10 HOURS TO RENDER!!! I hope my time was worth it. Tell me what you think.
Materials arn’t bad (there’s always room for improvment, though).
But the composition gives a strange impression of size. Like those rings could be for your arm, not fingers. There should be some space around the rings. Some surface structure could help to create a corect sense of scale.
The stone shouldn’t be so close to the border. The second ring being cropped off just slightly makes it look like an accident.
The bit one can see of the mount looks odd. Would be better to show either more or nothing of it.
You might want to read about composition, the rule of thirds and the golden ratio.
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3275&page=
The woman’s ring should be a little thinner and have something clasping the stone into place.
(laugh) I sent the wrong photo I know that one sucks. %|
Thanks for being nice, but, uh, be brutally honest, OK?
That looks much nicer thanks the warm coloured environment.
Everything else I said still stands.
I agree with streen: the woman’s ring should be a bit smaller, more fragile in an obvious way.
I agree, woman’s should be smaller.
I think it would be 1,000 times better if you gave the rings, at the very least the women’s, a little more character.
When I was ring shopping for my wedding you just didn’t see many rings with that smooth design. The smooth ones were mainly for the men, and the few smooth ones for women looked chincy. You already have a pretty nice looking diamond. What about a few inset ones, or a groove around the ring that is lined with them.
One other thing. Almost every ring has some sort of engraved lettering inside of it with the type of gold, etc. Mine says Diana PT 950 18k. Very small lettering, but I think it would add quite a bit of realism if you could engrave the inside of the ring.
Good Luck
I like the diamond on the first ring better than the second one, though the first rings light spectrums were way outdone.
I am taking up on artjunky’s idea of engraving the ring, using boolean operation, but every time I try, it says “Both meshes must be a closed mesh” What’s this about?
Only tried boolean operations several releases ago with so poor results I never touched it again. So I no clue about the current abilities/limitations.
But I asume closed means the meshes must describe a body with volume, closed on all sides (so you can’t see any face from both sides).
How else would you suggest I engrave text?
You could use displacement mapping by mapping a picture of your text or whatever onto your ring and then enabling Disp rather than Col. Alternatively, Nor map it (this will be quicker and will probably look fine but is not actual phyical displacement mapping).
If you Disp map it, ensure you have enough vertices for the displacemnt to look nice.
How do I confine it to the inside of the ring? It is always on both sides!
Also, how do I use Alpha in Nor or Disp?
Not the best at modelling myself, but for booleans you must have two closed meshes. In other words you can’t use plain text.
But you can make text, extrude it, then use boolean. Just make sure that both the front and back sides of the text have faces.
How would I bend the txt to fit the inside of the ring? (No, I am not a newbie)
You’ve got a very nice diamond; a not-quite convincing gold texture.
On my monitor at least, the gold looks somewhat green. But of greater concern is the fact that it seems to me to have no surface. There is a sharply specular quality to a fine gold.
Recall that any material in Blender can have several textures associated with it. Each texture is applied in-order, and it modulates (only) the specified variables. Therefore, you can begin with your existing gold – with slight color adjustment perhaps – and add to it the additional qualities.
To my eye, I would like to see not less than three attributes of the material quite clearly: (1) the color and surface of the material itself; (2) the sharp specularity, which primarily captures the “strobe” of my flash; and (3) a limited amount of reflectivity showing the surroundings, but which in a studio I would be taking great care to limit and to control.
Varying these three elements to a pleasing degree is a bit of a trick, and you may wish to set up an improvised studio-setup on your desktop and look at it closely to see what I mean. The subject, first and foremost of all, must be the rings. So the surface-plane of the object must be clear and distinct, and the plane of the table upon which it rests must not compete with it. Then, the object must look pleasing, because I’m shooting the photo after all to sell them. This is where the specularity, and the color of that specularity, is important … but also the reflection. The reflection is, if you will, “where the ‘pixie dust’ is,” and all good commercial photographs, especially of luxury goods, must have pixie-dust.
I suggest that you buy a copy of Bride’s magazine, even if you are a male of the species, and objectively study the photographs of jewelry. The best work of that genre, anywhere in the business, is going to be found there. You can also find excellent examples of chrome and the treatment of specularity in high-end biker magazines and magazines relating to men’s luxuries… yachts and so-forth.
It’s a very good idea to start building up your so-called “morgue file” of reference pieces. These mags are a great place to get them.
Okay, first off thanks for really making an effort to criticize (I’m not being sarcastic) But that is a little much all at once, you know? And, I have no money, so I can’t go out and buy a magazine, I am a student, you know how that is. Also, I really can’t see what you mean about “Green” in the gold, I really can’t see any flaw in the gold colour, If you can send me a photo or something to compare it to then great, but it could be my monitor, I get my inspiration for this piece from www.ice.com it really matches many of the gold colours there. I know that the design isn’t too good, I was going to inlay some square cut diamonds to create somewhat of an eternity band. I’ll post a new design photo very soon. I really don’t know what you mean by the “Pixie Dust”? I am really not a object photographer, I do outdoor and such. You obviously have the skills of the two of us so it would be very helpful to explain a bit better about what you mean. I still thank you for taking the effort.
hey
I agree i don’t see any floors in the gold, thats the problem. Between the fotographer and the desiner trying to hid the natural floors all materials have 
their don’t seem to be any clasps on the dimond which may make the lady rather upset in the morning.
i don’t like gold personally but i don’t see any green on my screen
New Design, I took out the Solitaire and AA, Time purposes, I really don’t have 10 hours to throw around. I know the square cut ceratianly need work, don’t bother with that. Tell me what you think of the design. I adjusted my monitor’s color, turned out with this:
This one I like much, much, better.
