How to photograph your collection

[bnz. 42]

My try

[Robert P.]

Excellent photos. A little more light directed at the bottom of the holders would be optimum. Still, excellent.

Robert

[bnz. 42]

one more

[Robert P.]

Outstanding display! What, no KC?

Robert

[bnz. 42]

Here is my favorite

[Marc Garlasco]

You call those COMMON!?!?!

[Robert P.]

OK, everything we've seen is in mint condition, the tdb, the numbered PAB, even the belt and buckle! Your photos are awesome, as are the tunics you're displaying. Very nice , very nice.

Robert

[alphie5002]

I just found this and found it be extremely helpful. My camera isn't a piece of crap after all. Thanks a bunch guys!

[mcmike]

Originally Posted by Anthony N

Just tried all the white balance settings & this one is by far the best, Incandescent:

That is one hell of a picture. Thanks to Marc for this discussion, and to you for venturing to show your effort. Well worth it!

[Roglebk]

Here is my lightbox setup, pretty small but enough as a EKII collector. Lights are from that "big Swedish furniture company" and are called "Inreda" (bookcase/ picture lighting). To get the right white balance i use a white paper inside the box and manually lock the balance, most modern cameras got this function. Grey background fabric seems to work the best with crosses. Not using a camera stand but for those knife sharp pics with slow shutter speed it is neccesary. As a underwater photographer i found a cheap way of making softboxes for flashes and lights. Use frosted plastic milk bottles, they can be cut up to fit most flashes and lights.

[bnz. 42]

I received a few PMs and emails asking about the background setup. Here it is:




Results:

[marcotk]

Can anyone care to elaborate on the set up presented by bnz? What is what in that array of lights.. why they are in the position and orientation they are.. What they are, how they are, and so on..

These photos are top quality!

Thanks!

[bobcam1]

The lights are good, standard photographic lights. They point into those reflective umbrellas, so that the light is softened, and reflected back onto the subject. The reason for this, is so that no harsh shadows are cast onto the subject.
This makes for a broad, even lighting with few, if any, hotspots.

bnz's setup is very nice, as is evidenced by his stellar photos, but the only thing that I would add is a backlight, which separates the subject from the background, by putting a rim of light onto the back of the subject being photographed. This would be more noticeable against a darker background, but works well with a white background, as well.....

Cheers,
Bob.

[bobcam1]

The lights are good, standard photographic lights. They point into those reflective umbrellas, so that the light is softened, and reflected back onto the subject. The reason for this, is so that no harsh shadows are cast onto the subject.
This makes for a broad, even lighting with few, if any, hotspots.

bnz's setup is very nice, as is evidenced by his stellar photos, but the only thing that I would add is a high backlight, which separates the subject from the background, by putting a rim of light onto the back of the subject being photographed. This would be more noticeable against a darker background, but works well with a white background, as well.....

Cheers,
Bob.

[marcotk]

bob,

Thanks a lot, great wisdom! But now.. why is the brightest light not "reflected back"?
Is the "black-squared" one supposed to be equivalent to the other "direct" light?
Meaning.. is the setup willingly: [front] [back] [back] [front] ?? (front/back meaning where it is pointed?)

Why are there those 2 little lights on the floor?

I guess my question can be summed up as: "is it random" or not the way the lights are positioned/ortiented?!

I'd like to derive some general guidelines so that I can recreate the same effects but with maybe fewer lights..

Thanks again