![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
| Diamond Jewelry Forums
|
|||
|
| |
||
» Diamond Prices and Grading »
» RockyTalky
» |
|
![]() |
Which is the better daylight photo? |
![]() |
| P: 1/31/2005 11:28:03 PM | |
Soon Rough Rock Total Posts: 4 Last Post: 2/2/2005 Member Since: 1/31/2005 |
Hi Please advise on 3 daylight photos of the same stone attached here - what is right and what is wrong and how can they be improved. Thank you. Soon. No.1 ![]() No.2 ![]() No. 3 ![]()
Soon |
| Posted: 1/31/2005 11:28:03 PM | |
![]() |
There are 16 replies to this message. There are 16 replies on this page. |
![]() |
| P: 1/31/2005 11:47:41 PM | |
ICAA Rough Rock Total Posts: 77 Last Post: 7/8/2005 Member Since: 1/11/2005 |
#2 & #3 seem overexposed to me. I prefer #1 because it shows the true nature of the stone. That being said, at such high zoom, I am sure it would face up nicely. Out of curiosity, do you know the depth of that stone? It appears to have a fisheye.
|
| Posted: 1/31/2005 11:47:41 PM | |
| P: 1/31/2005 11:54:26 PM | |
Soon Rough Rock Total Posts: 4 Last Post: 2/2/2005 Member Since: 1/31/2005 |
Hi The depth of the stone is 3.55. Soon |
| Posted: 1/31/2005 11:54:26 PM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 12:06:00 AM | |
|
strmrdr Ideal Rock Total Posts: 23,296 Last Post: 10/9/2009 Member Since: 11/1/2003 |
#1 the better picture. 2 and 3 the exposure wasnt right or there was too much light. In the first picture one side of the stone is getting more light than the rest. Trying for more even lighting will help. ........... Karl has joined the diamond trade and is now posting as Karl_K |
| Posted: 2/1/2005 12:06:00 AM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 1:23:35 AM | |
ICAA Rough Rock Total Posts: 77 Last Post: 7/8/2005 Member Since: 1/11/2005 |
Date: 1/31/2005 11:54:26 PM Author: Soon Hi The depth of the stone is 3.55. Heh, I was thinking more the percentage. Did you have all the relevant specs on the stone? Looks like an SI stone possibly?
|
| Posted: 2/1/2005 1:23:35 AM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 11:03:42 AM | |
|
Garry H (Cut Nut) Ideal Rock Total Posts: 11,587 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 8/16/2000 |
Backlight is good for inclusions, but it is bad for cut beauty
Garry Holloway FGAA DipDT |
| Posted: 2/1/2005 11:03:42 AM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 11:13:53 AM | |
|
valeria101 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 14,048 Last Post: 4/30/2006 Member Since: 8/29/2003 |
These make great substitutes for the clarity plots... but it takes fantesy to associate the futuristic "tatoo design" with a diamond, in my opinion. Face down photos are great adds for terrific optical symmetry and H&A, but when those are not the issue... what do these tell me (aside clarity) ?
Ana "The greatest experts are only as good as the sum total of what they have seen." [Souren Melikian] |
| Posted: 2/1/2005 11:13:53 AM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 11:19:01 AM | |
|
Hest88 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 3,681 Last Post: 11/24/2009 Member Since: 1/22/2003 |
I like the first one best.
|
| Posted: 2/1/2005 11:19:01 AM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 11:26:25 AM | |
|
Garry H (Cut Nut) Ideal Rock Total Posts: 11,587 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 8/16/2000 |
This took 3 minutes and is pretty rough. Need that depth % and girdle thickness helps. A long way from a fisheye. ![]() Garry Holloway FGAA DipDT |
| Posted: 2/1/2005 11:26:25 AM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 11:39:56 AM | |
|
Rhino Ideal Rock Total Posts: 4,866 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 3/29/2001 |
Gary ... you're such a show-off.
Rhino |
| Posted: 2/1/2005 11:39:56 AM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 11:43:28 AM | |
|
valeria101 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 14,048 Last Post: 4/30/2006 Member Since: 8/29/2003 |
Date: 2/1/2005 11:26:25 AM Author: Garry H (Cut Nut) This took 3 minutes and is pretty rough. Wait a minute... even secondary reflections seem to match to a tee. Why is it "rough" just because it took so little time ![]() Ana "The greatest experts are only as good as the sum total of what they have seen." [Souren Melikian] |
| Posted: 2/1/2005 11:43:28 AM | |
| P: 2/1/2005 7:43:40 PM | |
Soon Rough Rock Total Posts: 4 Last Post: 2/2/2005 Member Since: 1/31/2005 |
Thanks to all your input. So, should I use backlight or not? What are you guys looking for in a daylight picture? Please be specific. Thanks. Soon |
| Posted: 2/1/2005 7:43:40 PM | |
| P: 2/2/2005 3:32:08 AM | |
|
Garry H (Cut Nut) Ideal Rock Total Posts: 11,587 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 8/16/2000 |
Back light for identifying inclusions No back light at all to see how good the light return is (unless your initials are DL) What are the stones dimensions and proportions? Garry Holloway FGAA DipDT |
| Posted: 2/2/2005 3:32:08 AM | |
| P: 2/2/2005 4:06:18 AM | |
|
DiaGem Ideal Rock Total Posts: 3,927 Last Post: 11/21/2009 Member Since: 10/21/2004 |
Please do not get offended, Is this a real diamond??? Cause if it is, the picture does not complement it!!! Just curious, ********************** |
| Posted: 2/2/2005 4:06:18 AM | |
| P: 2/2/2005 5:03:31 AM | |
|
lostdog Cut Rock Total Posts: 179 Last Post: 7/15/2005 Member Since: 12/15/2004 |
Inclusions? Or dust?
|
| Posted: 2/2/2005 5:03:31 AM | |
| P: 2/2/2005 6:27:32 PM | |
Soon Rough Rock Total Posts: 4 Last Post: 2/2/2005 Member Since: 1/31/2005 |
It's a real one. My lens is kinda sharp - it will show any dust, inclusion or flaws on the stone. What do buyers, appraisers or manufacturers or labs looking for in a daylight photo? Do they want to see a realistic or a 'pretty-looking' one which i can use software to touch up.
Soon |
| Posted: 2/2/2005 6:27:32 PM | |
| P: 2/9/2005 3:04:58 AM | |
|
lostdog Cut Rock Total Posts: 179 Last Post: 7/15/2005 Member Since: 12/15/2004 |
If you are using these to sell, do not electronically "touch up" the diamond image. I wouldn't trust any source that I caught doing that, even if it was just removing dust.
|
| Posted: 2/9/2005 3:04:58 AM | |
|
|
Next Page |
Contact Us | Back Home | Privacy Statement | Forum Agreement | Forum Policies | |
| Ideal BB Version: 0.1.5.4.beta1 | Message forum software powered by the Ideal BB |
Pricescope -
Knowledge -
Diamond Prices -
Tools -
Resources -
About
© 2000-2009 Pricescope. Terms of Use Privacy Policy Disclaimer
forum archives