Trinkette, dear, your hearing aid is on the table, over there.

 

I have to admit that I don't like the majority of lightbox photos. There is something about them that is just too impersonal for my taste (and makes me wonder where the picture was stolen from - not that I think David would ever do that, I just spend/spent too much time on eBay). DBL's previous lack of them may be the largest reason why I keep coming back here and plotting my first purchase.

I may end up getting myself banned, but in defense of GiaGirl, I do think the forum has become very "cliquey" (for lack of a better word) in the past several years.  Until GiaGirl posted her recent comments, I can't remember reading a truly dissenting opinion among the main group in a really long time.  Just my two cents.  

Another thing strikes me....
In any group situation, there's a dynamic.
People that get along famously on one level, may not relate at all on another.
That's why discussion of political views, religion- and a few other subjects is very divisive.

Many of the people posting here know me very well.
I consider many of you good friends- the others are folks I just don't know (yet).

Going back to the dynamic of any group, it's totally possible that two friends of any given person might not get along with each other.

Look, the amazing thing, to me- is that we've had this forum, which in a strange oxymoron of life, is not dominated by ads-in diamonds or jewelry discussions, it's generally about DBL.
The lack of ads and other vendors does eliminate a certain stress. I believe for both tradespeople, and consumers.

I would not want to host discussions of other vendors- positive or negative- for many reasons.
So that is "restricted"- but a passing reference in discussion is no big deal.
I used to get weirded out when people said Tiffany.
I got over it.

But other than politics, religion, or other vendors of Diamonds and Jewelry- anyone who has an opinion they'd like to voice, is welcomed to do so
If I wanted to design something to appeal to everyone, it would look nothing like DBL- some people are going to like it, some won't- and that goes for the diffident elements within DBL as well.

To all who read this: please feel free to speak your mind.
The greatest part about CDi , for me- is seeing people connect on some level- really connect- and enjoy each other's company.
Knowing we have been a part of this makes me proud.

Keep in mind I haven't been here as long as some.  So when I make a comment about cliques it's from more of an outsider point of view compared to some.  To me a clique group is one where a newcomer feels totally left out.  Now there are threads now and then I feel that way but as a whole I don't get the vibe of a big clique.

I don't always agree.  I know I said some not as good thoughts about the newer uber ring as well as the purple-pink radiant that most loved.  I feel like I can say I don't like something without fear.  I am comparing to other gem/diamond sites though where the love is no where near this level.  I feel like I can say something different and not get jumped all over.

Honestly I am still confused how this all came about with tempers flairing so quickly.  I imagine the nature of forums (text based) makes it hard.

As for R3969 the 2nd light box photo is one I do like.  I do like being able to see into the stone more like that, but then again I say I really like both.  I do think that more of the "glamour" shots definitely bring in the generic public.  I showed them to my husband and he liked the top ones first.  With the 2nd lightbox shot being a close favorite.

To me the 2nd of the lightbox shots really shows strong color and the personality of a stone in average lighting.

The first lightbox shot is just okay to me for some reason.  I think the slight blurr to the photo is a turn off.

If I were to pick a favorite, it would either be the 2nd "glamour" shot or the 2nd lightbox shot.  I actually like the 2nd lightbox shot a bit more than the 1st "glamour" shot.

For me it should be about showing off the personality of a stone.  One isn't always better than the other honestly...  but that's my thought

David, I think it's great that you are so open minded and welcoming to opinions and criticism. (not sure I would be).  I actually have not seen any of your stones in person (yet) so it is difficult for me to comment on your photos. I personally want to see realistic photos-whether they are glamourous or not. I like seeing lots of different photos of the diamonds and especially the videos. I think overall they should give a good representation of the stone. The asscher cuts and DBL branded cuts just aren't going to look as glamourous and sparkley because of the style of cutting. I don't see how that would change no matter what style of photo you do.
It annoys me that there is one particular person on Pricescope who continually infers that your photos are not representative of your stones. With soooooooo many photos that you publish  for each stone and usually a video,too,  I just have a hard time believing that your diamonds don't look like what you post- especially with so many return customers. I love your website and your photos- kudos to you,David!

For pics of R3969,  I like the 1st two without the lightbox and the 2nd in the lightbox.  The 1st lightbox shot colour is too grey/green and it kills the beauty of the stone.  As I had said in my other post, I like seeing both types of photos. 

I am guessing that it is the grey/green color characteristic, or cast, which causes a number of the lightbox photos to be less appealing to some people. I don't think it is the lightbox, per se, or even the fact that stones do not appear as the unaided human eye sees them, that makes the photos more or less appealing to folks (sorry, Mrs. M... one of the few times we disagree, lol). Rather, I believe that it may be some of the other digital exposure/color settings that are coupled with the lightbox-produced pics that result in the biggest visual impact. I remember when David was first experimenting with the then-new lightbox, he made a lot of test shots for exposure and color. If I am not mistaken, the type of shot described here as "grey/green" was what came out of that testing period. Regardless, there are lightbox photos on this very thread that look quite different in terms of their color characteristics (ie, they are not "grey/green"). What do you all think about this?

Also, in regards to photographing what looks "real," I will say that I do agree with Mrs. M. as it relates to scale, proportion and how a stone "performs" or projects itself, for sure. The videos can be great for this. Also, over the years, I have asked David to photograph several specific diamonds or rings in his hand, sometimes two or more together, from farther away. For me, the ultra-close-ups are wonderful to see "exactly" what you are getting, however, (back to the unaided-eye thingy here), I want to know what something will look like when I, or someone else, sees it being worn IRL from one foot, or several feet, away (not with a magnifier or loupe). David has been terribly gracious in taking those special-request pics for me.

I've always felt very welcome here - there was a time when I had more time to spend participating - but I've found even when I only have time to lurk, I still feel part of the CDI family. And the members are so kind when I do occasionally post.

I think that the range of photos is really important when buying from afar - but it's the glamour shots that really get my heart racing and keep me coming back to look. And the videos give a really great moving view of the pieces.