Girl's best friend
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 6:10 pmA whopping 3 diamonds on a ring.
Canon 5D
180 Macro L
1 Studio Light
2 make shift reflector
[/img]
Canon 5D
180 Macro L
1 Studio Light
2 make shift reflector
[/img]
DSLRUsers.com
A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
https://www.dslrusers.com/
Girl's best friend
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 6:10 pmPosted: Wed May 03, 2006 6:12 pmNice ring, it looks a little dirty and I think the lighting could be better, but I'd say it would have most the girls drooling.
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 6:19 pmDust bunnies, I guess that would make the stones an SI quality 
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 6:46 pmBeautiful looking ring and nice shot, but the blue tac really distracts from it in my opinion, perhaps a bit of PP would help!?
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 7:42 pmKatie would like to know...
who's is it ?
Is it for sale ?
Do you have a more top down view of it ?
(she loves rings).
who's is it ?
Is it for sale ?
Do you have a more top down view of it ?
(she loves rings).
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 9:17 pmAlpha_7 wrote:Katie would like to know...
who's is it ?
Is it for sale ?
Do you have a more top down view of it ?
(she loves rings).
Tell Katie: It's fake!
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 9:20 pmWhat does the engraving say?
Hi
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 9:58 pmHi
The dirt on the background belongs to the white paper i used as a background.
The dirt on the diamonds are "inclusions". Real diamonds have inclusions. If yours do not have inclusions, they are not real diamonds - probably CZ.
Each of the stone is enough to buy you a 2 bedroom house. Unfortunately, they don't belong to me. The ring was made inhouse to accomodate the 3 stones (each more than 2 carat).
The blue showed the "fire" coming out of the stone. It is a good indicator that the cut and clarity are top grade. Not the blue tac of course.
Yes, i do have a top view. Top view is the most difficult to photograph.
regards,
Arthur
The dirt on the background belongs to the white paper i used as a background.
The dirt on the diamonds are "inclusions". Real diamonds have inclusions. If yours do not have inclusions, they are not real diamonds - probably CZ.
Each of the stone is enough to buy you a 2 bedroom house. Unfortunately, they don't belong to me. The ring was made inhouse to accomodate the 3 stones (each more than 2 carat).
The blue showed the "fire" coming out of the stone. It is a good indicator that the cut and clarity are top grade. Not the blue tac of course.
Yes, i do have a top view. Top view is the most difficult to photograph.
regards,
Arthur
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 10:39 pmThanks Arthur, that's one huge ring - "my girl has good taste".
Wowsa! (I find shooting top down a challenge too!).
Wowsa! (I find shooting top down a challenge too!).
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 10:59 pmYeesh, more than 6 carats of diamonds? If the white balance is correct, they look pretty white too!
Those sparklies seem to increase exponentially in price after about 0.75 carats (yes, I know way too much about clarity, cut and colour after doing my research)
Nice pic though! I have to take updated photos of my fiancee's ring. Didn't have my D70s when she got it, so all I have are dodgy p&s pics
Those sparklies seem to increase exponentially in price after about 0.75 carats (yes, I know way too much about clarity, cut and colour after doing my research)
Nice pic though! I have to take updated photos of my fiancee's ring. Didn't have my D70s when she got it, so all I have are dodgy p&s pics
Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 2:46 amVery classy ring & good picture... but i agree, the bluetac's gotta go... it doesn't suit this magnificant ring at all.
Some light refracting through the diamonds would produce some spectactular colours too... would have been a great contrast to the majority of whites & greys.
Some light refracting through the diamonds would produce some spectactular colours too... would have been a great contrast to the majority of whites & greys.
Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 3:33 amwasn't sure if it was inclusions at first or distinct dust bunnies
blue tac definitely has to go and I think you need more lighting in the background as the overall image is rather dull. I know the focus is on the diamonds, but the ring itself should complement that. You get the "wow" factor with the diamonds, then the lack of shine in the ring itself brings the image down.
Also what f stop did you use? I'd be tempted to increase it so that the entire ring is tack sharp.
If you can, only use a very small amount of blue tac to hold the ring up.
For some ideas, have a look at the jewellery sites like Georg Jensen, Tiffany & Co (*shudder*), etc
blue tac definitely has to go and I think you need more lighting in the background as the overall image is rather dull. I know the focus is on the diamonds, but the ring itself should complement that. You get the "wow" factor with the diamonds, then the lack of shine in the ring itself brings the image down.
Also what f stop did you use? I'd be tempted to increase it so that the entire ring is tack sharp.
If you can, only use a very small amount of blue tac to hold the ring up.
For some ideas, have a look at the jewellery sites like Georg Jensen, Tiffany & Co (*shudder*), etc