I was thinking a scanner but someone mentioned depth of focus? Most pics I see with a camera are not good. I'd like opinoins on imaging coins please. mk
> I was thinking a scanner but someone mentioned depth of focus? Most pics I > see with a camera are not good. > I'd like opinoins on imaging coins please. > mk
You can make good pictures with either, if you have decent equipment and some experience using it. One advantage with cameras is that you can adjust the lighting much easier than you can with scanners.
On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:57:13 -0500, "Storm's Hamburgers"
<storms@hometowncomputing> wrote: >I was thinking a scanner but someone mentioned depth of focus? Most pics I >see with a camera are not good. >I'd like opinoins on imaging coins please. >mk
I've found that scanners tend to wash out any luster a nice BU coin might have. Here are some pictures that I recently took with a Nikon Coolpix 5900 digital camera:
<inva...@bigfoot.com> wrote: >I've found that scanners tend to wash out any luster a nice BU coin >might have. Here are some pictures that I recently took with a Nikon >Coolpix 5900 digital camera:
Some interesting things going on with that obverse.....curved die crack at the tops of the letters in "UNITED STATES", die polish lines above and behind the Pilgrim's hat and perhaps a little bit of mechanical doubling in some of the letters in "HALF DOLLAR".
> I was thinking a scanner but someone mentioned depth of focus? Most pics I > see with a camera are not good. > I'd like opinoins on imaging coins please. > mk
A digital camera with a macro capability and use natural ambient light--that's the best. With scanners what works on someone elses computer might not work for beans with your box. It's mostly a software and rendering issue as to how well of a scan you end up with. It isn't always a matter of spending the most either--there's a whole slew of issues to consider. Most all scanners you only get a one-way light source. So sometimes you have to stick something under a coin and cock it up just right to capture some luster or some really fine details. Another trick on a scanner is to keep the lid open and use a raised-up background with different colors. I have used some of those transparant colored plastic CD ROM cases and propped them up with some bottle caps to get some colors to show up. It's just like using a colored filter on a regular camera. Otherwise you need to scan at over 2400 dpi to get the colors to show up and the images turns out to be very very large--over 100MB's and most computers choke up hard trying to chew on that large of an image.
Storm's Hamburgers wrote: > I was thinking a scanner but someone mentioned depth of focus? Most pics I > see with a camera are not good. > I'd like opinoins on imaging coins please. > mk
When used properly a camera will provide images a scanner cannot possibly match, especially when it comes to showing a coin's luster.
However, if you must use a scanner make sure it has a CCD image sensor as this will provide the best depth of field (focus).
You'll always do best with a camera provided you light the coin properly and use a good macro lens.
That said, I never enough time to set up a runway shoot for the coins as they flow in and generally use a scanner. For most of the time, it works great for internet file size images. I won a presentation award from NGC for one of my sets where nearly every coin was scanned. The downside tht many do not consider is the effect the scan mechanism has on passing over the topographical details of a coin's surface. You can get all sorts of annoying reflections that wash out features. It is really a pain if you are trying to capture details specific to a die variety and have to experiment with various scan orientations. One (to remain nameless) auction company either scans their consignments or photographs them poorly sometimes in ways that limits internet viewing of details all of the time. I bid on guesses and hit most but miss some because of that.
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 22:43:34 -0400, Phil DeMayo <flip1...@aol.com> wrote:
>Some interesting things going on with that obverse.....curved die >crack at the tops of the letters in "UNITED STATES", die polish lines >above and behind the Pilgrim's hat and perhaps a little bit of >mechanical doubling in some of the letters in "HALF DOLLAR".
The doubling is there, and I noticed the die polish, too -- it's a pretty nice camera, after all!
>>I was thinking a scanner but someone mentioned depth of focus? Most pics I >>see with a camera are not good. >>I'd like opinoins on imaging coins please. >>mk
>I've found that scanners tend to wash out any luster a nice BU coin >might have. Here are some pictures that I recently took with a Nikon >Coolpix 5900 digital camera:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 19:29:34 +1000, "Jeff R" <contact...@this.ng> wrote:
>Bob, I'm getting a "403-forbidden" on these links. >Is it my breath?
LOL ... I certainly hope not!
Strange, I thought it might be that they let me in because I still had a cookie from the uploads or something, so I used another browser, and they worked fine. Going through Google, I also had no trouble getting in.
Try copying and pasting the URL addresses into the browser manually ... do you still get the error?
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 19:29:34 +1000, "Jeff R" <contact...@this.ng> > wrote:
> >Bob, I'm getting a "403-forbidden" on these links. > >Is it my breath?
> LOL ... I certainly hope not!
> Strange, I thought it might be that they let me in because I still had > a cookie from the uploads or something, so I used another browser, and > they worked fine. Going through Google, I also had no trouble getting > in.
> Try copying and pasting the URL addresses into the browser manually > ... do you still get the error?
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:50:38 +1000, "Jeff R" <contact...@this.ng> wrote:
>Yup. >Still no dice
Very strange ... I know that at least one other forum member has been able to see these. If you look for a thread from today with the subject "Help on grading my 1896 Morgan needed", you will see that "jcsuperstar" was apparently able to get in through the very same links to that coin's pictures.
Are you on a LAN behind a firewall, by any chance?
>>>Bob, I'm getting a "403-forbidden" on these links. >>>Is it my breath?
>>LOL ... I certainly hope not!
>>Strange, I thought it might be that they let me in because I still had >>a cookie from the uploads or something, so I used another browser, and >>they worked fine. Going through Google, I also had no trouble getting >>in.
>>Try copying and pasting the URL addresses into the browser manually >>... do you still get the error?
If it works, you need to do a bit of tweeking with the settings. If not, then it's likely that the OP's server isn't accepting connections from your ISP or the bunch of IP addy's it uses. Been there.
> If it works, you need to do a bit of tweeking with the settings. If not, > then it's likely that the OP's server isn't accepting connections from > your ISP or the bunch of IP addy's it uses. Been there.
>I was thinking a scanner but someone mentioned depth of focus? Most pics I > see with a camera are not good. > I'd like opinoins on imaging coins please.
1) Good solution: a CCD scanner
2) Best solution: a digital SLR camera (DSLR) with a macro lens and a copy stand
--
E' mai possibile, oh porco di un cane, che le avventure in codesto reame debban risolversi tutte con grandi puttane! F.d.A
Bob Hairgrove wrote: > On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:57:13 -0500, "Storm's Hamburgers" > <storms@hometowncomputing> wrote:
>>I was thinking a scanner but someone mentioned depth of focus? Most pics I >>see with a camera are not good. >>I'd like opinoins on imaging coins please. >>mk
> I've found that scanners tend to wash out any luster a nice BU coin > might have. Here are some pictures that I recently took with a Nikon > Coolpix 5900 digital camera:
<afakeaddre...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: >Those are great pictures. What do you use for lighting and holding the >camera?
Thanks, Bruce.
Lighting: the more pictures I take, the more I am getting into using natural sunlight. We have one window in our kitchen where the afternoon sun hits it from a certain angle. On a nice day, with our cream-colored drapes drawn, I get just enough diffused sunlight to illuminate the coins without any harshness. If it's cloudy, I leave the drapes open. You have to experiment, of course. At least with digital cameras, it doesn't cost you anything to take 2 or 3 dozen shots until you find the right settings! I have also tried halogen lamps, but I find that they only work for certain kinds of coins, and it's much less of a hassle to set up both the camera AND the lamp than it is to just set up next to the window.
Holding: I use a tripod, which we had anyway for our Sony video camera, and the adaptor attachment fits the Nikon as well. I use the camera's macro setting and place the camera as close as I can get and still use the auto-focus feature. This is about four inches or so. Then I shoot the pictures using the camera's self-timer to ensure that the camera is steady.
It's also very important to set the white balance properly. For this, I use the back side of a Kodak 18% gray card. It does make a difference in the way the colors come out, although I'll be damned if I can tell the difference between the white of the card and a plain sheet of white paper with the naked eye...I know, the gray cards are expensive, but it's really a one-time purchase until you get it dirty, if ever.
Once you have this set up, you need to think about the background you want to use for your coins. It also has an effect on the way the camera reproduces the coin's color. I usually use light-blue colored paper for silver coins, but green or black is also nice. I use green paper for most slabs, for example. Copper coins seem to come out best with a pink background. That's a tip I got from this website:
Also, be sure to set up the imaging mode for the finest possible quality and highest resolution. You can always size a picture down, but if you start with a smaller picture, you might get stuck. Because when you enlarge a picture, you're just making the pixels larger, not adding any detail. BTW, you will need some kind of paint program to crop the pictures and perhaps rotate them after you have put them into the computer. I use an old version of Paint Shop Pro which used to be shareware, but is now a retail product. Adobe PhotoShop is the "big brother" of that program but is expensive. If all you need to do is resize, rotate and crop, and perhaps save in different formats, you can probably find free software to do that. Since I know and like Paint Shop Pro, I can recommend it.
As to paint sotware: yes, there are lots of "tricks" one can use, but if I find that the colors aren't right, or the focus not quite sharp, I always get better results by going back to the camera and starting over. I feel strongly that it is also not ethical to adjust things unless you just can't get the picture to look like the coin otherwise. Look at Ira Stein's auctions on eBay ("iras4"). He says he takes all his own pictures and admits to using Photoshop just so they match the coin. I've seldom seen more beautiful pictures on eBay, but then again he has beautiful coins to showcase.
I used to (still do) have a Panasonic Lumix which has great features, but I always had trouble with the color for some reason, so I would have to do some gamma correction in the computer. But it never looked as good as the pictures from my Nikon, which I actually only bought because the Lumix is heavy and my wife complained about the weight when we went on vacation trips! Of course, I looked around for recommendations for a camera which was also good at coin shots, and lots of people had recommended the Nikon Coolpix.
One last thing which is more of an aesthetic issue: Since I work with a fixed lighting and camera setup, I find that I often turn the coin at funny angles so that the angle of light is best for the coin's design. For example, the Swiss 20 Franc gold "Vreneli" coins have this innocent-looking milk maid (??) looking left and upwards with mountains in the background. If I have the light coming from W-NW, it looks like she is gazing into a sunrise in the Swiss mountains. But I have to turn the coin and rotate the image -- which is another reaso why you'd want an imaging program that can do more than 90 degree increments. Here's the results of the Swiss coin:
<inva...@bigfoot.com> wrote: >I have also tried halogen >lamps, but I find that they only work for certain kinds of coins, and >it's much less of a hassle to set up both the camera AND the lamp than >it is to just set up next to the window.
Meant to say: "...it's much MORE of a hassle to set up", etc.
<inva...@bigfoot.com> wrote: >an imaging program that can do more than 90 degree >increments
What I meant was, of course, a program that can do increments in various degrees other than 90% increments (i.e. any number from 0 through 360 and fractions of a degree).
|
