Lighting techniques for coin photography - updated 1 1

[GoldFinger1969]

Any quick suggestions for taking quickie pics with a smartphone (in my case, a Galaxy S9) ?  I pretty much just use the default settings I use for all pictures.  Sometimes I use that macro focus if I am taking it from less than 1 foot away.

I never use the flash, BTW.  Too much reflection and glare then.

 

[Insider]

I changed my mind.  Rather than start a new discussion that no one will have any idea what it relates to, I'm going to let the other posters in this thread decide if I should post my experiments and quiz in this discussion to honor a "challenge" from the OP that I post an image I took of a full coin.

So far, in the interest of education, the OP cast the first vote: NO!  "Now, thank you kindly for keeping your nonsense out of this thread.  Goodbye." 

What do others want from me?  Continue in the discussion and post my images or stop posting?

[RWB]

RE Insider comments: "Sorry everyone, this photography "expert" does not wish for me to play anymore."

Unfortunately, so far nothing in Insider's posts or photos demonstrates the in-depth knowledge and comprehension to qualify as an "expert." The posted photos are useful utilitarian images that meet certain needs - that is fine - but they lack the technical quality to have come from the hand of a photographic expert. But, it is probably incorrect to assume that Insider's posted photos were specifically made for "best quality." The text posts are almost entirely dogmatic and seem to reject basic optical science. Again, not what would come from expert knowledge.

With Insider having withdrawn from the thread, I hope members will ask brg5658 relevant questions for improving their coin photos. Also, there seem to be some areas where his approach is clearer than Mark Goodman's.

[Insider]

4 hours ago, RWB said:

RE Insider comments: "Sorry everyone, this photography "expert" does not wish for me to play anymore."

Unfortunately, so far nothing in Insider's posts or photos demonstrates the in-depth knowledge and comprehension to qualify as an "expert." The posted photos are useful utilitarian images that meet certain needs - that is fine - but they lack the technical quality to have come from the hand of a photographic expert. But, it is probably incorrect to assume that Insider's posted photos were specifically made for "best quality." The text posts are almost entirely dogmatic and seem to reject basic optical science. Again, not what would come from expert knowledge.

With Insider having withdrawn from the thread, I hope members will ask brg5658 relevant questions for improving their coin photos. Also, there seem to be some areas where his approach is clearer than Mark Goodman's.

Roger, 

It appears that you also are mistaken about my suggestion and my posts  As for your comments above:

1.  "With Insider having withdrawn from the thread, I hope members will ask brg5658 relevant questions for improving their coin photos. Also, there seem to be some areas where his approach is clearer than Mark Goodman's.

Not so, waiting to see if anyone is interested in seeing what our camera did.  So far, one NO vote.

2.  "Unfortunately, so far nothing in Insider's posts or photos demonstrates the in-depth knowledge and comprehension to qualify as an "expert."

Absolutely true!  Read the thread again.  I confessed ignorance about digital imaging several times already and then accepted a challenge from THE "EX-PERT" I was referring to in my post.  I was asked to remove myself from the "ex-pert's" discussion!  I'm not an "expert" in anything except perhaps self-gratification.

3.  "I hope members will ask brg5658 relevant questions for improving their coin photos. Also, there seem to be some areas where his approach is clearer than Mark Goodman's."

Perhaps everyone should get a copy of Mr. Goodman's book - "Numismatic Photography."  After all, the OP recommended it too!  Perhaps the OP didn't read his copy or didn't comprehend what he read because...wait for it...wait for it....

In Chapter 13 , page 102-106 (Advanced) Mr. Goodman discusses TILTING COINS when making an image.   Well, what did I know?  Who knew that his book published in 2008 mentioned something I was doing after trial & error  thirty-five years before BECAUSE I discovered that some coins looked better in a photograph when they were tilted! 

BTW  I still claim to be totally ignorant regarding coin photography.  I leave things like photography to the to the real experts such as Mr. Mark Goodman. 

PS  If anyone wishes to see my quiz posted, please ask.  Otherwise, I'll respect the OP's wishes and be done with him.  I'm really glad he reposted his old post.  

[Henri Charriere]

To steal from one person is plagiarism;  to steal from many is research.

Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.

We should all try to be more like Just Bob, myself included, who jumps in, has his say, and jumps right back out, unscathed.

[ldhair]

Brandon

Sorry your thread went so far off track. It started off great. I agree 100% with what you have posted.

It's what I was teaching over 40 years ago, back in the film days. 

The same rules hold true today even with the cool equipment we now have to work with.

Tilting the coin takes away from the quality that's possible.

There are times where the slab needs to be tilted a tiny bit because the coin is not parallel to the plastic slab. 

The coin needs to be parallel with the lens. 

 

[brg5658]

17 hours ago, Insider said:

BTW  I still claim to be totally ignorant regarding coin photography. 

This we can agree on. 

Truly insufferable. 

[RWB]

OK. Here's a relevant question for brg5658.

When photographing a portrait light should usually come from the direction in which the subject is facing. Is there a similar rule of thumb (or some other body part) for eagles and figures on the reverse, or for geometric designs?

(See the first post, coin photos in right column, center and bottom.)

Edited October 26, 2020 by RWB

[brg5658]

30 minutes ago, RWB said:

OK. Here's a relevant question for brg5658.

When photographing a portrait light should usually come from the direction in which the subject is facing. Is there a similar rule of thumb (or some other body part) for eagles and figures on the reverse, or for geometric designs?

(See the first post, coin photos in right column, center and bottom.)

I think there is a lot of subjectivity and room for artistic freedom that can be taken in this arena. 

My personal opinions are:

1. The lighting should accentuate the subject matter in a "realistic" way - e.g., most devices lit from below simply look odd - be it an eagle, a bust, a full length figure, or a crest/arms.
2. Legends should be legible.
3. Devices should be well defined/separated from the fields.
4. Colors should be accurate.
5. Areas of darkness should be avoided (this is sometimes difficult for very large coins and medals).

It's not always possible to get the "perfect" shot - especially when encumbered by shooting through plastic.  Again, much of the lighting is subjective but the general rule of keeping your lights high will give you better final images than side lighting or complete diffusion methods like light tents or light boxes.

Below are a few examples of photos I have taken of coins without a classic bust on either side.  When I image a coin, lighting is very subjective - I go with what I personally find as accurate.  There is no getting around practice - practice will improve images.  There is no magic universal solution!

Example 1:

3 Lights - even coverage of the coin surface, with no particular obvious luster bands from extreme directional lighting sources.

 

Example 2:

3 Lights - lights are high and the point sources are large enough to avoid blasted luster banding across the coin.  This is a large token - about the size of a Morgan dollar.  Note some scuffs over the owls face on the reverse - one of the limitations of photographing through plastic slabs.

 

Example 3:

3 Lights - Lustrous coin. The devices are well lit and legends legible - honestly displaying the strike weakness on the reverse center (opposite the horse on the obverse).

[VKurtB]

20 minutes ago, brg5658 said:

I think there is a lot of subjectivity and room for artistic freedom that can be taken in this arena. 

My personal opinions are:

1. The lighting should accentuate the subject matter in a "realistic" way - e.g., most devices lit from below simply look odd - be it an eagle, a bust, a full length figure, or a crest/arms.
2. Legends should be legible.
3. Devices should be well defined/separated from the fields.
4. Colors should be accurate.
5. Areas of darkness should be avoided (this is sometimes difficult for very large coins and medals).

It's not always possible to get the "perfect" shot - especially when encumbered by shooting through plastic.  Again, much of the lighting is subjective but the general rule of keeping your lights high will give you better final images than side lighting or complete diffusion methods like light tents or light boxes.

Below are a few examples of photos I have taken of coins without a classic bust on either side.  When I image a coin, lighting is very subjective - I go with what I personally find as accurate.  There is no getting around practice - practice will improve images.  There is no magic universal solution!

Example 1:

3 Lights - even coverage of the coin surface, with no particular obvious luster bands from extreme directional lighting sources.

 

Example 2:

3 Lights - lights are high and the point sources are large enough to avoid blasted luster banding across the coin.  This is a large token - about the size of a Morgan dollar.  Note some scuffs over the owls face on the reverse - one of the limitations of photographing through plastic slabs.

 

Example 3:

3 Lights - Lustrous coin. The devices are well lit and legends legible - honestly displaying the strike weakness on the reverse center (opposite the horse on the obverse).

Truly inspired (and inspiring) work. I still don't know how I feel about coin glamour shots in general, but these are compelling.

[Insider]

58 minutes ago, brg5658 said:

This we can agree on. 

Truly insufferable. 

Sorry you feel that way but I'm suffering also from all the dodges.  I'm just seeking for you to agree with Mr. Goodman.  Basically, it is OK to tip a coin when photographing it.  Let me refresh the problem I've been having for over a week...   

 

Posted October 15

   On 10/15/2020 at 11:57 AM, Insider said:

Thanks, great post (I've used up my quota of likes for today).  That should covey to you that the info you posted was very educational and a great addition to any Internet forum.  

The only thing I should suggest folks try is to TIP the coin at various angles and rotate it into various positions.  That gives many more options to "get it just right." As this is an "open" forum, based on my experimentation in the past, I  believed this was a nicely made suggestion that you and others may wish to try.

Your response:  "I would strongly disagree.  If you’re just looking at a coin, tilting into a light source is a good idea.  True.
 

If you’re trying to take in focus photos you should absolutely not tilt the coin.  Macro photography functions with very shallow depth of field. Tilting a coin causes the surface of the coin to only be in focus for part of the coin, not the full coin." My simple question - AGAIN, and AGAIN from a member interested in learning to take better images after reading the OP is this. 

Who should I believe?

Mr. Goodman from one of my books I consulted upon your recommendation.  You and others here: "If you’re trying to take in focus photos you should absolutely not tilt the coin."  

Simple request: Now do you agree that my suggestion to try tipping a coin may work in some cases and still keep the coin in focus?  If you ask me to prove it for you, I spent about 14 minutes taking images to be sure that I was not blowing smoke in your discussion. 

 

•  

[VKurtB]

2 minutes ago, Insider said:

Sorry you feel that way but I'm suffering also from all the dodges.  I'm just seeking for you to agree with Mr. Goodman.  Basically, it is OK to tip a coin when photographing it.  Let me refresh the problem I've been having for over a week...   

 

Posted October 15

   On 10/15/2020 at 11:57 AM, Insider said:

Thanks, great post (I've used up my quota of likes for today).  That should covey to you that the info you posted was very educational and a great addition to any Internet forum.  

The only thing I should suggest folks try is to TIP the coin at various angles and rotate it into various positions.  That gives many more options to "get it just right." As this is an "open" forum, based on my experimentation in the past, I  believed this was a nicely made suggestion that you and others may wish to try.

Your response:  "I would strongly disagree.  If you’re just looking at a coin, tilting into a light source is a good idea.  True.
 

If you’re trying to take in focus photos you should absolutely not tilt the coin.  Macro photography functions with very shallow depth of field. Tilting a coin causes the surface of the coin to only be in focus for part of the coin, not the full coin." My simple question - AGAIN, and AGAIN from a member interested in learning to take better images after reading the OP is this. 

Who should I believe?

Mr. Goodman from one of my books I consulted upon your recommendation.  You and others here: "If you’re trying to take in focus photos you should absolutely not tilt the coin."  

Simple request: Now do you agree that my suggestion to try tipping a coin may work in some cases and still keep the coin in focus?  If you ask me to prove it for you, I spent about 14 minutes taking images to be sure that I was not blowing smoke in your discussion. 

 

•  

Having used the Canon 45mm TS lens, I must disagree most vociferously with Roger's protestations - it is a truly MAGNIFICENT tool, if you can find one.

[RWB]

So you feel it is more of an individual decision for non-portrait designs?That is: what lighting produces the most accurate and pleasing result....is that correct? (PS: That 1825 is a beauty !)

Another question. Assuming the camera (CCD plane) is parallel to the coin, how can one best light a modern brilliant proof so that the field is dark (or light)? Also, what can be done about non-cameo proofs to get good results without erratic reflections off the relief? (Well -- that's 2 1/2 questions.....)

[Insider]

1 minute ago, RWB said:

So you feel it is more of an individual decision for non-portrait designs?That is: what lighting produces the most accurate and pleasing result....is that correct? (PS: That 1825 is a beauty !)

Another question. Assuming the camera (CCD plane) is parallel to the coin, how can one best light a modern brilliant proof so that the field is dark (or light)? Also, what can be done about non-cameo proofs to get good results without erratic reflections off the relief? (Well -- that's 2 1/2 questions.....)

Imaging Proofs are in Goodman's book.  My copy is at home just now.  

[RWB]

RE: "Having used the Canon 45mm TS lens, I must disagree most vociferously with Roger's protestations - it is a truly MAGNIFICENT tool, if you can find one."

If you've ever spent years with a 4x5 view camera and superior lenses, the little 35mm tilt/shift lenses from Nikon and Canon are mostly "cute." There is no viable comparison in results.

[RWB]

1 minute ago, Insider said:

Imaging Proofs are in Goodman's book.  My copy is at home just now.  

I asked to hear brg5658's views on this. Mark is 3,000 miles away. Different photographers might achieve excellent results through different means.

[VKurtB]

3 minutes ago, RWB said:

RE: "Having used the Canon 45mm TS lens, I must disagree most vociferously with Roger's protestations - it is a truly MAGNIFICENT tool, if you can find one."

If you've ever spent years with a 4x5 view camera and superior lenses, the little 35mm tilt/shift lenses from Nikon and Canon are mostly "cute." There is no viable comparison in results.

I own both a 4x5 and a TS lens. Both are the right tool for something, but neither is the right tool for everything. Just like most of life.

[brg5658]

20 minutes ago, RWB said:

So you feel it is more of an individual decision for non-portrait designs?That is: what lighting produces the most accurate and pleasing result....is that correct? (PS: That 1825 is a beauty !)

Another question. Assuming the camera (CCD plane) is parallel to the coin, how can one best light a modern brilliant proof so that the field is dark (or light)? Also, what can be done about non-cameo proofs to get good results without erratic reflections off the relief? (Well -- that's 2 1/2 questions.....)

The lighting of proofs isn’t really much different from non proofs.  You just have to keep the lights far enough back from the lens so as not to glare off of the mirrors.  Below are three somewhat progressively more mirrored proofs I have photographed in the past couple months. 
 

[RWB]

RE: "The lighting of proofs isn’t really much different from non proofs.  You just have to keep the lights far enough back from the lens so as not to glare off of the mirrors.  Below are three somewhat progressively more mirrored proofs I have photographed in the past couple months."

Some use a black (or white) card around the lens how does that work?

Also, what about older proofs were the entire surface is mirrored?

[MN1]

Great post!  Very helpful.  To me anyway as I sometimes have difficulty taking pics of some coins.

[Insider]

1 hour ago, RWB said:

I asked to hear brg5658's views on this. Mark is 3,000 miles away. Different photographers might achieve excellent results through different means.

Again, I offered a suggestion FOR EVERYONE into the "circle thing" you two are having.  Apparently, you didn't have Goodman's book either or you would know that tilting coins is recommended in certain situations.    I forgot his recommendations for proofs.

Edited October 26, 2020 by Insider

[brg5658]

12 minutes ago, Insider said:

Again, I offered a suggestion FOR EVERYONE into the "circle thing" you two are having.  Apparently, you didn't have Goodman's book either or you would know that tilting coins is recommended in certain situations.    I forgot his recommendations for proofs.

Skippy - get off it! 

I have Goodman's book and have read it more than once.  He mentions that tilting coins may be possible on 2-3 pages of his much larger 160+ page book.  He specifically says that if you tilt coins you have to accept the degradation of sharpness lost by stopping down your aperture to very large f-values.  He also specifically says that you can use more complicated lens set-ups like tilt-shift lenses (as I also mentioned before).  Another technique he doesn't discuss in his 10+ year old book is focus stacking - which is a software fix-up for tilting coins into the light source where you take multiple pictures and the software stitches them together into a fully in focus image.  The point is that none of this is a standard technique (i.e., it is rarely used) and doesn't help the masses take better photos. 

You're such a self-serving pedantic pillock.  This thread is about LIGHTING for taking better coin photos - please stop with your childish and incessant "told you so" posts. 

[brg5658]

54 minutes ago, RWB said:

RE: "The lighting of proofs isn’t really much different from non proofs.  You just have to keep the lights far enough back from the lens so as not to glare off of the mirrors.  Below are three somewhat progressively more mirrored proofs I have photographed in the past couple months."

Some use a black (or white) card around the lens how does that work?

Also, what about older proofs were the entire surface is mirrored?

Roger, I have not used colored cards around the lens for photographing proofs (or any other coins). 

I'm not a big proof coin collector, so I do what I can to make the images of my particular coins look like they do in hand.  Others will have to chime in on your specific questions.  I think the only "older" proof coin I own is the 1907 V Nickel below.  

[VKurtB]

1 hour ago, RWB said:

RE: "The lighting of proofs isn’t really much different from non proofs.  You just have to keep the lights far enough back from the lens so as not to glare off of the mirrors.  Below are three somewhat progressively more mirrored proofs I have photographed in the past couple months."

Some use a black (or white) card around the lens how does that work?

Also, what about older proofs were the entire surface is mirrored?

I used a sheet of translucent vellum formed into a tube and that tube went over the coin and up to the camera lens. At that point, four floods (Polaroid MP4 copy stand) lit up the tube. The lens was fitted with a black ring holding a black card, which kept the fields completely black. This setup also created some "enhanced" views of "PL" Swiss circulating coins.

[Henri Charriere]

On 10/26/2020 at 1:57 PM, brg5658 said:

Skippy - get off it! 

I have Goodman's book and have read it more than once.  He mentions that tilting coins may be possible on 2-3 pages of his much larger 160+ page book.  He specifically says that if you tilt coins you have to accept the degradation of sharpness lost by stopping down your aperture to very large f-values.  He also specifically says that you can use more complicated lens set-ups like tilt-shift lenses (as I also mentioned before).  Another technique he doesn't discuss in his 10+ year old book is focus stacking - which is a software fix-up for tilting coins into the light source where you take multiple pictures and the software stitches them together into a fully in focus image.  The point is that none of this is a standard technique (i.e., it is rarely used) and doesn't help the masses take better photos. 

You're such a self-serving pedantic pillock.  This thread is about LIGHTING for taking better coin photos - please stop with your childish and incessant "told you so" posts. 

[The words schmuck and in Yiddish, and pillock in Norwegian -- a corruption, of pilliock over time, are references to a male's  primary member and their use to describe an esteemed colleague is not only ill-advised but  unwarranted.  Why can't we all just accept each other on common ground and all just try to get along?  Re lighting, the advice given by the two main camps may very well be sound, but lacking resources (and the initiative to be resourceful) I do what every one else does: the best I can with what I have.

Edited October 28, 2020 by Quintus Arrius
Clarifications

[brg5658]

3 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

[The words schmuck and in Yiddish, and pilliock in Norwegian, are references to one's primary member and their use to describe an esteemed colleague is not only ill-advised but  unwarranted.  Why can't we all just accept each other on common ground and all just try to get along?  Re lighting, the advice given by the two main camps may very well be sound but lacking resources (and the initiative to be resourceful) I do what every one else does: the best I can with what I have.

Pillock is British slang for a dolt.  It may come from a Norwegian word, but that is not what I typed.

[AstroStu1]

Thanks to @brg5658 for the guide, it's similar to what I had done a decade ago.  I left the boards here for many years because I got busy with work, and apparently my extensive, vast post history disappeared so it looks like this is only my first post!  I thought I'd check them out because I've been re-inventorying (auditing) my collection for insurance purposes.  It's nice to see helpful, educational posts like the original one on this thread.  But the rest of the thread reminds me why I stopped reading and posting to internet forums years ago.  Sigh.

And now to pile on the dumpster fire before I take my leave again, speaking as an occasional professional photographer (not my main job, but it's a job): As others have said, depth-of-focus has to do with the lens' aperture, the distance between the lens and the object to focus on, and the focal length, as well as what's called the "circle of confusion" which has to do with imperfections in the lens' ability to focus light perfectly.  Almost always, you want a coin to appear to be fully in focus.  Almost always, you want it to have the correct geometry, meaning that if it's a perfect circle in real life, you want it to appear as a perfect circle in the photograph, without needing to digitally (or in film, manually) manipulate it.  Unless you have a tilt-shift lens, which just makes things more complicated, there's no reason to tilt the coin to highlight different things, and it will make parts of the coin be more out-of-focus, whether you can tell that or not is a separate question.  But usually with this sort of macro photography that is coin photography, it is a very shallow depth-of-focus so any perturbation will put it out-of-focus.  As has been stated, the reason to tilt the coin is almost always because you want to highlight something different via lighting angle.  Which gets to the original point of this thread: Instead of doing that with tilt, which makes the geometry distorted and can make parts of the coin be out-of-focus, just adjust your lights!  Plain and simple.  Really not sure why there are 5 pages of yelling about this.

Edited November 1, 2020 by AstroStu1

[Insider]

On 11/1/2020 at 5:12 AM, AstroStu1 said:

Thanks to @brg5658 for the guide, it's similar to what I had done a decade ago.  I left the boards here for many years because I got busy with work, and apparently my extensive, vast post history disappeared so it looks like this is only my first post!  I thought I'd check them out because I've been re-inventorying (auditing) my collection for insurance purposes.  It's nice to see helpful, educational posts like the original one on this thread.  But the rest of the thread reminds me why I stopped reading and posting to internet forums years ago.  Sigh.

And now to pile on the dumpster fire before I take my leave again, speaking as an occasional professional photographer (not my main job, but it's a job): As others have said, depth-of-focus has to do with the lens' aperture, the distance between the lens and the object to focus on, and the focal length, as well as what's called the "circle of confusion" which has to do with imperfections in the lens' ability to focus light perfectly.  Almost always, you want a coin to appear to be fully in focus.  Almost always, you want it to have the correct geometry, meaning that if it's a perfect circle in real life, you want it to appear as a perfect circle in the photograph, without needing to digitally (or in film, manually) manipulate it.  Unless you have a tilt-shift lens, which just makes things more complicated, there's no reason to tilt the coin to highlight different things, and it will make parts of the coin be more out-of-focus, whether you can tell that or not is a separate question.  But usually with this sort of macro photography that is coin photography, it is a very shallow depth-of-focus so any perturbation will put it out-of-focus.  As has been stated, the reason to tilt the coin is almost always because you want to highlight something different via lighting angle.  Which gets to the original point of this thread: Instead of doing that with tilt, which makes the geometry distorted and can make parts of the coin be out-of-focus, just adjust your lights!  Plain and simple.  Really not sure why there are 5 pages of yelling about this.

I find that it is much easier and quicker to tilt the coin and rotate it under a light source that never moves.  

[brg5658]

1 hour ago, Insider said:

I find that it is much easier and quicker to tilt the coin and rotate it under a light source that never moves.  

Except - as we've explain to you probably 10 times now - for all the reasons why that isn't a best practice (loss of sharpness, geometric distortion, etc.). 

Skip, you are free to do whatever you'd like, but that doesn't mean it's good practice or up to par of professional images. 

We're waiting going on 2 weeks now for your supposed good images you took with your company's multi-thousand dollar automated equipment. 

 

[Insider]

1 hour ago, brg5658 said:

Except - as we've explain to you probably 10 times now - for all the reasons why that isn't a best practice (loss of sharpness, geometric distortion, etc.). 

Skip, you are free to do whatever you'd like, but that doesn't mean it's good practice or up to par of professional images. 

We're waiting going on 2 weeks now for your supposed good images you took with your company's multi-thousand dollar automated equipment. 

 

I've had them on my computer since last week!   I thought you were done with "OUR" discussion.  I'll post them for everyone but ONLY if YOU promise to play the game:  

TIPPED or NOT TIPPED.      It will prove a coin can be tilted in the light, in focus, and no one can tell which is which.  

 

PS  And you and others critique my images so I'll get better.  It was my first time and the camera was pre-set.  I made no adjustments and only took the image.  

 

Edited November 2, 2020 by Insider