Working on better Jewelry Shots

canceled...

It looks like you added a lot of noise reduction. You definitely need a macro lens, or even just some cheap closeup filters for this shot. The quality would be one million times better.

cancelled..

I'm sorry, I just don't see any detail at all in the ring, which typically happens when people try to add too much noise reduction. If you could get closer, why the heck didn't you? The other jewelery shots you posted look great!

cancelled

Biggest problem for me (other than it being a horrible piece of jewelry) is the dullness of the stone. Guess you just have to move some lights around until it gets some life in it.

I can see why the NR accusation was leveled - there's hardly any local contrast or detail - very smooth. That's particularly obvious in the larger image posted. I thought it might be a low-quality JPEG conversion, but the file's 221kb - plenty given the dimensions. Unlikely, but might as well ask... you didn't select "smoothing" when saving the JPEG?

Shooting at f/13 you'll be starting to get diffraction issues - would keep to f/11, or even f/8 if DOF suffices.

Finally, isn't the EF-S 60 is a 1:1 macro like the EF-180? They have different angles of view, but your subject matter is shallow enough that that won't be too relevant, so your suggesting that you could fit the item at close to using 1:1 with the EF-S 60 while the EF-180 would somehow be excessive seems a fundamental misunderstanding about magnification. The 180 simply lets you get the magnification from further away, with a narrower angle.

Cheers, Tony

tonydee wrote in post #8052304
Biggest problem for me (other than it being a horrible piece of jewelry) is the dullness of the stone. Guess you just have to move some lights around until it gets some life in it.

Well, do you even have freaking clue what that ring represents? Your comment is way out of line...and uncalled for.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

brecklundin wrote in post #8052570
Well, do you even have freaking clue what that ring represents? ......

I believe it is a ring from the United States Bowling Congress (previously known as American Bowling Congress). With almost 3 million members, its a pretty big organisation. (www.bowl.com)

The ring is a awarded as a sign of recognition for performance in the 800 series.
If I'm not mistaken, the colour of the gems represents something also?

(You can buy a similar one on ebay for about $US600)
Looks to be pretty well made.

~Ronen

brecklundin wrote in post #8052570
Well, do you even have freaking clue what that ring represents?

I think the aesthetics of the trophy-ring has little if anything to do with the award it represents. I did not see the photo that started the thread but this one (is it the same photo?) doesn't look too bad at 100%. Just need to get a bit closer to capture more detail.

brecklundin wrote in post #8052570
Well, do you even have freaking clue what that ring represents? Your comment is way out of line...and uncalled for.

As Sisyphus guessed, I was commenting on the appearance rather than the significance. I have some ugly things from different organisations I've belonged to too... doesn't mean I don't value them. It is a photography forum, inherently concerned with appearance, and subject selection can be part of the skill being honed, though perhaps you were expected to shoot this particular subject, or just considered it good to develop technical skill with. Regardless, I am genuinely sorry if I've offended you.

brecklundin wrote in post #8052570
I am not happy with the lighting either and as I already explained the shot was not intended to even turn out as it did. I was happy it came close as it did to an OK shot, which it actually is when sized down. But that is not the idea so I completely agree. At least you somewhat tried to use your words to describe what you see as lacking. But your editorial comment just tells me to stop this thread here and now...so never mind you flitboy snob!

*shrug*

What is a flitboy anyway?
Not used in Australia, and google not a massive help

~Ronen

guys, I want to apologize too. I had a very, and I mean very crappy day...having billing/insurance cluster you know what!! Anyway, that particular ring is something which represents a very important time of life for me. I had thought it lost in a move back home when my mom became ill...I found it the other day. I once earned a very tidy living in the game but my own health put an end to that...so this was a very personal thing.

I did take the comment as derogatory. Rather than being a twit I should have asked why you wrote what ya did!! Just my fuse was very near the stick...hehehehee...so​, while I cannot undo my behavior I can just say thanks for being great and reaching out to explain it all. That does help, believe it or not...

Now, as for "flitboy"....well, it is a nasty thing to call a guy when you cast aspersions on his manliness...childish, huh?

But I will post the original shot and then the new shots I take tomorrow. I was also just actually pleased more with getting the light bar/box thing done and works really well, than the shot.

Ironically shortly before it was misplaced I was rarely able to wear the ring because my RA had and has progressed so far...

And know it's silly to place so much on something so trivial in the grand scheme of things, but for all my degrees and good things in life, that was the one thing I genuinely enjoyed doing. Nothing is more fun than a bit of action at $1000/shot when you have $8 in your pocket...the competition at the top levels are something beyond description when you know it all comes down to a single shot for $20k or $5k or even nothing.

So, I am glad I peeked back and thank you a lot for the kindness of understanding.

Don't worry about it
We all have our bad days.

I wouldn't mind 20k for a single shot... assuming I can make it!

Can you share that lighting setup shot you had up?

~Ronen

Yeah... no worries... misjudgements both sides. I'm pretty thick skinned, and my manhood can withstand an aspersion or two . Posting on Critique Corner can be a bit of a shock: many people don't really expect to be told there's much wrong with their images, so especially posting an image which was more a show and tell rather than a deliberate work of photography can lead to a clash of expectations. And I try to - hopefully it's fair to term it contribute - as many detailed critiques as I've time and energy for, but sometimes I do get a bit worn down and less patient and careful with my phrasing, less constructive and more critical. I do generally explain why I don't like something, and do my best to suggest some alternatives though. Sorry to hear you've had to give up something you were so passionate about. Grim. Cheers, Tony

I know everyone has hashed out their differences, but I just want to mention something that can help everyone.

Tony, I am not trying to specifically call you out, but I am using this piece of your post for reference.

tonydee wrote in post #8052304
...(other than it being a horrible piece of jewelry) ...

As this is a photography forum and we are in the Critique Corner I have to ask what this has to do with the picture? How is it constructive in any way to helping the OP take better photographs? Critique here is about making the photographer better. Recently the mod team has been made aware of an absolutely wonderful critique. I don't know how many of you may have seen it, but you can view it here: https://photography-on-the.net …php?p=7903095#p​ost7903095

As you can see it is very detailed, very honest, but also very tactful. While we realize that not all critiques will be this thorough, we would like everyone to make sure to remain tactful.