• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Continuing to Photograph my Moderns - Gold and Platinum Proof Bullion (part 3)

Started by astrostu,

9 posts in this topic

astrostu

astrostu

Posted
Posted

On to part three of my photos, where part 1 was commemoratives and part 2 was SBAs. This one is hopefully going to be more interesting - at least in part - than the SBAs (yeah, it's a semi-boring series but kinda interesting from a historic point of view).

 

First off, the platinum. I entered grad school in Fall 2005, and I wanted to do something to celebrate. I had really liked the 2004 platinum coin design, but of course it was now late 2005 so I couldn't get it directly from the Mint. But I decided to celebrate getting into grad school by starting a set of proof 1/10 oz platinum coins. I've collected them since (so 4 years up through last year), and here are the photos:

 

2005 was an interesting design, if somewhat hard to figure out what it really is on a 16.5-mm diameter coin. It shows a "bald eagle sits perched upon a heraldic shield surrounded by symbols that represent America's strength and bounty," to quote the li'l insert. The "bounty" looks like a cornucopia that has wheat and grapes, and I think there's also an olive branch. There may be another plant in there, but I can't tell ... but I didn't think grapes and olives were native to America. Go figure. ;)

 

2005_PR_large.jpg

 

 

This was the first year of the "branches of government" series. Its purpose was to show the legislative branch, with a legislative "muse" looking away from the law she's just written "as if to examine and reconsider its durability and integrity over time." I gotta say, that sounds about as new-agey feel-good as any hippie, and I'm a liberal.

 

2006_PR_large.jpg

 

 

2007 marked the executive branch. I think it's less interesting and more sterile than the legislative, but it makes more sense. It shows a bald eagle (duh) with its wings "spread wide to represent freedom with a shield at the ready to enforce the laws that guarantee those freedoms." I also think my camera lens was slightly out of focus on the reverse of this one.

 

2007_PR_large.jpg

 

 

Of the "three branches" series, I like this one the best, the judicial. Granted, it's a little stereotypical, showing "Lady Justice" holding scales to show the balance of law and she's blindfolded as usual, but it also has a "sword signifying the power that is held by those making decisions; in the background, the bald eagle watches over our Nation's firm foundation of democracy." It's slightly busy, but I like the concept.

 

2008_PR_large.jpg

 

 

Then there's the gold. In 2006, I wanted to add another coin series, and since I love gold and I also, as most collectors, love the Saint-Gaudens double eagle design, decided to collect 1/4 oz proofs of this coin:

 

2006_PR_large.jpg

 

2007_PR_large.jpg

 

2008_PR_large.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coindude

Coindude

Posted
Posted

I like the quality of the pictures, megapixel that is... but I haven't decided whether or not I like the fact that the cameo appearance is inconsistent. Some of them show full cameo, some show half cameo and some show very little if any cameo on coins that I know are cameo. Another issue that is perplexing is the color on the coins. I know that the silver cameos especially should be blast white on the upraised portions, but the colors are very inconsistent. Take a look at the first and second pictures in this thread. I would expect that the coins should look like the second coin.

 

I hope you take this as constructive criticism because that's what it is and not as non-constructive criticism.

 

Keep working at it though, I know you said you are new to photography and you will just continue to get better. I think you might want to get more consistent with the angles of your coins as I probably like the half cameo photos that you've been making vice the full cameo pictures. And, I am a cameo kinda guy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
astrostu

astrostu

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I like the quality of the pictures, megapixel that is... but I haven't decided whether or not I like the fact that the cameo appearance is inconsistent. Some of them show full cameo, some show half cameo and some show very little if any cameo on coins that I know are cameo. Another issue that is perplexing is the color on the coins. I know that the silver cameos especially should be blast white on the upraised portions, but the colors are very inconsistent. Take a look at the first and second pictures in this thread. I would expect that the coins should look like the second coin.

 

I hope you take this as constructive criticism because that's what it is and not as non-constructive criticism.

 

Keep working at it though, I know you said you are new to photography and you will just continue to get better. I think you might want to get more consistent with the angles of your coins as I probably like the half cameo photos that you've been making vice the full cameo pictures. And, I am a cameo kinda guy!

 

Thanks for the input, I think the same way. There are a few things that are at issue, though (and if you have any ideas on how to solve them, please let me know!!):

 

(1) I'm doing all this manually. Yes, the camera is on a tripod and the lighting is in the same place, but I use a sheet of parchment paper as a diffuser and that's held manually (since I use it differently for different types of coins).

 

(2) At least for the reverses of the platinum coins, the fields do not have the same geometry. I discovered this a lot when shooting my commemoratives for both their obverses and reverses (the "part 1" of this now 4-part series). I know that the fields look flat. But even the slightest change - especially on proofs - will alter the way the light is reflected and completely change the way the cameo shows. The '07 is the way I think the cameo "should" look except for the brighter parts above "ITED." And I tried to make that happen, especially for the '06, but I could not get the lighting vs. camera angle geometry to work out. I blame the coins for this, mostly, and I realize that I can probably improve it a little, but I'm not sure how to really fix the issue in a broader sense. You'll notice that I was reasonably consistent for the obverses of the platinums and gold ... not sure what happened with the '07 gold reverse, though.

 

(3) Color's an adjective that I again can't use on this forum, especially with highly reflective (modern proof) coins. Silver's blast white. I have no issue with that and I can easily just desaturate the image to remove all vestiges of color. Platinum, however, is not. It's more of a grey color, though still fairly white. I agree that the '05 platinum should be desaturated a little more, though. But, even though I try to block all other lights (as in turn them off) there are other objects in the room that can lend small hints of color to specific parts of the coin for which there's no good way to remove them that I know of (other than the desaturation, but I try to limit that).

 

(4) Adjusting contrast in post-processing is delicate. Because of the nature of proofs, there are always areas that have blown-out highlights (look at the top of the crown, below the rays on the platinum coins). Then there are the fields but also shadows which if I try to adjust down become too dark and lose any depth. That was part of the issue with the 2005 obv. and rev. It was a trade-off between the highlights growing (look at the ~3-5:00 position on the obverse) or the frosted parts being darker. I also didn't completely notice the difference between the '05 and the others until I put them all side-by-side on this site.

 

(5) The lens I'm using is el-cheap-o. A $250 telephoto zoom with macro is bargain-basement. Chromatic aberration abounds and the sharpness leads much to be desired. I have it on tab to buy a new macro around 2012, though (2009 is 24-70 mm f/2.8L, 2010 is good tripod, 2011 is new camera (successor to 5D Mark II), 2013 is new macro, 2014 is 14mm f/2.8).

 

(6) Some people seem to like the differences. :) I'm not trying to go for an argument ad populum, but at least on the commemoratives I think it was EZ_E who said he liked that there was not a uniform lighting distribution on the coins. He hasn't replied to this particular thread, so he may think differently for series. But again, I do agree with you, I would prefer it to be more uniform.

 

All that said, tonight and/or tomorrow, I'm going to photograph my ASEs and the rest of my Morgans and Peace dollars. I'm going to try to rig the setup to get as uniform a lighting as possible, especially for the proof ASEs. We'll see how they turn out.

 

Oh, I'm also not new to photography (been shooting for 5 years) ... just haven't really delved much into coin photography except on-and-off until recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing