PDA

View Full Version : Eye clean, loupe clean or...



Gemsetterchris
24-03-2013, 09:33 AM
What seems the standard these days? Has it upgraded with more people becoming aware of details thanks to microscope filming & internet ability to view close up work?
I don't know of any goldsmiths working under microscope but I notice the setter needs to these days to keep up with what's expected...your thoughts?

Quite a lot of soldering work looks quite grim magnified yet that seems not to matter :confused:


Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

Dennis
24-03-2013, 11:16 AM
Well getting into Photoshop did it for me, because once you crop your photo you also enlarge it disclosing all the cruddy defects. Patstone Has already said she inspects her work on a photograph before finishing it.

Once I saw a strange object on my photo and realised that it was a ball of shot trapped after tumbling. As for getting a microscope, that would be a luxury too far. Dennis.

Gemsetterchris
24-03-2013, 11:47 AM
Back in the day, we all worked by eye & only the top manufacturers louped work..nowadays even run of the mill setting jobs are jumped on even though the mount quality doesn't match up.
Worse still, the overall job looks fine to the eye, which is the whole point!
I am aware that consumers are abit more knowledgeable due to technology..but I think It's getting abit ridiculous :)
I must add I do like messing around with details no-one can see at my own expense..that's why I never say I'm "working" only setting.
Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

SilverBouillon
24-03-2013, 12:10 PM
Well getting into Photoshop did it for me, because once you crop your photo you also enlarge it disclosing all the cruddy defects.
I use macro settings in my camera for it taking pictures under daylight. It works so well for me, so I'm not happy yet with anything I try to make :) Now I'm trying to take pictures of pre-polished things to see what will be a nasty scratch after final polish. I do so many scratches so far.
But I calmed down about all of it, just patient and keep practicing.

Gemsetterchris
24-03-2013, 12:18 PM
Trying to get a great job to look good in a closeup pic is an art in itself..I gave up & use "arty" instagram ones now for less hassle :)

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

Wallace
24-03-2013, 01:32 PM
I have several lens types, but have an optitions appointment booked for getting something that is going to work close up. I couldn't afford a scope unless there was a sale and I was lucky like Peter. But, in saying that. I am happy with what I do and so are my customers. So for the sake of my loupes, optisight and optilight I am doing all I need to for now. I won't go down the smaller than the 1mm that I set, but imagine it would be fun to do with something that gave you mega vision.

ps_bond
24-03-2013, 02:03 PM
Back in the day, we all worked by eye & only the top manufacturers louped work..nowadays even run of the mill setting jobs are jumped on even though the mount quality doesn't match up.

I've seen Hans Meevis comment to the effect that if you aren't setting by scope in Germany, you aren't setting. Surely it has to depend upon price point?


Worse still, the overall job looks fine to the eye, which is the whole point!

Yup - if it looks clean under a loupe, it'll look perfect to the eye.


I am aware that consumers are abit more knowledgeable due to technology..but I think It's getting abit ridiculous :)

Again, price? If it is a piece worth (or costing anyway) eg £50k, then the labour needs to be pretty good to justify the cost - and I suppose being able to blow a picture up to A3 and not see a flaw goes with the value of the piece.

If it's £200, then it isn't really justified. But then there's the pride in getting the job done as perfectly as possible.

medusa
24-03-2013, 02:14 PM
I got so horrified at my soldering after seeing blow ups that I stopped using it on my collars and just used cold connections for a while.

Like Pete says, if you are spending thousands on a piece, then you would expect pristine settings, mounts and overall manufacturing, but for a couple of hundred quid you wouldn't.

Also, and I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I kinda like slight imperfection. It gives something a human touch.

Petal
24-03-2013, 06:14 PM
I've been beating myself on the head for the last few months for the quality of my work. I'd assessed it before Christmas under my magnifying glass and didn't like what I saw. The links of my maille looked unclosed and I just wasn't happy with it. I've also spent some time researching other maille sites and comparing my jewellery to the competition. I saw badly closed rings and really badly taken photographs, blurred etc. I find it hard to accept any flaws in my work and feel that once someone sees a jumpring that is slightly open in a photograph, that they will not want to buy, but perhaps I need to be less critical. (I still want my rings to be perfect though...). :D

medusa
26-03-2013, 05:38 PM
I think something like chainmaille must drive you mad if you wanted completely perfect closures. I don't think I've ever seen a closeup of any sizable piece where the links were even nearly perfect. Its good to aim for perfection though :)

Petal
27-03-2013, 08:52 PM
I think something like chainmaille must drive you mad if you wanted completely perfect closures. I don't think I've ever seen a closeup of any sizable piece where the links were even nearly perfect. Its good to aim for perfection though :)

I made the mistake of asking someone close to me ! to have a look at my stuff for any imperfections. He used a x10 loupe and under that magnification every single piece looked dreadful. Trouble is, when you photograph something to go onto a website etc, the tiniest imperfections looks terrible. Trying to draw a line between what is acceptable and what is not is really difficult, especially when comparing with other work that is out there.

Do others have a formula that they use that they are happy to share? ie up to 3 jump rings that are not EXACTLY aligned is ok, but more than that is not...? (I tried to italicize the exactly, but for some reason this option was not available, so my apols for caps).

enigma
24-09-2014, 11:12 PM
Sorry for replying to an old thread but just wanted to say that Ive given in and bought a Leica scope because my damn camera ( Nikon D200 or some such with macro lens) shows me all the flaws my eye couldn't see every time I have to photograph for customers.
My purse isn't happy but Im hoping my eyes will be :-"

Gemsetterchris
25-09-2014, 04:10 AM
Good choice.
The pain of expense will go eventually but the scope will help no end.
Strange you dug up this old thread as I'm in the middle of a row about the same thing that prompted this in the first place..nothings changed.:rolleyes:

Patstone
25-09-2014, 05:52 AM
I have actually had a customer at a craft show take out a loupe from her handbag to look at a ring of mine. It must have been ok cos she bought it.

Hans Meevis
25-09-2014, 06:39 AM
"I've seen Hans Meevis comment to the effect that if you aren't setting by scope in Germany, you aren't setting. Surely it has to depend upon price point?"

I wish that were true.

I had to really raise the bar in terms of anal perfection when I do work here.

Unfortunately, the prices didn't rise in sympathy as well.

The piece looks perfect when you finished, put it under the microscope--- and you look like a rank beginner.

Back to the bench.

It is a real drag, but eventually you do all the prep work absolutely perfectly, as in finish, and then the later work is not too bad.

Basically, a microscope causes you to work harder for the same money.

Sad but true.

Gemsetterchris
25-09-2014, 07:06 AM
It`s a case of learning what is a realistic level of "perfection" when using a scope.
If it looks neat at x10 -x15 then it should be more than ok, you can go further but for what purpose?

After a few hours wear a ring looks a mess of scratches anyhoo.

I find the scope makes neat work easier, less damaged or loose stones & a healthier back, neck & eyes.

What irritates me is stone setting being louped when it`s had to be done for peanuts with a less than perfect mount.

Goldsmiths don`t generally work under microscope, so how come they get away with what looks a mess magnified but setters can`t ?
Customers are quick to point out minor setting details, but get upset when you tell them their metalwork was crap to begin with & any any defects were unavoidable because of it.

Bit like trying to make a silk purse out of a sow`s ear & taking the flak because the result never came.

enigma
25-09-2014, 09:15 AM
I did manage to find it second hand so it wasn't as painful as it could have been thankfully.

As regards the metalwork getting scratched, I always think that when Im polishing trying to get a perfect finish and wearing gloves so I don't mark it- all seems crazy really when by the time the customer has picked it out of the box they will have their own fingerprints all over it lol
Not sure I want to see my soldering at 10X though :-O

Gemsetterchris
25-09-2014, 09:54 AM
You need to present stuff as best you can, but I know what you mean especially if someone else wants a look first (don`t touch it)!
As to soldering ect, that`s exactly my point regarding the smithing side of things..it`s all one sided.

All being well having top quality materials but unless they are properly calibrated & put together (mounting & setting) to the same standard, you won`t get a high end result.

enigma
25-09-2014, 11:07 AM
Thing is if you don't work with magnification you are still going to see flaws the minute you take a decent photograph anyway and I find once seen you can't unsee so all that leaves you with is the knowledge that your work has flaws but the inability to prevent them.
Maybe I should have ditched the Nikon and just use my iPhone to take pics though , would be much cheaper :D

Dennis
25-09-2014, 11:20 AM
Would this be a worthwhile cheaper option, or a complete waste of money? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AmScope-SE400-Z-10X-20X-Widefield-Binocular-Inspection-Stereo-Microscope-on-Boom-/151383077749?_trksid=p2054897.l5660

Gemsetterchris
25-09-2014, 12:15 PM
Might do for inspection but if your wanting a decent one for full time use then probably not.

Hans Meevis
25-09-2014, 12:21 PM
What irritates me is stone setting being louped when it`s had to be done for peanuts with a less than perfect mount.

That's the truth.

Make no mistake, having a microscope is a major advantage with work.

Especially when one of those rings comes in that sheds a bunch of micro pavé diamonds in the ultra sonic.

I have something similar to the micro scope you sent a link too, Dennis.

It works very well for me.

Dennis
25-09-2014, 07:31 PM
Thanks Chris and Hans, I'll do a bit more browsing and then take the plunge. However I would like to tackle imperfections while looking down it, so I need room to work and use tools without getting sea sick.

enigma
25-09-2014, 07:40 PM
If its any help Dennis I found a good used Leica for £580 on ebay .

ps_bond
25-09-2014, 08:57 PM
I probably shouldn't mention my £10 Nikon again :D

enigma
25-09-2014, 09:24 PM
No, go away Peter :-p

Dennis
25-09-2014, 09:48 PM
OK, so how about one of you kind people outlining the basic requirements and which marques to look out for?

ps_bond
26-09-2014, 05:33 AM
A first stab:

Stereo zoom microscope with a boom arm (as opposed to on a traditional scope stand), reflected illumination (ringlight or external spotlight)
10x eyepieces, objective up to around 2x for 20x total.
Working space under the scope is vital - I'll measure mine but as a rough guess 4". No point being able to magnify if you can't get at things.
At least one eyepiece separately focussable (2, fine - but focus with one eye and adjust the other)
Not down to the scope - workholding. Mostly a variation on the GRS microblock in my case.

Good optics. Poor optics will give you eye strain as you try to compensate.

Good brands: Leica, Nikon, Meiji
Amscope - according to what I've read - is a bit variable on quality, so there are some good examples and there are some bad ones.

Gemsetterchris
26-09-2014, 05:44 AM
The general setup for a scope would be x10 eyepieces & .5 barlow lens (plus a movable stand & ring light).
That`ll give you around 6" of clearance space to work.
You want a stereo microscope & adjustable eyepieces.

Meiji, Leica, Omano, Zeiss, Nikon, Olympus ..

AVOID- cheap chinese scopes or unfamiliar names as the optics inside are often inferior (mirror glass rather than optical) & you`ll possibly not do your eyes any favours in the long run & get a headache if using for hours at a time.

Second hand on ebay is a minefield so be careful & resist those cheap bargains.

If you want to play safer, look on the selling section of the engraving forums until you find one from a regular member (bear in mind most are in the USA, but once in a while local),

Safer still either a Leica or Meiji from a tool supplier, all ready & no risk .

They can be expensive, but if your intending to use it alot, it pays to spend out on a decent safe scope with good optics in the long run.
It`ll last a lifetime & have your eyes thanking you.

If you can go & test one out somewhere first, that would be sensible...

ps_bond
26-09-2014, 05:49 AM
The general setup for a scope would be x10 eyepieces & .5 barlow lens (plus a movable stand & ring light).
That`ll give you around 6" of clearance space to work.

OK, my Nikon has x4 objective and a 0.5 Barlow. But... Someone else advocates no Barlow.

If I end up needing a second scope I'll probably just buy a new Meiji for ease & convenience.

Gemsetterchris
26-09-2014, 06:08 AM
It`s abit complicated & I only go with what`s been said on the engraving forums..there are probably various options if you understand all that technical stuff (which i don`t) :( Also why i just got one from the tool store to save the headache & risk.

As for work holding.. I guess a bench pin or benchmate is do-able but requires moving the scope stand alot (which is a pain) & re-focusing ect.

Using a engraving block on a flat surface is way better, microblock for small things is perfect & you can get step raisers for it.

The reason is tilting the work & it going out of view & focus, so a block can be easily slid around & raised/lowered as needed much faster without so much hassle of adjusting everything constantly.

They are abit clumsy to use to begin with, but once you get the hang of it becomes second nature.

ps_bond
26-09-2014, 06:28 AM
I've printed 3 different height stands as I got fed up with the step risers - more fiddly than I could be bothered with in the end. I probably ought to put them up on Thingiverse.

Gemsetterchris
26-09-2014, 08:06 AM
OK, my Nikon has x4 objective and a 0.5 Barlow. But... Someone else advocates no Barlow.

If I end up needing a second scope I'll probably just buy a new Meiji for ease & convenience.


Without a Barlow you get more magnification but alot less working distance.

ps_bond
26-09-2014, 08:33 AM
...Which is why I've got one. Working with a Meiji without a Barlow turned out to be feasible. Bench height was probably part of that equation too.

Dennis
26-09-2014, 08:47 AM
Well that's something to be going on with. Thank you.

enigma
26-09-2014, 08:49 AM
Yikes another £400 plus !
http://www.suttontools.co.uk/engraver-s-bullet-with-30-piece-accessory-set.html

Too many toys to buy in this jewellery lark :-O

Gemsetterchris
26-09-2014, 09:11 AM
http://www.suttontools.co.uk/grs-micro-engravers-block.html

This is better for jewellery size stuff.

Workbench height: I had to get an adjustable height chair & put my drill foot pedal on a footrest once the scope was in place.

enigma
26-09-2014, 09:20 AM
Thanks Chris, that price is a bit better!

josef1
26-09-2014, 09:25 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd6FfPtS_ys&list=UU8PYq3lRFdXS9wxepg9BNKQ

this is how I got round the hassle of different fixtures its a cheap microscope but I remade the stand an built a bench for it.

Gemsetterchris
26-09-2014, 10:01 AM
That`s abit posh Josef =D>
Hate clicking youtube links as I end up watching more..nice CAD videos, way beyond my skills.