I have not followed most of this thread, but will say this.
Those sample photos would never be published in a jewelry catalog. They are soft, in part because of DOF issues.
That said, even if those photos were sharper on screen, it would still be impossible to judge them critically. Even a photo that looks good on screen at 600x400 pixels could be too soft for professional use at the resolutions required for publication.
The 18-55 is a great lens for $100. It is a passable lens overall for most users to take snapshots with. It is an unsuitable lens for macro or professional use.
After page one I gave up reading the rest of the posts :P But you get what you pay for, and at $100, the 18-55mm EF-S is not a bad lens at all. But there are better lenses out there just need to folk out more $$$ for it.
Tim, if you aren't already doing so, try this technique.
Put the camera on a tripod. You want two light sources: one upper right, and one directly to the left. These can be table lamps, or the one on the left could be a reflector. Best not to use flash. The idea is to see how the light is falling across the jewelry, and adjust it to minimize shadows and enhance the luster/sparke of the jewelry. Focus carefully on the blue gem, AFTER the tripod is locked down and the camera isn't going to be moved again. If autofocus isn't cutting it, try manual focusing. You'll want a lot of light to get this right. Shoot in aperture priority mode at f/16 or f/19, with mirror lockup and the self-timer.
Dave Baker wrote:
plus put the darned thing under/inside some diffusion material. You've got way too much going on in the reflections.
... and give it a quick polish.
Right... consider my suggestions as starting points. I was going to comment on the reflections, as it almost looks like I can see Tim standing there taking the photo. As for the jewelry itself, a quick dip in some jewelry cleaner and a rinse will clean it up nicely.
HinduG wrote:
I think maybe he was referring to the quality of the images taken with the Kit Lens (18-55 EF-S).
I'll just congratulate myself for getting the original point from the OP.
People don't poo-poo on the output of kit lenses alone. There are other factors as well. The build quality, USM or non USM, FTM, rotational front element, weather sealing, etc. Add that up, plus okay image quality, and you have a lens, that is mediocre at best.
The 50 mk II is super cheap in build quality, non-USM, average bokeh, and a non-usable focus ring, but it can produce fantastic images. Add all that up and you have a great value.
The kit lens is a cheap, all in one, tool. Its just like those old all-in-one printer,fax, scanner, copier machines. Sure they've gotten better, but their not anywhere near the quality of standalone machines (price being equal).
Tim, why not take a nice landscape type shot with the kit lens stopped down as thats what its best at ?
Using a 18-55mm lens for a macro type shot simply doesnt make alot of sense to me in the first place. its not the correct tool for the job and while it does work for that purpose, not very well. You can pound nails with a cordless drill after all but a hammer is better suited for the job.
Macro and near macro photography a very specialized type of photography with its own techniques, equipment and composition. The 18-55 is a consumer grade general purpose lens and it simply doesnt make sense to use in such a way. Even with very highly rated lens such as the 35 f1.4L, the 16-35 f2.8 L etc, a jewerly shot like yours just isnt going to work well. Its not the quality of the lens its simply the focal length and min focusing distance
The real point of the 18-55 is that its an affordable wide angle solution for people with a 1.6x crop dslr and up til very recently there were not any affordable options to give anything near wide angle
we sure are Sunny and we'll stay here until Tim proves he can take a good jewerly shot with the kit lens
To make the most of things, we are learning some do's and dont's for jewerly photography and you never know when that may be useful knowledge. Really alot of whats being said can apply to any small item photography though.
As for the latest shot I think its a step in the wrong direction for many reason
I can see you standing there in front of a window taking the shot
the fuzz is still on the left prong
the mounts simply dont look in focus to me
the background is very distracting
the other stones have a yellowish cast to them which is a big "no, no" remember the 4 C's, two of which are color and clarity so you need to make sure your WB and lighting is really spot on
the shot feels a bit "flat" overall and lacks contrast
the piece has lots of reflections on it in addition be to very dirty and spotted
last of all the angle simply doenst work for me
What I would like to see you do Tim, and I think everyone else here would as well, is to take in all the feedback and tips you've gotten and produce a nice quality jewerly shot.
I think that would be a really fitting ending to this thread and we could all walk away the better for. We woudl of seen a photographer improve his skills, a nice shot from the kitlens and lots of good info on product photography
So Tim, for tonight I challenge you to clean up that stone, play around with some lgihting, even household lamps will work, get a nice fabric to lay the stone on, and then come up with a nice angle to shoot it from. use a tripod, experiment with the DOF a bit, and then give it some nice processing to really make the whit balance and contrast "pop"
I believe you can do it and Im sure everyone else here supports you as well.
See people, less time worrying about lens and more time learning post processing can do you wonders
Hey Jeremy, Ive got about 1,200 shots from this weekends Ohio State mens and women's basketball games, care to dontate your PP skills to me for a while
See people, less time worrying about lens and more time learning post processing can do you wonders
Hey Jeremy, Ive got about 1,200 shots from this weekends Ohio State mens and women's basketball games, care to dontate your PP skills to me for a while
hahaha! Only 1200? Oh, sure, no problem! I'll do it on my 15 minite break at work tonight! :P
I'm done with shooting it, I really don't care about anyones opinion here, I posted what I thought was a pretty good example of a nice shot and I still don't care what others here think. People I know took a look at it, liked the stone and diamonds in focus, liked how it seemed to be "deep" not just a flat image.
I'm done here anyway, I'll go back to DCrecourse with the rest of the "scum."
Tim, if you can't see what's wrong with those photos, you need to develop a more critical eye. We offered you advice for how to make the photos better. If you're not interested in learning, that's fine... but don't boast about how great a given lens or a given shot is if you're not prepared to have it critiqued by folks with more experience. The fact that "people you know" with little photography knowledge think it's nice doesn't say much.
What you don't show is how crappy that lens is in low light.
I bought the kit and then I bought the 28 - 135 IS to replace the kit lens.
THEN, I woke up and bought the 70 - 200 f/2.8 L IS. Wow, forget the noise issues and lack of sharpness I was getting with the first 2 lenses. Even with a non L lens but a fast lens, 100 f/2.8, I got much sharper pictures.
The kit lens is fine for goofing around and it's so cheaply built you won't cry when it breaks, but overall, it doesn't compare to a decent lens.
Thats a bummer, I thought we were going to get a good shot out of him after all. Some people just can't handle being told that they could do better. Even with step-by-step instructions on how to do so.......
Big Bad: I'm not here to make your shot. I don't care what YOU think or what YOUR perfect shot is. In fact on your OWN WEB SITE you've got some pretty poor quality pictures (Nice purple fringe on the auroma therapy bottle, want some TIPS to fix it?)
I posted it here for one reason, and the shot I posted shows none of the typical complaints that come from the 18>55 lens. Not to point out how with 2 bouncers, better lighting, maybe a 100 MM macro, or better yet a 85 1.2 L you can get a better shot, it was to point out to the MANY folks (some who posted here, 2 who PM'd me) seeing that the kit lens isn't as bad as I've read and heard on this very forum before.
The end. No "tips" no "ways to make the shot and get nice internal reflections and polish the product before and reconsider backdrop and blah blah blah"
