We then tried to take pictures of faceted pink tourmaline. It seems
that the beauty of the stone (all the facets) is taking away from the
beauty of the actual picture. The picture looks very black. We have
changed lighting,covered the lights, put in a mirror nothing
Not the expert in photography,but I am real pleased with my
results,accurate color,sharp details.Check it out at my site the URL
below. A digital camera should take minutes to set up the stage.Then
shoot a series of photos,perfect.I use a Kodak DC120.Discontinued
now,I got it about 4-5 years ago.I thought to upgrade many times,but
the Macro features on this camera are better than newer versions.
Learning artifical lighting like it appears you are trying is really
hard.Take your photos in natural indirect sunlight.Outside on your
porch or deck,a windowsill.Put your camera on a tripod,and I use white
computer typing paper as backdrop.My camera feeds to the computer by a
serial port cable,and there is a program in which you can adjust the f
stop,shutter speed.The actual picture is triggered in the program,you
don’t touch the camera,no blur.I shoot 1 photo to check out focus.Then
adjust the height of the tripod or back and forth until perfect.Max
2-3 photo’s more.Then once the stage is “set” shoot hundreds of
photos.You can mark the windowsill with pencil line of your
successfull position at a particular hour of the day.Then the whole
process is speeded up.With practice you get a feel for all this,and
can just hold the camera in your hand.Crop the photos and a lightening
of one or two shades is all the doctoring I ever have to do
after.Indirect natural sunlight is a snap,perfect color.On very dark
stones like Garnet,direct sunlight,with a reflective background.If you
are getting too much flashback,just a white typing paper,if not a
mirror.I get good results with a sheet of aluminium. The trick is to
make sure your camera has good Macro capability,and can accept
10x,20x,30x lens for small objects. Mark Liccini http://www.LICCINI.com
It all depends on what you want to do with the camera. If you want it
mainly for close up shots of jewelry, then you want the BEST Macro
capability. That’s the Nikon 990. If you want GOOD close up
capability but your main consideration is portability and small size
for carrying in your shirt pocket, then Canon S100 is for you. If
Macro capability is not important but printing fine quality 8 X 10s is
what you mainly want to do, the ANY 3.X Megapixel camera by Nikon,
Canon, Sony or Olympus or Kodak will do fine. If you just want to
display images on the web or e-mail, any decent 1.X Megapixel camera
will suffice. There are at least 75 different digital cameras from at
least 10 different manufacturers on the market today. ALL are a best
buy for SOMEONE, because of that person’s special needs. Your "Guru"
is assuming that HIS priorities are the same as yours. My guess is
that they are not. If you can post, in order of importance, what you
want your camera to do, then I or some other Orchidian will be able to
advise you intelligently. The hardest thing to do is to decide what is
REALLY important to you and try not be influenced by marketing hype to
think you need the biggest, latest, fanciest camera, laden with
features you will never use… Bob Williams
Hello camera mavens! I have my new and well used digital camera, its
a DSC-S50 / SONY / CYBER-SHOT / 2.1 pixels. Its takes sound movies and
great close-ups, how about 1-2 inches from the lens to the item? I can
use 640 pixels and but it can jump up to 1600x1200 pixels size. Its
light weight, small, very compact! I have three memory chips 4 mb, 16
mb and a 32 mb for a grand total of ONLY 750 usable pictures! If you
guys/gals buy this, make sure you have a re-chargeable unit for your
battery, at all times. The battery lasts for 3 hours only! which is
still great on vacations and at the bench, like what I do! If you all
want to click into my new web-site in about three weeks time, you
will see all of my pictures www.gemzdiamondsetting.com
I was just given the cybershot S50 and I am having much trouble using
the on screen menu. I find the manual inadequate. Any help would be
much appreciated.
The Nikon 990 can be purchased for about $800-$825. However, it has
been discontinued, soon to be replaced by the 995. Also, you’ll want
to use the closeup lens adapter kit. Gesswein sells the adapter kits.
The Nikon 990 is costing between 645$ to 999$. Unfortunately though
it is going out of ther market and i am talking from personal
experience that I tried to buy it just a week ago, but in it’s place
it will come the coolpix 995 that has 4x zoom, one more then the 990
and it has also a built in flash. Through internet they told me that
the new coolpix 995 it will be for sale soon, now how soon only god
knows. I hope that this helps.
I use a Sony Mavica FD 90 which has superb macro capabilities. Here’s
a shot of a ring I took yesterday. The lighting is not that good since
I didn’t use my regular lighting setup, but simply laid it on a white
sheet of paper in my lap here in the computer room and did a quick
shot. However, it WILL show you the capabilities of this camera
The FD 90 copies to a floppy disk which is GREAT. No cables or
special software, etc. Also check out http://www.hobonickel.net 95%
of those images are taken with the same camera.
Richard, Currently the Nikon 990 (which I have used for some time) is
available by careful searching of Web sites for about $850-900.
Finding one in stock might be a problem as Nikon has never been able
to keep up with the demand. The 990 has been “replaced” by the
recently released 995, good luck finding it in stock. The differences
can be seen at www.steves-digicams.com, with which I have no
connection. I run a custom design only retail outlet but have a great
deal of prior experience in the photography of small objects,
including silverware, glassware and jewelry for catalog production as
I used to own a business doing just that. In those days it was all
film, and for serious work still is, but there is a place for digital
work…and the Web is it. You won’t go wrong with either the 990 or
the 995. Lighting is everything, with any camera, and jewelry and
gems are very demanding. We are working on a simple solution for those
with those needs and can provide lighting solutions from very cheap up
to over $1000 for serious professional work requiring photography of
objects over the size of a breadbox and these solutions are good for
either digital or film. If there’s any interest, I can post some
simple shots of jewelry done using the setup I’m talking about. Heck,
for occasional use, it can be done under $100, easily.
I just bought a “close-up” lens for my Sony Cyber-shot camera,
$135.00 CDN. . Its like having a microscope attached to my camera. The
total distance from lens to object is not DOWN TO ONLY 1 INCH…the
results are fantastic! If this had to be a “SLR-35mm”, I would need
tunz of attachments and lens coupling devices… With this new
advancement in digital, I hear that Kodak is having a real tough time
keeping up with the ‘new kid on the block’. Either they must adjust to
the reality in photograhy, NOW, or say “oops, we missed the
train!”…gerry, the cyber-setter / teacher / writer /
Depends the purpose of the photo… For the web… the poor
resolution of a cheap scanner will do… say 300… but for slides,
etc. then 600 should be a min… Jim
...I was wondering if anyone out there can recommend a digital
camera for taking photos of my jewellery.
Hi Karen, Last September there was a lot of discussion about digital
cameras, so it may help to check the archives. I just joined then and
had many of your same questions. My old SLR had been taking nice
shots with a close up lens for years, but not good enough for a new
website. Bottom line, after reading everything posted on Orchid,
getting some direct e-mail help from one of the members, and doing
other research, I purchased a Nikon CoolPix 995. I love it. Can’t say
enough good about it (so contact me if you’d like more info!) The
only drawback was the price: over $900, but I read on Polygon that
the prices have dropped to around $600 recently. I also decided to
spring for a Cloud Dome because I didn’t want to take the time to get
something else set up, but again, all the is in the
archives: Wayne Emery’s posting on creating successful lighting
seemed excellent. The Cloud Dome works great with the lighting I used
befoRe: the metal has no problem hot spots, the gems sparkle, the
resolution is great… With this camera and lighting system, I don’t
see the need to spend a lot of time reading about how to take good
photos - the equipment does it for you!