Synthetic Alexandrite #2 - updated images

[Deleted]

This is stone #2. Materials is Laser Alexandrite Chrysoberyl. 10mm in size, 4.9 carat weight. The cut is called "Mr. Sparkle" and was performed by rockncajun. Great job Ray!

I kinda dig the way both colors of the alexandrite show when lit by sunlight.









Better but still battling dust. More to follow.

[jamesp]

It's awesome . A kaleidoscope.

[Deleted]

thanks Jim. That means my photos did Ray's work some justice.

[Thunder69]

MAn that is awesome...fantastic cut too...John

[jamesp]

You didn't take those photos. That is spectacular photography. What gives?

[Deleted]

Jan 19, 2014 19:31:22 GMT -5 jamesp said:

You didn't take those photos. That is spectacular photography. What gives?

I took the photos! Ray did the cut!

That means my photos did Ray's work some justice.

[scott = emphasis mine]

So.........................

Thank you for the compliment! I will be happy when I get consistently clean stones in the images. Dust is my foil at the moment.

[Deleted]

This image is for gemfeller - looking straight into the gaping maw of the table, yet my reflection is absent.

[Deleted]

Stunning, no diamond that I have seen ever looked that good. Totally totally impressed. Oh yea, and the photography is pretty snappy also.
Jim

[Deleted]

Thanks Jim! There is a triangular cut that is out of this world. Beyond fantastic. A total of 9 stones in the lot. I have a lot of photography to do.

[gemfeller]

Great work, both of you. Scott, I dusted it for you so now you have to tell me how you made the shot -- even though I do notice a little lens or head shadow in the culet area. I don't have much trouble with reflections in faceted stones. But cabs can be a whole 'nother proposition, especially highly reflective ones like psilomelane. Keep up the good work you two!

[Deleted]

Jan 19, 2014 20:52:36 GMT -5 gemfeller said:

Great work, both of you. Scott, I dusted it for you so now you have to tell me how you made the shot -- even though I do notice a little lens or head shadow in the culet area. I don't have much trouble with reflections in faceted stones. But cabs can be a whole 'nother proposition, especially highly reflective ones like psilomelane. Keep up the good work you two!

Haha! photoshopped dust removal may be the answer in the long haul! Thanks Rick.

As for technique, this time I put a $20 ebay light tent on a table in the back yard. The sun high and "off to the right" is sole light source. Photo taken thru the opening in the side of the tent. I think the "head" is the shape of the opening showing as dark. My "head" is covered in white hair, so it ain't me! lol

Equipment is a Canon T1i body, 100mm Macro, tripod and off camera shutter release. Camera settings: ISO 100, AV set @ f16 (looks better than f22 for this), exposure compensation set to -1 1/3 stop, shutter automatic, like 1/25 sec or so.

Nothing really special. Except my $700 lens now sells for $1100 and comes internally stabilized (which the tripod & off camera release negates).

[rockncajun]

Great photo work guys! I too, am looking forward to seeing a good photo of the others.

[Deleted]

I am looking forward to selling these!

So we can do more!

[rockncajun]

Whoever buys them will be getting a bargain!

[pghram]

Beautiful gems & great photos.

Rich

[gemfeller]

Jan 19, 2014 21:03:39 GMT -5 @shotgunner said:

As for technique, this time I put a $20 ebay light tent on a table in the back yard. The sun high and "off to the right" is sole light source.

Scott, I really don't want to be a nit-picker but learning the stone was shot in sunlight leaves me a little puzzled. The challenge of shooting color-change stones is to show the color change from daylight to incandescent, usually in separate images. The daylight hue of alex is green to bluish-green; incandescent, pinkish-red. For some reason your images show both hues, with reds dominating, usually the result of mixed lighting (like using incandescent lighting next to window, where both light sources influence color in the image.) Where did all that red come from?

Don't get me wrong: the images are great. But in daylight the green/blue should be emphasized. What time of day did you shoot? Very early and late in the day sunlight has a lot more red. Maybe that's the answer.

[Deleted]

I dunno about what "should be"..... lol

I started shooting at 1pm'ish and finished at 2:30pm'ish. So, no, time of day is not the reason for your dilemma.

I suspect that the reason for your query is actually simple. I never, ever, do anything like everyone else, ever, never.

Having perused the online examples of syn-alex images. I see they are all studio shots. I have the luxury of comfortable outdoor conditions nearly year round and I have always just used the brightest and best color balanced light source there is - the sun - . The reason for this is two fold. I am too lazy to set up and tear down studio lights and also because modern digi-SLR's do not have a pc-sync cord plug and I do not have a hot shoe adapter. Today I did the same as I almost always do. I just put the light tent out of doors and got to work. No crappy wires and cables and power cords and flashmeters and and and... . I have all that! Except the pc-sync dealie bobber. Just good ole sunlight. It is rare to have an issue with any camera nor any setup using diffuse sunlight.

Further, there is some discussion of c-axis versus A-B axis cutting. rockncajun Ray did cut some with the C-axis on the table and some rotated 90 degrees. Until I image the balance of the consignment we won't know if this plays into this discussion. Unless Ray knows if this is a C-axis specimen or not. Still we need to see the 90 degree rotated specimen in contrast.

I said it in the other thread. All criticisms and observations are accepted with an open mind and a warm heart. Your input here is important to me. Please dont hesitate to add more when you can. It is sincerely appreciated.

edited to add:

here is a heavily color enhanced image of a 55+ ct wt. stone cut from the same material. Both colors show in studio.

[Deleted]

Wifey has a 1/3 ct Brazilian natural Alex ring I got her a decade ago. It needs to me photographed too. Maybe we learn something.

[gemfeller]

Scott, I'm not being critical; I'm trying to be helpful. That said, I have no hesitance saying I know more than the average bear about natural Alex. All things being equal, synthetic material should equal or out-perform the natural kind when it comes to strong color change. Since I've only worked with natural CC chrysoberyl I'd forgotten that synthetic alex can require orientation. That alone may explain the matter. You should easily be able to see a color change simply by looking at the stone in pure incandescent and then taking it outside into daylight.

[gemfeller]

Scott, re: the image you edited into your earlier post about the 55 ct. (whoo!) stone, the only question is what was the main light source? All CC stones tend to show two colors in images, but the primary light source determines the most prominent color.