Here's ONE shot I managed to take of my ring (on a fencepost at my parents' home, no less)...it has zero fluorescense but kinda looks like it has some blue in this shot. ETA: actually, that's an old rusted gate hitch which is apparently a size 7, LOL! Sorry the pic is so small...I'm always working on posting better pics...maybe it's my computer? Anyway, enjoy!Date: 10/3/2006 11:23:56 PM
Author: Molly1024
Rhino, my ring is a square radiant cut. Thanks!
Hey, Jon, thanks for the note (and the compliment)! The photos were taken in Digital Macro Mode with my Canon 550SD Digital Elph. I got it strictly because of all the great photos I''d seen here on PS taken with Canons!Date: 10/3/2006 11:12:29 PM
Author: Rhino
Lynn...YAWZA!!! That 2nd shot about took my eye out.
What camera are you using?!? I really like it''s macro.![]()
I''ve gotten big flares and little sparkles... both on camera.... when I focus on the diamond and then let the flares in, they''re smaller and more pinpoint - sometimes. Fewer of the big huge flares that went like several inches as when I focused ON the flare itself. I have gotten very intense fire that isn''t flared out all over though. I don''t have any pictures on this, my laptop, but on my thread I have a ton of fire shots. There are fire shots on ALL 6 pages of this thread.... mostly 1,3,4,5, but all have at least a couple.Date: 10/4/2006 1:13:21 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
2. One difference here in the eye / lens is that we do not tend to get as much of the over exposed ''flair'' with our eyes as a lens does. Possibly the better the lens, the less flair.
Some of you may remeber and even link to the thread where someone noticed fire reduced when they got their new glasses and specs perscription - their diamond lost some fire. This is a real effect - and one that you can deliberately fake by focussing at a point well behind the diamond - eg the ground. Notice the flairs often get bigger.
Just beautiful Molly. Usually in radiants you get lots of smaller flashes with a crushed ice look but I see some that can throw off broad flash too depending on how the pavilion is cut. When you view yours daily does it have more of a crushed ice look or do you think broader chunkier flashes? In those pics it looks like you caught some good broad flash which I like.Date: 10/3/2006 11:23:56 PM
Author: Molly1024
Rhino, my ring is a square radiant cut. Thanks!
What I believe is causing this is a combination of things. The temperature of the light combined with the intensity of its illumination. Something I''ve been noting as I do observations in various environments that feature spot lighting is ... The stronger the light source the darker the body appearance, yet the more intense the flashes and flares that emanate from the stone (talking typical tolkowsky type proportsions and those outside of it that produce similar optics and particularly most or all stones I''ve seen with solid reflector images). Direct sunlight is perhaps the strongest spot light we''ll ever find and as you pointed out the body goes dark and as observed in these pictures and also in the fire video I did as well. And yes ... this is something I see.Date: 10/4/2006 1:13:21 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Great shots.
A couple of observations:
Most of these shots were done in direct sunlight.
Notice how the body of the diamonds are dark in most shots (except where the whole diamond is on fire or a ball of over exposure).
The shots on the mirror / glass with a dark background that you took Ellen - in general show the diamond is really bright, where as most of the shots where there is a lot of very bright areas in the field of view show the diamond as having less burned out total sparkles, and more dark body color. The reflections in the glass/ mirror show the diamond as a fair bit darker.
LynnB most of yours show dark body color away from the bright sparkles too.
Rasberry the middle shot of your group of 3 allows us to see the dark body color too.
So what is causing this?
And do we see this when we look?
This is true as the stone is then overexposed. However common folk don''t wear non reflective black backgrounds behind their diamond. So in essence this is reversing what you''re talking about because the background behind most engagement rings is a neutral color and not black or for that matter white. Perhaps closer to white but not bright white.In general there have been many ''panic'' threads over the past 5 years from consumers who are shocked that their supa doopa new ideal cut looks dark in direct sun light.
1. I think the biggest variable is the back ground color. Non reflective black makes the diamonds non sparkling body look and photograph brighter over all.
An interesting experiment would be to take a tolkowsky stone view it in direct sunlight or a spot lighting environment which causes the body to go dark. Then observe the same diamond in the same lighting with a white background and observe the body appearance. Then a flat black background and observe the body appearance. I''ll do it tomorrow and tell you what I see.A white background makes the diamond body look darker.
I agree. When we blur our vision we will see more of the flare. If you bring a stone akin to the wonderful photographs that people have been sharing here into direct sunlight you''ll see and observe strong fire of course BUT ... and this is to everyone here wearing a diamond. Squint your eyes as you look down on the fire. As you do that your eye will not be able to focus on the diamond as it would if it were open normally but the squinting (out of focus eyes) causes the flares to extent out such to the point that it looks akin to the photographs.2. One difference here in the eye / lens is that we do not tend to get as much of the over exposed ''flair'' with our eyes as a lens does. Possibly the better the lens, the less flair.
Some of you may remeber and even link to the thread where someone noticed fire reduced when they got their new glasses and specs perscription - their diamond lost some fire. This is a real effect - and one that you can deliberately fake by focussing at a point well behind the diamond - eg the ground. Notice the flairs often get bigger.
It would be interesting to see photo''s with dark and bright backgrounds, and in focus / out of focus shots![]()
Ew ... another Canon. This forum is good for Canon''s business! I''m also a Canon nut.Date: 10/4/2006 8:42:19 PM
Author: Lynn B
Hey, Jon, thanks for the note (and the compliment)! The photos were taken in Digital Macro Mode with my Canon 550SD Digital Elph. I got it strictly because of all the great photos I''d seen here on PS taken with Canons!Date: 10/3/2006 11:12:29 PM
Author: Rhino
Lynn...YAWZA!!! That 2nd shot about took my eye out.
What camera are you using?!? I really like it''s macro.![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Lynn
Date: 10/5/2006 1:26:54 AM
Author: Rhino
Date: 10/3/2006 11:23:56 PM
Author: Molly1024
Rhino, my ring is a square radiant cut. Thanks!
Just beautiful Molly. Usually in radiants you get lots of smaller flashes with a crushed ice look but I see some that can throw off broad flash too depending on how the pavilion is cut. When you view yours daily does it have more of a crushed ice look or do you think broader chunkier flashes? In those pics it looks like you caught some good broad flash which I like.![]()
haha - yes, but I do have visitiation rights and in fact am going to go visit it today!Date: 10/5/2006 12:55:24 AM
Author: Scott 00
CB,
Isnt that the worst when you cant play with your pet rock?? I was separated from mine for like 6 weeks! But dont worry I am sure its being well cared for, in not played with as lovingly as you do![]()