A new technique in imaging coins with color & luster.

[Buffalo Head]

I've been trying to image coins to bring out the luster & color of some of my buffs and I came up with a new techniqe that seems to work quite well. What do ya think....Joe

 

 

[KeyMan64]

Neat....but, Are the centers of the coin really that dark? If it looks like it does in hand then I say congrats, well done!

[jesbroken]

Wow Joe, I didn't know that the mint used crayolas!!

Gorgeous, absolutely gorgeous. You are one talented individual.

Thanks for sharing.

Jim

[bsshog40]

Looks great to me Joe!!

[Oldtrader3]

Nice pic but I have no idea how to do that!

[AnkurJ]

So are you going to share how you did it?

[Walkerfan]

Wish that I could take pics that good. That green, red and gold really stands out. Nice, Joe!

[robec1347]

Joe, you da man!!

 

That Buffer is oozing with luster. Gorgeous!!

[Buffalo Head]

So are you going to share how you did it?

 

 

This technique took me longer to figure out than I want to admit. But to sum it up ....I use as little light as possible, in this case two, indirect, and fiddle around with my aperture and my shutter speed until I get the affect that works best with coin I'm shooting, in this case with great luster & color. They're all a little bit different so I can't really give ya a setting. I also use a light meter...Nikon D-3100 with a Sigma 150mm Macro lens I do appreciate the complements....Joe

[No+4Me]

Great job, Joe. Using a light meter? Sounds like you are in full manual mode to me!

[rrantique]

Joe, you da man!!

 

That Buffer is oozing with luster. Gorgeous!!

 

[Buffalo Head]

Great job, Joe. Using a light meter? Sounds like you are in full manual mode to me!

 

Yes sir, all the way. If you want to get the effect of the coin you want, then you must. Some folks say...Oh just put it auto mode and let the camera do it thing. Well, ya might as well just buy a point and shoot....I have the time to fiddle around as I'm retired now and love my coins and imaging, it's fun. Ya know, imaging your coins opens the door for an old guy like me to see the coin better, not necessarily "grade the coin" but to see it & appreciate the coin , freeze it in just the right light, still in hand is the best, if ya can see it.....

 

[123cents]

Great photos!

[Buffalo Head]

I just did this 14-S the same way...I opened my aperture a bit...

 

[James_OldeTowne]

to sum it up ....I use as little light as possible, in this case two, indirect, and fiddle around with my aperture and my shutter speed until I get the affect that works best with coin I'm shooting

Great idea! You might find that you can achieve similar results simply by backing the light way off the coin. Increasing the distance between the coin and light source has a similar effect to using a dimmer light up close.

[leeg]

Spectacular as usual!

 

(thumbs u

[brg5658]

Joe, absolutely stunning images! (thumbs u

 

I have to ask though, if you are shooting with an APS-C sized sensor (Nikon D3100) and a 150mm lens, to fill the complete frame with the nickel you'd need to be about 620mm away from the coin. That equates to around 2 feet from the back of your camera to the coin surface.

 

This prompts my next questions:

 

1) What kind of copy stand are you using? It must have really, really long extension.

 

2) Do you use the timer delay to avoid camera shake, or do you use a remote shutter release, or both?

 

3) What kind of lighting do you use? Point source LED, Ott lights, Incandescents, CFL?

 

Keep up the awesome work! I love your images.

[RWB]

I don’t understand how changing the intensity makes any difference.

 

The important factors are: 1) angular size of the light source in relation to the subject; 2) angle of the light source to the normal of the subject; 3) intensity of the light which only affects the range of f-stop and shutter speed available.

 

Changing light intensity is not related to #1 or #2, so it is immaterial how bright or dim your light is, except as it relates to the f-stop and shutter speed.

 

A large lens opening (small f-#) will commonly have more optical aberrations than a small opening (large f-#). A large f-# will also have greater depth of field. But, too large an f-# will introduce refraction defects that degrade the image.

 

"Confused"

[Oldtrader3]

Thanks, Joe, I appreciate the explanation and you are getting great results.

[KeyMan64]

Since viewing the 14-S that is posted. The prongs are severely under exposed. They are not white. I understand the lights are more focused on the coin but they still should not border on a medium gray. This tells me that it is highly likely that the coin is under exposed at least a little bit. And that is why I posed my original question yesterday about ...does the coin look like this in hand, guessing that the coins were under exposed. I agree with RWB, I too am confused. It looks like the technique is fine for getting the colors to pop because the coin is under exposed but you are not getting the full range on the coin in regards to your levels. I will agree that a softer light source(one that is either further away or more diffused) will lend itself to a nicer look on toners instead of a harsh direct light source but at the end of the day you still need to adjust your iso, f-stop, shutter speed, to get the coin exposed properly after you have set your custom white balance for the lighting conditions by either using a gray card or light meter.

 

Do not get me wrong, the images are very nice and I am a fan of them but I have a feeling the coins are a bit brighter than shown....but if you did that you will kill some of the look of the toning. It's a struggle.

 

Although I do struggle with coin photograph due to my own personal setup and lack of a longer macro lens etc, I do know a little something about other forms of photography...if you want to see: My Photography Website

[brg5658]

Since viewing the 14-S that is posted. The prongs are severely under exposed. They are not white. I understand the lights are more focused on the coin but they still should not border on a medium gray. This tells me that it is highly likely that the coin is under exposed at least a little bit. And that is why I posed my original question yesterday about ...does the coin look like this in hand, guessing that the coins were under exposed. I agree with RWB, I too am confused. It looks like the technique is fine for getting the colors to pop because the coin is under exposed but you are not getting the full range on the coin in regards to your levels. I will agree that a softer light source(one that is either further away or more diffused) will lend itself to a nicer look on toners instead of a harsh direct light source but at the end of the day you still need to adjust your iso, f-stop, shutter speed, to get the coin exposed properly after you have set your custom white balance for the lighting conditions by either using a gray card or light meter.

 

Do not get me wrong, the images are very nice and I am a fan of them but I have a feeling the coins are a bit brighter than shown....but if you did that you will kill some of the look of the toning. It's a struggle.

 

Although I do struggle with coin photograph due to my own personal setup and lack of a longer macro lens etc, I do know a little something about other forms of photography...if you want to see: My Photography Website

 

There is no reason why the prongs should be exposed as full white. White balance properly set will ensure that the white parts of the image will be represented in the final image as a pure form of gray, not simply as "white" -- by that I mean, the Red, Green, and Blue components of the color should all be equal.

 

Proper imaging of coins is when you guarantee that the coin part of the image is properly exposed, not the stuff around the coin. If Joe metered the holder so that the prongs were properly exposed (as pure white), the coin would be completely blown out. Most cameras allow for spot metering, and the reason why you use spot metering for coin photography instead of "average metering" for the entire frame is precisely because you don't care about the exposure of the non-coin parts (e.g., the prongs). Indeed, if you open the 1914 image in Photoshop and circular select just the coin part of the image, the exposure is about as good as it can get.

 

Take away message: methods used in action photography and non-macro work don't really translate directly. But, KeyMan, you do have some really cool pics! (thumbs u

 

 

PS -- The EXIF data on the 1914 file is about what I would expect for a properly exposed image. See screen capture below.

[KeyMan64]

I never said the prongs should be FULL WHITE but with the lights further back and set to light the center of the coin, they should still be brighter, not a medium gray like I said.

 

The coins are under exposed to show off the colors. After all of these replies, I wonder why Joe hasn't replied to answer if the coin is brighter in hand like I highly suspect it is.

 

And there just isn't 'action' photography on my website. And I have done plenty of macro work to know the difference.

[Buffalo Head]

I don’t understand how changing the intensity makes any difference.

 

The important factors are: 1) angular size of the light source in relation to the subject; 2) angle of the light source to the normal of the subject; 3) intensity of the light which only affects the range of f-stop and shutter speed available.

 

Changing light intensity is not related to #1 or #2, so it is immaterial how bright or dim your light is, except as it relates to the f-stop and shutter speed.

 

A large lens opening (small f-#) will commonly have more optical aberrations than a small opening (large f-#). A large f-# will also have greater depth of field. But, too large an f-# will introduce refraction defects that degrade the image.

 

"Confused"

 

I cannot converse with all of you Ansel Adams out there........Now I'm confused

 

[Buffalo Head]

I never said the prongs should be FULL WHITE but with the lights further back and set to light the center of the coin, they should still be brighter, not a medium gray like I said.

 

The coins are under exposed to show off the colors. After all of these replies, I wonder why Joe hasn't replied to answer if the coin is brighter in hand like I highly suspect it is.

 

And there just isn't 'action' photography on my website. And I have done plenty of macro work to know the difference.

 

I'm here, reading this that you wrote and I'll answer ya...The coin is a bit brighter than the image. But I was not to cocerned about that because I was trying to pick up the color & luster...That's it, nothing more to add....Joe

[brg5658]

I never said the prongs should be FULL WHITE but with the lights further back and set to light the center of the coin, they should still be brighter, not a medium gray like I said.

 

The coins are under exposed to show off the colors. After all of these replies, I wonder why Joe hasn't replied to answer if the coin is brighter in hand like I highly suspect it is.

 

And there just isn't 'action' photography on my website. And I have done plenty of macro work to know the difference.

 

The coin is not underexposed. Any further exposure would cause blown out areas of the coin. However, the surface of the coin may not be completely evenly lit. My reply was not meant to belittle in any way your photographic skills (as you seem to have interpreted it). I was simply stating that coin photography is not like images where your goal is to have all parts of the frame correctly exposed.

 

Again, if you still don't believe me, then download a copy of Joe's 1914 nickel, open it up in Photoshop, circular select the part of the image that is the coin, and look at an exposure/levels histogram. If after that you still think it's "underexposed" then I'd like to know why.

 

-Brandon

[Buffalo Head]

Here another shot of the 13-S. I changed my settings a bit for this image...

 

 

But I feel it's a bit over exposed....Joe

[Buffalo Head]

Joe, absolutely stunning images! (thumbs u

 

I have to ask though, if you are shooting with an APS-C sized sensor (Nikon D3100) and a 150mm lens, to fill the complete frame with the nickel you'd need to be about 620mm away from the coin. That equates to around 2 feet from the back of your camera to the coin surface.

 

This prompts my next questions:

 

1) What kind of copy stand are you using? It must have really, really long extension.

 

2) Do you use the timer delay to avoid camera shake, or do you use a remote shutter release, or both?

 

3) What kind of lighting do you use? Point source LED, Ott lights, Incandescents, CFL?

 

Keep up the awesome work! I love your images.

 

Yes I do have a very ridged copy stand and it quite tall. Your also right about how far away from the coin I am, about 2' to the back of the camera...Thanks again for the complements. Yes I do use a time delay. For the lighting I use the G.E. instant-on mini daylight bulbs, 100 W......Joe

 

[coinman_23885]

I like your technique, and I think the photos came out quite well. Thanks for sharing, and for this educational thread.

[KeyMan64]

The coin is not underexposed.

-Brandon

Yes, yes it is. Joe even confirmed that it is by saying: "The coin is a bit brighter than the image."

 

No more information required.

 

That being said, he did an amazing job on the sharpness, luster and showing off the colors.

[brg5658]

The coin is not underexposed.

-Brandon

Yes, yes it is. Joe even confirmed that it is by saying: "The coin is a bit brighter than the image."

 

No more information required.

 

That being said, he did an amazing job on the sharpness, luster and showing off the colors.

 

I suggest you have your monitor calibrated. Also, I looked and looked but found NO macro images on your website. I might suggest you read this article which is written by the authority in coin photography. Part way down you will see an example shot of a Morgan in a slab. The higher the lights, the more "gray" the surrounding white part of the slab. As I've already said, the exposure is only relevant to the coin part of the image; I'm not trying to image the prongs.

 

I thought maybe you actually cared about the diagnostics of the image, which is why I suggested you look at it in Photoshop. But, since apparently you know all there is to know about coin imaging, I'll leave this thread with this final comment to the OP:

 

Joe, don't change what you're doing. The images look fabulous.

 

Cheers,

-Brandon