Stir crazy lockdown macro.

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
1,794
632
Davidson, NC
OK, so I tried to duplicate SteveC's setup, more or less. This is what I got. the only processing I did in ACR was adjusting color temperature to make it look like a dime. Then I resized to fit the image size of his post.

IMG_2416.jpg


Then the 100% crop:

new100.jpg


It looks sharp to me.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,948
1,792
Yeah, you've got it nailed. :)

I've put a lot of effort into getting the lighting set up so I don't have to do too much color-fiddling in Gimp--but that's a totally different topic! Generally I can just focus, shoot, crop, do a circle-select, and get rid of the background. [I know that's more than you need to do for your purposes--I'm writing for the benefit of anyone reading this who might decide they want to do this on a large scale.]

Side note to others: I've found applying artificial sharpening tends to make things worse; when I see pics online I'll notice many of them have the "speckles" from over-sharpening. Of course, starting with an excellent lens/sensor makes it easy to avoid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
1,794
632
Davidson, NC
And just to push my luck, I decided to try a 1:1 magnification. (Though I was close before.) I was beginning to wonder whether I should just avoid that magnification. Apparently not. For this I used the ring light away from the lens, so as a side light. Who knows? Maybe it was the flat lighting that kept the earlier tests from looking sharp.

IMG_2421.jpg


And 100% crop:

one2one.jpg


Maybe tomorrow, I'll try the rings on the lens again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kodakrome

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
1,794
632
Davidson, NC
I decided to try the tubes before going to bed. This is at f/11, and just about 2:1 with 3 tubes. It's a little softer, but still usable. With more care, maybe I could focus more accurately and shoot at f/8 or maybe even f/5.6 for less diffraction. This is effectively a bit smaller than f/33.

IMG_2429.jpg


two2one.jpg
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,948
1,792
Cheapass ring light: Buy one of those makeup mirrors with the light all around the round mirror, and take the mirror out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,948
1,792
Somehow my other reply got lost.

I could see both of your "full dime" pictures being published (if someone wanted pictures of a common dime); the top 100% crop is certainly usable too. Sometimes collectors want to zero in on a particular feature (like an overdate or a mint mark, especially if the mint mark turns out to have been added on by some fraudster. (There are cases where a mint mark can hugely increase the value of a coin; e.g., any 1909 S cent [there were three different kinds] versus a 1909 cent of the same type is a huge difference, also an 1914 D cent versus a 1914 cent or a 1916 S versus 1916 dime.) With increasing sensor resolution, magnification is becoming less and less necessary (though sometimes it really is needed).

When your full image is three feet across on a computer monitor at 100%, you've got the coin under pretty good magnification from the start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Valvebounce

EOS R5
CR Pro
Apr 3, 2013
4,497
411
53
Isle of Wight
Hi Kodakrome.
Nice photo, ugly looking subject, the green ones I see are much less foreboding.

Cheers, Graham.

Warmer weather...bigger bugs.
This looks like a young lubber because it was small - less than 2 inches long. The ones I see in July and August are twice this size.