Took a few shots of the coin last night with two different cameras. First up, my shiny new Nikon D610, 200mm Micro-Nikkor lens. 1/60 sec, f8, ISO 200. Mounted on Kaiser RS1 copy stand, height of camera was about 80 cm. Two gooseneck lamps at 11 and 3. Piece of white paper used as fill reflector just south of the coin. Minor exposure corrections in Camera Raw editor.
Next shot, removed the fill reflector (reverse included)
Now, how about a cheaper setup. Canon SD1200 pocket point-n-shoot, cost me about $120 a few years ago. Custom white balance, auto exposure 1/125 sec f4.9 ISO 80, camera height 42cm. Same gooseneck lamps at about 11 and 3. No reflector. Minor exposure corrections using curves tool in Photoshop.
For that "in hand" look, you have to be able to tilt the coin and watch the luster swirl. Back to the D610 setup, 6 shots with hand-held lights approximately 120° apart, starting at roughly 8 and 12, working around to 12 and 4. Exact positioning imprecise, as I was holding one light and my remote camera trigger in one hand, and the other light in other hand. Color seems a little dead quite possibly due to the limit of the color quantization, as animated GIFs can only have 256 colors, and no better file format exists for this (APNG is non-standard).
Oh, and the coin is VAM 52. Doubling in the ear, chips on the first 8, mint mark position, both obverse and reverse fields quite concave, funky polishing between the cut end of the olive branch and arrows.
Love the GIF! Gives a nice feel for the quality of the luster.
There is a distinct disadvantage to being one of the last to shoot the coin. Some of these images will be impossible to improve on. Differences will probably just be those of personal preference. Technically, coin has already been shown beautifully.
That GIF is cool. Personally I would think that having other images to compare would offer an advantage as you can see those images while holding the coin. You would be able to see where some images are soft or some with the exposure off etc... An important part of this is the setup people use and how they are using it. As John (messydesk) has shown a DSLR vs a point and shoot for comparison. Also look at the different setups Ray (rmpsrpms) used to get different images. Johns GIF is of interest as it shows just how lighting from different angles changes the coin, parts of the coin actually appear to grow and shrink. Don't be discouraged Bryce it will be ok
Was thinking that it would be cool to use lenticular printing to get an enlargement of a lustrous coin so you could tilt the picture and see the luster. Another neat application of lenticular printing that would be a stereoscopic print of something with really high relief that wouldn't require crossing your eyes or using a special viewer.
Images were shot raw using aperture-priority (F8), ISO 100 and 40/160 shutter speed (obv/rev). No adjustments were made to contrast, color, sharpening, saturation, definition, vibrancy, noise reduction, etc.
Camera white balance is set to "tungsten", yielding temp of 3050 and tint of 18, which works well for halogen lighting, so no post-processing WB adjustment was needed. Exposure was adjusted along with a reduction in shadows via Apple's Aperture editor. Circle cropping, background color and resizing were done with Acorn software. Lance.
I don't want to seem like I am picking favorites yet but,Lance those images are really good and look sharp enough to cut my fingers if i picked up that coin. mercurydimeguy also captured the die cracks on the reverse and has a very good reverse overall also.
<<I don't want to seem like I am picking favorites yet but,Lance those images are really good and look sharp enough to cut my fingers if i picked up that coin.>>
I second that and Lance was able to pick up the die cracks at 12 o'clock on the reverse, which I did not
Those die cracks are hard to image, I know they are there but even when I was imaging the coin before sending it out I was having a heck of a time with them. EDIT to add: Thank you for the links to reviews on the equipment you you used I did not realize those were links.
Bryce remember take your time there is no rush as this is really turning out neat to see all these images and how people are achieving them. The more information about your process the better. I also would like to know your opinion of the coin in hand, good luck and have fun with it.
Lance, I'm curious about your statement that the images were shot raw. It may not be well-known, but this is actually impossible. Let me explain...
I can make two interpretations from "raw":
1) Camera output was .jpg, and you made no changes to the images after they came out of the camera.
This seems on the surface to be the least-processed way to go, but the camera does a LOT of processing to the image to convert it from the truly raw sensor data, which is incompatible with .jpg format. That conversion involves adjustments to color, sharpness, and especially tone mapping from the wide dynamic range (12-14bits) sensor down to the medium dynamic range (8bits) of the jpg format. All these parameters are selectable within the camera through the "picture style" or whatever your camera brand calls this function. On most cameras you can select a general style, like neutral, dynamic, landscape, or even load in a custom style you or someone else creates. In addition, within the particular style you can (usually) select specific magnitudes of the different adjustments. I shoot Canon, and for each of the styles I can select Sharpness from 0...7, Contrast from -4...4, Saturation from -4...4, and Hue from -4...4. The styles form a baseline conversion "look" to the image, and each of the styles has a default value for each adjustment.
2) Camera output was RAW, and you made no attempt to adjust parameters, just converted directly to .jpg.
Again, seems minimal-processed, but the RAW image has stored with it the same parameters that the shot was taken with. So if you shoot with "standard" style, the image you see on the screen is processed with the standard style using the specific parameters selected, and when the RAW editor converts them to a screen image it uses the same style. So RAW is really not "raw". The selected style is just the baseline that is used by the editor. In fact, if you don't make any changes to the image using the RAW editor, you will end up with exactly the same processing shooting RAW as you do shooting .jpg.
So, it would be good to know what picture style each of the photogs used, and the specific settings used (even if they are the defaults).
I'll start...
For most of the pics I took, I used Neutral 0,0,0,0 (sharpness, contrast, saturation, hue). For the last pics, I used Neutral 3,0,0,0.
Ray
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
Ray, You are a lot smarter than I am. So I am not sure I can answer your question.
Yes, the camera output was raw (#2). I made no attempt to change it other than a tweak to exposure and shadows before exporting it to the jpg that was presented here. Lance.
Lance...not so smart, just been researching this stuff...
If you did RAW conversion without any changes, the settings would be passed through from whatever you selected within the camera.
I looked up a review that described the various options for your camera. Here's what it said:
"In addition, the SLT-A77 provides an enlarged selection of Creative Style choices as compared to the A55, each of which offers +/- three-step control over contrast, saturation, and sharpness. New Creative Style modes include Neutral, Clear, Deep, Light, Night Scene, Autumn Leaves, and Sepia, in addition to the existing Standard, Vivid, Portrait, Landscape, Sunset, and Black & White modes from the A55.
A Dynamic Range Optimizer function aims to open up the shadows while maintaining highlight detail, and can be left under automatic control, or set to one of five preset levels. There are also several multi-shot modes, including Hand-held Twilight (which allows faster shutter speeds with reduced image noise), and an Auto HDR mode. This last creates a single high dynamic range image from three sequential shots, whose exposure level varies anywhere from 1 - 6 EV in 1 EV steps, controlled automatically or manually."
Can you check to see what you have the camera set to for the "Creative Style" mode? Seems the camera gives 3-step control on contrast, saturation and sharpness, and 5-step control of dynamic range optimizer, so would be nice to know what those were set to as well.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
The coin arrived in the mail this AM. It's a rainy Saturday morning - the perfect time to shoot photos!
First, in-hand the coin strikes me as being a little darker and a little more red/purple than most of the images demonstrate. The obverse is actually quite dark. Luster is full and powers through the toning quite easily. This is easily seen in the excellent GIF files John posted earlier. I decided that not emphasizing the luster in the final 800x800 photos would be a mistake, even at the expense of a little color.
Equipment:
Canon EOS Xsi Rebel, purchased used from a family member for $200. Canon 100mm 1:2.8 USM Macro Lens Ebay, no-name, imported Copy Stand Halogen flood lights, 90Wx2, and 50Wx1 f/6.3 1/640 obverse, 1/1600 reverse ISO 200 Tethered Connection to Canon EOS Utility Software Manual focusing via Software Closeup White balance set by 18% graycard before each shoot
Post-processing:
I shot the reverse about 20 times and the obverse about 50 times, trying different techniques. After picking my favorites, I imported the JPEG files to Photoshop. I haven't ever used the RAW format, as I don't really do all that much adjusting from the software. I then cropped the photos to a circular shape, imported them to a 800x800 pixel file, and resized the images to fit. I used a very slight amount of sharpening on the reverse, none on the obverse. I freely admit to applying just a VERY SMALL saturation bump to better match what I was seeing in-hand. (I juiced it!) I don't know if it's the camera photo-sensor, my monitor, or just my own taste, but I sometimes do that on nicely toned coins to keep them from looking too flat.
My own critique of the photos is that Liberty's forehead is a little over-exposed, which bleeds a bit into the hair and liberty cap. This is tough to avoid on Morgans simply due to the angle of the surfaces in that area. I really like how the granular field texture shows through. This is something I always try to show. The cheek textile toning comes through a little less than in some of the other folks' photos. Again, this is a tradeoff that happens when you try to emphasize luster.
The reverse is easy to overlook, but I tried to put just as much effort here. I like this image as an overall compromise. There are a few relatively dark areas and a few bright spots, but that's how it looks in-hand. The coin is highly lustrous and it's fun to show that. I don't mind a few hot spots as long as it isn't more than 2-3% of the entire image. I like how the 12 o'clock die crack is showing. I don't like how there is a bit of shadow around the 10 o'clock rim, but there are always lighting trade-offs.
One trick that I often employ with high-contrast coins is to set the shutter speed such that the coin is a little over-exposed and then do on-the-fly "dodging" or masking of the lights with my free hand. That way it's pretty easy to knock down the hot spots while allowing the naturally darker areas to come through.
All in all, it's a fun coin and one that could be enjoyed in almost any collection.
Nice images Bryce! You captured the luster well and also got the surface details on reverse.
I am with you on the darkness of the obverse compared with reverse. I tried to emphasize that on my final images by not cropping the coin to a fixed background, leaving the white holder as the background. I actually ended up having the obverse be 25% lighter (vs reverse) than it really is in order to match the brightness of the bottom of the obverse image holder with the top of the reverse image holder. Because the light is coming from above, the upper part of the images are brighter than the lower. I initially balanced the two exactly, but then the two images looked wrong next to each other. The reverse holder looked brighter than the obverse, so I figured no one would believe that they were calibrated for brightness, and that the obverse was actually not as dark as I was showing. So I brightened up the obverse a bit and darkened the reverse so they blended better together. Anyway, too many words and details but I'm glad you also took pains to balance the brightness of obverse and reverse.
Ray
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
Bryce I like the fact that you picked up on the surface of this coin. It is know for the soft strike and this also tends to cause the fields to be bumpy but with full luster. You have caught some of the die cracks on the reverse which has been an issue. You described your setup and process nicely and it along with the others will be a help to those imaging coins. The soft strike and the fact it is in a small ANACS holder tend to make the coin look a bit out of focus and it plays a bit with eyes. I have 2 issues with your images and you have already addressed one, the textile toning is a bit washed out and that is one of the key features of this coin. Second is the revers, there are some tan spots that are above the eagle that are not evident in your images and the color seems just slightly light and a tad out of focus, it could use a bit more sharpness. You have stated that you are a novice on many occasions on your posts but your images are those of someone with a great photographic eye. I myself am considering an upgrade to my setup to get a camera that has a sensor with better image quality that provides strong contrast and great color reproduction so I do not need to post process as much, I mention this because of your statement about your cameras sensor.
<< <i>I myself am considering an upgrade to my setup to get a camera that has a sensor with better image quality that provides strong contrast and great color reproduction so I do not need to post process as much, I mention this because of your statement about your cameras sensor. >>
Careful, this is exactly why I posted the picture taken with my 3 year old, $120 ($40 used today, but don't buy a brightly colored one) point and shoot. I wanted to show that for taking pictures for the web, the camera isn't as important at first as learning how to light the coin, set your white balance, and control the exposure. The PowerShot SD1200 and D610 pictures are using almost exactly the same lighting angle. Due to glare, I couldn't use a higher angle for the SD1200, and I wanted to keep the D610 shot close to it for comparison. The lesson from my shots, other than how I took them and how cool an animation of this coin's luster looks, is that it's worth your while to try and get a good picture with the inexpensive equipment you may already have before spending a lot of money.
<< <i>The lesson from my shots, other than how I took them and how cool an animation of this coin's luster looks, is that it's worth your while to try and get a good picture with the inexpensive equipment you may already have before spending a lot of money. >>
Excellent advice. My first shots were taken with a camera I bought on eBay for <$150, and a lens I bought for <$50.
Lighting is everything, and the main difference you see between the various folks taking photos of this coin is how we lit the coin.
PM me for coin photography equipment, or visit my website:
John you make a good point about being able to use a point and shoot camera to take decent pics of coins to post online with the right lighting. You can also get good pics with a cell phone with the right lighting. That being said there is no substitute for quality equipment and some "point and shoot" cameras are up around 1000.00 dollars now. I find my self imaging coins and other items with a lot of different colors and a quality sensor on the camera will improve how the initial image looks and reduce the need for post processing. The quality of the sensor is quite varied between the different cameras at different levels including point and shoot types. It is just like lenses when I switched to my 100mm Canon USM dedicated macro lens my initial images improved dramaticly because of the quality of the lens.This is not meant to say that everyone has to do this to get good images, I am just saying it is easier to get good images with good equipment and it is easier to get great images with great equipment. This of course is just my opinion.
I just wanted to post this image, it is only the obverse of the coin and I will be imaging the coin again when I get it back. This image was taken with a Canon T3i camera, Canon USM 100mm macro lens and the camera set to neutral on all settings. The lighting on this was directly from the built in flash with a couple of white pieces of paper stood up to act as a reflector to get the light more directly on the coin. The post processing was a slight crop then resize to the 800x800 using photobucket to do this and a slight adjustment to the sharpness using the native Canon software. The flash gave the image the look of being juiced, I did not add anything to the hue or saturation settings post processing or in camera processing. I have always been told not to use a flash and I think this is a good example of why as it obviously blazes the colors to the point of being far from the in hand ambient light look. Now I would say that the luster of the coin is produced well. As John (messydesk) and others have stated lighting is the primary item to get right from the get go.
Canon EOS 7D Microscope stand, bellows and a Rodenstock Apo-Rodagon 75mm enlarging lens Three Jansjo LED lights with diffusing element covering the bulb f/6.3 Shutter speed 1/10 ISO 100 Tethered to the computer with Canon Software Maunual focusing using microscope stand controls White balance via Color Temperature of 3000º
As is usually the case, imaging coins in slabs does create problems, primarily slab glare. Color wasn't a problem with this coin however. It appeared as soon as lights hit the surface. My major problem was dark areas on the obverse and hot spots on the reverse. Others seemed to manage the problem very well. I took about 10-15 shots of each side until all shots started looking alike.
I used Photoshop to crop and add background. Adjustments were made on the Level slider which added slight modifications with contrast and exposure.
Bob thank you for taking the time to image this coin. I agree with you that the holder does offer a challenge especially this smaller ANACS holder. The smaller holder makes light placement a bit more criticla and it reacts differently that one of the larger PCGS slabs. Your images show the luster and color of this coin very well and I can see those small bright spots, do you feel they are because of your desire to catch the luster of this coin. You have also captured the surface texture as well as the spots on the reverse and I see that some of those die cracks were a bit elusive. Some people have shown some images of their set up and some have not and that is fine but I am asking if you could so people who are not familiar with a bellows and scope stand setup to be able to better visualize it.
<< <i>Bob thank you for taking the time to image this coin. I agree with you that the holder does offer a challenge especially this smaller ANACS holder. The smaller holder makes light placement a bit more criticla and it reacts differently that one of the larger PCGS slabs. Your images show the luster and color of this coin very well and I can see those small bright spots, do you feel they are because of your desire to catch the luster of this coin. You have also captured the surface texture as well as the spots on the reverse and I see that some of those die cracks were a bit elusive. Some people have shown some images of their set up and some have not and that is fine but I am asking if you could so people who are not familiar with a bellows and scope stand setup to be able to better visualize it. >>
Since color wasn't a problem, my main focus was capturing luster. I did have problems with die cracks. Half my photos didn't show them at all, especially if they were exposed to light. They seemed to show up much better in the shadows. My setup is similar to Ray's, who is responsible for building my setup.
These photos also show the use of a reflector in the form of Opalux translucent paper. I don't use it for every shot, but it does a pretty good job of filling dark areas. The photo also doesn't show the 3rd light. These photos were taken before imaging this coin.
Here is the lens
The Rodenstock Apo-Rodagon 75mm lens in comparison to a 100mm and 180mm Macro lens
Showing the small footprint of the microscope stand in comparison with the CopymateII copy stand.
I don't know why I did sign up for this contest, but I did. I confess that I was thinking that I'm somewhat better at shooting coins, but looks like I'm only the beginner Anyway, I was using:
Bencher CopymateII copy stand; Sony DSLR-A100 - 10MP - with Sigma 18-50mm 1:28EXD lens. 2 Ott 13W lights and 1 LED light.
After making pictures I adjusted contrast on Photoshop, cropped and resized to 800px.
My main problem was, that this coin have a dark obverse and I simply cannot get enough light on it, because my working distance is so low with that lens. Anyway, I enjoyed the coin very much! Now I need just another address where to send the coin! Great pictures everyone! (except me )
Love this thread and project!!! Almost signed up to participate but I've got too much going on in my life at this point to have added this to the mix.
So much creative and thoughtful work have gone into this! The sharing of tools, knowledge and techniques is top notch and is one of the things that make this a great forum. Thanks so much!
Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014
Brol your images are not bad for your setup as this coin is very hard to image. The more working space you have the better off you are in terms of lighting. Your reverse image shows a lot of the coins detail and surface texture and that is also very hard to capture. Don't beat yourself up over this coin but instead enjoy the chalenge it gave you .
I used to use OTT lights. I loved working with cool lights with daylight color temperature. My only problem with them was how cumbersome they are when working in a small area.
Next up is CoinZip I am very happy with the way this is turning out and a lot of information has been shared. I find it interesting that over the last 2 years how much better images of coins have become and how better images are now basicaly demanded lol. Thank you all who have thus far partisipated as you have helped our coin community and helped all of us to improve.
Dino-Lite AM3011 Microscope (camera) 640 × 480 image size or 0.3 mega pixels Dino-Lite AM411T (camera) 1280 x 1024 image size or 1.3 mega pixels Dino-Lite AM7013MZT (5 mega pixel)
Dino-Lite Microscope Stand Dino-Lite Photo Box
These are raw images, no editing at all. I turned on the photobox, placed the 3011 in the stand, focused, clicked the button to take the photo, uploaded the photos to tinypic. Less than 5 min from start to finish.
Next up is the Dino-Lite AM411T 1280 x 1024 or 1.3 Mega Pixels.
Same deal raw images, no editing at all. I turned on the photobox, placed the 411T in the stand, focused, clicked the button to take the photo, uploaded the photos to tinypic. Less than 5 min from start to finish.
This next image was taken with a Dino-Lite AM411T
I did not use the photo-box instead I used a pair of Comfort II LED table lamps so I could play with the lighting angles. I did spend about 20 minutes on this photo, circle cropped it with photoscape and added a 10 pixel border. I do not alter colors or touch up photos.
Now for the fun part.......... these images were taken with a Dino-Lite AM411T, cropped and re-sized to 900 px wide.
These images were taken with a Dino-Lite AM7013MZT (5 mega pixel) cropped, and re-sized to 900 px wide
Very interesting CZ the enlarged images are very interesting. The thing that has stood out to me right off is how soft the images are, they appear to be lacking details such as the surface texture seen in some of the other postings. The softness makes the coin look in better condition than it is, JMO. Color reproduction is strong and looks good and it is neat seeing the colors when enlarged.
Hey CZ which images do you want to be considered for the contest part? They need to be at 800 x 800. Also is there a way to add sharpness to your images as I know with my dino (a different model) sharpness and contrast can be adjusted in program? I noticed that the reverse has completly smoothed out the die cracks?
<< <i>Hey CZ which images do you want to be considered for the contest part? They need to be at 800 x 800. Also is there a way to add sharpness to your images as I know with my dino (a different model) sharpness and contrast can be adjusted in program? I noticed that the reverse has completly smoothed out the die cracks? >>
oops I failed to read the rules...... Let me see if I can get pics close to 800 x 800
I noticed the softness too, I was shooting it with all the settings to default, I'll play with the sharpness and see if it makes a difference.
Ok here is my official contest entry.....
photos taken with a Dino-Lite AM411T (1.3 mega pixel camera) I did set the sharpness on 13, the default is 11 and max is 15 Dino-Lite stand MS35B lights are two Comfort II LED Table Lamps (7watts, color temp 5500K, 450 lumens) I think I payed about 25-35 bucks each photo shop used to erase the background
The total retail cost of the setup I used would be about $500
We are coming to the end of the list here soon so does anyone else want to image this Morgan and get in on this thread? I just got a Sony Alpha A6000 so need to learn a new system now. Time to order some adapters to use my current lenses and my older manual focus and bellows setup.
Comments
Next shot, removed the fill reflector (reverse included)
Now, how about a cheaper setup. Canon SD1200 pocket point-n-shoot, cost me about $120 a few years ago. Custom white balance, auto exposure 1/125 sec f4.9 ISO 80, camera height 42cm. Same gooseneck lamps at about 11 and 3. No reflector. Minor exposure corrections using curves tool in Photoshop.
For that "in hand" look, you have to be able to tilt the coin and watch the luster swirl. Back to the D610 setup, 6 shots with hand-held lights approximately 120° apart, starting at roughly 8 and 12, working around to 12 and 4. Exact positioning imprecise, as I was holding one light and my remote camera trigger in one hand, and the other light in other hand. Color seems a little dead quite possibly due to the limit of the color quantization, as animated GIFs can only have 256 colors, and no better file format exists for this (APNG is non-standard).
Oh, and the coin is VAM 52. Doubling in the ear, chips on the first 8, mint mark position, both obverse and reverse fields quite concave, funky polishing between the cut end of the olive branch and arrows.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
There is a distinct disadvantage to being one of the last to shoot the coin. Some of these images will be impossible to improve on. Differences will probably just be those of personal preference. Technically, coin has already been shown beautifully.
For the lighting compo, I prefer the one without fill light. Shadows are important to the aesthetics.
http://macrocoins.com
I've seen you do them before but it seems like it's been awhile.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
Was thinking that it would be cool to use lenticular printing to get an enlargement of a lustrous coin so you could tilt the picture and see the luster. Another neat application of lenticular printing that would be a stereoscopic print of something with really high relief that wouldn't require crossing your eyes or using a special viewer.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Here are my shots. These were taken with a Sony SLT-A77V mirror-less D-SLR, and a Minolta AF 200mm F/4 G APO Tele Macro Lens, using a Beseler CS-14 copy stand and two flood halogen lamps.
Images were shot raw using aperture-priority (F8), ISO 100 and 40/160 shutter speed (obv/rev). No adjustments were made to contrast, color, sharpening, saturation, definition, vibrancy, noise reduction, etc.
Camera white balance is set to "tungsten", yielding temp of 3050 and tint of 18, which works well for halogen lighting, so no post-processing WB adjustment was needed. Exposure was adjusted along with a reduction in shadows via Apple's Aperture editor. Circle cropping, background color and resizing were done with Acorn software.
Lance.
I second that and Lance was able to pick up the die cracks at 12 o'clock on the reverse, which I did not
Lance, I'm curious about your statement that the images were shot raw. It may not be well-known, but this is actually impossible. Let me explain...
I can make two interpretations from "raw":
1) Camera output was .jpg, and you made no changes to the images after they came out of the camera.
This seems on the surface to be the least-processed way to go, but the camera does a LOT of processing to the image to convert it from the truly raw sensor data, which is incompatible with .jpg format. That conversion involves adjustments to color, sharpness, and especially tone mapping from the wide dynamic range (12-14bits) sensor down to the medium dynamic range (8bits) of the jpg format. All these parameters are selectable within the camera through the "picture style" or whatever your camera brand calls this function. On most cameras you can select a general style, like neutral, dynamic, landscape, or even load in a custom style you or someone else creates. In addition, within the particular style you can (usually) select specific magnitudes of the different adjustments. I shoot Canon, and for each of the styles I can select Sharpness from 0...7, Contrast from -4...4, Saturation from -4...4, and Hue from -4...4. The styles form a baseline conversion "look" to the image, and each of the styles has a default value for each adjustment.
2) Camera output was RAW, and you made no attempt to adjust parameters, just converted directly to .jpg.
Again, seems minimal-processed, but the RAW image has stored with it the same parameters that the shot was taken with. So if you shoot with "standard" style, the image you see on the screen is processed with the standard style using the specific parameters selected, and when the RAW editor converts them to a screen image it uses the same style. So RAW is really not "raw". The selected style is just the baseline that is used by the editor. In fact, if you don't make any changes to the image using the RAW editor, you will end up with exactly the same processing shooting RAW as you do shooting .jpg.
So, it would be good to know what picture style each of the photogs used, and the specific settings used (even if they are the defaults).
I'll start...
For most of the pics I took, I used Neutral 0,0,0,0 (sharpness, contrast, saturation, hue). For the last pics, I used Neutral 3,0,0,0.
Ray
http://macrocoins.com
Yes, the camera output was raw (#2). I made no attempt to change it other than a tweak to exposure and shadows before exporting it to the jpg that was presented here.
Lance.
If you did RAW conversion without any changes, the settings would be passed through from whatever you selected within the camera.
I looked up a review that described the various options for your camera. Here's what it said:
"In addition, the SLT-A77 provides an enlarged selection of Creative Style choices as compared to the A55, each of which offers +/- three-step control over contrast, saturation, and sharpness. New Creative Style modes include Neutral, Clear, Deep, Light, Night Scene, Autumn Leaves, and Sepia, in addition to the existing Standard, Vivid, Portrait, Landscape, Sunset, and Black & White modes from the A55.
A Dynamic Range Optimizer function aims to open up the shadows while maintaining highlight detail, and can be left under automatic control, or set to one of five preset levels. There are also several multi-shot modes, including Hand-held Twilight (which allows faster shutter speeds with reduced image noise), and an Auto HDR mode. This last creates a single high dynamic range image from three sequential shots, whose exposure level varies anywhere from 1 - 6 EV in 1 EV steps, controlled automatically or manually."
Can you check to see what you have the camera set to for the "Creative Style" mode? Seems the camera gives 3-step control on contrast, saturation and sharpness, and 5-step control of dynamic range optimizer, so would be nice to know what those were set to as well.
http://macrocoins.com
The Dynamic Range Optimizer is set to "off" (default).
Lance.
<< <i>Gotcha. Creative Style is set to "Std" (default) with contrast, saturation and sharpness set to 0, 0, 0.
The Dynamic Range Optimizer is set to "off" (default).
Lance. >>
Cool. Now I know more about the Sony system than I did before! Love this thread.
How about the other photogs...what were your camera settings? You may already have stated but would be nice IMO to summarize.
http://macrocoins.com
First, in-hand the coin strikes me as being a little darker and a little more red/purple than most of the images demonstrate. The obverse is actually quite dark. Luster is full and powers through the toning quite easily. This is easily seen in the excellent GIF files John posted earlier. I decided that not emphasizing the luster in the final 800x800 photos would be a mistake, even at the expense of a little color.
Equipment:
Canon EOS Xsi Rebel, purchased used from a family member for $200.
Canon 100mm 1:2.8 USM Macro Lens
Ebay, no-name, imported Copy Stand
Halogen flood lights, 90Wx2, and 50Wx1
f/6.3
1/640 obverse, 1/1600 reverse
ISO 200
Tethered Connection to Canon EOS Utility Software
Manual focusing via Software Closeup
White balance set by 18% graycard before each shoot
Post-processing:
I shot the reverse about 20 times and the obverse about 50 times, trying different techniques. After picking my favorites, I imported the JPEG files to Photoshop. I haven't ever used the RAW format, as I don't really do all that much adjusting from the software. I then cropped the photos to a circular shape, imported them to a 800x800 pixel file, and resized the images to fit. I used a very slight amount of sharpening on the reverse, none on the obverse. I freely admit to applying just a VERY SMALL saturation bump to better match what I was seeing in-hand. (I juiced it!) I don't know if it's the camera photo-sensor, my monitor, or just my own taste, but I sometimes do that on nicely toned coins to keep them from looking too flat.
My own critique of the photos is that Liberty's forehead is a little over-exposed, which bleeds a bit into the hair and liberty cap. This is tough to avoid on Morgans simply due to the angle of the surfaces in that area. I really like how the granular field texture shows through. This is something I always try to show. The cheek textile toning comes through a little less than in some of the other folks' photos. Again, this is a tradeoff that happens when you try to emphasize luster.
The reverse is easy to overlook, but I tried to put just as much effort here. I like this image as an overall compromise. There are a few relatively dark areas and a few bright spots, but that's how it looks in-hand. The coin is highly lustrous and it's fun to show that. I don't mind a few hot spots as long as it isn't more than 2-3% of the entire image. I like how the 12 o'clock die crack is showing. I don't like how there is a bit of shadow around the 10 o'clock rim, but there are always lighting trade-offs.
One trick that I often employ with high-contrast coins is to set the shutter speed such that the coin is a little over-exposed and then do on-the-fly "dodging" or masking of the lights with my free hand. That way it's pretty easy to knock down the hot spots while allowing the naturally darker areas to come through.
All in all, it's a fun coin and one that could be enjoyed in almost any collection.
I am with you on the darkness of the obverse compared with reverse. I tried to emphasize that on my final images by not cropping the coin to a fixed background, leaving the white holder as the background. I actually ended up having the obverse be 25% lighter (vs reverse) than it really is in order to match the brightness of the bottom of the obverse image holder with the top of the reverse image holder. Because the light is coming from above, the upper part of the images are brighter than the lower. I initially balanced the two exactly, but then the two images looked wrong next to each other. The reverse holder looked brighter than the obverse, so I figured no one would believe that they were calibrated for brightness, and that the obverse was actually not as dark as I was showing. So I brightened up the obverse a bit and darkened the reverse so they blended better together. Anyway, too many words and details but I'm glad you also took pains to balance the brightness of obverse and reverse.
Ray
http://macrocoins.com
Reverse is a little dark/monotone ... it's a little more vibrant in hand. You picked up die cracks, etc., really well though.
<< <i>I myself am considering an upgrade to my setup to get a camera that has a sensor with better image quality that provides strong contrast and great color reproduction so I do not need to post process as much, I mention this because of your statement about your cameras sensor. >>
Careful, this is exactly why I posted the picture taken with my 3 year old, $120 ($40 used today, but don't buy a brightly colored one) point and shoot. I wanted to show that for taking pictures for the web, the camera isn't as important at first as learning how to light the coin, set your white balance, and control the exposure. The PowerShot SD1200 and D610 pictures are using almost exactly the same lighting angle. Due to glare, I couldn't use a higher angle for the SD1200, and I wanted to keep the D610 shot close to it for comparison. The lesson from my shots, other than how I took them and how cool an animation of this coin's luster looks, is that it's worth your while to try and get a good picture with the inexpensive equipment you may already have before spending a lot of money.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>The lesson from my shots, other than how I took them and how cool an animation of this coin's luster looks, is that it's worth your while to try and get a good picture with the inexpensive equipment you may already have before spending a lot of money. >>
Excellent advice. My first shots were taken with a camera I bought on eBay for <$150, and a lens I bought for <$50.
Lighting is everything, and the main difference you see between the various folks taking photos of this coin is how we lit the coin.
http://macrocoins.com
Microscope stand, bellows and a Rodenstock Apo-Rodagon 75mm enlarging lens
Three Jansjo LED lights with diffusing element covering the bulb
f/6.3
Shutter speed 1/10
ISO 100
Tethered to the computer with Canon Software
Maunual focusing using microscope stand controls
White balance via Color Temperature of 3000º
As is usually the case, imaging coins in slabs does create problems, primarily slab glare. Color wasn't a problem with this coin however. It appeared as soon as lights hit the surface. My major problem was dark areas on the obverse and hot spots on the reverse. Others seemed to manage the problem very well. I took about 10-15 shots of each side until all shots started looking alike.
I used Photoshop to crop and add background. Adjustments were made on the Level slider which added slight modifications with contrast and exposure.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
<< <i>Bob thank you for taking the time to image this coin. I agree with you that the holder does offer a challenge especially this smaller ANACS holder. The smaller holder makes light placement a bit more criticla and it reacts differently that one of the larger PCGS slabs. Your images show the luster and color of this coin very well and I can see those small bright spots, do you feel they are because of your desire to catch the luster of this coin. You have also captured the surface texture as well as the spots on the reverse and I see that some of those die cracks were a bit elusive. Some people have shown some images of their set up and some have not and that is fine but I am asking if you could so people who are not familiar with a bellows and scope stand setup to be able to better visualize it. >>
Since color wasn't a problem, my main focus was capturing luster. I did have problems with die cracks. Half my photos didn't show them at all, especially if they were exposed to light. They seemed to show up much better in the shadows. My setup is similar to Ray's, who is responsible for building my setup.
These photos also show the use of a reflector in the form of Opalux translucent paper. I don't use it for every shot, but it does a pretty good job of filling dark areas. The photo also doesn't show the 3rd light. These photos were taken before imaging this coin.
Here is the lens
The Rodenstock Apo-Rodagon 75mm lens in comparison to a 100mm and 180mm Macro lens
Showing the small footprint of the microscope stand in comparison with the CopymateII copy stand.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
http://macrocoins.com
http://macrocoins.com
I confess that I was thinking that I'm somewhat better at shooting coins, but looks like I'm only the beginner
Anyway, I was using:
Bencher CopymateII copy stand;
Sony DSLR-A100 - 10MP - with Sigma 18-50mm 1:28EXD lens.
2 Ott 13W lights and 1 LED light.
Aperture Priority
f/6.3
Exposure: 1/160sec.
ISO: 100;
Exposure bias: +1.3;
Metering Mode: Center Weighted Average.
After making pictures I adjusted contrast on Photoshop, cropped and resized to 800px.
My main problem was, that this coin have a dark obverse and I simply cannot get enough light on it, because my working distance is so low with that lens.
Anyway, I enjoyed the coin very much!
Now I need just another address where to send the coin!
Great pictures everyone! (except me
Almost signed up to participate but I've got too much going on in my life at this point to have added this to the mix.
So much creative and thoughtful work have gone into this!
The sharing of tools, knowledge and techniques is top notch and is one of the things that make this a great forum.
Thanks so much!
Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
I am very happy with the way this is turning out and a lot of information has been shared. I find it interesting that over the last 2 years how much better images of coins have become and how better images are now basicaly demanded lol. Thank you all who have thus far partisipated as you have helped our coin community and helped all of us to improve.
Dino-Lite AM3011 Microscope (camera) 640 × 480 image size or 0.3 mega pixels
Dino-Lite AM411T (camera) 1280 x 1024 image size or 1.3 mega pixels
Dino-Lite AM7013MZT (5 mega pixel)
Dino-Lite Microscope Stand
Dino-Lite Photo Box
These are raw images, no editing at all. I turned on the photobox, placed the 3011 in the stand, focused, clicked the button to take the photo, uploaded the photos to tinypic. Less than 5 min from start to finish.
Next up is the Dino-Lite AM411T 1280 x 1024 or 1.3 Mega Pixels.
Same deal raw images, no editing at all. I turned on the photobox, placed the 411T in the stand, focused, clicked the button to take the photo, uploaded the photos to tinypic. Less than 5 min from start to finish.
This next image was taken with a Dino-Lite AM411T
I did not use the photo-box instead I used a pair of Comfort II LED table lamps so I could play with the lighting angles. I did spend about 20 minutes on this photo, circle cropped it with photoscape and added a 10 pixel border. I do not alter colors or touch up photos.
Now for the fun part.......... these images were taken with a Dino-Lite AM411T, cropped and re-sized to 900 px wide.
These images were taken with a Dino-Lite AM7013MZT (5 mega pixel) cropped, and re-sized to 900 px wide
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
http://macrocoins.com
Also is there a way to add sharpness to your images as I know with my dino (a different model) sharpness and contrast can be adjusted in program? I noticed that the reverse has completly smoothed out the die cracks?
This is a very interesting and informative thread. Sincere thanks to all who made it happen.
Whit.
<< <i>Hey CZ which images do you want to be considered for the contest part? They need to be at 800 x 800.
Also is there a way to add sharpness to your images as I know with my dino (a different model) sharpness and contrast can be adjusted in program? I noticed that the reverse has completly smoothed out the die cracks? >>
oops I failed to read the rules...... Let me see if I can get pics close to 800 x 800
I noticed the softness too, I was shooting it with all the settings to default, I'll play with the sharpness and see if it makes a difference.
Ok here is my official contest entry.....
photos taken with a Dino-Lite AM411T (1.3 mega pixel camera)
I did set the sharpness on 13, the default is 11 and max is 15
Dino-Lite stand MS35B
lights are two Comfort II LED Table Lamps (7watts, color temp 5500K, 450 lumens) I think I payed about 25-35 bucks each
photo shop used to erase the background
The total retail cost of the setup I used would be about $500
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
reminds me of my 12' or 13' ? "matte proof lincoln photo contest" that members awarded messydesk the winner of
this one adds the inclusion of set-up and camera settings
nifty stuff
Any updates to this??? Neat to see so many different pics of the same coin.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448