| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 2,566 |
|
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Having shot my first coin and first macro this year. I think Digital is great but I miss the shift lens on the 4x5 besides using an angled glass there is no way to be square over a mirrored object like a proof set and bare glass just scares me but I did it anyway  and  this holder in white I like but This was where I started worrying and really having issues with angeled glass notice the variation in exposure the quarter and the nickle shine! but the half and the penny just aren't in the light here are two relected examples first a circulated dime  |
|
|
|
New Member
 United States
29 Posts |
Hmm How do I show in line photos as opposed to links
|
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Ahh I have to have 50 posts I see.
&
Yes I often answer myself
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
936 Posts |
|
|
Forum Dad
 United States
24153 Posts |
Naaah, you're allowed to do that now. Click on the  icon above your post and take a peek at how it's done.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
936 Posts |
You beat me to it, as to the photos I like how they show luster, I am going to have to try the angled glass out.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Actually, I like the Half and Nickel best for details/contrast - a little Levels increase, and you've got something gradable in the forum. Sometimes (most of the time) it's tough to get a fair representation of the coin's luster without washing out details vital to grading. I do Proofs with a circular fluorescent:  With my limited setup, it's the best way for me to show the cameo contrast while retaining detail. I end up correcting for color, because the color temp isn't consistent around the circumference of the lamp, but for silver that's not a problem. I'd probably do something different for copper proofs; never tried one. Hmmm. Now you got me thinking.... |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
SuperDave I like your eagle. But I hate flourescents might be due to the fact I photograph people more than coins. they do Make daylight balance flourescent tubes now. they are very clean many photographers and film makers are using them. one of the major (expensive) manufactures is kino flo before I was rudly interupted mid post by the AT&T line tech I was actually uploading an eagle These are actually reflected light of an 8x8 white board with two lights  Ah ha it works and the reverse  I love the obverse although I know for grading it's horrible there are waves from the reflector the crispness of the reverse with the black mirror look I like too. but wait whats that peachy color grrr a reflection of my finger on the shutter next time it's white gloves I guess. I tend to agree with the washing out of the highlight areas, you can hide a lot in over exposure. (it was a fashion trend in the 80's to hide skin flaws on models) I try to keep my white highlights at 210 R 210 G 210 B next color balance |
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
By the way Superdave I love the crisp detail on your eagle there.
and when you say circular flourescent do you mean like the old kitchen ceiling fixture type or the new 100 watt bulb replacements.
I may have to look into something like that (ring flashes have always been popular for macro work and fashion)
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
quote:
like the old kitchen ceiling fixture type
Literally. I painted it flat black and bored a hole thru the center for my lens:  It's a Daylight spectrum bulb, but like I said the color temperature is not consistent around the circumference. I've access to 3800k and 4100k bulbs, and I'm going to experiment with them for consistency. I can always correct the white balance, as long as I get consistent color. I haven't bothered squaring the fixture; it puts out too much light to worry about that. If I recall, this one was 1/400 @ f/8.0, ISO 400. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1173 Posts |
Phauxtog: welcome to the forum, and thanks for the great pix. We are always in search of knowledgeable folks to help us take better coin pictures. SuperDave is one of the best, but methinks you are proving to be right there with him. Now if only you'll let me pick your brain a bit!  What kind of set up are you using? Camera and lens? And your lighting? Edited by hunter20ga
12/13/2007 10:54 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
SuperDave I love it ! functional and inexpensive
|
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
Hunter20ga thanks I'm hoping to get better I'm up to six coin shots so far. probably 1000 exposures but only of 6 coins LOL test test test.
I'll amswer anything I can.
My set up at the moment is 2-3 speedotron heads attached to a 4800ws pack.
the heads are bounced into an 8'x8' white board (2 pieces of 4x8 foam core taped together) 1/4 blue gels on all the lights I think the foam core is a bit old
the camera is a Hasselblad with a 150mm lense and 2 extension tubes I thing they are 21 and 10 mm eash (this gives me macro
the back is an Imacon V96
A minolta colormeter II
and a can of dust off!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1173 Posts |
Fauxtog...so you're using a digital Hasselblad I gather. Wow. That's what I get for asking. Now I'll have to spend some time on the web looking up Hasselblad digitals. I've not seen or heard of them (OK, OK, so I'm not up on the wide world of photography.) LOL Of course I know the name, and Hasselblad's reputation for superior studio film cameras. I guess I just wasn't thinking that they'd gone digital, too. So close-minded of me!
|
|
New Member
United States
29 Posts |
They do the digital two ways one is a complete new system called the H3 it has a back that will write to CF cards or direct to the computer and the H3 camera, with an H3 back and fujinon lens cost more than most cars.
The other way is the v series back this is much more reasonable in price and works on the old Hasselbald cameras with the older ziess lenses. Phase one also makes a few backs for the older V Series hasselblads.
For me it was 12K for the back I could use with my old lenses or 18k for a new canon / nikon system. I have never been comfortable with 35mm. I went for the 12k patch LOL which has few bells and whistles like no metadata in the file due to the camera body not bieng electronic and if you shoot past the buffer there is nothing to stop you from firing the shutter and recording nothing.
I myself have never even paid 12k for a car. but there ya go can't write off a car as easily as a camera.
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 2,566 |
|
Posted 12/12/2007 7:16 pm
