Coin Photography: Post a pic of your lighting setup

coin22lover

Please post a picture of the lighting setup you have (and describe as much as possible, such as wattage, etc), along with as many other relevant details as possible such as camera type and of course an example of your photos...

pendragon1998

My inexpensive Coin Photography Setup

rmpsrpms

My setup is fairly simple:
Two LED Goosneck lamps with blocking diffusors, 80mm above the coin surface. My latest photos are with APO-EL-NIKKOR 105/5.6 on bellows with Nikon 7000 (not shown since I am taking picture of setup with it). Here is the setup, and below that a picture of Lincoln Cent taken with it.

AnkurJ

Copy stand was $90 from ebay. Three desk lamps (only two shown) with multiple movement points ($20 each at target). PAR30 Halogen bulbs about $7 each at target.

Canon XSI bought preowned for $400 on ebay.
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro usm lens, also $400 preowned on ebay.

DieClash

rlarick

I only shoot copper. I have to use about 300 watts of light due to the 70mm extension on a old 35-70mm Nikon lens adapted to Canon 40D. I have to use that much to provide enough light to the sensor. Lighting at 10,12, and 2 o'clock going Reveal, Flood, Reveal - consistently gives me the best results on both MS and Brown copper.



results:

lkeigwin

It's on a table nowadays and I've added 100mm and 180mm macros, ring light, etc.

Pictures like the below ones are easy.
Lance.

Russ

For coins:



For larger stuff:



Bought used, (11 years old), Nikon Coolpix 950 cameras, $27 copy stand, $10 tripod, five bucks worth of light bulbs.

Russ, NCNE

rlarick

<< <i>It's on a table nowadays and I've added 100mm and 180mm macros, ring light, etc.


>>




Who makes that copy stand and does the lighting assembly come with it? What type of bulbs in the stationary hoods do you use.?


questions questions..

mingot

<< <i>Who makes that copy stand and does the lighting assembly come with it?) >>



http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0024NW5WW/ref=oss_product <-- THIS DOES NOT COME WITH THE LIGHTS IN THE PHOTO.

coin oriented review here

ibzman350

Nothing fancy for me.






but if the photography gods smile on me I can get fair results.












Herb

ambro51

a 4 tube florescent fixture on the ceiling and a cheap kodak z712IS on a broken old enlarger stand with a 9 dollar achromat lens taped onto the front of the camera.

Id post a picture but you guys with the big expensive camera and sixteen lights would just laugh. I can only post my results.

One thing Ill tell you guys....and this is coming from someone who is a 'professional photographer' of sorts, and a camera builder.....there is a fine line that is often crossed where the Photographer loses sight of making an image and focuses on equipment.....becoming an 'equipment collector'. Focus on your results. Sometimes simple is good, and just as effective.

lkeigwin

<< <i>

<< <i>It's on a table nowadays and I've added 100mm and 180mm macros, ring light, etc.


>>

Who makes that copy stand and does the lighting assembly come with it? What type of bulbs in the stationary hoods do you use.?

questions questions.. >>

Copy stand: Beseler CS-14 (bought from a NYC photo shop). Yes, the lighting assembly is optional. The lights are halogen. You can buy ones today that screw into ordinary sockets. Lots of options. Spot vs. flood. I have most but have settle on halogen.
Lance.

ambro51

Lance can you heat up a bowl of dinty moore stew under that setup?

messydesk

Except I usually use a Nikon D80 with 105/4 manual focus Micro-Nikkor instead of a Kodak No. 1 Autographic Pocket Camera (especially given the cost of 120 autographic film). Daylight-balanced 13W mercury bulbs, Kleenex® brand diffusers.

rmpsrpms

<< <i>One thing Ill tell you guys....and this is coming from someone who is a 'professional photographer' of sorts, and a camera builder.....there is a fine line that is often crossed where the Photographer loses sight of making an image and focuses on equipment.....becoming an 'equipment collector'. Focus on your results. Sometimes simple is good, and just as effective. >>



You're far too late with that advice, and at least for me it would not have been helpful sooner anyway. A collector is a collector. Coins, photographic equipment, whatever strikes the right chord with the collecting interest. And the drive to own the best is there as well. Key date in a series, condition census, or best resolution and lighting, what's the difference?

rlarick

<< <i>

<< <i>One thing Ill tell you guys....and this is coming from someone who is a 'professional photographer' of sorts, and a camera builder.....there is a fine line that is often crossed where the Photographer loses sight of making an image and focuses on equipment.....becoming an 'equipment collector'. Focus on your results. Sometimes simple is good, and just as effective. >>



You're far too late with that advice, and at least for me it would not have been helpful sooner anyway. A collector is a collector. Coins, photographic equipment, whatever strikes the right chord with the collecting interest. And the drive to own the best is there as well. Key date in a series, condition census, or best resolution and lighting, what's the difference? >>





No difference!. And frankly, all you old codgers!! coming from someone new to this as a hobby..... Photographing your coins feels like it is as important as the coin itself. On so many levels, there are so many advantages. It starts by not handling them as often. It could end with maybe selling the coin. Coin arrives, gets photographed, coin gets stored. I then open image to actually look at it. Imagine my surprise when I noticed that the coin might be a DDO!

The bug with equipment has bitten me for sure. A new lens arrived today and after some choice words, I finally got some good shots. but it also has me to thinking.. that the DOF isn't what I want, whether the sensor is the same size as the coin. If the contrast has gotten better, will it get even better with another bigger better lens....? and what about the lights? I want goosenecks that I can control dimming and switching from the computer.. lol it doesn't end, does it?

Here is a before and after shot of the same coin, new lens. The before is with a rigged retrofitted lens and the after is with a 100mm macro. Pretty sure the lighting was and is the same. GE 75w Reveals and (1) 150w halogen Flood.

Before:



After:

rlarick

I guess the point is, that the upgrade lens that cost as much as the camera was worth it. which coin looks better? Before or After?

ambro51

I feel the same way as you do. I like the photos sometimes better than the coins themselves in a strange way, both slabs and high quality digital photos have revolutionized coin collecting to a very large degree.

Youre dumping 300 watts of light onto a subject that is only inches away from your lens and lights. What that is doing is telling your automatic exposure camera to close the lens aperature way down, and speed the exposure way up. The smaller aperature increases you depth of field, and this in turn brings all those pesky slab scratches into the plane of focus, along with the surface of the coin. The increase in shutter speed is great for catching someone kicking a soccer ball but its not doing anything at all of any value for a coin that is just sitting there.

When the light level is lower, the aperature will open and the shutter will slow down. Youll get the same exact image. However, your depth of field is now quite restricted. Your autofocus will now detect the surface of the coin, and the surface of the slab is a bit less than 1/8 inch above the coin, and will be out of focus. That renders all the scratches invisible, except large groups of scratches which will give a white foggy patch. But, all in all...the effect will be better.

Lighting....no matter how strong the light, or how weak the light, direction is ultra important. If youve ever peered at the full moon through a decent telescope, you will see that those craters, mountains and irregular 'maria' will appear flat, featureless...and lacking in contrast. When you look at the moon when it is a 'half moon' or so, youll note the craters, mountains and features now look much more distinctive and contrasty. The setups Ive seen here remind me of what is taking place with the full moon. A flooding of light, omindirectional light...is taking away all the highlights and contrasts that the embossed surface of the coin is able to present. Rembrandt learned about light, he was among the first painters to really realize this. To this day, this type of directional lighting is called "rembrandt lighting'. Back during the 19 the century, every town had a photographic studio. Amateur photographers, home 'snapshots', casual pictures...just did not exist. It was all done carefully and with thought to placement, lighting, and equipment. Artificial lighting did not exist until about 1890 or so, and that was the flash powder of the era. It was all about skylights and reflectors. The skylight was usually controlled by adjustable blinds, so the photographer could alter the light angle and intensity while he watched the subject on his ground glass. While the skylight provided 75% of the light, the reflector filled in the shadows slightly. The skylight always faced north, so strong sunlight never entered into the photographic area. The light came in at about a 45 degree angle, and about a 2 oclock direction to the sitter. This sculpted the sitters features, giving excellent contrast and highlights to certain areas.

This is exactly what I get with my simple as can be setup. So simple, yet so effective. The 4 tube overhead florescent fixture is giving me a nice moderate light coming in from about a 45 degree angle (based on where I put the copy stand and camera) and the balance of the illuminated room provides the fill light. Since the light is not super strong, it is allowing the camera to open the aperature (which eliminates scratches) and it also slows the shutter speed down (no effect on a stationary subject like a coin).


I would encourage everyone who is tinkering with 2, 4, 6 or more lights of high intensity to try my way. Less light, but carefully placed...and further from the coin.

Since the previous photo was of a 1909 V D B, I will add a photo of a 1909 VDB I had (and sold). This IS the DDo.

BaseballAbs

<< <i>

That's what i'm talking about. Looks just like my setup.

BaseballAbs

<< <i>I guess the point is, that the upgrade lens that cost as much as the camera was worth it. which coin looks better? Before or After? >>



rlarick,

I like the one before. The second looks to have a white film over it, kind of washed out version. The first one has a wonderful color and looks like a nice coin.

Jesh

<< <i>

<< <i>It's on a table nowadays and I've added 100mm and 180mm macros, ring light, etc.


>>




Who makes that copy stand and does the lighting assembly come with it? What type of bulbs in the stationary hoods do you use.?


questions questions.. >>



It's Important to note the CS model does not come with lights. The CSK does (k meaning kit I assume).

CoinForums.com review of CSK

Russ

Russ, NCNE

scottgardener

I just stick mine on a flat bed scanner and make rather crappy blurry images. It's quick and cheap. I could probably do better, I know.

rlarick

<< <i>I guess the point is, that the upgrade lens that cost as much as the camera was worth. which coin looks better? Before or After? >>



rlarick,

I like the one before. The second looks to have a white film over it, kind of washed out version. The first one has a wonderful color and looks like a nice coin. >>



WOW really....? hmmmmm... I really need to get a new monitor. Then again your preference may tie into something Ambro was getting at and that is the style of presentation, whether it be more artistic or more diagnostic. The first shot is with a lens built from parts, an old NIkor 35-70mm from a film camera. The second is with the 100mm Macro.

It is important for me to stress that my very limited experience is only with shooting copper.

The first shot was with shutter priority at 1/125th ISO at 640 not sure about the f-stop since the lens isn't hooked to the camera, so the data isn't there around 4 if I remember right. 300watts of light at about 20" and 80 degrees to the coin.

The second shot. with A-DEP at 1/100th ISO at 500 f-stopped at 2.8 300watts of light at about 20" and 80 degrees to the coin.








<< <i>I feel the same way as you do. I like the photos sometimes better than the coins themselves in a strange way, both slabs and high quality digital photos have revolutionized coin collecting to a very large degree.

Youre dumping 300 watts of light onto a subject that is only inches away from your lens and lights. What that is doing is telling your automatic exposure camera to close the lens aperature way down, and speed the exposure way up. The smaller aperature increases you depth of field, and this in turn brings all those pesky slab scratches into the plane of focus, along with the surface of the coin.

Since the previous photo was of a 1909 V D B, I will add a photo of a 1909 VDB I had (and sold). This IS the DDo.

>>





Hmmm.. okay, but there is something I don't understand. My depth of field is extremely shallow, with this new lens. I Manually focus on the fields and allow the high points to be out of focus. I use a crank on the copy stand since the camera wants to focus on the plastic.

I think what you are pointing out with lighting is what works for your brush and your image is in a style that you like. What I have seen suggested over and over is that you have to try different set ups and find the one that works best for you. I'll take your advice and see how it works in a semi controlled test. Camera is set on A-Dep which is giving me the best results IMO everything else is automatic except white balance and focus.

Also using a 09VDB DDO-002 MS65RD

1st up - As suggested, this is using only room lighting which consists of 2 large Daylight CFL's 5500K directed up at a white ceiling YUCK! 1/15th at f2.8





2nd up - small desk lamp halogen 50w? you can see the lamp in my desk pic on the top shelf. Highlights luster, hides defects and spots 1/100th at f2.8





3rd up - Single 150w halogen Flood in reflective hood diffused with a paper towel Bounty, I think. at 12 o'clock - Highlights luster, hides defects and spots - 1/100th at f 2.8





4th up - (2) GE 75w Reveals at 10 & 2 o'clock - A lot of people like 2 lights, these don't work for me YUCK! - Hides luster, exaggerates dings, and over highlights the bust IMO - 1/100th at f2.8





and lastly - 3 Lites at 10-12-2 GE-Flood-GE I feel this gives and shows a copper coin the best from a diagnostic standpoint and is still attractive. It highlights luster but not so much to hide tics and dings. HOWEVER this configuration exaggerates toning and spots. I should add, this image is color matched exactly to coin in hand (white balance is set to this configuration)1/125th at f3.5

rmpsrpms

You might want to make the pics a little smaller to make comparisons easier. Also aperture may be too big, try f/5.6 or f/8 to improve resolution, contrast and DOF. I think I like the last one best for lighting. What 100mm lens are you using, Canon?