Colin Mangan
, Feb 05, 2009; 12:29 p.m.
I've been practicing some accessory stills and I was in need of comments of the photo that is attached. Composition, lighting, the whole thing! Be hard on me I want to learn from this.
Untitled
Errol Young - Toronto, ON, CA , Feb 05, 2009; 02:42 p.m.
Good composition. I would have liked to see the rings completely in focus. Higher f-stop or move back and crop.
Nadine Ohara - SF Bay Area/CA 

, Feb 05, 2009; 02:53 p.m.
The scale of the bracelet in comparison to the rings takes attention away from the rings, even though the diamond is sharp. The trend is to have the diamond sharp and everything else soft, but in this case, the sharpness isn't enough. Perhaps get closer to the rings--make them bigger in the frame and the bracelet less so.
Also, the white background is kind of bland, and I think ring shots are better in color (strictly my opinion). Part of the purpose of the image is to show the rings in a personalized environment. I realize the bracelet does this to some extent, but again, perhaps a more lively background could add more. Also, the lighting on the rings could be broader and softer--like in jewelry ads.
Maria McManamey , Feb 05, 2009; 04:46 p.m.
Also, I like to put the woman's ring on top, because it is the fancier, prettier ring. Really show that diamond off, don't leave it buried in the table.
I think the bracelet does distract from the ring, because it is more ornate. It is pretty, I'd like to see a shot of the bracelet in it's own setting.
David Wegwart - Denver/CO. 
, Feb 05, 2009; 05:58 p.m.
Just an opinion and not intended to be the only way...
Ok, firstly the positioning.If the rings were to "point" to the center (al la, looking into the frame) it would be a better comp. I would also have them above whatever other elements were in the shot as a general position. So, imagine you flipped the image horizontally and vertically, that is kind of what I mean, except the rings "pointing" into the center.
Lighting: I prefer to get some pretty contrasty light for this type of close up. I would side light it in some way, rahter than top lighting it with bounced flash.
Placement: if you are putting them somewhere, get the rings on something to add dimension or interest.
Hope you don't feel bashed. Best, D.
Ed Richter
, Feb 05, 2009; 08:50 p.m.
Colin Mangan
, Feb 05, 2009; 11:16 p.m.
thanks for the input i'll try to put the suggestions into practice and see what I get!
Colin Mangan
, Feb 06, 2009; 09:52 a.m.
Colin Mangan
, Feb 06, 2009; 09:59 a.m.
Lets try this again, sorry for the double post! Which of the two photos below is better technically? Which do you prefer? Suggestions? I think I still have to work on the lighting!
Untitled
Colin Mangan
, Feb 06, 2009; 09:59 a.m.
Untitled
David Wegwart - Denver/CO. 
, Feb 06, 2009; 11:36 a.m.
Lindsay Dobson
, Feb 06, 2009; 12:19 p.m.
I always like to see rings shot without the intrusion of other objects. You can always find an interesting background - I've used tiles, bits of moss, wood, but I think colourful neckties or cravats are perfect, with natural light.
Of the two above, I prefer the first one.
Daniel S , Feb 06, 2009; 04:35 p.m.
i always try shoot so the diamond is aiming at the camera. its the most expensive part of the ring, photographs the best so it should have prominence.
another "tip" when shooting rings is make sure the engraving is right side up! sucks when u shoot it upsidedown (talking from experience)