Tweet
Re: Awful flame tops.
You're a horn swallower?
You're a horn swallower?
-
I feel my soul go cold... only the dead are smiling. -
Re: Awful flame tops.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">damn, that's purdy [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]Originally posted by Stephan:
Since we're postin' pics..
Warmoth here, Tung Oil only on this one.. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]
Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
Its definately about the type of light (incandescent, floro, sun, flash, etc), your angle viewing the top and the angle the light is striking it. As well the quality and grain pattern of the wood. But in making pictures, its easy to get a crappy view on a nice guitar.
Both those 1st pics are focused on the background, bleached by bright direct sunlight and at an angle in late day sun.
Check this. You would wonder if it even was a flame top. Example 1 CRAP
Now same model guitar, but this one is mine, one crappy pic, one much nicer, totally different light setups, angles, etc, BIG difference.
Not so fabulous flametop.
More fabulous
Most people with digital cameras put it on automode and click away, but if you play with manual settings, you tend to get better pics.
Also, Archtop can vouch for this, I rag about people who seem to think direct sunlight pictures would be best, but I tend to disagree in most cases.
As well digital cameras compute all kinds of crap about the brightness and contrasts of the surrounding background, which 90% of the time takes away from the primary subject of the picture (guitar)
One of my fav sunlit pic environments, very overcast (no direct sun), but bright and diffuse, with a dark shady background provides crisp pics.
Example Not a megaflametop but givin another guitar would be.
I think overall, most people take pics to show a basic representation of a guitar, and not what would make it stand out (flames, etc) They're dealers/players, not photographers and I would bet either guitar doesn't look that bad in person. Maybe not phenomenal McNaught-like flametops, but we're also not paying 3x as much.
Sure there are some with tops better than others, but I'd gamble that's the nature of a production flametop.
Ramble over...Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
Hey Audiophile, that's my bookscan, been a while since I posted that!!
And yes, I agree with you, with maple tops a subtle change in angle will change the way the top looks. Add in some careless photography and you get what you get above. Both guitars are probably great looking in person and because the light hits each seperate maple laminate differently, they'll look like that in a crappy photo.
The maple tops may be thin, but, like most maple tops these days, they are only there for SHOW. They make the guitar look nice without charging you extra for a thick maple cap. They're not there to change the guitars tone, just it's looks. This ain't a Les Paul maple cap situation, it's a maple laminate one.
Be happy it is at least real wood and not just a photo!!Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
Speaking of flame tops, what's the thickness of the maple veneer on an SL2H ?Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
I really believe that the thickness of the vaneer has alot to do with the quality. I usually find that the flamed vaneer tops on many inexpensive guitar is usually nicer than some of the middle priced guitars. This is prabobly because the veneered wood is so thin. If have a thicker vaneer the quality seems to go down, until you start to pay a few grand. Look at all the PRS guitars with the crappy flame and quilted tops. Unless you get a 10 top, which will cost more, The PRS caps are not really that nice. If you put a cheap jackson import with a flame vaneer on it next to a PRS CE. Most of the time the flame on the Jackson will look nicer, but it is nowhere near at thick as the maple cap on the PRS. Not bashing PRS I actually own three, just an observation.Damn, I love this Interweb.Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
That makes sense in that a really thin veneer of great flame is dirt cheap compared to a thick maple cap with some decent flame/quilt to it. The
Still, it can be done, check this out, heh heh. This pic is of a guitar of mine. That is a maple cap designed to not only look good, but affect the tone of the guitar. After this pic it got a blackburst on the edges, but this one shows the flame better. You can see it on the edges too, it's very cool.Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
Vic and Stephen, those guitars are drop dead gorgeous!!! [img]graemlins/drool2.gif[/img] One thing about flamed maple, when it looks good it looks GOOD, but when it looks bad........ [img]graemlins/puke.gif[/img]My goal in life is to be the kind of asshole my wife thinks I am.Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
I (like Inazone) have bought 2 Jacksons from GuitarXpress.com as well, (an SL1 Soloist USA select and a DK2, both with flame-tops),and mine came just as they showed in the webpages; I couldn't be happier with them! My red one even has a neck with an unusual flame on its back that runs vertically rather than along the length of the neck; never had one like it before. But yeah, if it isn't the light those pics were taken in, then someone had to either order them online and never saw them first, or just bought whatever they had left at their local neighborhood guitar store, I'd bet. I know I'd be pissed if I received one of them! To any of you who are a little nervous about ordering an axe online before you ever play it, then I highly recommend GuitarXpress.com to you. They are the largest independent Jackson dealer in the USA (out of Tulsa, OK.) and they really bend over backwards to make sure that you get what you want. I'll go to them again, should I choose to add another axe to my collection...
KarmicApexIntellectComment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
Audio, I agree with you that the camera DOES make a difference, however those pics, the camera would only help so much, you can clearly tell they are different colors, and that they are mismatched.
The automode on my G3powershot blows away most manual modes (like on the nikon 5700 turd).
I do play with the manual mode, I like being in control of my ISO and my shutter speed, but even in my manual mode I get light balance control, and many others.
For the money one of the g3 powershots is, its well worth it.
I read that the g5 technically takes better pics, but the naked eye sees the g3s as being better, go figure, and since the g5 is out, the g3 is probably a bit cheaper.
For all the more they cost, they are the best bang for the buck, along with all the extensions you can buy for it, unless you spend 2x as much as this camera, you won't find one better, (IMHO).Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
O btw, my EBMM has a 1/4 flame on it, and it looks wonderful.Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
I still miss that Hamer... it was a KILLER guitar.
Pete
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by toejam:
Here's some cool flame on my Hamer and Carvin. They look pretty good in the pics, but they look much better in person. http://members.aol.com/stratotone/hamerflame.jpg
http://carvin.electricshockmusic.com/toejamdc400_2.jpgComment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
It's even more killer now with the chrome EMG 81 set!! [img]graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]I feel my soul go cold... only the dead are smiling.Comment
-
Re: Awful flame tops.
Here are some of my EBMM Axis, in AUTO MODE, only change is the flash, and the white balance. The THICK 1/4 inch flame on this looks KILLER.
This is to say that thick flames DO look good, and it is to show that these NORMAL not even TRYING to get good pictures look good, thus proving those 1st 2 guitars are ass ugly.
<img src=http://onlinerock.com/clubs/marywithacherry//withoutflash.jpg><hr><img src=http://onlinerock.com/clubs/marywithacherry//mmflame.jpg><hr><img src=http://onlinerock.com/clubs/marywithacherry//headwithflash.jpg><hr><img src=http://onlinerock.com/clubs/marywithacherry//facewithflash.jpg><hr><img src=http://onlinerock.com/clubs/marywithacherry//closerwithflash.jpg><hr>
Admins, feel free to resize, they are like 555 by whatever makes it even. They originally were 2218x1900 something like that.
That was in poor light also, I have a 60 watt bulb in my bedroom that is 22'x18'.(I want track lighting, and if I do not change the present bulb I am more inclined to put it in [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
I could get alot better pics too, it took more time to type this out than taking those 5 did. In good light whatever manual mode, I could probably make the guitar look better than it does.Comment
Comment