Ike Dollar Cameo versus Photo Position - Update with Walker Added

lilolme

So seeing some Proof and cameo threads, it got me wondering how the cameo might change versus photo setup. So I got the snap-o'matic out, an Ike dollar (in a plastic holder, sorry) and then took some photos as I rotated the Ike about 45 degrees. The single light is at 12 o/c (first photo) and does not move. I held the camera at about light level and up against the light shade. Then zoomed in and snap. Nothing dramatic here but since the cameo changed some I thought I would post the results. Cheap entertainment maybe. 2 lights might be better?
.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.
And then I thought I would try to get one of those reflection type shots. Sort of did, I think.
.

.
.
.
EDIT UPDATE with Walker.
.

I was curious about the impact of lighting and/or camera position on the cameo. I only have one slabbed Walker purchased long ago and it is not a proof. So I don't know these. However, I took some pictures rotating the slab around a single lamp that is about 10 inches above the surface. I made a few notes about where the light is below. Might be able to tell the light position by noting the shadow of the slab to the left or right, glare if any on slab and how raised devices are lit up or not.

I hand held the snap-o'matic camera as directly above the slab as best and steady as I could.

Was kind of interesting seeing how the sun and other areas lit up and then didn't. This is only one light and two or more would do better but the one shows the impact of light position better.

Note - This was done in relation to this thread:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1107959/first-cameo-1936-half-dollar-certified

Stared with light in 12 o/c position (top).
.

.
Then rotated around counter-clockwise. So the next few are moving from 12 o/c toward 9 o/c.
.




.
Now moving from the 9 o/c toward 6 o/c.
Note: there is a lamp bar at 6 o/c so this stops at about 6 to 7 o/c.
.



.
Now moving to the other side of 6 o/c or about 5 to 6 o/c and the sun lights up. Then moving to 3 o/c.
.



.
Now moving from 3 o/c toward 1 o/c.

BStrauss3

Part of being CAM is that the entire surface is cameo. A scuff or other patch is very noticeable. And our hosts have reportedly gotten much stricter about this over the years.

The last shot is interesting. I figured that the tail of the Y was casting a shadow - much more visible because of the cameo. But why is the L not? and the tops of the 7s. I think there is a tiny bit of MD - check out the 2nd from last shot.

If nothing else, you've shown how difficult it is to shoot cameos.

FlyingAl

2 lights is definitely better for CAMs/DCAMs. It allows for the camera to take in the contrast at all angles at one given time, so like compiling all the contrast you would get by swirling the coin in one shot.

ricko

Lighting and angles.... evidently prime contributors to coin photography - and probably many other things. Cheers, RickO

lilolme

@BStrauss3 said:
Part of being CAM is that the entire surface is cameo. A scuff or other patch is very noticeable. And our hosts have reportedly gotten much stricter about this over the years.

The last shot is interesting. I figured that the tail of the Y was casting a shadow - much more visible because of the cameo. But why is the L not? and the tops of the 7s. I think there is a tiny bit of MD - check out the 2nd from last shot.

If nothing else, you've shown how difficult it is to shoot cameos.

Thanks for the information. I actually thought the differences would be even more noticeable than they were. Had not paid attention to the last shot and was just seeing if I could get the reflection thing. There is some glare just starting to show at the bottom by the date. Now that Y thing - I don't know but it is along the top of the head also. FYI the light is at 12 o/c and slightly behind the coin and I and the camera move far in front of the coin so the light is reflecting back at a somewhat steep angle. Was a quick and kind of fun little thing to do. Never had tried it before and I am not a photographer so was different for me.

Edit: looking at the last photo and where the camera was, I am thinking the dark area around Y and along the top of the head is the light reflecting off the field surface but being blocked by the devices. The camera lens is fairly large so I don't know how that would impact it but I know it will pick up glare and stuff that I don't see with my eye.

lilolme

@FlyingAl said:
2 lights is definitely better for CAMs/DCAMs. It allows for the camera to take in the contrast at all angles at one given time, so like compiling all the contrast you would get by swirling the coin in one shot.

Thanks: That is what I was thinking. I did one light because I thought it would show the most difference. While it changed I though it would be even more. Kind of a fun thing to try out for a non-photographer with a snap-o'matic in hand.

Coinscratch

Hold my beer

lilolme

@Coinscratch said:
Hold my beer

Beer - can do better than that.

Coinscratch

@lilolme said:

@Coinscratch said:
Hold my beer

Beer - can do better than that.

Oh damn now I feel like the rookie
actually looks very familiar

Coinscratch

As a rookie photographer I prefer to point the lights away especially for proofs, likes and the such.

Direct light (shown here) looks too raw.

Indirect light then adjust aperture/ that lil turn knob on the lens. the texture looks richer.

Also, I can adjust and/or remove the roof for optimum shots. Mouse in one hand while holding the roof airborne to find the perfect places to highlight on a particular coin.

Coinscratch

I have yet to figure out the reflection shot on this setup obviously the cell phone is easy.

More recent shooting practice.

Coinscratch

And again, the first pic is direct lighting while the second is indirect. It exposes cameo that you wouldn't normally see. This coin is PR68RD.

ironmanl63

@Coinscratch said:
And again, the first pic is direct lighting while the second is indirect. It exposes cameo that you wouldn't normally see. This coin is PR68RD.

Good Stuff. I will have to try that. Where did you get the white cardboard?

lilolme

@Coinscratch Yes the drinks are familiar.
You are way over me on the photography. Nice summation.

@ironmanl63 White cardboard and other similar type stuff I find at Hobby Lobby. If you don't have one of those then perhaps a similar type place.

Coinscratch

@ironmanl63 Its a trifold designed for 6th grade science projects, amazon. I cut a section of the bottom for wires and use a folded taped one for the roof. Indirect light can work for and against, sometimes you lose color and/or pick up every little ting. Every coin is slightly different.

Why not

Coinscratch

@lilolme said:
@Coinscratch Yes the drinks are familiar.
You are way over me on the photography. Nice summation.

@ironmanl63 White cardboard and other similar type stuff I find at Hobby Lobby. If you don't have one of those then perhaps a similar type place.

I'm just learning and my lights I believe are way off. This is something of a work-around but more than suitable for me determining whether or not to have graded.

BryceM

Cameos can be tough, but I think they're still easier than circulated copper. I never could really figure it out until I got Goodman's book. It was a lot easier to copy his technique than invent a different one.

ChrisH821

Some really nice photos in here!

Ronsanderson

Animation of a series of photos, using a different light angle for each shot. The cameo effect does not change with the angle, but the other surfaces do change. Taking a careful look at one point on the cameo surface will show how the light is evenly scattered no matter what angle it comes from.

There may be disagreement about whether this is relevant to the discussion above, but I thought it provided some new insight that may not have been easy to see using only the individual still shots.