Photo Failure Frustration - 1912 London Mint Sovereign With Concave Exergue

[LawrenceChard]

Photo Failure Frustration - 1912 London Mint Sovereign With Concave Exergue 

I was handed this sovereign recently with "weird" written on it packet. It appears to be a standard default description when someone sees something unusual:

See anything?

The obverse looks perfectly normal.

Still nothing unusual apparent on this closer shot of the exergue area.

Our photographer commented "Info re "concave exergue" I could see it in the hand but tried multiple angles and couldn't capture what I saw."

It is not always possible to capture an effect we can see with the naked eye. I will see if we can try again, perhaps using different lighting.

I might as well tag @SemolinaPilchard in here. He may be able to create a simple diagram to explain what we could all see.

I wonder if using a macro flash would reveal the concave effect?

😎

[DrDave]

Now that i've googled exergue, i can see what you are talking about!

I'm new to this world, so please excuse my opinion. 🤓

One of the problems with photographing and lighting anything top down if that the perspective of depth can be lost. If you look at a mountanous area on GoogleEarth you can't really work out how high the mountains are or how low the valleys are, but our minds can fill in the gaps to a degree. As the sun sets, the shadows will cast shadows which give us a better idea of the scale.

So using an alternative light source from an angle probably would show the effect you can see in hand.

I'll be interested to see the result

 

 

 

[LawrenceChard]

59 minutes ago, DrDave said:

Now that i've googled exergue, i can see what you are talking about!

I'm new to this world, so please excuse my opinion. 🤓

One of the problems with photographing and lighting anything top down if that the perspective of depth can be lost. If you look at a mountanous area on GoogleEarth you can't really work out how high the mountains are or how low the valleys are, but our minds can fill in the gaps to a degree. As the sun sets, the shadows will cast shadows which give us a better idea of the scale.

So using an alternative light source from an angle probably would show the effect you can see in hand.

I'll be interested to see the result

 

I completely understand and agree with all that. Although we do have the advantage of binocular vision.

Doug also, I am sure. It was probably just time constraints.

😎

[DrDave]

7 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

I completely understand and agree with all that. Although we do have the advantage of binocular vision.

Doug also, I am sure. It was probably just time constraints.

😎

Yes, but binocular vision isn't an advantage when looking at a 2d image

[Britannia47]

There seems to be by default, a semi-circular shallow depression on the 'ground' (concave exergue) immediately above the 12 digits, which is very tricky to show. My first attempt (shown) left this cut-out in shadow. Moving the direction of the light source, meant 'now you see it-now you don't' so I gave up!  Your close-up pic shows it up in light on the vertical edge of the ground. Either way I think its supposed to be there IMO. One of Pistrucci's finishing touches perhaps when he heard about the sinking of the Titanic! 🚤😃

 

[dicker]

May I suggest that a photo taken from an angle might bring out the detail of the concave element?

When looking at overdates / over letters this is often extremely useful.

Best

Dicker

[SemolinaPilchard]

20 minutes ago, dicker said:

May I suggest that a photo taken from an angle might bring out the detail of the concave element?

When looking at overdates / over letters this is often extremely useful.

Best

Dicker

Yeah I tried multiple angles and light settings/direction and just couldn't capture what I was seeing.

I did have to move on to other things - we will be trying again soon though

 

[SemolinaPilchard]

Seeing this thread I revisited the RAW's I had.

This one shows some of the detail - though is poorly lit...when I added light it vanished.

You can see on this view the different depths of the exergue above (and through) the numerals.

Edited August 30, 2022 by SemolinaPilchard

[LawrenceChard]

2 hours ago, Britannia47 said:

There seems to be by default, a semi-circular shallow depression on the 'ground' (concave exergue) immediately above the 12 digits, which is very tricky to show. My first attempt (shown) left this cut-out in shadow. Moving the direction of the light source, meant 'now you see it-now you don't' so I gave up!  Your close-up pic shows it up in light on the vertical edge of the ground. Either way I think its supposed to be there IMO. One of Pistrucci's finishing touches perhaps when he heard about the sinking of the Titanic! 🚤😃

 

Pistrucci's "Sinking of the Titanic" medals are extremely rare, which is a great pity, as his prescience deserves to be better recognised, especially among groups with great experience of boating accidents.

😎

[Britannia47]

I’m not wasting any more time on this, when I could be out in the garden having a beer!  I’ve used a loup on my 1912 and several other sovereigns. Apart from an alien base embedded in the cliff face, and. a miniature version of Mount  Rushmore I found absolutely nothing! ……☹️ A numismatic wild goose chase you might say - What’s next LC?🥸

[LawrenceChard]

6 hours ago, DrDave said:

Yes, but binocular vision isn't an advantage when looking at a 2d image

Research has confirmed that, especially in "double blind" tests.

😎

[SidS]

The obverse looks concave below George's head to me (the pointy bit where his throat would be), might just be a trick of the light though - seems darker.

Edited August 31, 2022 by SidS