Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 40

Thread: Eye clean, loupe clean or...

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    1,533

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by medusa View Post
    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).
    Jules

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,067

    Default

    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

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    724

    Default

    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.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Exeter, Devon
    Posts
    1,803

    Default

    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.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    53

    Default

    "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.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    724

    Default

    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.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,067

    Default

    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

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    724

    Default

    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.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,067

    Default

    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

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Central London
    Posts
    8,845

    Default

    Would this be a worthwhile cheaper option, or a complete waste of money? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AmScope-SE...p2054897.l5660

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •