My Adventure in Pictures
Click to view full-size image.
Related topics
|
|
|
|
Claude, Thanks for the compliment! I'm really happy with how the ring turned out, and I can tell you that my fiancé will barely part with it long enough for me to examine it (I still feel compelled to play with it occasionally). The diamond is a .78 D, VS1, SuperbCert I purchased directly through Barry (I'd recommend him to anyone). The setting is a fairly simple "classic Tiffany-style" 18K yellow gold shank with platinum prongs, and is from Stuller (a pretty big distributor of "non-designer" settings). The style I chose is model 140309H and the code they use for the metals used would be 18KY (18K yellow/platinum). The setting is also available in various other metals, like 14K yellow or white gold (with palladium prongs), 18K white gold (platinum prongs), and all platinum. The "H" in the model number denotes a "heavy shank" design, and the same basic style is also available in a regular weight (140309), light weight (140309L), and pre-notched (140309N). I'd be hesitant to get the lighter weight versions though, as even the "heavy" model isn't exactly a beefy ring. When my jeweler received the setting I had a look at it and thought the prongs were a bit higher off the ring than I'd like, so I asked him to set it "as low as possible" in the prongs, which he did a fantastic job accomplishing, so the prongs in the pictures I've posted are actually a bit shorter than you would expect to see in a "stock" version of the ring. Btw, I ended up paying less than $250 for the ring (including having the stone set), so another bonus of this setting is that it's quite economical relative to a lot of engagement settings. Hope this helps... -Tim |
|
|
|
|
NICE pictures Tim!! I love looking at pictures of diamonds..what girl doesn't?
 How did you snap the shots? I am hoping that once we get our ring finished and it's official, I can take some pictures fairly easily with my digital camera. It's a Sony P71 with 6x optical zoom and can get in pretty close, but I might do a magnifying glass if I can't get sharp shots. I'm still learning how to use the camera with closeups but since it's digital, I can see fairly quickly what looks WRONG when enlarged, thank goodness...not like film. I really like Stuller's settings as well. We were considering one that is similar to one that another poster had..he bought the diamond from Rhino at GOG and then they posted the shot on the product page at GOG, it was a split-4 prong head on a basic solitaire setting similar to yours. It was gorgeous! I think the stone was a H&A or maybe an 8star. Stunning. Anyway congrats and again..good shots!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
Note: Had to resize that "test" picture above to fix the margins in this thread, so don't be surprised if it's much smaller than it used to be. :) The test was a success though, and I now see that it's possible to post a 400KB+ picture (as long as it's hosted on another site). Thanks for the kind words, Mara! I'm glad you enjoyed the pictures! I must confess the quality of the pictures is mostly dumb luck. :) I was using an Olympus D-520Z digital camera, which is a pretty "basic" 2.0 megapixel point-and-shoot camera (a Christmas present my fiancé received from her brother this year). As you probably already know, it's pretty difficult to get really good shots of diamonds. IMO the images never really capture the true brilliance and colors of the diamond (although sca_24s cool pictures had some pretty incredible pyrotechnics). The few pictures that I posted were the best of maybe thirty or forty shots I took with the digital camera. Several of them came out over/under exposed or blurry, but a few came out pretty well. I think it's safe to say that if I had been using up film, I would have never kept trying for the good shots. I agree with you that it's awfully nice to have those benefits that come with being able to snap pics without wasting film. :) I think the best pictures I took were the result of using the "macro" (close-up) function of the camera in conjunction with the longest optical zoom possible with the Olympus (3X). The ring was at a distance of probably 10 inches or so, and the zoom was cranked all the way. I tried a combination of flash photos and ambient incandescent lighting, but the flash pictures seemed to come out the best. I'm still planning on taking some more pics using some halogen lights I have available, so more pictures may be coming. :) I would caution you that, like my fiancé's Olympus, your camera appears to have a 3X optical, 2X digital zoom (for a combined 6x "digital-enhanced" zoom level), so you'll probably want to stay with the 3x function to ensure the best image quality (this is based on a quick browse of Sony's site to get the zoom specs on the P71). I say this because optical zooms actually "get you closer" to the subject, while digital zooms essentially just narrow the field of view, so the pixels just get bigger and clunkier with no real image enhancement. Since your camera is a 3 megapixel model, there's a good chance you may even be able to get sharper pics than mine without too much effort, assuming your macro function allows you to get nice and close to the ring. Additionally, if you get really creative you may be able to monkey with the shutter speed and get some nice shots without using the flash at all, which may lead to some interesting results. As far as the Stuller setting goes, in all honesty I sort of just stumbled across it during my diamond search. I was at a local jewelry store and had finished up looking at their on-hand diamonds (no winners there), and was browsing the settings they had in the display case when I saw the Stuller model. I knew that my fiancé wanted a plain/simple yellow gold setting, and I have my own fondness for six-prong Tiffany's, so when I saw the setting in the case I immediately focused on it. The one they had on display was 14K yellow gold with palladium prongs so I didn't get that one, but I took down the model number and asked my normal jeweler to order it in for me in the 18K/platinum. I really like the look of it, and at under $250 for 18K/platinum (including setting the stone), it's hard to knock. Sometimes I think the prongs are a bit on the beefy side, but I think that's a result of me asking to have the diamond set so low in the setting. Besides, having that much platinum holding the diamond securely in place gives me a little extra piece of mind, so I don't mind it too much. She loves it regardless, which is really what's important.... :) That's all I have. I look forward to seeing some pics of your ring when it's finished! I don't have a whole lot of photography experience, but be sure to let me know if I might be able to give you any tips when you get ready to preserve the ring in pictures. -Tim |
|
|
|
|
Thanks everyone! Wow, I'm surprised to see so much new life in this thread from so long ago. Thanks! Giangi, I couldn't have asked for a better segue than your question! Leonid may start to get upset at my pics cluttering up the servers but I have a fresh batch ready to go, so now seems like a good time.  -Tim |