Have you tried to photograph jewelry objects? This is perhaps one of the most difficult of the macro and close-up tasks. The reason is simple: Metal is very reflective and needs a nicely diffused light to avoid distracting reflections. Gemstones absolutely need a point source of light to show the color and reflections from inside the gem.

Here are two examples of the same ring, a 2 carat diamond surrounded with rubies. Yes, this is rather not my style but loved by the owner.

See how washed out the stones are in the image where the metal is subdued? See the reflections in the metal in the other shot?

Pros at making ads for jewelry items will often use software to combine many shots for the final outcome. Often the stones are shot for brilliance and placed into an image properly lit for "reflective metal". To try and do it in one shot is very, very difficult.

I have become the "staff photographer" where I work. The did buy PaintShopPro and some batteries for the cam...all in a days work, I suppose.

Lighting is generally homemade stuff, using local lights, tissue for diffusion* and custom white balance for the shots. These are not ad quality shots, lol! These shots are for reference and good enough to show customers some of the work done.

*I also use a sandblasted plastic tea pitcher with a hole in the bottom for the lens..a neat but relatively effective diffuser. We have a simple light box with "cold cathode" lighting but this will not take a large lens as the macro on my D70. Light balance is not good in that box, either.

If you have tried taking jewelry images...I mean with stones brilliantly reflecting and metal in true color but not showing all the background and lighing in refelection..let me know how you did and how you did it!

Maybe the pros have the way..take shots of the gems and the metal and combine for the best effect overall.
BYW, these are old shots taken with my old Minolta DImage F100 point and shoot with manual control. The best pics are on the computers at work. Still, the idea is presented, I hope.

Message edited on: 12/29/2005 18:44

Heree is one more example, an image shot a couple of years ago to show the difference in lighting in showing the stone properly. This is an opal and single source incandescent lighting works best. Diffused mutes the colors and makes some color show while others disappear.

With opal, the stone has a sort of in-built diffraction grid made of tiny balls of silica. The arrangement, size and compactness of the beads determines the color shown.

Some of the best color in these gemstones is done with a flatbed scanner. Then again, that is digital production and not photography.

Lighting made the difference in these two shots of the same stone on the same background. White balance was apparently not changed for the lighting, seeing the difference in the bg color.
Metal reflection is not acceptable in either shot.

Message edited on: 12/29/2005 19:38

Message edited on: 12/29/2005 19:40

Have you ever tried using a polarize filter, or surrounding the jewelry with solid black objects.

Interesting work Tom. The images in the incandescent light are certainly the ones with more appeal, the soft light just dulls the whole thing. If it were me, this is only theory because I don't have any jewelry to practise with, I would go for the shots with a point source of light and control the reflections by choosing what they are. Probably do this by shooting inside a light tent with the front open and black cardboard rolled into cylinders at the sides to give a black reflection and outline to the metal. You could postwork the ones taken in diffused light but not sure how acceptable that would be. I did one from the top shot.

I think Radlafx may have a point there with the black bg, try a black velvet or valour drape. In both of your shots I like the top image, I personally like the reflective gold, I wouldn't even go look at the ring in the bottomof the first two images, the gold looks brushed or something! Brenda :)

If I get a chance to post some of the nice shots I will do that. Remember, these were taken some time ago and were mostly experiment and necessity at the time. Brenda, there is a chance the lower ruby/diamond shot was smudged in postwork, looks that way but I really don't recall. Still, when very diffused light is used, the metal surface almost takes on a satin or dull coated look, postwork or no. There is a very fine line between realistic reflection and that reflection masking metal color, for instance. The idea of managing reflections to be acceptable is a good one...the bg drape or the bg of black cylinders..etc. This is the sort of info I do not hear from jewelry sites when photo is discussed. It is refreshing to hear ideas from folks who do photography of all sorts. Generally, if a pro studio(read portrait) photographer is asked to shoot jewelry images, the result is frustration for the photographer and poor results.

Now you have me interested in shooting jewelery! :) As a potential customer though, the image with the bling is what is going to make me come to your store to see that ring! However you postworked or shot that opal makes it appear as though it has more fire in the top image, something that is very desirable when selecting an opal. The bottom image the opal simply blends right in with the bg. Brenda :)

Definitely a background makes the difference.Somehow I think you need to fill avery area with light not too bright,to lose shadows.Got me interested now, so may give it a few whirls. Your first one though is definitely top notch.

Attached Link: rings shot by a-blue--angel

the top images in both of your pieces really show off the stones in their brilliance cept the reflection in the gold of the 1st bothers me..

i tried a few.. it is difficult (photo)
you want to set off the stones, make them sparkle,
show off the craftsmanship of the setting,
watch for burn out & unwanted reflections
& smudges like i did on this one.. oops :P

i suppose one of those tabletop studios would be perfect

just for added interest.. a member here who did a fantastic series of modern jewelry shots in the gallery used a model to set them off in an unique way.. maybe you saw them.. might be too much for the "discreet" buyer ;] the rings are done in an interesting way

Message edited on: 12/30/2005 00:19

This shot was aslo made with the old point and shoot cam, manual focus and custom white balance. This was taken only as a reference to the design. Note how "everything" reflects on the highly polished metal..from the red backdrop to exaggeration of "shadows" on the lower part of the ring band. That is a problem in many shots. Maybe a very uniform universal lighting with a point source for the stone will work..shall try to set that up. I am trying to avoid too much postwork..eventhough that is how it is done in advertising images.

ooooooooooooooh.. i luv that one Tom.. dazzled by the ring more then anything!!! i'm sold!!! you found my weakness..

I think you could be right with the lighting Tom. No doubt it will take a bit of experimentation to get it how you want it, I would love to hear how it turns out and what you decide upon.

Jewelry really needs to be shot in a light tent with even lighting all-around. Great job showing the pitfalls of this type of photography! ;]

Here is an idea. If you want to try it and don't have the jewelry around a good test piece is silverware, like a shiny spoon. The idea is to get the spoon looking natural, not too much reflection and just enough to show it is metal...without losing the color. Losing the correct color of metal is one of the hard parts!

Throw in a little glass figure of some sort and try together...can you get it to sparkle and get the spoon? That pretty much sums up the difficulties in jewelry imaging...unless separate images are taken and postworked together. Nothing against the postwork since that is how the pros in the ads do it.

For me, we need a decent image for personal reference, decent enough for a slide show for customers and clear enough in detail for printing with an appraisal of the item.

I am a jeweler..a jeweler become the "staff photographer" since my camera is bigger. Well, also since my pics come out the best.. : ) I don't have time at work to do much digital imaging postwork since the other work is waiting for hands on from these worn out hands. That is it, in a nutshell.

I remember seeing the old "photo school" view camera shots of telephones(the large old dial ones). These were so very clear and perfect..following much lighting arrangement and polaroid back test shots, long exposures, etc. We can't do that. Still, to try is fun and some get better each day.

Somehow, somewhere there is balance between point source light and diffused light. Tom.

Message edited on: 12/30/2005 19:59