Sovereign Photo Thread...

[Charliemouse]

10 hours ago, Silverlocks said:

@DrDave also suggested that, and I did another one that way here -

https://www.thesilverforum.com/topic/4681-sovereign-photo-thread/?do=findComment&comment=755677

 

Yeah I was agreeing with the lighting choice.

My main tip was around using exposure compensation to help with highlights. Parts of the coin are overexposed, causing you to lose detail around 'GIN' and 'ETH' on the obverse. Turning the light down won't help because the camera will just compensate.

And agree shooting in raw is always preferable if you can, as it will use lossless compression and will store much more dynamic range. That will allow you to recover much more from the highlights and shadows.  JPEGs should only be used as an export format, never to store and edit photos.

Edited November 14, 2022 by Charliemouse

[Mox]

When I bought a decent camera I expected decent shots (with a bit of messing with settings) but I have to faff about a bit on the pc but its all to try and show the true quality of the coin, some enhancements feel like cheating. Makes it easier to grade though, nice big clear shot saves me farting around with a loupe (especially when you leave the light on, the batteries run out and you dont have spares...).

[Silverlocks]

Here's one I tried by underexposing the image a bit per @Charliemouse's suggestion and bringing it up in post.  Captures the sheen of the coin but maybe could be a little brighter?

Also gone full arts-and-crafts.  Here's the diffuser I made from tracing paper and pipe cleaners

Edited November 16, 2022 by Silverlocks

[Charliemouse]

14 hours ago, Silverlocks said:

Here's one I tried by underexposing the image a bit per @Charliemouse's suggestion and bringing it up in post.  Captures the sheen of the coin but maybe could be a little brighter?

Here's the histogram of your shot:

The good news is that you are nowhere near clipping, at either end, but especially the top end.  That means the dynamic range of the camera is easily capable of capturing the dynamic range of the scene.  Cool.

The bad news is that, yes, it's a bit dark.  You have far too much head room, i.e. you are not using all of the dynamic range available to you.  So, there's certainly space to adjust the exposure compensation to make the image brighter.  This will also mean you will have less noise in your image, which unfortunately it has a lot of.  That probably means you have a high ISO because there's not enough light and/or your shutter speed is too high.  Slowing the shutter speed may mean you will need to use a tripod - if you still want to do handheld shots, try to brighten the light.

Of course, digital noise is relatively easy to remove in post, but it will never be as good as if there was no noise at all.  Also, your image has a load of jpeg artefacts in it.  Try exporting with at least 80-90% quality - the files are tiny by modern standards anyway.

Last negative is your focusing is slightly off.  If you can manually focus, do so.  Macro shots are really tough for camera autofocus.  Also try to use a narrower aperture to improve DOF, but not too narrow (max f/16).

Finally, I have taken the liberty of running your image through some modern noise and sharpening filters, to make the most of it.  It's a good image, and you should be pleased with it.  Everything can be improved.

Edited November 17, 2022 by Charliemouse

[Silverlocks]

And, here's another attempt at the 1963 Gillick.  This time, with the camera at a slight 10-15 degree tilt and just using the diffusers on the lights.  I tried underexposing the photos a bit and bringing them up in Photoshop again. This time a tad flat, losing the detail of the hair a bit, but I got Liz's face quite well.  The reverse came out pretty clearly.  I did a bit of detail enhancement and noise reduction on the photos as well, through the pre-filter for raw images that comes with CS6.

And for this one we pulled the lights back a bit.  This got us more contrast at the expense of a bit of the background reflecting off the coin.  Also, the shape of the portrait tends to produce reflections that make Liz look like she's got vitiligo if lit from some angles, and it can be a faff to get rid of that.  Not sure if it's just this coin, as I've got another Gillick that shows a similar effect.

And here's one holding one light above the other, and getting a consistent reflection from the coin.  I feel as though I've actually solved one of the problems tonight.  Still scope for better contrast in the detail on the obverse - maybe the exposure is a little to high.  But, we can see the detail and the lustre of the coin.
I feel sovs are actually quite tricky to photograph - very small, but just reflective enough to cause trouble with glare.  OTOH, the intervention in the last two was quite a bit lighter than the previous ones - I think I made some progress tonight after a few weeks of on-and-off frigging.

 

And here's the previous photo with the exposure pulled down a bit, getting rid of the worst of the glare and showing the lustre and the detail of the coin a bit better.
Not perfect, but I think a lot of the original 'how-do-we-do-this questions are starting to get answers.

Edited November 20, 2022 by Silverlocks

[Charliemouse]

18 hours ago, Silverlocks said:

And, here's another attempt at the 1963 Gillick.  This time, with the camera at a slight 10-15 degree tilt and just using the diffusers on the lights.  I tried underexposing the photos a bit and bringing them up in Photoshop again. This time a tad flat, losing the detail of the hair a bit, but I got Liz's face quite well.  The reverse came out pretty clearly.  I did a bit of detail enhancement and noise reduction on the photos as well, through the pre-filter for raw images that comes with CS6.

And for this one we pulled the lights back a bit.  This got us more contrast at the expense of a bit of the background reflecting off the coin.  Also, the shape of the portrait tends to produce reflections that make Liz look like she's got vitiligo if lit from some angles, and it can be a faff to get rid of that.  Not sure if it's just this coin, as I've got another Gillick that shows a similar effect.

And here's one holding one light above the other, and getting a consistent reflection from the coin.  I feel as though I've actually solved one of the problems tonight.  Still scope for better contrast in the detail on the obverse - maybe the exposure is a little to high.  But, we can see the detail and the lustre of the coin.
I feel sovs are actually quite tricky to photograph - very small, but just reflective enough to cause trouble with glare.  OTOH, the intervention in the last two was quite a bit lighter than the previous ones - I think I made some progress tonight after a few weeks of on-and-off frigging.

 

And here's the previous photo with the exposure pulled down a bit, getting rid of the worst of the glare and showing the lustre and the detail of the coin a bit better.
Not perfect, but I think a lot of the original 'how-do-we-do-this questions are starting to get answers.

Good work.  I think it's great that you are trying different things and learning.

I think we can safely say you've fixed your dynamic range problem.  Considering you don't care about detail in the background, the histogram on the last shot is effectively spot on.  It meets zero almost perfectly at the right edge.

The tiny little bump at the end of the red is the only clipping.  If you are perceiving glare, you may have your monitor turned up a little high.

That said, I don't think what you've done is wrong - it's an aesthetic choice.

Sovereigns are very difficult.  I find the newest, super-shiny ones to be the worst.  Very difficult to keep detail in them.

[Silverlocks]

1 minute ago, Charliemouse said:

Good work.  I think it's great that you are trying different things and learning.

I think we can safely say you've fixed your dynamic range problem.  Considering you don't care about detail in the background, the histogram on the last shot is effectively spot on.  It meets zero almost perfectly at the right edge.

The tiny little bump at the end of the red is the only clipping.  If you are perceiving glare, you may have your monitor turned up a little high.

That said, I don't think what you've done is wrong - it's an aesthetic choice.

Sovereigns are very difficult.  I find the newest, super-shiny ones to be the worst.  Very difficult to keep detail in them.

It's really about getting the detail not to be washed out in the reflections.  I've had way more trouble with sovs than any other coin I've tried, including the 2021 Germania Knights, which is shiny to the point that I've seen folks describe it as a reverse proof. 

[Mox]

11 minutes ago, Silverlocks said:

It's really about getting the detail not to be washed out in the reflections.  I've had way more trouble with sovs than any other coin I've tried, including the 2021 Germania Knights, which is shiny to the point that I've seen folks describe it as a reverse proof. 

Sovs have been a pain in the ass for me as well. Took all sorts of different settings to get something decent for my website. Don't have the time to get it right at the moment but @Charliemouse is brilliant at knowing what to try.

[CANV]

jm.pdf

 

Edited November 24, 2022 by CANV

[CANV]

[Charliemouse]

A deeper description of photographing proof sovereigns.

Equipment: Nikon D850, 150mm macro, tripod with macro head, remote trigger, LED light panel 5600K with diffusion paper, light box with black lining.

Settings: f/16, ISO 100, -1 stop exposure comp, shutterless, focus peaking, RAW at max resolution.

Image 1

This was a single exposure, straight on.  Because the coin was parallel to the image plane, I could take a single shot and have it all in focus.  f/16 is the smallest aperture I would use; anything higher and diffraction starts to soften the image.  Use of a tripod, remote and shutterless exposure means that I can let the exposure time go as high as it wants, and still keep a small aperture and low ISO.

Image 2

My favourite.  The coin was angled up about 20 degrees, capturing the depth and giving a soft light across the fields.  The coin is pointing almost directly at the light, and this is where the diffusion paper is essential, not only to stop harsh reflections but simply to increase the area of the light source.

Much more difficult to capture, the coin is no longer parallel to the sensor, so I need to focus stack 7 images to get the whole coin in focus.

 

[Simonz]

11 hours ago, Charliemouse said:

A deeper description of photographing proof sovereigns.

Equipment: Nikon D850, 150mm macro, tripod with macro head, remote trigger, LED light panel 5600K with diffusion paper, light box with black lining.

Settings: f/16, ISO 100, -1 stop exposure comp, shutterless, focus peaking, RAW at max resolution.

Image 1

This was a single exposure, straight on.  Because the coin was parallel to the image plane, I could take a single shot and have it all in focus.  f/16 is the smallest aperture I would use; anything higher and diffraction starts to soften the image.  Use of a tripod, remote and shutterless exposure means that I can let the exposure time go as high as it wants, and still keep a small aperture and low ISO.

Image 2

My favourite.  The coin was angled up about 20 degrees, capturing the depth and giving a soft light across the fields.  The coin is pointing almost directly at the light, and this is where the diffusion paper is essential, not only to stop harsh reflections but simply to increase the area of the light source.

Much more difficult to capture, the coin is no longer parallel to the sensor, so I need to focus stack 7 images to get the whole coin in focus.

 

Epic pics, appreciate all the info on your method. I've failed to come up with a consistent technique that works with older flat guineas and the shiny new stuff. Might have to make/get a black light box, assume it doesn't need to be too big? Would be great to see a pic of your setup?

 

Edited November 24, 2022 by Simonz

[Charliemouse]

59 minutes ago, Simonz said:

Epic pics, appreciate all the info on your method. I've failed to come up with a consistent technique that works with older flat guineas and the shiny new stuff. Might have to make/get a black light box, assume it doesn't need to be too big? Would be great to see a pic of your setup?

 

The shiny new sovs are a nightmare.  Now I have my technique reasonably polished, I will try again.

As for the lightbox, I have a "Neewer Photo Studio", currently under £50 on Amazon.  It's 50cm cube, which is easily big enough, probably too big for normal coins but means you can use it for other things.  I don't usually use the built-in lights, as I have the light panel, but it comes with backgrounds and diffusion cloth.  And it packs up flat.  There are many others, of all shapes and sizes.

[DrDave]

I've taken these with my light setup which are available here:

 

the principle (if you don't already know) is that light enters from the diffuser end and reflects down onto your coin via the angled glass. With your mobile camera, or DSLR shooting perpendicular (ie, straight down) to the light source, the glass prevents any reflections from outside of the rig. 

So in short, the coin is lit from above which is ideal, and there are no reflections of the camera which is an issue on shiny coins, jewellery etc

Quick and easy to use. The coin images were taken with an iphone and are unedited.

 

 

[SheepStacker]

Received this today, thought I'd take a picture.

• 1885 Melbourne Full Sovereign

[SheepStacker]

Another recent slurp from my new favourite shop (the trade board):

[Booky586]

1 hour ago, SheepStacker said:

Another recent slurp from my new favourite shop (the trade board):

The trade board? What's that?

[SheepStacker]

Just now, Booky586 said:

The trade board? What's that?

https://www.thesilverforum.com/forum/13-united-kingdom-ungraded/

[SheepStacker]

1 minute ago, Booky586 said:

The trade board? What's that?

 

Just now, SheepStacker said:

https://www.thesilverforum.com/forum/13-united-kingdom-ungraded/

I call it the trade board, because it just seems to be members shuffling their collections amongst each other trying to find a happy equilibrium

[Booky586]

Just now, SheepStacker said:

 

I call it the trade board, because it just seems to be members shuffling their collections amongst each other trying to find a happy equilibrium

Ahh,  I understand now 👍

[Deus]

1871 die 24. Supposedly from RMS Douro shipwreck but no proof. 

[AaaGee]

16 minutes ago, Deus said:

1871 die 24. Supposedly from RMS Douro shipwreck but no proof. 

Beautifull 😎

[Petra]

16 minutes ago, AaaGee said:

Beautifull 😎

Nice coin. How do you know the die number?

[SheepStacker]

Just now, Petra said:

Nice coin. How do you know the die number?

If you look on the reverse, it's just below the bow.

[modofantasma]

5 hours ago, Petra said:

Nice coin. How do you know the die number?

Not all have a die number but if they do it's here