"Final" Numismatic Photography Setup

[ray_parkhurst]

I'm finally happy with my numismatic photography setup, at least "happy enough" to stop modifying it for a while. My latest work developing "Smile Directors" (light source shapers) for the Jansjo LEDs has paid off and they are giving me a method to equalize the differences between raw and slabbed coins; maximize angle from horizontal to bring out color; provide diffusion to minimize hotspots; yet still provide a small enough illumination spot to set-off a luster response.

A major factor in making this setup "final" is the ability to "calibrate" the lighting using a now permanently-installed stage mirror. Before, it was all guesswork as to how the lights were shining on the coin. With the mirror, I can accurately position them at the same incident angle for every photo, so if I bump the lights, shift over to high magnification imaging, set up to test a new lens, etc I can quickly get right back where I was.

Here is my calibration photo of the lighting setup. Note that I stopped-down to f22 for this to show a better definition of the size and shape of the illumination slots in the Directors.

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Lights20Final.jpg

As you can see, I'm not shifting very far from the traditional 10-2 arrangement that seems to work so well. Only real difference is that the size and shape of the sources are tightly-controlled with the Directors and positioning is made repeatable with the calibration method. By the way, try doing this with halogens and you'll start a fire!

And of course, first photo I took is of my old favorite 57D toner.

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4397_01.jpg

This coin has been through a lot since I first photographed it. It's been my primary coin for comparing lighting techniques, lenses, vibration reduction methods, tilting, etc. Every setup I've built has been verified with this coin. But 99% of the photos taken of this coin have been the obverse. Well...tada! Here is the reverse in all its glory:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4401_01.jpg

For those of you not familiar with my setups, I have them documented pretty well on CC forum in this thread:

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=87392

Here's an older photo of the setup I'm using now, but before I added the mirror:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4152_01.jpg

Here's a recent photo showing the reversible stage plate on top of the calibration mirror:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Copy-Img4271_01.jpg

Finally, here's a photo of a "Smile Director" over the face of a Jansjo LED light:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/jansjo20directors20005.jpg

Now for my sinister plan...I am going to take photos of the rest of the toned Lincolns from this same roll and publish them in this thread. I will do this over a bit of time, taking down the setup between photos in order to ensure the calibration method works well and gives repeatable illumination.

By the way, I settled on a height of 100mm from coin surface to the faces of the Directors. This gives what I think is best shadow detail on the coin.

And of course there are other setup details...

Camera: Nikon D7000
Shooting modes: RAW; Aperture Priority
ISO: 100
Shutter Speed: 1/13sec (+/-)
Copy Stand: Modified Chinese StereoZoom Microscope stand (would not recommend...B&L A-Stand are better)
Bellows: Nikon PB4 (no tilt or shift used) with BR15 M39 adapter (overkill but nice precision instrument)
Lens: 75ARD1 (Rodenstock 75mm f4 Apo Rodagon D M1:1)
Aperture: f5.6
PostProcessing: Nikon ViewNX2; Sharpening "1" after downsizing for web publishing

[1sgret]

Nice photos and I believe you have the right combination.

[Maineman750]

Very nice photos and explanation..hope I can find this thread when I'm ready to improve my pictures.Right now my Camaro is acting like a wife..it wants all my money.:tinysmile_hmm_t:

[seal006]

I am completely speechless, and oh so jealous. I need you to take photos for my website. I would have no trouble selling coins ever again.

[Roller]

Terrific! in my book. I just got a Chinese made bellows for my D70 Nikon with a manual micro 50mm. I have not worked it out yet. I jerry rigged a mount for it but never thought to use my stagnant B&L for a stand. Thanks for the thought.

[lara4228]

Your set up reminds me of a dentist chair for coins! :LOL_Hair:

However, the end result is AMAZING!

Lara

[ray_parkhurst]

Here is coin #2...Ray

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4406_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4407_01.jpg

[jallengomez]

Nice setup Ray, and nice coins. What kind of closeups can you get with that? Thanks for sharing.

Jody

[Roller]

By the way. You're shooting "raw". How much time does it take to produce one of these pictures?

[creme_brule]

Very nice setup. If I had money to buy a nice camera, I would do the same thing as you :)

By the way, love the toners you got there.

[hasfam]

Excellent setup and photos. I took your advise from your earlier post and purchased 2 of the Jansjo LED's. I haven't got the filtering or distance quite right yet but there was an immediate improvement from what I had. Thanks

[Amadauss]

The trick is to diffuse the light as you are doing. Nice job.

[foundinrolls]

Absolutely Phenomenal Images! I need say nothing else:-)

[ray_parkhurst]

Thanks to all for the kind words!


Nice setup Ray, and nice coins. What kind of closeups can you get with that? Thanks for sharing.

Jody

With the 75mm lens I can get to about 2:1 magnification, filling the frame with about half a Cent. If I change over to a 35mm lens, I can get up to 5:1 and fill the frame with just the date and mintmark. Great for variety shots.


By the way. You're shooting "raw". How much time does it take to produce one of these pictures?

I'm using ViewNX2 for capturing and raw processing. I'm not very sophisticated at post processing. It takes me about a minute to set levels and such, and then another minute to convert to jpg for the web. Cropping takes another minute or two, so from time I shoot the coin til I have an 800x800 image for the web it's about 5 minutes or so. Not fast, but the work needs to be done whether RAW or jpg and the RAW processing is only a bit slower than jpg.

Now if I was having to focus stack, it's a whole different story, so high mag photos take much, much longer to process. At f5.6 for M=0.8 on these cents, DOF is enough without too much compromise in sharpness that I can get by with a single image.


Your set up reminds me of a dentist chair for coins! :LOL_Hair:

However, the end result is AMAZING!

Lara

Maybe I should have been a dentist instead of an engineer? Uh...maybe not. Thanks Lara!

[Antiquity]

how much do you want for the setup? Instruction manual required. :LOL_Hair:

Nice, very nice.

[Maineman750]

how much do you want for the setup? Instruction manual required. :LOL_Hair:

Nice, very nice.


Good question though. Ray, how much could one expect to shell out to get quality pics like this ?

[ray_parkhurst]

Assuming you already have a DSLR, then the stand, bellows and lens can cost anywhere from $250 to $700 or so depending on quality level. But keep in mind that with a bellows setup, you don't need to get the most expensive lens out there. The bellows allows you to decouple the camera from the lens, and gives you a wide range of choices, NONE of which are the more traditional "dedicated macro" lenses. I've found that most enlarger lenses are superior to most dedicated macros, so I've concentrated on putting together setups using enlarger lenses.

For compact setups like I use, the range of 75-105mm seems to work best for the lens. I did a "shootout" of a bunch of lenses in this range and published the results over on CC forum. Here's the link:

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=98494

For the bellows, it's best to use a "universal" type so you can adapt it to your camera on one side and lens on the other. You can go with a dedicated bellows for your camera but most of the reasonably-priced bellows out there are quite old, before digital, so have archaic mounts, so you'll have to adapt anyway. Why not start with an easily-adapted T-mount or M42?

Rather than going on and on, go ahead and ask questions...Ray

[Chugly]

Your photo's are simply outstanding Ray! Thanks for taking the time to show us how its done. Being able to take good photo's is so critical in this hobby!

[ray_parkhurst]

Very nice setup. If I had money to buy a nice camera, I would do the same thing as you :)

By the way, love the toners you got there.

Thanks...This one is transfixing my gaze...here's #3:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4424_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4423_01.jpg

[Amadauss]

Not trying to drag this thread on Ray, but these pics are so beautiful. You might want to explain with the bellows and decoupling the camera from the lens for all because in your setup you do not show a camera at the top. Or am I missing something? Thanks.

[ray_parkhurst]

Not trying to drag this thread on Ray, but these pics are so beautiful. You might want to explain with the bellows and decoupling the camera from the lens for all because in your setup you do not show a camera at the top. Or am I missing something? Thanks.

Nope, you got it right. No camera is shown because I used it to take the pics of the setup:)

In fact, this capability was a prime reason for putting this sort of setup together, so I could use my camera for coin photography, remove it from the setup for family, ebay, whatever photos, then go right back to taking coin pics AS IF I WAS CHANGING A LENS.

That's the key, ie the setup appears to the camera as if it's a manual lens. The bellows allows magnification adjustment, while the actual lens mounted on the bellows has the aperture adjustment. The microscope stand moves it all up and down to adjust focus.

It is important that whatever DSLR you choose for such a setup be able to work with manual lenses. I think most DSLR's will "work" with manual lenses, though some offer more functionality than others. Ultimately, if the DSLR can be "tethered" to your PC to control its functions, provide a preview of the image for focusing, etc this is the recommended way of using a setup like this.

Hope this explanation helps with understanding the setup...Ray

[kloccwork419]

I would thank you twice if I could

[ray_parkhurst]

I would thank you twice if I could

Too cool! Glad the information is useful.

Now how about another coin from the roll. Here's #4:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4425_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4426_01.jpg

[kloccwork419]

Im trying..Hopefully Ill get it tonight. I have a Canon T3. Its a good camera but I just dont fully understand it yet..
I can take perfect closeup with no issues at all. Its my full pics that dont make me happy. Hope all your setting work with mine

[busyeye]

WOW! Truly, thank you for sharing!!

[ray_parkhurst]

OK, one more and I will pause for a while. Here is #5, which has a reverse I am in love with:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4427_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4428_01.jpg

[ray_parkhurst]

Here are 3 more toners from the same roll of 1957-D. Just 11 more to image...Ray

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4436_01.jpghttp://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4437_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4466_01.jpghttp://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4467_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4470_01.jpghttp://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4471_01.jpg

[Coppertop]

I'm in Awe :)

[pman860507]

Beautiful pictures. it really brings out all the color and detail to the coin. I would say your photos look better then the pros, o wait nvm im guessing you are the pro! anways awesome pictures thanks for the information too.

[ray_parkhurst]

Beautiful pictures. it really brings out all the color and detail to the coin. I would say your photos look better then the pros, o wait nvm im guessing you are the pro! anways awesome pictures thanks for the information too.

Thanks pman and Coppertop! I'm no pro, just a collector who wanted to document his collection but was dissatisfied with my options and had to figure out the best way to do it, and I'm still trying to do better...Ray

[Coppertop]

That looks so good ,I feel like it belongs in a centerfold or something lol

[pman860507]

Thanks pman and Coppertop! I'm no pro, just a collector who wanted to document his collection but was dissatisfied with my options and had to figure out the best way to do it, and I'm still trying to do better...Ray

I think you did very well. You dont take pictures though. You make art.

[BadThad]

Very nice! What I would expect for a $1500 camera and a $700 setup.....excellent work!

[ray_parkhurst]

Actually, the camera, lens, etc are not that important to getting nice photos. I did a shootout of a group of 15 or so 75mm lenses, all purchased on eBay from $15 to $50, and compared them with the $300 lens I used for these shots as well as a $2500 Printing-Nikkor. At 100%, you can definitely tell the difference between lenses, but the differences are much less than you might expect. Once the images are downsized to 800x800 (still quite big) the differences become miniscule to non-existent. Couple a $30 75mm lens to a $50 bellows, mount it on a $20 tripod, add two $10 gooseneck lamps, and you can produce the same shots I'm showing in this thread with a $120 setup (still need camera...).

But of course the big stumbling block for cost is the camera, since you need one with removable lenses in order to use a setup like I describe. But cameras are dropping in price...in fact I just picked up a Canon T2i new on Amazon for $499. At 18MP, it is higher res than my D7000 and has EFSC. Or you can buy a used Nikon D5000 for $300-400.

So you DON'T need to spend $2200 to get good quality photos. You DO need to spend more than a lot of folks feel comfortable with, though as long as the camera is used for general photography it might be justified.

[pman860507]

I wish that i bought a camera with a removable lenses, i can complain with my camera im sure if i got a decent tripod it would help a lot with my bury closeups.

I dont know if you said this i tried to read though it really fast but what lighting do you use.

[Roller]

Did you use a "stacking" program for the shots?

[ray_parkhurst]

I wish that i bought a camera with a removable lenses, i can complain with my camera im sure if i got a decent tripod it would help a lot with my bury closeups.

I dont know if you said this i tried to read though it really fast but what lighting do you use.

I use two Jansjo LED gooseneck lights from IKEA. I add some diffusion to them and also some black paper cut in a curve to shape the light "beam". Early in this thread there are pictures of the lights and the setup. The lights are around 100mm from the coin, at approx 10:00 and 2:00, at as high an angle (almost vertical) as I can get them before creating direct glare off the coin surface...Ray

[ray_parkhurst]

Did you use a "stacking" program for the shots?

No, all these shots are single images. The aperture is at f5.6 for these and this gives "just enough" depth of field. The lens I am using is capable of f4, and I have done stacking of similar shots with the lens set to f4. Even at f4 the DOF is enough that only 3 images are required...one focused on highest features, one focused on the middle features such as the throat below the jaw, and one focused on the field. The lens I'm using has flat enough field, and I've calibrated the flatness of the coin, such that I don't really need more than this.

All that said, here is the obverse of coin #2 with a 3-stack at f4 using CombineZP...Ray

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/57D-Toner2-02.jpg

If you compare this with the single image, you will see the following:
- slightly better sharpness across whole image
- Background is more out of focus since I only stacked the coin itself, and at f4 the background is out of the depth of field more versus f5.6
- lighting is slightly different. This was using an earlier variation to the "final" setup.

[jallengomez]

Ray-

Have you ever experimented with a macro and a ring flash for coin photography?

Jody

[ray_parkhurst]

Ray-

Have you ever experimented with a macro and a ring flash for coin photography?

Jody

I've tried using continuous ring lights, not flash type, on many occasions. I actually prefer a continuous ring light to other solutions for higher magnification shots (3x-5x for varieties, etc) since I'm looking for surface and device details and don't care much about "normal" coin photography factors such as luster, color fidelity, etc. But when you use a ring light for full-coin shots, the coin can look very "flat" because the illumination pattern greatly reduces local contrast. Ring lighting is touted as "shadow-free", which is not really true unless the light is quite close to the coin. But even though you may get reasonable shadow detail with the light far enough away from the coin, ring lights essentially kill any representation of luster, which is an expression of local contrast. Luster requires specular reflection to contrast with local shadowing on a micro (grain) scale, and a ring light creates reflection from all angles and illuminates the local shadows, thus goodbye luster.

...Ray

[coop]

The problem with rings lights are that the light floos the image and light and shadow which shows detail disappear.
Single light source:
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/coop49/1960d1mm015m.jpg
Ring light:
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/coop49/1960D_1MM_003RL.jpg

[Roller]

Here's the rig Ray. Comments?

[coppercoins]

Roller - I would like to see some of the results you get with your setup. I have been watching this thread with a lot of interest.

[Amadauss]

I've tried using continuous ring lights, not flash type, on many occasions. I actually prefer a continuous ring light to other solutions for higher magnification shots (3x-5x for varieties, etc) since I'm looking for surface and device details and don't care much about "normal" coin photography factors such as luster, color fidelity, etc. But when you use a ring light for full-coin shots, the coin can look very "flat" because the illumination pattern greatly reduces local contrast. Ring lighting is touted as "shadow-free", which is not really true unless the light is quite close to the coin. But even though you may get reasonable shadow detail with the light far enough away from the coin, ring lights essentially kill any representation of luster, which is an expression of local contrast. Luster requires specular reflection to contrast with local shadowing on a micro (grain) scale, and a ring light creates reflection from all angles and illuminates the local shadows, thus goodbye luster.

...Ray

Good points on the ring light. In my pursuit of the perfect coin photo (almost there) I have tried several ring lights and agree with Ray on his points made. The ring lights do create reflection from all angles and illuminated the local shadows. I am playing around with diffusing the ring light (diffusing it with various methods) and so far no luck. Even tried a very bright ring light and then cut a styrofoam cup and placed that around the coin to see if it would help with calming the reflection but so far no luck. Going to try the ring light with the cup and then blast some more light from several directions at the cup and see if that might work. Nice set up Ray.

[Amadauss]

Ray, have you tried raising the f stop up to 8 or 9?

[ray_parkhurst]

Here's the rig Ray. Comments?

Roller...Absolutely love the setup! That slider looks super rigid and adjustable, should be a great copy stand.

That said, you have a severe limitation with that setup using a 55mm Micro lens. It's possible you will never get the stand much above its minimum extension because it just won't focus at longer working distances. To explain the problem, I've got to explain magnification in an optical system, so don't go to sleep...

First, let's discuss magnification. Using a Nikon APS-C camera as example, the sensor height is ~16mm. Thus to fill the sensor with an image of a 19mm diameter Lincoln Cent, the magnification is 16/19mm, or M=0.84.

Nikon cameras have a "register" distance, ie the distance from sensor to the lens mount plane, of 46.5mm. This is the distance that any Nikon mount lenses are designed to give infinity focus. All lenses extend somewhat either inside or outside this register distance. Your 55mm Micro actually sits outside by about 8.5mm when focused at infinity, so it sits exactly 55mm from the sensor at infinity focus as a 55mm lens should.

The Nikon Bellows-2 you are using has a minimum extension of approx 50mm. This includes the physical length of the bellows "standards" and the mounts. This minimum extension adds to the "register" distance.

The critical number to calculate magnification is the Total Extension. For your system, the minimum total extension of the lens from the sensor is 46.5mm + 8.5mm + 50mm = 105mm.

The magnification of a lens system is given by:

M = (Total Extension - Focal Length) / Focal Length

With the numbers from your system, the minimum magnification is:

M = (105 - 55) / 55 = 0.91

This is more than 0.84 so is too much magnification to frame a Lincoln Cent on your sensor! And there is little you can do about it with the system you have. There are bellows available that have shorter minimum distance that you can use, but most are at least 40mm, though you really only need a few mm less to get the whole Cent in the picture.

You could use a full-frame camera, with 24mm sensor, but that's a big extra expense.

Unfortunately, your best option may be to shift over to a longer lens. For the system you've constructed, the 105mm Micro is a better choice. Working through the numbers gives a minimum magnification of 0.47 with the 105 Micro. Even this may get a bit annoying to you since you need minimum magnification of 0.42 to fill the sensor with a Dollar, but at least you have plenty of length for Cents.

An even better approach may be to use an enlarging lens instead of a Macro lens. A 105mm EL-Nikkor has very little if any lens extension, so would allow nearly infinity focus with your system. 135mm and 150mm EL-Nikkors are available as well and would allow much bigger working distances and lighting flexibility.

Hope this helps...Ray

[ray_parkhurst]

Ray, have you tried raising the f stop up to 8 or 9?

Higher f-stops are generally not needed for coins since they are fairly flat objects, assuming you can get your camera sensor and coin on parallel planes. There are simple methods to do this if you are interested.

The problem with larger f-stops is diffraction. While f8-f9 is not a problem, this is not the true aperture setting for the system. The aperture shown on the lens is for infinity focus, when M=0. When M>0 the effective aperture is:

Feff = Finf (1+ M)

I like to keep the Feff less than 12 to avoid diffraction. For a Cent photo, with f5.6, Feff is:

Feff = 5.6 (1 + 0.84) = 10.3

If I go to f9 for a Cent:

Feff = 9 ( 1 + 0.84) = 16.6, which will definitely start to limit sharpness due to diffraction.

...Ray

[coppercoins]

You've stepped way over my level of understanding any of this. I don't understand the formulas and math, what I want is a set-up that does what yours does, and I'll pay for it. I want to be able to get everything from the whole coin in the frame up to just the date and mintmark.

Can you explain what I need and where I can get it? I have a Nikon D-80 camera, and a very good, heavy professional Polaroid copy stand. I also have a rather healthy understanding of my camera and settings, I just have no idea about bellows and lenses. I have a 50MM macro and a 105MM macro.

[ray_parkhurst]

You've stepped way over my level of understanding any of this. I don't understand the formulas and math, what I want is a set-up that does what yours does, and I'll pay for it. I want to be able to get everything from the whole coin in the frame up to just the date and mintmark.

Sorry, I knew it would be a bit much for most folks but I wanted to explain it thoroughly.

I assume you are interested mostly in shooting Lincoln Cents, correct? The recommendations may be a bit different if you want to shoot Morgan Dollars full-frame as well. Adding Dollars doubles the total magnification range needed in the system.


Can you explain what I need and where I can get it? I have a Nikon D-80 camera, and a very good, heavy professional Polaroid copy stand. I also have a rather healthy understanding of my camera and settings, I just have no idea about bellows and lenses. I have a 50MM macro and a 105MM macro.Long Post follows...Executive Summary at the bottom...Ray

Yes, no problem, though there are a wide variety of options available. First thing I would recommend is to not use the existing lenses. Not that they aren't good lenses, but especially for bellows use they might not be appropriate.

For full-frame images, my recommendation is to buy a Rodenstock 75mm f4 Apo-Rodagon D M1:1 ("75ARD1"). I have not found anything that beats it for coins other than a Printing-Nikkor. All the photos I've been posting recently used the 75ARD1 and it is a superb lens for coins. Working distance for Cents is 5-1/4" so there is just enough room to get lighting where you need it using something like the Jansjo gooseneck LEDs. The lens is available fairly often on eBay, or you can buy one new at B&H or other retailer.

The 75ARD1, on a 160mm bellows, will get you to approx 2:1 magnification. This isn't high enough for framing the date and MM. For that you need to be at around 4-5X. A simple and cheap way to get there is simply to add a 2x teleconverter between camera and bellows. I'll post a pic of how this comes out later in the thread. There are many more options for high mag and I'll let the low mag discussion stew for a while before delving into higher mags.

For bellows, since you are shooting Nikon and have a large copy stand available, I would recommend a Nikon PB4. It will give you not only easy interface with the camera without adapters, but also tilt and shift capability in case you want to experiment with tilting coins for optimizing your lighting, etc. Again, that's what I am using. I caution you however that the PB4 and 75ARD1 won't quite allow you to shoot full-frame Dollars. If you need to do that, I can make other recommendations.

An option to the PB4 is the PB6. It is a wonderful bellows with super-precision quality, but does not do tilt/shift. either PB4 or PB6 will do well with your D80.

You will need a Nikon-M39 adapter to mount the 75ARD1 to the bellows. These are cheap on eBay.

One limitation you may find is your camera itself. The D80 has a couple limitations:
- no Live View (far as I know)
- no metering with manual lenses

These are not showstoppers, they will just make imaging on the bellows a bit more tedious since you don't have live view for immediate focus feedback, and need to set exposure with trial and error.

One issue that will become quickly obvious is the effect of vibration, especially for higher mags. I have found that resolution in my D7000 is limited by the vibration of the camera even at 3X. At these higher mags, keeping everything bolted down tight is critical, and often I have to do long exposures to average out the effects of shutter vibration. On your D80 you will also have mirror slap to deal with, so you may need to go to multi-second exposures to give the camera time to settle, or use a delayed flash. Mags at 3x or higher is a completely different world from 1x, and will need a lot more discussion.

Realize also that I do some amount of post-processing with the images. For critical shots I shoot RAW, and do all my levels processing in RAW format. This is mostly critical for shadows, which are a lot less noisy when shooting RAW due to the massively higher dynamic range.

Executive Summary:

- I recommend the Rodenstock 75mm f4 Apo-Rodagon D M1:1 lens
- I recommend either Nikon PB4 or PB6. I can explain usage as needed
- Higher mag shots for varieties need further discussion
- I recommend Jansjo gooseneck LED lights (cover with a piece of tissue to diffuse)

By the way, if you do decide to buy a new camera, let's discuss it on here first as I'm in process of comparing Nikon vs Canon for bellows shooting.

I also want to add that traditionally my bellows recommendation has been the Pentax Auto Bellows in M42 or the Vivitar Bellows in T-Mount. I still recommend these, but mostly in conjunction with usage on a microscope stand. With an existing, heavy duty copy stand, the larger Nikon bellows are excellent and as long as the user is shooting Nikon they require no camera adapters. Note the Pentax and Vivitar bellows (with focus rack) will still work well, and are less expensive alternates to the Nikons, but will require more adapters. If the user is shooting Canon, then the Pentax and Vivitar remain my top choices.

[coppercoins]

Wow....just wow. You should get the man of the month award or something for the detail and clarity of your exchange here and the willingness to openly share such information. It is obvious that you are either a high-functioning super-genius or perhaps a normal genius who has spent a great deal of time learning what you are freely sharing here. Either way, still very brilliant. Good man.

With regard to shooting images of larger coins - that would not be the purpose of the bellows set-up. I already have the Sigma 105mm macro for such shots. My purpose would be in being able to use the D80 to shoot mintmark photos, but I was hoping the solution would be less expensive than buying a new trinocular microscope.

So this leads me to a question - what IS the advantage of using a bellows and enlargement lens over using two separate instruments a person (like me) might already have (a microscope plus a good copy stand setup)? Is there any particular benefit to having the bellows that I am overlooking?

[ray_parkhurst]

Wow....just wow. You should get the man of the month award or something for the detail and clarity of your exchange here and the willingness to openly share such information. It is obvious that you are either a high-functioning super-genius or perhaps a normal genius who has spent a great deal of time learning what you are freely sharing here. Either way, still very brilliant. Good man.

With regard to shooting images of larger coins - that would not be the purpose of the bellows set-up. I already have the Sigma 105mm macro for such shots. My purpose would be in being able to use the D80 to shoot mintmark photos, but I was hoping the solution would be less expensive than buying a new trinocular microscope.

So this leads me to a question - what IS the advantage of using a bellows and enlargement lens over using two separate instruments a person (like me) might already have (a microscope plus a good copy stand setup)? Is there any particular benefit to having the bellows that I am overlooking?

Thanks very much! I truly enjoy "talking macro" and the exchanges here, especially coupled with my main hobby of Lincoln Cent die varieties.

The advantage the bellows gives is the ability to use the highest quality optics directly with your camera without anything extra getting in the way. That said, I've been very impressed with some of the photos coming from modest setups with cameras held up to microscopes, so there are obviously folks who make the very best of these.

What I can tell you is the bellows route seems to give the best results I've been able to achieve to date, for either full-coin or detail shots.

OK, all that said, I want to show the results for overall and variety shots using the 75ARD1. Here is an UNC 1949-D RPM#5 full-coin shot using the 75ARD1, downsized 4x for publishing (not cropped):

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/Img4475.jpg

Here is the same coin with the 75ARD1 but with bellows fully extended. Working distance is 2-3/4". This is a SINGLE image at f5.6 and is downsized 4x as above:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/75ARD1-SGL_01.jpg

Here is same as above but with lens at f4 and a 2-image stack using CombineZP:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/75ARD1-2ST1_01.jpg

Here is the same as above but adding a 2X teleconverter between camera and bellows:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/75ARD1-2ST2_01.jpg

And finally here is the third image (2-stack) but first cropped 2x and then downsized 2x:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/75ARD1-2ST1CR_01.jpg

The crop and downsize shows sharpest result for a modest increase in the workflow.

Note that the lighting wasn't changed between overall and detail shots. In an actual photo shoot, you'd likely move lights around to emphasize the shadows and surfaces to show a variety at its best.

If the above quality is acceptable, then the 75ARD1 on its own will meet your needs. If you want a further step up in quality, you can get it by using another, shorter focal length lens. The shorter lens will allow you to get more magnification so you don't need to crop. Disadvantages with the shorter lens is less working distance, and the absolute need to do image stacking, likely more than 2 images, so the workflow starts to get more complex. There are always tradeoffs.

Ray

[kloccwork419]

Close up arent a problem at all for me. I have a Canon T3 that came with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Type II Lens. I cant get a good full pic for anything. Im not sure if Im too close or what. Should I add a telephoto lens to the end of it or what do you suggest?. I have 2 Ikea lights in the mail on the way. I been stalking this thread trying to learn but your talkin WAY OVER my head. Any suggestions? Maybe something under a couple hundred?

And what is the mirror doing?

[ray_parkhurst]

Close up arent a problem at all for me. I have a Canon T3 that came with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Type II Lens. I cant get a good full pic for anything. Im not sure if Im too close or what. Should I add a telephoto lens to the end of it or what do you suggest?. I have 2 Ikea lights in the mail on the way. I been stalking this thread trying to learn but your talkin WAY OVER my head. Any suggestions? Maybe something under a couple hundred?

How close is your lens to the coin when you take a close-up pic? You should have no problem taking an overall picture of the coin. The problem should be inability to get detail shots, but it sounds like you are able to do that? Best thing is to post a couple photos and describe the direction you want to go. In general I thought the 18-55 lenses can't quite get close enough to get a full pic of a Lincoln Cent, and at their closest distance start to cause problems for lighting...

For Canon users who don't want to go the full bellows route, I've been recommending a combo of a 50mm f1.8 Canon FD mount lens (typically $35 on eBay) along with a Vivitar 2X Macro Teleconverter in FD mount (maybe $40 on eBay). You will also need an adapter to go from FD to EOS mount (another $25 or so, try local camera shop first, then eBay). This will effectively give you a 100mm f3.6 1:1 macro lens for around $100. It won't beat the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro for sharpness, but will beat your 18-55 and give you a lot of lighting flexibility with the added working distance.


And what is the mirror doing?

Ahh yes, the mirror. It is there for three purposes:

1) for calibrating flatness of sensor to coin
2) for calibrating positions of my lights
3) for giving a smooth surface to move my stage plate around on

...Ray

[Amadauss]

You've stepped way over my level of understanding any of this. I don't understand the formulas and math, what I want is a set-up that does what yours does, and I'll pay for it. I want to be able to get everything from the whole coin in the frame up to just the date and mintmark.

Can you explain what I need and where I can get it? I have a Nikon D-80 camera, and a very good, heavy professional Polaroid copy stand. I also have a rather healthy understanding of my camera and settings, I just have no idea about bellows and lenses. I have a 50MM macro and a 105MM macro.

If you are going to go this level, You might where you live have a camera shop that will let you rent out some camera's along with some macro lens or if you plan on keeping your camera just rent the lens and give it a try and see what you think. If you are going to purchase the setup he suggested. Only a thought.

[kloccwork419]

ok. I can take high quality pix thru my Amscope with the T3 and the scope adapter I have from Amscope for the Canon. FOr some reason the full pix I take with my camera being on a stand suck really bad. Rarely I get one that I would post but today seems worse. Do you suggest I get the rig of lens to make the 1:1 or just buy the real thing?. I know my lighting sucks too. I made the stand at work (Fabricator)and Im not sure if its high enough. I can buy anything at a reasonable price but Im not going for the $2000 lens. Id rather spend that on my truck..lol. I just cant get anything in a good enough sharpness to share.

[Roller]

Another question Ray. I'm having a bad time focusing through the viewfinder and the D70 does not have live view. So, I'm thinking of getting the Nikon camera control pro 2 software to remedy this. It is my understanding that the software would give me the ability to pre view any shot on my computer screen and focus in using the screen. At least that is what Nikon tells me. Have you had any experience with the pro 2 and is it true that I could perform the task I intend to?

[Amadauss]

Another question Ray. I'm having a bad time focusing through the viewfinder and the D70 does not have live view. So, I'm thinking of getting the Nikon camera control pro 2 software to remedy this. It is my understanding that the software would give me the ability to pre view any shot on my computer screen and focus in using the screen. At least that is what Nikon tells me. Have you had any experience with the pro 2 and is it true that I could perform the task I intend to?


And quoting for kloccwork question:

Not trying to steel your thunder Ray because you are the master of this, the pics are fantastic! To Roller and Kloccwerk, taking with my camera attached to the AM scope I have realized is not going to cut it. No matter what I do, and believe me have gotten a great deal of help on other forum sites about how to do this, the pics for the most part do not turn out great. To many factors come into play. Most DLSR's work in conjunction with the lens they are using to take the pictures. When you use the camera body and attach it to a part that really gives no feadback to the camera and just lets it sit on top of the scope, it just does not do it. This is not only my opinion. I am thinking would have better luck going with a USB camera of high pixel rate and using that with the scope.

Also using the canon EOS utility similar to the nikon utility, taking pics with my scope and camera together, I found getting them to match up, again what I saw on the computer screen was not the final result after taking the pic in many cases.

Using Ray's setup separate on a stand and set up like he has it is the way to have the perfect pic and will work much better with any utility you use to few on screen. Plus the utility allows you to use the mouse to click the trigger on the camera to take the pic so no vibration. You do not need a separate trigger to take the picture. Although with Ray's set up it looks so sturdy, I am sure you have no vibration.

[ray_parkhurst]

ok. I can take high quality pix thru my Amscope with the T3 and the scope adapter I have from Amscope for the Canon. FOr some reason the full pix I take with my camera being on a stand suck really bad. Rarely I get one that I would post but today seems worse. Do you suggest I get the rig of lens to make the 1:1 or just buy the real thing?. I know my lighting sucks too. I made the stand at work (Fabricator)and Im not sure if its high enough. I can buy anything at a reasonable price but Im not going for the $2000 lens. Id rather spend that on my truck..lol. I just cant get anything in a good enough sharpness to share.

You don't have to spend $2k for the lens. You don't really have to spend $300, unless you are needing the lens to walk on water like the 75ARD1 does. I did a "shootout" of a bunch of 75mm lenses a while back, many of which can be purchased for less than $30, and they ALL did just fine for all intents and purposes. I included the 75ARD1 for comparison, and even included the 105PN so readers could compare with perfection. A 1957-D Lincoln Cent Toner was the subject for all comparisons...

Here is the link to the post:

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=98494&SearchTerms=75mm,shootout

One important thing to mention is that the best dedicated macro lenses (tested in a separate shootout published on photomacrography.net if you are interested) come in around the middle of the pack of lenses tested in terms of resolution and sharpness. What this means is that virtually any dedicated macro lens, regardless of price level or manufacturer, can be bested by a $100 (used market price) enlarging lens, and completely trumped by a $300 (used) duplicating lens (75ARD1).

If you stick to 75-105mm, the stand does not have to be that high, especially if you get a bellows with integral focus rail like a Vivitar, Pentax, or Nikon. Your existing stand will almost certainly work.

Ray

[ray_parkhurst]

Another question Ray. I'm having a bad time focusing through the viewfinder and the D70 does not have live view. So, I'm thinking of getting the Nikon camera control pro 2 software to remedy this. It is my understanding that the software would give me the ability to pre view any shot on my computer screen and focus in using the screen. At least that is what Nikon tells me. Have you had any experience with the pro 2 and is it true that I could perform the task I intend to?

I use CCP2 exclusively for my macro shots and it's great for adjusting camera settings and firing the shot, but I don't think it will help the problem you are having. In order to get the benefit of screen focusing, the camera needs to have Live View. Now, I could be wrong and there is some other way the software previews things, but somehow the image has to get to the sensor, and Live View is the only way other than actually taking a photo to get the mirror and shutter out of the way.

Ray

[ray_parkhurst]

And quoting for kloccwork question:

Not trying to steel your thunder Ray because you are the master of this, the pics are fantastic! To Roller and Kloccwerk, taking with my camera attached to the AM scope I have realized is not going to cut it. No matter what I do, and believe me have gotten a great deal of help on other forum sites about how to do this, the pics for the most part do not turn out great. To many factors come into play. Most DLSR's work in conjunction with the lens they are using to take the pictures. When you use the camera body and attach it to a part that really gives no feadback to the camera and just lets it sit on top of the scope, it just does not do it. This is not only my opinion. I am thinking would have better luck going with a USB camera of high pixel rate and using that with the scope.

Also using the canon EOS utility similar to the nikon utility, taking pics with my scope and camera together, I found getting them to match up, again what I saw on the computer screen was not the final result after taking the pic in many cases.

Using Ray's setup separate on a stand and set up like he has it is the way to have the perfect pic and will work much better with any utility you use to few on screen. Plus the utility allows you to use the mouse to click the trigger on the camera to take the pic so no vibration. You do not need a separate trigger to take the picture. Although with Ray's set up it looks so sturdy, I am sure you have no vibration.

No worries Amadauss, answer away!

To your point, I have had good luck using Tucsen USB cameras in conjunction with my B&L Monozoom7. Nice thing about these cameras is they have no shutter, so nothing to cause vibration, and thus are perfect for microscope use. But, don't expect very high quality from them, even the expensive ones. Even an entry DSLR will handily beat them long as you can keep vibration in check.

I have also had a lot of issues with the Live View not matching final pics on my Nikons as well. It all came down to vibration. Once I tamed the vibrations, I could zoom in 100% on the image I just took and compare with the Live View image and they are a perfect match.

Note that Canon cameras have a special shutter functionality called Electronic First Shutter Curtain (EFSC). This eliminates the vibration caused by the shutter motion at the beginning of the image. I am now the proud owner of a T2i and am planning to do a shootout between my D7000 and the T2i, but need to upgrade my OS first. Min system requirements for EOS utility are higher than for CCP2.

Ray

[Maineman750]

Ray, may I suggest reducing the size of those last uploads so we can read all of this great info without scrolling back and forth ? Thanks:tinysmile_hmm_t:

[Roller]

I did not believe the Nikon rep. I think he knew not of what he spoke. It is my understanding also that the camera needs to have live view capability to get the pre-shot on the screen. Yours does have the live view. Do you have the on-screen focus capability?

[jcuve]

I suppose, in a thread this large, with so many (great) examples, it wouldn't hurt if these images were maybe 500 pixels across horizontally. I have enjoyed it. I'm a an artist and photographer but the images are rather large.

[ray_parkhurst]

I've seen folks posting on this forum using thumbnails. Can I link to an outside service (I'm using photobucket for now) and have thumbnails for the images?

Unfortunately the point of these exercises is to see the image quality, so bigger is better. First few photos were of a whole coin, so could be cropped to 800x800 and that seemed to be OK with folks. It's when I posted the variety photos at 1232x816 that folks started having issues. I'll keep the images to 800x800 max for future posts, and if I do a variety shot I'll make it 616x408. Unless someone can tell me how to do thumbnails with photobucket...Ray

[Maineman750]

The 800 in width will keep us within the boundaries Ray..I know nothing about thumbnails,but this great stuff and I don't want to take away from it either... thanks !

[coop]

Ray: I figured it out by trial and error. Seems like it should be easier? I'll have to try and see if I can make an image system to show how it can be done. (Not that I'm the expert. LOL)



Post message:
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/coop49/THUMBNAIL_2.jpg
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/coop49/THUMBNAIL_3.jpg
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/coop49/THUMBNAIL_4.jpg
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/coop49/THUMBNAIL_5.jpg
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/coop49/THUMBNAIL_6.jpg
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/coop49/THUMBNAIL_7.jpg

[kloccwork419]

Most DLSR's work in conjunction with the lens they are using to take the pictures. When you use the camera body and attach it to a part that really gives no feadback to the camera and just lets it sit on top of the scope, it just does not do it.

Also using the canon EOS utility similar to the nikon utility, taking pics with my scope and camera together, I found getting them to match up, again what I saw on the computer screen was not the final result after taking the pic in many cases.



I have no problem at all with my scope setup. Heres an example that I took with my scope.

btw, when you click on the thumbnail, it goes to a bigger picture with black surrounding. When you click on that, it opens in a separate window. In most cases you can even click on THAT pic to go to its original size

[ray_parkhurst]

I did not believe the Nikon rep. I think he knew not of what he spoke. It is my understanding also that the camera needs to have live view capability to get the pre-shot on the screen. Yours does have the live view. Do you have the on-screen focus capability?

Yes, and I use it extensively. I own a D5000 and it also has Live View capability. In fact I got just as good image quality out of the D5000 as I do from the D7000, though the D7000 has a "crisper" Live View so it's easier to critically focus...Ray

[jcuve]

I do all my resizing via editing programs on my computer - easy. Photobucket is not as easy...

I know the point is to show image quality, but the whole of the thread is becoming huge taken all together.

[ray_parkhurst]

I only use photobucket to host the images, not to edit them. I just use Nikon ViewNX/NX2 to do my RAW processing, jpg conversions, downsizing and cropping then upload the final image to photobucket for hosting...Ray

[Amadauss]

[QUOTE=kloccwork419;139646]I have no problem at all with my scope setup. Heres an example that I took with my scope.

I get the same pics you do but just like yours, the light source causes shadows to appear and also give the coins some lines it really does not have or makes you believe you have something you don't. I guess you have to look at Ray's shots and then look for shadows versus what we put up. Not making it a negative using the scope for pics because your 1962 looks very good but it is not giving a completely accurate view. That's why I was getting so frustrated taking pics with my camera attached to the scope. It is very hard to master the scope with a light source that will give you what a bellows or tube gives you.

Here is a scope pic with hard control of the lighting:

http://a.imageshack.us/img846/5774/img8365ow.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/846/img8365ow.jpg/)

And here is one where I used tubes, versus bellows which I am going to use moving forward, but you can see the way the light changes to a non-glare of sorts but you get to see any type of variance on the coin surface much better if it were there.

http://a.imageshack.us/img683/9688/img7199n.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/683/img7199n.jpg/)

[ray_parkhurst]

Here's the same coin shot with a 50mm f2.8 EL-Nikkor at f4. The lens is not sharp at f2.8. At f4 this image needed a 2-image stack. I am showing it at 616x408 pixels by request to downsize things a bit.

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/New-Out82-01_01.jpg

[ray_parkhurst]

It looks to me like you need to do some stacking of the image. The sharpness of the in-focus areas is good, but the depth of field of the microscope is not sufficient to give a critically-sharp image. This is actually a good thing, indicating the microscope is capable of reasonably high resolution. Probably if you take another shot focused on the field, the stack would come out very nice...Ray


[QUOTE=kloccwork419;139646]I have no problem at all with my scope setup. Heres an example that I took with my scope.

I get the same pics you do but just like yours, the light source causes shadows to appear and also give the coins some lines it really does not have or makes you believe you have something you don't. I guess you have to look at Ray's shots and then look for shadows versus what we put up. Not making it a negative using the scope for pics because your 1962 looks very good but it is not giving a completely accurate view. That's why I was getting so frustrated taking pics with my camera attached to the scope. It is very hard to master the scope with a light source that will give you what a bellows or tube gives you.

Here is a scope pic with hard control of the lighting:

http://a.imageshack.us/img846/5774/img8365ow.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/846/img8365ow.jpg/)

And here is one where I used tubes, versus bellows which I am going to use moving forward, but you can see the way the light changes to a non-glare of sorts but you get to see any type of variance on the coin surface much better if it were there.

http://a.imageshack.us/img683/9688/img7199n.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/683/img7199n.jpg/)

[ray_parkhurst]

Here's what I get with a Tominon 35mm and ring lighting. Overall:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/New-Out83-1_01.jpg

And detail around the Mintmark:

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/New-Out83-2_02.jpg

[ray_parkhurst]

I just got some new glass yesterday and decided to try it out for this thread. Here's the view at 4x, and below that is a 1600x1600 crop downsized to 800x800. Sorry for the large image size, I just couldn't help myself. Anyone care to guess what this was taken with?

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/New-Out84-1_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/New-Out84-2_01.jpg

[ray_parkhurst]

My last few posts have gone unanswered so I think this thread has worn out its welcome. However, I will answer my question for anyone who is curious...the last photo was taken with a Nikon CF Plan 4x 0.13 objective mounted on the bellows in place of the 75ARD1. It's not the best one in Nikon's line but it's equivalent to a 16mm f2.8 lens that is optimized for 4x magnification so is pretty much perfect for variety shots. The large aperture means freedom from diffraction effects. The drawback is the need for more images in the stack. This was done with 5 images...Ray

[Amadauss]

[QUOTE=ray_parkhurst;139692]It looks to me like you need to do some stacking of the image. The sharpness of the in-focus areas is good, but the depth of field of the microscope is not sufficient to give a critically-sharp image. This is actually a good thing, indicating the microscope is capable of reasonably high resolution. Probably if you take another shot focused on the field, the stack would come out very nice...Ray


Thanks Ray, I have stacking software and will give it a try. Will post the pic.

[Amadauss]

My last few posts have gone unanswered so I think this thread has worn out its welcome. However, I will answer my question for anyone who is curious...the last photo was taken with a Nikon CF Plan 4x 0.13 objective mounted on the bellows in place of the 75ARD1. It's not the best one in Nikon's line but it's equivalent to a 16mm f2.8 lens that is optimized for 4x magnification so is pretty much perfect for variety shots. The large aperture means freedom from diffraction effects. The drawback is the need for more images in the stack. This was done with 5 images...Ray

Ray, that last close Mint mark of D looks real good. a 5 stack and got to say you could have probably done a few more because the top of the D looks a little out of focus towards the coin body. And the light was reflecting off that area also. Your lighting is coming from the top of the coin.

You aren't putting anything into photoshop are you? You could probably fix that with it.

And I think when you start talking about stacking, most here might not be sure or have the software to accomplish.

[ray_parkhurst]

Ray, that last close Mint mark of D looks real good. a 5 stack and got to say you could have probably done a few more because the top of the D looks a little out of focus towards the coin body. And the light was reflecting off that area also.

You aren't putting anything into photoshop are you?

And I think when you start talking about stacking, most here might not be sure or have the software to accomplish.

Yeah, I figured that might be a little much. But this was prompted by Chuck's question about what he needs to get highest quality images with the bellows. The 75ARD1 can give excellent results for full-coin pics of Lincoln Cents without stacking. But to get highest quality shots of varieties, stacking is required. It's actually not that difficult, and the software I use is free and has a Yahoo (or maybe Google) group associated with it so plenty of support from the guy who wrote the program. There is a lot of neat stuff you can do with focus stacking...Ray

[ray_parkhurst]

...You aren't putting anything into photoshop are you? You could probably fix that with it...

No, I'm not a photoshop guy. Always wanted to learn but ultimately I don't try to fix anything except overall levels and such. I recently saw a coin photo that I thought was almost hopeless turned into a thing of beauty with photoshop. Dark areas lightened without messing up the rest of the image, sharpening applied to just the right level, etc. Made me want to learn how to use the tool but ultimately I try to balance my shots best I can and minimize the post-processing...Ray

[Amadauss]

It is a great tool to change lighting and shadows. Use it every day on faces and hair mostly and have been playing around with it for coins. Have a pic from Karah I am going to play with tomorrow. Will post both pics.

[ray_parkhurst]

I've made a transition from my Nikon D7000 to a Canon T2i. I shot the next coin in the roll (#9) using the Canon.

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0008_01.jpg
http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0009_01.jpg

[RWBILLER]

Wow!!!!
Rog

[lara4228]

Forgive me Ray, this thread has been so interesting and useful.

What was your original question that hasn't been answered?

Lara

[Maineman750]

What was your original question that hasn't been answered?

Lara


There was no question Lara, this is the General Discussion forum :tinysmile_hmm_t:

[ray_parkhurst]

Here is coin #10 from the roll, imaged with the Canon T2i. I'm getting used to the workflow with the Canon.

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0052_01.jpg
http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0053_01.jpg

[ray_parkhurst]

Here are 3 more. Just 6 to go...Ray

#11
http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0056_01.jpg
http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0057_01.jpg

#12
http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0058_01.jpg
http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0059_01.jpg

#13
http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0060_01.jpg
http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0061_01.jpg

[BadThad]

Simply excellent pictures....the deal is done IMO! These are all-out professional level results.

[lara4228]

There was no question Lara, this is the General Discussion forum :tinysmile_hmm_t:

Roger on Post #76 he mentions something about questions going unanswered and welcome being worn out.

Lara

[Maineman750]

Gotcha Lara...one post up and you would have seen the question :Anyone care to guess what this was taken with? :LOL_Hair:

[sonyaonya]

Thanks for the info. I liked your coin so much that I wanted to see what he'd look like with a 'face lift' so I gave him one. This is what I ended up with.

[ray_parkhurst]

Haa! Cool, but points out how easy it would be to deceive with just a bit of retouching. Came out nice though...Ray