James Allen pictures

[I Love Carats]

Under how much magnification are James Allens photos with and without the loupe? Thanks!

 

[chrono]

My guess is 10x magnification. How about emailing or calling JA with that question?

 

[Lorelei]

I believe it is 10X magnification.

 

[Moh 10]

It depends on the original size of the diamond.

I just measured a couple of JA round images on my 17' monitor without using his loupe tool.

A 0.21 carat measured 28 mm in diameter on my screen and it is 3.9 mm in real life. So the magnification is about 7x.

A 5 carat measured 43 mm on my screen and it is 10.9 mm in real life. So the magnification is about 4x.

Also, If you have a larger monitor than I and you are using full screen the magnification may be greater, and less for a smaller screen.


I don't yet know about that loupe tool.
I'll try to measure it.

 

[Moh 10]

I just measured the loupe tool.

I picked an ideal cut 1 carat stone.

Without the loupe tool the length of an arrow was 14 mm.

With the loupe tool the length was 30 mm.


So the loupe tool magnifies it additionally about 2x.

 

[chrono]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:30:30 PM
Author: Moh 10
I just measured the loupe tool.

I picked an ideal cut 1 carat stone.

Without the loupe tool the length of an arrow was 14 mm.

With the loupe tool the length was 30 mm.


So the loupe tool magnifies it additionally about 2x.

Moh,
Is this consistant with stones of other sizes? How does it play out with a monitor that displays a larger/smaller picture?

 

[Moh 10]

I do not know, but you can measure it if you have a ruler and a different size monitor and want to take the time.

 

[Lula]

Date: 7/25/2009 2:11:52 PM
Author: Moh 10
It depends on the original size of the diamond.


I just measured a couple of JA round images on my 17' monitor without using his loupe tool.


A 0.21 carat measured 28 mm in diameter on my screen and it is 3.9 mm in real life. So the magnification is about 7x.


A 5 carat measured 43 mm on my screen and it is 10.9 mm in real life. So the magnification is about 4x.


Also, If you have a larger monitor than I and you are using full screen the magnification may be greater, and less for a smaller screen.



I don't yet know about that loupe tool.

I'll try to measure it.

Moh, you are such a geek! Very clever! I would never think to do this!

 

[Moh 10]

Aw shucks. It's a disease, I'll tell ya.

 

[marcy]

I change my zoom level until the on screen image matches the size of the diamond then use the loop.

 

[Moh 10]

News Flash.

Hey, you know those "40x" Whiteflash pics? . . .

I just measured two ACAs and those enlarged pics are NOT 40x.
They are not even the same magnification, which is fine but then they should not all say 40x.

A 3 carat measured 74 mm on my screen, but is 9.36 mm in real life for a magnification of about 8x.

A 0.27 ACA measured 73 mm on my screen, but is 4.14 mm in real life, for a magnification of about 18x.

I wonder why they call them 40x?

 

[chrono]

Ewww...good thing I''m not eating anything as I see you opened your can of worms.

 

[strmrdr]

10x magnification and 10x life size are 2 different things when it comes to images.
The term magnification is as abused as the term ideal.

10X magnification is the resolving power of the optics.
You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it is still a 10x magnification image.

 

[strmrdr]

For example this is a 10x magnification image

 

[strmrdr]

This is also a 10x magnification image.

 

[Moh 10]

Date: 7/25/2009 3:37:20 PM
Author: strmrdr


You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it is still a 10x magnification image.

Huh?

I disagree.

 

[strmrdr]

The way the JA image viewer works is it is one large image and you view it at 2 different sizes.
With the older viewer you could actually download the full image which I liked a lot.
The new one you cant because of problems with image theft.
The actual magnification is around 10x.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/25/2009 3:43:52 PM
Author: Moh 10

Date: 7/25/2009 3:37:20 PM

Author: strmrdr



You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it is still a 10x magnification image.

Huh?

I disagree.

digital zoom which is what increasing the size of the image does, does not increase the resolving power of the optics which is magnification.
There is no added information like there would be if you increased the optical magnification.

 

[Moh 10]

If an object is 5 mm in real life and the image on my screen measures 15 mm, the magnification is 3x.

If you blow up the pic so it measures 30 mm the magnification is 6x.

The ratio or magnification that the photographer obtained when actually using the camera in not relevant when determining the magnification of a final print.

In macrophotography we talk of 1:1.
That is when the image on the film or CCD is the same size as the subject.

Now when we print it all bets are off.
You can print is 1 inch or 100 inches.
That changes the magnification.

Still the image was taken at 1:1.

Naturally the more you blow up the same image the less sharp it appears.

 

[Moh 10]

Date: 7/25/2009 3:50:59 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 7/25/2009 3:43:52 PM

Author: Moh 10

Date: 7/25/2009 3:37:20 PM


Author: strmrdr




You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it is still a 10x magnification image.

Huh?

I disagree.

digital zoom which is what increasing the size of the image does, does not increase the resolving power of the optics which is magnification.

There is no added information like there would be if you increased the optical magnification.

Wrong.
Resolving power of optics is independent of magnification.

I can buy a 1000x microscope for $30 at Toys-R-Us or one for $200,000 from Zeiss, Germany.
Same magnification.
Different resolution, or resolving power of the optics.

You'll see the same thing through both except the $30 one will look like someone rubbed vaseline over the lenses when compared to the Zeiss.

I can buy a 10x loupe for $2 to $500 and you will see more detail with the $500 one - same magnification more resolution.

 

[strmrdr]

No matter how much you blow up this 20x image I stole from Todd...
It will not contain the information of the following 60x image.

 

[strmrdr]

60x sample....

 

[I Love Carats]

Wow.

So if I look at JA picture and try and tell someone else the picture is ____ as big as the actual diamond, how would i fill that in?

 

[stone-cold11]

Just tell him the dimension of the actual stone vs the image stone. Do the math.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/25/2009 3:56:10 PM
Author: Moh 10
Wrong.

Resolving power of optics is independent of magnification.


I can buy a 1000x microscope for $30 at Toys-R-Us or one for $200,000 from Zeiss, Germany.

Same magnification.

Different resolution, or resolving power of the optics.


You'll see the same thing through both except the $30 one will look like someone rubbed vaseline over the lenses when compared to the Zeiss.


I can buy a 10x loupe for $2 to $500 and you will see more detail with the $500 one - same magnification more resolution.

There are several other factors that go into it but comparing bad optics to good is not an answer.

A 10x optical magnification image with a zeiss will not have as much information as 1000x optical magnification with a zeis no matter how large you blow up the 10x image.

 

[Moh 10]

Date: 7/25/2009 4:28:26 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 7/25/2009 3:56:10 PM

Author: Moh 10

Wrong.


Resolving power of optics is independent of magnification.



I can buy a 1000x microscope for $30 at Toys-R-Us or one for $200,000 from Zeiss, Germany.


Same magnification.


Different resolution, or resolving power of the optics.



You''ll see the same thing through both except the $30 one will look like someone rubbed vaseline over the lenses when compared to the Zeiss.



I can buy a 10x loupe for $2 to $500 and you will see more detail with the $500 one - same magnification more resolution.

There are several other factors that go into it but comparing bad optics to good is not an answer.


A 10x optical magnification image with a zeiss will not have as much information as 1000x optical magnification with a zeis no matter how large you blow up the 10x image.

I didn''t say it did.

 

[Moh 10]

Date: 7/25/2009 3:37:20 PM
Author: strmrdr


You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it is still a 10x magnification image.

Permit me to modify your statement. . .

You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it still {contains only the detail present in the original} 10x magnification image {even though the magnification is now 1,000x}.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/25/2009 4:36:04 PM
Author: Moh 10

Date: 7/25/2009 3:37:20 PM

Author: strmrdr



You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it is still a 10x magnification image.

Permit me to modify your statement. . .


You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it still {contains only the detail of the original} 10x magnification image {even though the magnification is now 1,000x}.

We are on the same page as far as what the image actually shows.
What bugs me is when 10x detail level images are called anything but 10x.

 

[Moh 10]

Date: 7/25/2009 4:42:27 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 7/25/2009 4:36:04 PM

Author: Moh 10

Date: 7/25/2009 3:37:20 PM


Author: strmrdr




You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it is still a 10x magnification image.

Permit me to modify your statement. . .



You can take an image taken at 10x and blow it up 1000 times life size and it still {contains only the detail of the original} 10x magnification image {even though the magnification is now 1,000x}.

We are on the same page as far as what the image actually shows.

What bugs me is when 10x level detail images are called anything but 10x.

I understand and I sympathize, but there is nothing we can do about that.

If many people are not aware that blowing up the same image may not result in revealing more detail that is not your problem.
You can educate them though about the difference between resolution and magnification.

But calling a 10-foot wide pic of a one carat diamond 10x is not accurate. (unless that is one shaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalow diamond) LOL.

Whiteflash's 40x pics are not 40x, unless you are viewing them on a huge 4-foot wide, or so, monitor.

They are of varying magnification depending on the size of the stone and the size of the viewer's monitor and its settings, and on my 17" monitor they are all under 20x.

 

[Allison D.]

Moh, it's an excellent question, and one my photography staff has gotten before, so they designed a graphic to help answer it.