Clear Cut Gems: Experiences?

[RTFrog]

Jeff – The photos were not natural. The point I’m trying to make is that you are readily dismissive of everything that I pointed out regarding the pictures and image modification. Changing color from an electric blue with a slightly purple modifier to grayish lavender purple is not software or hardware variation. If a camera is doing this, then it needs to be replaced. With all of your experience, stated skills, and background – you actually missed that the photo was edited, and most likely have very little experience in the field of forensic image manipulation. I respect your work as a photographer, however, when there is ample evidence of image modification and tampering, it needs to be discussed. The pictures were not shot in raw, and even if they were, they were edited already in Jpeg – and there’s an actual archive of the edits within the photos themselves.

Please do not attack the method and analysis algorithm if you do not truly understand it – or are even willing to consider that sometimes people edit their pictures. You did not take the pictures. It just so happens that some pictures do tell a story, both by data and with image analysis. There was more involved here beyond Image Error Level Analysis – check out the histograms to see the color differences between shots. The same lens took the pictures at distances that are so far away that the results are highly improbable as naturally occurring.

I’m not going to explain to you why your blanket statement by copying a disclaimer from a website is incorrect. I see that you have posted it in another thread about it too. More information on this and other techniques can be found here:

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/files/bh-usa-07-krawetz.pdf

http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/error-level-analysis-detect-image-manipulation/

There are some very practical and revealing uses of this and other technologies. I think that the discussion should be carried out in the other thread - so as to not continuing to focus on an individual vendor's photographs.

 

[selous]

Rtfrog

You are dodging the issue of insinuating that my website pictures were somehow over processed by using a tool which is obviously not up to the task of detecting over processed images.You are trying to deflect the argument back to the original image that started this link.
If you bothered to read my posts you would have noticed that I admitted right in the first post ,long before you even appeared that it was a hard stone to photograph and yes I made several attempts to correct it.

Numerous respected people here have mentioned that your program is useless for determining what you wish it to no matter how much you would like it to be otherwise.
My issue with you is that you had the nerve to take clean images from m,y website which were not even part of the original issue,run them through your program and post results which are inconclusive at best but still you try to insist that your tool is accurate.

You had absolutely no right to use a program that obviously does not work properly and use it to try and discredit my entire website and what you are doing now is just smoke and mirrors to try to deflect the conversation away from that.

Let me be quite clear,my website pictures including the six or so that you posted on this forum are all clean images that have been mostly cropped in Irfanview for a quick simple editing program,some have slight in camera tweaks to make them as close as possible to the actual gemstone and some have a bit of additional sharpening - that is all. For you too insinuate otherwise is slander,pure and simple.

To anyone else who would like to rehash the very first few posts here,just to be very clear I did process that image to try to correct it,I admitted that without coercion of my own free will,the super blue images first posted by Frekechild were taken quickly posed on someones hand outdoors in bright sunlight,the saturation was too high and the pictures were too blue,this was a year ago,they were then processed in photoshop to try and get rid of most of the blue,inmy opinion there was still too much blue and new shots were taken a few days ago and processed to correct again,this was when the stone was first posted here.

This was the only gemstone which has ever been under question and I believe I have addressed that particular stone numerous times.
I can assure you that anyone who buys a stone from me in the future and judges it from a hand shot such as that will not find the stone to be much different from the picture.

 

[VapidLapid]

I can't really stomach reading most of this thread so I am going to post in general. We have had many discussions in many threads about photography and photoshop. Photoshop is a tool much like the darkroom was/is for silver based photography. With film one has to chose the right type of film for one's subject, situation, lighting and desired results, choose the equipment, set up the subject and lighting. chose what type of exposure+development to apply and chose from many different developers each of which produces different results, different contrasts different curves. After that in the making of a print there are as many choices to make. Photography per se has no privileged access to objective reality, not for the making of verisimilitudes. Digital images need to be processed and there are as many and more places in the process to make adjustments that are necessary to result in the natural accurate reproduction. I shoot large file sizes from the camera, but have to make smaller image sizes, resolution sizes and jpeg compression levels to match the limits of email if it is a file I am emailing, to any website I am posting to like this one which I think limits file sizes to 800k. If I had a commercial site that I was paying for web hosting I would still need to make smaller file sizes so as to reduce the volume of bytes per page (which I am charged for) but also to make it so the pages load in reasonable time. Photoshop is a tool, a useful tool. It can be applied to deceive, but it also needs to be used to represent accurately. Even if a forensic program could reliably determine compression and alteration it would not prove intent to deceive. Also very very few images on the internet would be shown to be unaltered. This is part of why it is important to ask questions about the color seen in images, and to give more consideration to the vendors words than what you see on your screen. And then one must see the stone in hand, because if a vendor is photographing and working in Arizona, and the potential buyer is going to be using the piece in the Yukon, even in hand you will have very different perceptions.

 

[kenny]

If anyone is interested in learning a bit more about photographing gems, I wrote up a blog post on this topic last November; its on my website.

Jeff, could you post a link please?
I'd love to read your info on gem photography.

 

[LoversKites]

If anyone is interested in learning a bit more about photographing gems, I wrote up a blog post on this topic last November; its on my website.

Jeff, could you post a link please?
I'd love to read your info on gem photography.

Here http://www.earthstreasury.com/2013/11/04/photographing-gems-and-jewelry/

 

[Alnitak]

Jeff – The photos were not natural. The point I’m trying to make is that you are readily dismissive of everything that I pointed out regarding the pictures and image modification. Changing color from an electric blue with a slightly purple modifier to grayish lavender purple is not software or hardware variation. If a camera is doing this, then it needs to be replaced. With all of your experience, stated skills, and background – you actually missed that the photo was edited, and most likely have very little experience in the field of forensic image manipulation. I respect your work as a photographer, however, when there is ample evidence of image modification and tampering, it needs to be discussed. The pictures were not shot in raw, and even if they were, they were edited already in Jpeg – and there’s an actual archive of the edits within the photos themselves.

Please do not attack the method and analysis algorithm if you do not truly understand it – or are even willing to consider that sometimes people edit their pictures. You did not take the pictures. It just so happens that some pictures do tell a story, both by data and with image analysis. There was more involved here beyond Image Error Level Analysis – check out the histograms to see the color differences between shots. The same lens took the pictures at distances that are so far away that the results are highly improbable as naturally occurring.

I’m not going to explain to you why your blanket statement by copying a disclaimer from a website is incorrect. I see that you have posted it in another thread about it too. More information on this and other techniques can be found here:

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/files/bh-usa-07-krawetz.pdf

http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/error-level-analysis-detect-image-manipulation/

There are some very practical and revealing uses of this and other technologies. I think that the discussion should be carried out in the other thread - so as to not continuing to focus on an individual vendor's photographs.

I have not been dismissive; I have pointed out where you are obviously wrong or misinformed. I have quite clearly stated multiple times that some of the images have been edited, and made it clear that I have absolutely *no* problem with that as I *expect* good quality images to have been edited.

You are the one that does not understand the algorithm. I provided information directly from the people who published the algorithm that explains how it works and why your use was incorrect. It's not a "disclaimer:" its a brief explanation of how the software works and it contains the crucial information that shows your use of it was incorrect.

BTW, with regards to electronic forensics? I'm quite confident I have more experience there than you do based on your simplistic errors and failure to grasp basic information about images. I've spent the last 20+ years of my life in technology, and have been using digital image editing programs since the first version of Photoshop was released. I have been the Chief Technology Officer at several large global IT firms, and led a large practice that specifically worked in data forensics, with clients that included the federal government. I'm quite confident in my knowledge and abilities in this area.

One other item: the histogram does not have the inherent power to tell you anything about whether an image has been edited or not. It simply tells you the range of values of the different color components within an image. Editing an image does change a histogram, but without prior knowledge of what the values were before editing, you can draw no verifiable conclusions of any kind. Indeed, the very act of saving an image in jpeg format for the web will discard a large percentage of all of the histogram data/values in an image. It's one of the many reasons folks who are very serious about their photography (like myself) use professional level cameras and shoot in raw mode. On my Canon and most Nikons we can get 14-bit raw data to edit before the image is saved as a 8-bit jpeg file--therefore throwing away tons of data (an 8-bit jpeg only has 256 levels of tonal data per color per pixel; a 14-bit has 16,384 levels!). I'd be glad to direct you to some scientific and/or technical papers that explain this if you're interested.

I wouldn't have replied but you quite blatantly misrepresented what I had said in my multiple comments in this thread and in my direct replies to you. I prefer that the record be straight on that. I'd also like those who are truly interested to be accurately informed and not misled.

Jeff

 

[Alnitak]

If anyone is interested in learning a bit more about photographing gems, I wrote up a blog post on this topic last November; its on my website.

Jeff, could you post a link please?
I'd love to read your info on gem photography.

Kenny,

Someone kindly helped me out and posted the link before I could. That article is written at a general level, so you may be more advanced than that. There is one topic I wish I had spent more time on; I might write another post delving into it further: For the macro photographer in the digital age, one key area that deserves a lot more attention than I gave in my article is the complex relationship between depth of field, f-stop, working distance and true sharpness. Many people mistakenly believe that simply stopping down further will help--but due to the wave nature of light and the tiny pixels many digital cameras have we now start to see a loss of overall sharpness as the f-stop gets into the "sweet spot" of sharpness on most lenses--around f/8 or so. Over f/11 you will now start to see the image actually become softer due to diffraction effects. This is the reason I often use my 180mm macro lens vs. the 100mm and why I almost never use my Canon MP-E 65mm lens (which lets me shoot between 1x-5x) except for true micro photography.

I'd be glad to discuss the more technical aspects of gem photography in another thread or offline via email.

Jeff

 

[bobsiv]

My D7000 also tends to shift blue quite a bit. I gave up on trying to correct it in camera, I do the color correction in Photoshop when necessary.

 

[blingergrrrl]

Ummmm...I hate to post this and can tell that Lloyd does good cutting, however...

I bought a sapphire from this same lot as Freke's friend, and experienced the same result. I have missed the return deadline, and I live in Canada so the shipping back is nuts. In all honesty, he did allow a return window and the fact that I missed it is my fault.

However, if the topic is how a stone is described and photographed, I would like to note that, yes, it is hard to accurately photograph gemstones, and yes, everyone's computer displays colours differently. BUT, we should go by the description that the seller STATES about the gemstone, as they have seen it personally. This is the trust issue. And we should give some visual credit to the photograph, no? So that being said, I will let everyone make up their own minds.

Vendor photo and description:

Email:
Hello,

I was wondering if I could have some additional photos of Sapphire S6?
When you state no treatments, I am assuming that also includes heat? Thank
you for your time, I am very interested in this stone. Have a great day.

Sincerely,
--------

Hi -------

I took a couple quick pics for you,for some reason the camera always shows
this stone more blue than actual and also more saturated in tone so please
bear this in mind when viewing these pictures,the stone is a light and I
mean light lavender/light blue,in some light and when viewed at some
angles the tone is almost medium,having said all the above it is a very
bright pretty gem and good value at the price for a 2ct stone.The out of
focus picture is taken with a different camera on flash to try and show
the color more accurately.
Best regards

Lloyd A. Forrester
Clear Cut Gems
http://www.clearcutgems.com
Attached pics:






The rest of the email conversation:
Hi Again LLoyd,

Just to be brutally honest, it is down to your stone and this one:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sparkling-Light-Blue-No-Heat-Sapphire-3-carat-Cushion-SriLanka-Eye-Clean-Gem/121145261627?_trksid=p2046732.m2060&_trkparms=aid%3D111000%26algo%3DREC.CURRENT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D27%26meid%3D2321761833324613632%26pid%3D100040%26prg%3D1011%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D121145261627%26

(--side note, the vendor for the above stone stated it was a "steel" blue, aka grey tone to his stone--)

Clearly there is a difference in wgt and price, but both of these
stones speak to me so I am very interested in your opinion on how your stone
(which doesn't photograph accurately) compares to the above noted one.
I do prefer the shape and lavender tones yours seems to offer.

Thank you for your honesty,
-----.



Hi -----
It's hard to compare the two as they are so different in color
size,shape and weight.My stone has much better cutting and I think it would hold
it's own in a platinum setting with other stones but it has nowhere near as
much blue as the one in the picture you provided.As far as saturation
goes the sapphire square S5 on my website is a medium saturated
purple/lavender,gorgeous stone and would stand out better with other
gems in a setting.
What color do you want exactly and what stone,does it have to be
sapphire? The difference in price between the one you sent and mine is that your
price range? If so I could work with you to cut something blue other
than sapphire.
I use paypal,bank transfer and western union for payments.I also accept
checks but only ship goods after they have cleared the bank.
Hope this helps.

Best regards.

Lloyd A. Forrester
Clear Cut Gems
http://www.clearcutgems.com


Hello Lloyd,

Thank you for your opinion, it does matter to me as you are the expert! I
would like to go ahead and purchase sapphire s6. I do prefer lighter
rather than a medium coloured stone, I just wanted to make sure it wasn't
so light that any colour disappears in a setting. If this stone isn't
exactly what I want in person, I will contact you for a custom cutting
although in all honesty I am looking for a rectangular/elongated cushion,
unheated sapphire with a "periwinkle" colour and no windowing - which as
you know are few and far between. I would have liked your stone to be
closer to a 9x7mm range but considering everything else it seems to be
bang on. Do you have a link for me to purchase through paypal? I haven't
bought anything through paypal in a while, lol.

(missing an email in here...)

Hi -----

Your gemstone was shipped via U.S postal service registered package this
morning,sometimes this service is quick and sometimes takes two
weeks,mainly because of Canadian customs.The tracking # is
---------,you can track it on the link provided and once it enters
Canada,you should be able to track it on Canada post website.
https://tools.usps.com/go/TrackConfirmAction!input.action
Thanks for your business and please be sure to let me know how you like
the stone when you receive it.

Best regards.


Lloyd A. Forrester
Clear Cut Gems
http://www.clearcutgems.com

End of emails.

I missed my window to return and I don't want him to cut me a stone as I feel the stone wasn't close to the description (would I want him to choose my rough?). He did say that he wanted to know what I felt about the stone, and again, my fault for not replying/returning. But that's not what this topic is about.

--see following continued post for my pics--

 

[blingergrrrl]

And here are the pics of the stone that I received. This is in mixed light (daylight from my windows and the overhead lights on). These are actually the nicest photos I could get of the stone, and I would say the colour and saturation is bang on in the first photo. In the second photo, the separation of colours (blue and purple) can't been seen by naked eye, but is otherwise accurate. There is a black rhodium plated twist ring, and an amethyst with the stone in some of the pictures for colour reference. Also, the blanket that everything is on is a warm-toned off-white, and there is a non-special regular white sheet of computer paper in the background.





And again, the original vendor pic with discription:



So was I totally off in what I should have expected? A light lavender "very bright and pretty" eye-clean stone? Because I don't feel that's what I got. I don't feel that it is a horrible stone, the cut is great. It does have some silk and a feather that I can see at arms length, but that doesn't really bother me. But I do think the colour is rather murky and dark, not what I would have described as light lavender or bright. And in the world of gems, colour is what you shop for. This is just my opinion, but I don't feel that the description was accurate, and the photos were so off base that they shouldn't have been posted. The only photo that was accurate was the out of focus one, but I trusted his description more that the photos, which is what I thought was the right thing to do. I don't want to slander, but I do feel that this is an accurate representation of my customer experience.

so...anybody want a medium greyish purple slightly included sapphire? I have one for sale!

 

[FrekeChild]

Oh dear.

Crazy as it is, this is the stone that I was considering buying. I thought it was a good price for the size and the advertised/photographed color.

 

[blingergrrrl]

Oh dear.

Crazy as it is, this is the stone that I was considering buying. I thought it was a good price for the size and the advertised/photographed color.

Like I said, it's for sale! lol.

I know, I thought it was good too, especially for unheated as well. It's too bad because the cut really IS nice. I might keep it just cuz it's a Winza tho...

 

[FrekeChild]

Oh dear.

Crazy as it is, this is the stone that I was considering buying. I thought it was a good price for the size and the advertised/photographed color.

Like I said, it's for sale! lol.

I know, I thought it was good too, especially for unheated as well. It's too bad because the cut really IS nice. I might keep it just cuz it's a Winza tho...

Hah! I'm afraid I'm out of the market now. I was hoping that it was a similar color to the Gene sapphire I sold recently. That was a light lavender blue.

 

[Alnitak]

And here are the pics of the stone that I received. This is in mixed light (daylight from my windows and the overhead lights on). These are actually the nicest photos I could get of the stone, and I would say the colour and saturation is bang on in the first photo. In the second photo, the separation of colours (blue and purple) can't been seen by naked eye, but is otherwise accurate. There is a black rhodium plated twist ring, and an amethyst with the stone in some of the pictures for colour reference. Also, the blanket that everything is on is a warm-toned off-white, and there is a non-special regular white sheet of computer paper in the background.

So was I totally off in what I should have expected? A light lavender "very bright and pretty" eye-clean stone? Because I don't feel that's what I got. I don't feel that it is a horrible stone, the cut is great. It does have some silk and a feather that I can see at arms length, but that doesn't really bother me. But I do think the colour is rather murky and dark, not what I would have described as light lavender or bright. And in the world of gems, colour is what you shop for. This is just my opinion, but I don't feel that the description was accurate, and the photos were so off base that they shouldn't have been posted. The only photo that was accurate was the out of focus one, but I trusted his description more that the photos, which is what I thought was the right thing to do. I don't want to slander, but I do feel that this is an accurate representation of my customer experience.

so...anybody want a medium greyish purple slightly included sapphire? I have one for sale!

I'm not going to belabor why these photos are a terrible representation of the stone...but one big problem is that the white balance is way off. Your "white" paper looks yellow. A quick correction to make the white appear white makes the stone look much more blue. As a future tip, mixed lighting is a HUGE no-no with digital cameras. They just can't handle the different white points like our brains do and the colors are always off as a result. In addition to the light temperature issues, the lighting on the gem itself is less than optimal. You're looking at it off-angle and the lighting is also off angle. Gems are cut so that the optimal appearance is with light behind you and the table face up and directly parallel to the viewer.

I read the whole thread between you and Lloyd, and it seems that he's pretty clear that its a light lavender-light blue, and while its hard to tell from the photos you posted, it does appear that this is the case. I suspect that the lighting for Lloyd's photos on the website are taken under fluorescent light, which will always favor blues on stones, particularly color-shift stones like the Winza sapphires. Your lighting is distinctly yellow-shifted, which will enhance the purple/lavender tones.

As for the feather/silk, I can't tell from your photos. In my opinion, he was pretty open with you about the color. The photos he had showed only the blue, and reading what you wrote, that was what you were looking for, so I can see why you were disappointed--but I don't see where he misrepresented it to you in any way. Ideally he would have had photos under different lighting to show the different color shifts. Perhaps if he had you would have not purchased it.

I'll say what I've said before: Color is very subjective. Its not just influenced by photos and lighting--we also all perceive color differently. That's why you have to see a stone in the hand and then return it if you don't like it. I see nothing here that warrants any disparagement of Lloyd or any reason to question his trustworthiness. His emails are thorough and he goes out of his way to be sure to tell you that the photos don't really represent the color all that well. He has a return policy, which is a very good thing. You admitted you missed the return window. You have buyer's remorse--but you could have avoided that by returning it.

Jeff

 

[marymm]

And here are the pics of the stone that I received. This is in mixed light (daylight from my windows and the overhead lights on). These are actually the nicest photos I could get of the stone, and I would say the colour and saturation is bang on in the first photo. In the second photo, the separation of colours (blue and purple) can't been seen by naked eye, but is otherwise accurate. There is a black rhodium plated twist ring, and an amethyst with the stone in some of the pictures for colour reference. Also, the blanket that everything is on is a warm-toned off-white, and there is a non-special regular white sheet of computer paper in the background.

So was I totally off in what I should have expected? A light lavender "very bright and pretty" eye-clean stone? Because I don't feel that's what I got. I don't feel that it is a horrible stone, the cut is great. It does have some silk and a feather that I can see at arms length, but that doesn't really bother me. But I do think the colour is rather murky and dark, not what I would have described as light lavender or bright. And in the world of gems, colour is what you shop for. This is just my opinion, but I don't feel that the description was accurate, and the photos were so off base that they shouldn't have been posted. The only photo that was accurate was the out of focus one, but I trusted his description more that the photos, which is what I thought was the right thing to do. I don't want to slander, but I do feel that this is an accurate representation of my customer experience.

so...anybody want a medium greyish purple slightly included sapphire? I have one for sale!

I'm not going to belabor why these photos are a terrible representation of the stone...but one big problem is that the white balance is way off. Your "white" paper looks yellow. A quick correction to make the white appear white makes the stone look much more blue. As a future tip, mixed lighting is a HUGE no-no with digital cameras. They just can't handle the different white points like our brains do and the colors are always off as a result. In addition to the light temperature issues, the lighting on the gem itself is less than optimal. You're looking at it off-angle and the lighting is also off angle. Gems are cut so that the optimal appearance is with light behind you and the table face up and directly parallel to the viewer.

I read the whole thread between you and Lloyd, and it seems that he's pretty clear that its a light lavender-light blue, and while its hard to tell from the photos you posted, it does appear that this is the case. I suspect that the lighting for Lloyd's photos on the website are taken under fluorescent light, which will always favor blues on stones, particularly color-shift stones like the Winza sapphires. Your lighting is distinctly yellow-shifted, which will enhance the purple/lavender tones.

As for the feather/silk, I can't tell from your photos. In my opinion, he was pretty open with you about the color. The photos he had showed only the blue, and reading what you wrote, that was what you were looking for, so I can see why you were disappointed--but I don't see where he misrepresented it to you in any way. Ideally he would have had photos under different lighting to show the different color shifts. Perhaps if he had you would have not purchased it.

I'll say what I've said before: Color is very subjective. Its not just influenced by photos and lighting--we also all perceive color differently. That's why you have to see a stone in the hand and then return it if you don't like it. I see nothing here that warrants any disparagement of Lloyd or any reason to question his trustworthiness. His emails are thorough and he goes out of his way to be sure to tell you that the photos don't really represent the color all that well. He has a return policy, which is a very good thing. You admitted you missed the return window. You have buyer's remorse--but you could have avoided that by returning it.

Jeff

+1

 

[FrekeChild]

And here are the pics of the stone that I received. This is in mixed light (daylight from my windows and the overhead lights on). These are actually the nicest photos I could get of the stone, and I would say the colour and saturation is bang on in the first photo. In the second photo, the separation of colours (blue and purple) can't been seen by naked eye, but is otherwise accurate. There is a black rhodium plated twist ring, and an amethyst with the stone in some of the pictures for colour reference. Also, the blanket that everything is on is a warm-toned off-white, and there is a non-special regular white sheet of computer paper in the background.

So was I totally off in what I should have expected? A light lavender "very bright and pretty" eye-clean stone? Because I don't feel that's what I got. I don't feel that it is a horrible stone, the cut is great. It does have some silk and a feather that I can see at arms length, but that doesn't really bother me. But I do think the colour is rather murky and dark, not what I would have described as light lavender or bright. And in the world of gems, colour is what you shop for. This is just my opinion, but I don't feel that the description was accurate, and the photos were so off base that they shouldn't have been posted. The only photo that was accurate was the out of focus one, but I trusted his description more that the photos, which is what I thought was the right thing to do. I don't want to slander, but I do feel that this is an accurate representation of my customer experience.

so...anybody want a medium greyish purple slightly included sapphire? I have one for sale!

I'll say what I've said before: Color is very subjective. Its not just influenced by photos and lighting--we also all perceive color differently. That's why you have to see a stone in the hand and then return it if you don't like it. I see nothing here that warrants any disparagement of Lloyd or any reason to question his trustworthiness. His emails are thorough and he goes out of his way to be sure to tell you that the photos don't really represent the color all that well. He has a return policy, which is a very good thing. You admitted you missed the return window. You have buyer's remorse--but you could have avoided that by returning it.

Jeff

I know you want to defend your friend, Jeff, because you feel like he's being attacked, but speaking as a vendor, would you feel comfortable posting pictures of a stone that do not accurately represent the stone's color at all?

She explained that she was out of town when it arrived and that's why she missed the return window. She would return it if she could.

 

[MollyMalone]

Well, she didn't express her dissatisfaction in a private e-mail & ask if he would extend his usual return policy:

* * * I have missed the return deadline, and I live in Canada so the shipping back is nuts. In all honesty, he did allow a return window and the fact that I missed it is my fault.
* * *
He did say that he wanted to know what I felt about the stone, and again, my fault for not replying/returning. But that's not what this topic is about. * * *

 

[blingergrrrl]

Hey y'all, I said the return ISN'T the issue. I realize that it was my own fault to not return it, and I don't care if I can return it or not. I'm not saying that the vendor wouldn't take it back, I'm not saying that his customer service sucks, because I actually found him very pleasant and I know that he would take it back in the allowed time. So calm down and put the boxing gloves away.

THE POINT is that I am saying the stone is different that what I thought I was getting and I am putting it out there on a consumer forum for others to consider when buying online.

And this is NOT FREKE, but a different member that had the same experience with the same lot of sapphires from the same vendor.

Also, I put the piece of white paper in the picture so that you COULD correct the white balance to your own eyes, lol. Like putting a penny in the picture for scale, I put a standard "white" object so we could all relate! The first picture is the most accurate - please adjust for the paper in that one. The reason I have mixed light and am taking pictures from an angle is because this stone IS hard to photograph. I agree that some stones are hard to photograph (as I stated initially). This was the only way I could get the camera to accurately capture the colour of the stone as seen in real life.

This is a forum for customers who buy stones online. There is a thread that asks people to post vendor pics and actual pics for this very reason.

My point is that I went on the DESCRIPTION of a "light lavender" and "bright" stone. Take away ALL the pictures/photoshop whateverness, this issue remains. I would not call it a light and bright lavender stone.

I wouldn't have posted this, but someone asked about customer experiences with a specific vendor and I saw that someone had the exact same experience as I did.

Isn't that the point of this forum????

 

[blingergrrrl]

Oh and Alnitak/Jeff, I do thank you for the tips with digital cameras, I didn't know they can't read mixed light...

When I tried to photograph the stone face on, I was having problems getting the camera to focus past the silk "stripes" on the table no matter if I used manual focus or macro and aimed it behind the silk. In real life the silk looks like a faint fingerprint on the table. I had to angle the stone so that you could see some of the pavilion faceting. You can also see the feather as a black line at the 6 o'clock position on Lloyd's photo, and it's hidden at the 3 o'clock in the my second picture. These don't bother me though, I was just pointing them out because you mentioned it. I also tried many different combinations of light so that the camera picked up the actual colour I see. Shouldn't that be the guideline? I honestly am trying.

Also, does having the sheet of paper make it easier for others to adjust the photo hue correctly for themselves? I thought I was being smart to have a "standard" in the pic.

I don't suppose you would like me to send the stone to you and you can settle this once and for all?

 

[royalstarrynight]

I don't suppose you would like me to send the stone to you and you can settle this once and for all?

This might be the stone that will travel to all the vendors to take a shot.

I know Gene would be up for it and I'd be very interested to see how Barry would photograph this as well.

 

[Alnitak]

Oh and Alnitak/Jeff, I do thank you for the tips with digital cameras, I didn't know they can't read mixed light...

When I tried to photograph the stone face on, I was having problems getting the camera to focus past the silk "stripes" on the table no matter if I used manual focus or macro and aimed it behind the silk. In real life the silk looks like a faint fingerprint on the table. I had to angle the stone so that you could see some of the pavilion faceting. You can also see the feather as a black line at the 6 o'clock position on Lloyd's photo, and it's hidden at the 3 o'clock in the my second picture. These don't bother me though, I was just pointing them out because you mentioned it. I also tried many different combinations of light so that the camera picked up the actual colour I see. Shouldn't that be the guideline? I honestly am trying.

Also, does having the sheet of paper make it easier for others to adjust the photo hue correctly for themselves? I thought I was being smart to have a "standard" in the pic.

I don't suppose you would like me to send the stone to you and you can settle this once and for all?

Thanks for the clarification. It can be difficult to deal with photographing a stone with silk. Often it takes just the right angle to make sure that the silk isn't reflecting and throwing off the camera. I used a function on my camera called "Live View" that allows me to magnify the image on the screen on the back of the camera and focus manually with high precision.

The sheet of white paper is helpful, but try to use a single source of light if you can, as setting the white balance after the fact with mixed light is also very hard to do. It was a great idea!

I guess my issue was the implication that one should use this to question Lloyd's integrity (i.e. trust). The email thread seems to imply the opposite, and I bet if you had emailed Lloyd he might have taken it back. While Frekechild called Lloyd my friend, I've actually never met him--but he is a colleague. I'm coming to his defense because of that, and because the issue of color is SO difficult to deal with. It's not just cameras--its lighting and eyesight. I've shown gems to groups of people and had situations where half of a group would see a gem as one color and the other half as another. There is a wide variation in color perception. In addition, there is a big difference in light just from the latitude you live at: the kelvin temperature of sunlight in Florida where Llloyd is located is much different than sunlight in Canada, where you are located. That means that the same gem can look different in Florida vs. Canada. There is just no substitute for seeing a gem and deciding if the color works for you or not.

I would be *glad* to photograph the gem for you if you want to send it to me. Gene lives quite nearby to me, so if he's up, I could send it to him as well.

Jeff

 

[chrono]

I read through the past email convos and interpreted the colour description differently than Blinger did. From what I could tell, picture-wise, the colour that one should deem as closest to what the stone looks like would be the very last picture, not the website picture or hand shots. The stone looks grayish blue with some purple. I think there has been some miscommunication about colour as well. When I read/hear the word "light" gem, I automatically think gray unless it is specified as the tone, not saturation. When a stone is light in tone, often times, saturation is also light (strongly gray). There are only a handful of exceptions and when that is the case, the price is not inexpensive.

Is anyone up to the task of colour correcting Blinger's pictures? Based on Lloyd's description, I think the stone you received is what I would expect colour-wise.

The part I am unsure about is the "bright gem". I'm not seeing that though - I wonder whether there is some blockage of light or head/camera obstruction that is making the sapphire look dark/shadowed in almost all of Blinger's pictures. Blinger, can you please clarify? If you view the gem outdoors (in the shade) but with the light source in front of you (but behind the stone), do you still see this darkness? I am just wondering how to replicate the light conditions Lloyd was in when he photographed the hand shots where the gem looks bright.

ETA
I just read Jeff's suggestion and I hope this test will clarify most of our questions/concerns.

 

[PrecisionGem]

Count me in to photograph the stone.

In light of this and a few other threads, I really think we should circulate several stones to various vendors to photograph. I could make up a special website to display all the images and have them for download so that they can be viewed unaltered by a website.

 

[kissmegoodby]

I have to say that all of his stone are amazing,
he has taken pic's for me and the colors have been off,but I have a lot of his stones, and i will keep buying from him!!!
He's one of the best cutter out there !!!!!!!!!!!!!
So all of you people have no idea want true color stone are and the love of them.
learn love and enjoy the stone.

 

[chrono]

Gene,
May I suggest several different colours? Orange and green are the most challenging for me.

 

[mastercutgems]

Count me in as well as you all know how I take pictures, outside subdued or diffused natural lighting... But there may be no need to send them to me as I do not use artificial lighting.

I am about like the rest of you; drag out the Nikon D-70S and the 105 macro and put it on automatic and shoot like a madman

Most Respectfully;

Dana Reynolds
ASG Certified Supreme Master Gem Cutter
#96CGE42

 

[chrono]

Dana,
I think that even though you use only natural lighting, it would be helpful to have you included, if nothing else other than to prove that the strength of sunlight in different regions differ, which affects the look of the gem and its photography.

 

[dk168]

I have not read the entire thread, therefore, please accept my apology in advance if quoting of Pantone colours has been mentioned in earlier posts.

I came across this while browsing, and thought it was a good idea. However, I then remember physical Pantone colour charts (or whatever they are called) are not exactly cheap, and online colour charts may appear different according to the display monitor etc... Therefore, I would not rely on the Pantone colour reference alone in deciding if the colour of a gemstone is right for me.

I would be very interested in seeing the results of photographs of the same gemstones being photographed by different vendors if that idea becomes a reality.

DK

 

[Alnitak]

I'd suggest we have at least one color-shift gemstone in the batch. I have some garnets that would be fun to include--one Malaia garnet I have can shift from red to orange-peach to a cinnamon red-brown depending on the lighting.

Jeff

 

[LoversKites]

This is a fantastic idea and I support it.