Coin Photographs & Lighting

Ray, axial lighting can be useful on non-proof surfaces. This is pure axial lighting:



So is this, but with the glass slightly tilted:

First off That last medal picture is stunning. I am impressed with the shadowing. Of course its not pure axial lighting( because of the tilting) but to criticize the picture on that basis would be extremely boorish. the quality of the picture, to my eye, is wonderful.




This forum is the only place I know where people are told there is only one technique to produce a picture. Everywhere else the advise is usually says, words to the effect, "this technique produces this particular effect" It is left up to the photographer to use the effect to achieve the result he or she wants. I have developed the strong impression that unless pictures and techniques match the expectations of some key contributors then the pictures and technique are going to be rubbished( politely or otherwise)

Photography is art, likewise coins are an art form.... it should be up to the photographer to decide how to capture the image and I strongly believe that stating,as so often happens here, X technique is only good for this type of coin is extremely bad photography.

To give good advice you need to know what the photographers purpose is and what they are trying to communicate with their photograph. There is so much more to photographing coins than ebay ( which so much of the advice given seems to directed at). Much of the advice is based on American coins and the american market. Yes that is not surprising, its an American based forum.....but there are many more numismatic items than American coins and not all people on this forum collect the same things as the main advice givers here.

The techniques that seemed to be pushed here work best on modern milled coins(Nearly all American coins are modern milled coins). When one photographs a coin that was produced more than 200 years ago the advice given here often falls down. Take this almost 300 year old milled medal as an example( note this is a severely reduced JPeg so the picture has lost a lot of quality):



From the advice given in this forum everything is wrong with the picture: only one light was used and worse it was positioned at too low an angle( it was sitting on the macro stand base board beaming across the the face of the coin( from the left). However for the photographer ( myself) this photo was a major achievement and I am still very pleased with it. Why?

It took 2 hours of trying different techniques to get this picture. The fact is if I used the the techniques religiously put forward in this forum the resultant photograph would be as rubbishy as this coin actually is in reality. The coin is in the last throes of bronze disease. My aim with this photograph was to highlight the design and communicate the patina of age this piece has. In real life the corrosion on this coin hides most of the design. You can't read the date at all and the Orange spot on the chest of Maria Theresa is actually a very nasty corrosion hole. The picture achieved everything I wanted it to. It has been used in a presentation at the summer seminar. If I were to follow the advice so often touted as expert here... my only solution would have been to spend money on a much better example, or pay the copyright fees to another person. Telling me that the light was positioned wrongly would be insulting to the hours of work that were needed to create this shot.

So here is some emphatically arrogant advice:

1. Before telling someone their technique is wrong find out what the purpose of the photograph is. Step back and enjoy the aesthetics.

2. Be an artist not a technician.

3. There is no such thing as the "perfect camera"

4. There is no such thing as the "correct technique"

There is some great advice on this forum but in the end its you, the photographer, who needs to decide what you want to portray. I really get tired of advice that is based on assumptions of how a coin should look. 90 % of the advise here seems to be oriented to selling on ebay. There is nothing wrong with that but before jumping in ask the question:"whats the purpose of that photograph?"

AK...I thought we were over these misunderstandings that result in your writing long replies to criticize something that was never said? I never said there was only one technique to produce images. Where do you get these things? What I said is that the axial technique does not produce luster, but in many cases (such as proofs, medals, and other pieces such as cpf's first image above) luster is not a photographic goal, so axial lighting is very appropriate. But the great majority (>99%) of coins from around the world are just run of the mill business strike coins, and luster is very important to their grading, valuation, and aesthetic character, so the axial technique is not really appropriate for photographing them...Ray