Coin pics with my Samsung S22 + 0

[VKurtB]

On 1/25/2023 at 12:51 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Here's 3 photos I just took outside my terrace door.  It's probably 60 feet to the trees across the parking lot (I'm on the 2nd floor about 15 feet above the ground).

I took these 3 shots with no zoom, 4x zoom, and 8x zoom.

Unless you have a very unusual phone lens system, you did not. Digital zoom is just taking the central portion of the frame and blowing up those pixels, creating far less resolution. Only OPTICAL zoom is even a real thing. Digital zoom is 🐂💩. 

[GoldFinger1969]

And those zoom lenses and wide-angles can cost serious $$$.....I believe anywhere from $300 - $1,000.   

Not included with the camera !!

[VKurtB]

On 1/25/2023 at 3:06 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

And those zoom lenses and wide-angles can cost serious $$$.....I believe anywhere from $300 - $1,000.   

Not included with the camera !!

The NORMAL lens for the Hasselblad digital I want is WELLLLLL over $1,000. 

[Hoghead515]

He was probably 100 feet. He was smaller in the picture I took. I used a photo edit app to crop him up and blow him up a little so you could see him better. Its the same app I use to crop my coin pictures up with. The old lady really wants one those Cannons. She got a friend that buys pictures and makes puzzles and things out of them if they are good landscapes and things. If they are good enough. I figured Id use it and rephotograph all my coins if I can build me a small light box or something. If I can find the right lens. I figured Id try get her one this summer when work picks up good. I may get her friend to make me a puzzle out of one of my coin pictures. 

[Hoghead515]

On 1/25/2023 at 4:09 PM, VKurtB said:

The NORMAL lens for the Hasselblad digital I want is WELLLLLL over $1,000. 

I may save up get her a nice one. Ive seen some nice used cameras with all kinds of extra lenses and things for around $1000 to $1200.  Not sure yet. May just get one around $300 or $400. Be a good birthday present for her this summer. I can get some use out of it to. 

[VKurtB]

I just looked it up. The Hasselblad digital I have my eye on WITH the nicer normal lens approaches $10,000. Then we start talking about other lenses. The digital sensor chip is HUNDREDS of times bigger than the ones in phones. Still think phones are enough?

Edited January 25, 2023 by VKurtB

[VKurtB]

A black and white ONLY digital back for a 4x5 camera runs $26,000 right now. It has FAAAAR less resolution than a sheet of 4x5 film, that has been available since the 1930’s. Think more. 

[Hoghead515]

On 1/25/2023 at 4:14 PM, VKurtB said:

I just looked it up. The Hasselblad digital I have my eye on WITH the nicer normal lens approaches $10,000. Then we start talking about other lenses. 

I probably wont be able to swing for anything like that. It would sure be nice. I bet those take some sweet pictures. We may just get into semi pro photography.  Or amatures trying to look like pros more like it. I figured a person could still probably take some good pictures with those ones we looked at. She was looking at those mirrorless cameras while back. But they well over $1000. She hasnt mentioned anything about it for a year or so now. I may save up and suprise her with one on her birthday. 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Hoghead515

[RWB]

Optical zoom or software "zoom?"

Look at the camera lenses sideline photographers use at football games this weekend. Those are optical. If  software version were any good, do you think they would be lugging that stuff around? Look closely at the TV coverage. The camera lenses are all optical which is why the coach picking his nose image is sharp from across the stadium.

Phone cameras are digital toys intended to amuse users and make their photos appear routinely competent. They can produce nice 4k video when viewed on a 4k system. But put them on a 256k pro system and they turn to mush.

The whole point is to understand what your camera can and cannot do well, then work with its strengths. As Kurt noted earlier, if you turn off all the cell phone automatic , you might be able to make a nice photo -- after a lot of experimenting.

 

To anyone thinking of getting a DSLR for coin photos, first use a cell phone or a cheap digital camera to nail down and understand lighting coin both raw and in plastic tombs. Once you have that zeroed in, then buy a good 24 meg camera, a close focusing zoom lens, and a set of auto extension tubes for detail photos. OH -- an practice -- a lot!   

[RWB]

Here's an example that popped up ATT (across the tracks).

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1086805/what-a-difference-lighting-makes

Both photos are awful, but the photographer was trying for improvement and the visibility of detail is much improved.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/25/2023 at 4:13 PM, Hoghead515 said:

I may save up get her a nice one. Ive seen some nice used cameras with all kinds of extra lenses and things for around $1000 to $1200.  Not sure yet. May just get one around $300 or $400. Be a good birthday present for her this summer. I can get some use out of it to. 

You would think some would be up for sale on Ebay or camera auction sites from people selling their equipment or looking to get digital replacements or estates needing to liquidate.

[bsshog40]

On 1/25/2023 at 6:28 PM, RWB said:

Here's an example that popped up ATT (across the tracks).

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1086805/what-a-difference-lighting-makes

Both photos are awful, but the photographer was trying for improvement and the visibility of detail is much improved.

Exposure is a big problem. It's been a while since I have been able to take pics with my Canon, but I can remember having it in program mode and playing with exposure for hours just trying to get something that looks like what my eyes see. Lol Even then, after uploading pics from the camera to the PC, I still seen differences from what I seen on the camera. I can bet that most people who have and use dslr's have no clue all of the options that are available in the camera. I'm one of them. My Canon is probably 10 yrs old now and it still has stuff I don’t fully understand. My cousin does some very nice photography with people. Sometimes when he talks about camera settings it just flys over my head. Lol

[RWB]

A coin is simply an irregular reflective metal object. Parts of the surface will reflect light directly into a camera's lens and, assuming a 'average' exposure, produce blown-out over exposed areas. Other parts reflect all of the light away from the lens and appear black, yet other parts reflect different proportions of light to the lens. This is based both on gross surface geometry - surface relief changes - and microsurface smoothness. A polished part of the surface will diffuse less light and thus appeal both higher contrast and visually sharper.

One of the little coin photo tricks is to pretend the coin is a portrait, and arrange your light so that it is lit from the upper face of the profile. You can 'smooth' the tones by directing light and different angles to 'open' the dark portions, and 'flatten' overly bright areas.

Master this - lighting first - then consider if you really can benefit from new equipment.

 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/25/2023 at 8:57 PM, RWB said:

A coin is simply an irregular reflective metal object. Parts of the surface will reflect light directly into a camera's lens and, assuming a 'average' exposure, produce blown-out over exposed areas. Other parts reflect all of the light away from the lens and appear black, yet other parts reflect different proportions of light to the lens. This is based both on gross surface geometry - surface relief changes - and microsurface smoothness. A polished part of the surface will diffuse less light and thus appeal both higher contrast and visually sharper. One of the little coin photo tricks is to pretend the coin is a portrait, and arrange your light so that it is lit from the upper face of the profile. You can 'smooth' the tones by directing light and different angles to 'open' the dark portions, and 'flatten' overly bright areas.  Master this - lighting first - then consider if you really can benefit from new equipment.

You've said that luster is light reflecting off thousands of microscopic "ridges" caused by deformations in the metal caused by the pressure of the striking (I remembered ! ). 

How would the picture look for 2 coins that were essentially the same but one had great luster (not handled at all) but the other was essentially full of luster-breaks from handling ?

Edited January 26, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[RWB]

On 1/25/2023 at 9:21 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

How would the picture look for 2 coins that were essentially the same but one had great luster (not handled at all) but the other was essentially full of luster-breaks from handling ?

Luster breaks are really just filling, or smoothing of sharper ridges. They would appear darker in tone from greater diffusion of light.

[VKurtB]

Ever notice how a frosted device proof coin can be photographed as black devices on a white background  OR white devices on a black background? Yeahhh. That is 100% lighting, folks. Same coin. Black on white or white on black. And it can be either one within seconds. NOW imagine what can be done on a non-proof coin. Important details can be revealed or hidden with trivial ease. All through choices of lighting. Don’t expect me to EVER be okay with coin photographs. It’s a literal impossibility. I am literally ALWAYS gonna need that “s-u-m-b-I-t-c-h” in my hand before I’ll even work on a grade. 

Edited January 26, 2023 by VKurtB

[rrantique]

On 1/26/2023 at 1:05 PM, VKurtB said:

Ever notice how a frosted device proof coin can be photographed as black devices on a white background  OR white devices on a black background? Yeahhh. That is 100% lighting, folks. Same coin. Black on white or white on black. And it can be either one within seconds. NOW imagine what can be done on a non-proof coin. Important details can be revealed or hidden with trivial ease. All through choices of lighting. Don’t expect me to EVER be okay with coin photographs. It’s a literal impossibility. I am literally ALWAYS gonna need that “s-u-m-b-I-t-c-h” in my hand before I’ll even work on a grade. 

 

[VKurtB]

On 1/27/2023 at 3:38 PM, rrantique said:

 

Whatcha tryna say? The lighting here tells me nothing. Now give me a physical holder like that and a light to swirl the whole deal under, and I can (under)grade them all. 

Edited January 28, 2023 by VKurtB

[rrantique]

On 1/27/2023 at 4:51 PM, VKurtB said:

Whatcha tryna say? The lighting here tells me nothing. Now give me a physical holder like that and a light to swirl the whole deal under, and I can (under)grade them all. 

Just showing what inverted colors (black and white)  would look like on Morgans

Edited January 28, 2023 by rrantique
photo

[VKurtB]

On 1/27/2023 at 8:58 PM, rrantique said:

Just showing what inverted colors (black and white)  would look like on Morgans

BRILLIANT!

[bsshog40]

So just another attempt thru a slab.

[J P M]

Looks good enough to me. Very nice coin also. I wish I could get the circle but my S8 will only do a circle if I draw it and that never works.

Edited January 29, 2023 by J P M

[VKurtB]

On 1/28/2023 at 11:56 PM, bsshog40 said:

So just another attempt thru a slab.

Very pretty coin with easily understandable toning, and one of the  most compelling reverse sides in the history of U.S. coins. For those beginners here who might never have held one of these, the depth of the reverse devices is utterly amazing. 

Edited January 30, 2023 by VKurtB

[EarlyUS.com]

My iPhone XS does an OK job - good enough to send pics to a potential customer without having to drag out the whole camera setup.