That looks great!
Just in case others don't click through, here's my favorite view of i. Alan in those photos at the link the "glossy" material seems to play tricks with the viewing of the figure - I wonder if an alternative of having it in a "flat" material like in the original might actually look better.
Hi Cassius, thanks for sharing your favorite view. I agree that the shiny-plated version can play tricks on the eye. I would say that when viewed up close, the die cutting on it is pretty clear, however the sterling silver is definitely less shiny and more clear in comparison. In the case of either material, someone at a distance is likely going to have to ask about who it is that you're wearing on your neck, so I would bet that both have equal opportunity to be conversation starters, with the shiny-plated perhaps having a slight edge for the simple fact it is more brilliant and specularly reflective, and thus can grab the eye even faster.
Currently I purchased a 20 unit batch of sterlings silver charms to be made, and I hope that by selling a few, it will give me the capital to order a 100 unit batch of the plated-silver variant (currently it is too cost prohibitive for me to do both at this time). (In either case, the number mentioned reflects the smallest possible batch order from the company I am working with).
I will be somewhat following Elon Musk's business model with Tesla, whereby the expensive model for 'enthusiasts' facilitates and subsidizes the cheaper model for the 'general populace'.
So in the spirit of VS 39 and in view of all that I have said, these are the reasons why I need some help from other Epicurean enthusiasts to bring these charms 'to market', so I would be really honored if some others would order some. I am currently confident that it is the most competitively priced and highest fidelity designed cameo necklace of Epicurus for sale anywhere on the internet.
I do have one competitor, but his cameo doesn't exactly look like Epicurus, the medal is oversized, looks more like an award medal rather than a charm necklace for daily wear, and the whole piece itself is way overpriced for what you are getting (he wants over $200 for equivalent materials to my $70 version):
Thanks again so much for everyone's consideration!
Hi Alan --
When I was referring to tricks on the eye I probably should have been more clear, as I was thinking mostly in terms of the photos - I presume it's not the same in person.
At any rate your explanation helps -- you are doing this yourself through etsy and producing a final product - that is good. I agree your design is superior to the round one at shapeways.
I am all in favor of everyone pursuing these as they think best, and people need rewards for doing things, so I think you're probably targeting a good "sweet spot" in terms of value and price.
I hope over time that we can produce some 3d "meshes" that people who have 3d printers can download and print on their own. I don't see that as conflicting with people who want to sell finish products like you're doing, because there will always be people who don't want to mess with the technology and effort of doing their own. I see that the round one offered at shapeways can be purchased in plastic for $15.00, but eventually it would be good to get some meshes together that can be downloaded for free.
So there's room for many initiatives and I wish you success with yours.
William Bligh's ring, revisited;Quote
Don: "Far be it from me to second guess the museum, but…"Quote
Me: "The ring was made by John Miers of London, "No. 111, Strand, opposite Exeter Change." Miers lived between 1758 and 1821."
I've been looking into this, and I am even more baffled than I was before.
I've spent hours chasing down examples of John Miers' work, and I've reached a startling conclusion–I don't think he made this ring.
John Miers was a sort of jeweller. He just wasn't really a jeweller who worked with...well, with jewels. John Miers was a profile painter who specialized in "Shades"–that is to say, in silhouettes. These were enormously popular, and he was and still is regarded as the finest painter of silhouette miniatures in his day. His miniatures adorned lockets, brooches, and rings. The bulk of his work was in framed wall hangings, usually a "his and hers" that would hang prominently in the house.
There are countless surviving examples of his profiles. He advertised in newspapers a 'sitting time' for a portrait of under a minute. Goodness knows how many thousands of silhouettes he and his associate John Field cranked out. And these specimens are highly regarded by collectors; several examples of his work hang in the National Portrait Gallery in London. It is all the more surprising, then, that I cannot find a single other example of a John Miers intaglio ring.
It strikes me now as increasingly plausible that the Bligh ring was simply tucked into an old ring-case for lack of anywhere else to put it. Which puts me even further to the wrong side of square one than I was when I started.