm going to try a few of my NGC coins with a different tact and compare...

 

James: As to the "adjustment". I really don't see anything wrong with any kind of adjustment as long as it gives two things or a reasonable combo of the two:

 

1) What the coin really looks like

 

2) Gives the ablility to the potential buyer what might be hidden. I can take some real nice shots of a coin but it might be so lusterous that the "dark" areas cover up some marks. A lightened photo would help here if NOTED what you did.

 

jom

[chinook]

Great pics. I just ordered 2 Ott lamps.

[shylock]

NGC & ANACS slabs deceive my camera too and usually come out darker than they appeared in the LCD screen. Raising the exposure a couple of notches to +.7 can help compensate for that (the Large cent I posted is in an NGC holder with the exposure jacked up a bit). As much as I appreciate PhotoShop, I'd much rather make a pre-image adjustment than a post-image correction. It seems like for every correction made in PS another element of the image suffers a little.

[MikeKing]

A few things.

 

First, I want to thank Shylock for introducing me to the OTT light.

In fact, my eyes, which are not what they used to be, have found a great friend in the OTT light for reading.

 

I still haven't figured out enough about lighting and photographing coins to feel really confident, but what I do know, is that you have to try different things. My best guess is, that there is no strict formula for something as variable in nature as a coin, whether it be the kind of metal it is, it's toning, other characterizations of the surface which would bend, reflect or absorb the lighting...etc...

 

For this reason, I've been trying different kinds of lighting and combinations of lighting, including sunlight, and have gotten some pretty interesting results. I never retouch my photographs. I don't think there is really any need. The issue is, how does the coin REALLY look. And what is REALLY. And in what lighting?

 

Photographing PROOFs is another entirely interesting dilemna in itself. Add a slab to that, and you're in for a struggle, big time. While you're trying to capture reflectivity off the coin's surface, reflectivity off the plastic almost always stands in your way. Awful.

 

The sheer beauty of a coin is best captured by holding it in your hand and looking at it. Within seconds, your eye has made over a hundred movements and your fingers have nimbly moved the coin in a hundred different directions, while your brain is gelling it all together.

 

With a photograph, there is only one view. To capture the best and most accurate picture is an art form, I am sure. Something I have barely dabbled in. And when I look at some of the pics posted on this board, particularly Shylocks, I'm totally in awe.

 

Here is a Washington quarter where I combined OTT lighting with a clear incandescent bulb. Is this really how the coin looks? Yes, absolutely, but it depends on how you hold it and under what light.

 

 

 

[airplanenut]

It all depends... my reason for not getting Ott lights yet is because they're expensive... I keep tinkering with new ways to photograph with some desk lamps... getting the glare out is key...

 

Raw:

 

Slabbed:

 

With the last two shots, the light was directly over the slab, with no glare... gotta love paper

 

Jeremy