Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I was just browsing through current ebay auctions and came across this 360 in fireglo. I hate to dis any Ric, but this might be the worst fireglo ever. There's almost no fade at all. I much prefer the well faded ones, like some of the '08s that have been showing up lately.

I've got to agree with you, Brian....... Clownglo at its worst!!

Mind you, I would have experimented with many different angles to try and make it look more like a 'normal' burst.... which can be done.

Wow..Where's my sunglasses? In all fairness, it's probably not as bad in person as the photos show, but still. What year is it?

Totally not that bad in person.

Fireglo goes not like flashes, and reflects em like made it seems.

It wasn't uncommon to see one auction with a photo like that next to a natural light shot that was a gorgeous transition and the color we love.

That's a Harrisonglo - back when they were practicing it for the 360/12c63 and it ended up on every FG guitar...note the overspray on the 'ramp'

dpowell wrote:That's a Harrisonglo - back when they were practicing it for the 360/12c63 and it ended up on every FG guitar...note the overspray on the 'ramp'

My '02 330 had that same ramp overspray, and not a very pretty Fireglo either. It's with Dale.

Eew...

In all fairness, my FG Comstock tends to look like "clownglo" when I photograph it, but it really doesn't look that way in person--the burst is really much more gradual than it looks in pictures--for some reason the camera doesn't capture the transition very well.

Nope....... that's 'Comstockglo' and is perfectly normal and permissible!!

I agree with you, Melibee - your Comstock looks nothing like the pic.

These bursts do not like flash photography...my MBs look awful in flash, and great in room light and natural light. The Aquaglos that I did for a couple of customers, looked terrible under flourescent, but lovely in natural sunlight. A good deal of this can be put to digital photography and its color limitations, to. Seems like I never had this problem with Ektachrome.

One thing I know is, when it comes to pictures, guitars are like people. Some picture do it for them, and some don't.

jingle_jangle wrote:These bursts do not like flash photography...my MBs look awful in flash, and great in room light and natural light. The Aquaglos that I did for a couple of customers, looked terrible under flourescent, but lovely in natural sunlight. A good deal of this can be put to digital photography and its color limitations, to. Seems like I never had this problem with Ektachrome.

Is this Aquaglo?:

Here are two photos of my Rickenbacker 360's in natural light, and even though the camera flash went off while I was taking the pictures, you can see the color transition on each guitar fairly well. The photos still do not capture the color gradient as it actually looks but the photos are close. The Montezuma Brown color fade was harder to photograph and looks the least like the actual guitar. I think natural lighting solves most of the photography issues even if it is digital photography. This photography issue seems to arise every time I try to photograph any of my guitars with a "burst finish" and so it is not just limited to Rickenbacker brand guitars although certain finishes are harder to photograph. -BC

My 2001 360/12CW has the Harrisonglo FG pattern, and I love it! Definitely nothing as garrish as those photos make it out to be. I didn't realize people had an aversion to this era of fireglo...to me, it was a bonus to get a CW with this pattern as only some of the later ones (mine's #475) had it.

I think the main complaint here was the lack of 'transition' spray on the one in the photo. Personally, I think it's a victim of bad camera flash.