Options
A nice example of why I don't like the "Lampshade Effect" of using diffused light when pho
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
I noticed this eBay listing and was amazed at the difference in the pictures that show an average Proof and a Deep Cameo Proof view of the same coin, the latter most probably a result of the "Lampshade Effect" popularized here by MadMarty. It is deceptive and by nature tends to hide flaws and accentuate contrast on Proof coins. To their credit, this particular seller added a picture which shows what the coin actually looks like.
When I first saw results here of using diffused light I tried the technique and was impressed with how it transformed average coins into monsters.
Al H.
When I first saw results here of using diffused light I tried the technique and was impressed with how it transformed average coins into monsters.
Al H.
0
Comments
lifeless proof into a whopper DCAM, or nearly so.
Franklin proof looks DCAM to me.
Same Frankie no DCAM.
Washie appears to be a Cam at least This is a one sided DCAM, the reverse is awesome and very DCAM.
The same Washie, no hint of CAM or DCAM.
Lighting has little to do with being able to identify a cam. From any of your images above, it is very easy.
And if one buys raw proofs and thinks they are cheery picking DCAMs they better learn to judge images very well.
peacockcoins
The photos of the half and quarter posted by Morgansforever all show the presence of frosted devices and mirrored fields. The only difference in the photos is the reflection of the lighting off of the coins. Twp photos have lighting which highlights and accentuates the contrast between the fields and devices. The other two photos minimizes the contrast. If you are familiar with how Cameo proofs look under different lighting conditions you can perceive the presence of frosted devices even when they are not readily apparent from a photo.
Buying proof and cameo proof coins from a photo is risky (unless there is a rock solid return privilege). I recently bought a 1957 proof set in a Capital Holder that contained (from the photo) what appeared to be a no question Cameo nickel. When I received the proof set I found a nickel that had only slight frost on the obverse (which showed only when the coin was tilted in one particular way) and moderate reverse frost. Still looking for a no doubt Cameo 1957 nickel.
<< <i>The linked EBay auction appears (IMO) to have two separate coins pictured, the slabbed PF half which is clearly not a Cameo and the other half which is a Cameo. >>
I agree.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Not familiar with the term "Lampshade Effect", but a lighting adjustment can turn a
lifeless proof into a whopper DCAM, or nearly so. >>
nice examples of various lighting positions.
these looks can be obtained without diffusing for those think diffusion is necessary. i am also not a big fan of diffusing. in my opinion it flattens the look of many coins.
.
<< <i>
<< <i>The linked EBay auction appears (IMO) to have two separate coins pictured, the slabbed PF half which is clearly not a Cameo and the other half which is a Cameo. >>
I agree. >>
this is an interesting point and one i didn't consider when i saw the listing, primarily because the in-holder pictures are too small for a good comparison. however, at first glance this morning with the obv/rev picture showing my initial thought was ricoins. they use diffused lighting extensively in their listings and it can be very deceptive.
So I switched back to normal lighting similar to the type you might use at your desk for examining proofs. Much better results.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!