EGL rounding on certificates

[sunnyinstl]

The crown height and pavillion depth are given as a %, like 15% for crown height. How do they round these, as the difference between 14.5% and 15% is pretty huge for the holloway cut advisor.

messing w/ the numbers, i can go from a 1.5 to a 5.5 within the standard rounding range of .5

any help is greatly appreciated

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

all you can do is request a Sarin if the stone appears to be a possablity.

 

[oldminer]

Some years ago, when we first took delivery of a Sarin Diamension, we decided to put the exact measures from the Sarin into our grading reports. Little did we know the degree of accuracy was something that might be challenged. Anyway, we used decimal points and made table and dept percentages with what we though to be more accurate readings than we had done before with lesser tools. People liked the apparent accuracy, but after using this process for several years we slowly realized the numbers given us by the electronic measuring tools were not perfectly accurate.

Some labs, maybe with more educated scientists on their staff, decided to round off the numbers. It might have been the right choice since the numbers are only approximate. We give the numbers
that we get from the device and others give rounded numbers. Does it really matter?

Ultimately one chooses a diamond that one likes and does not choose by numbers. Maybe an engineer uses the numbers to choose, but most of us won''t. There was a time where numbers and clarity plots gave us all the clues about how good a diamond was. Now that we can measure Light Performance, these other factors are becoming less important relics. Your eyes are a very good clue to what suits you best.

 

[sunnyinstl]

thanks for the reply. I really like the stone, it has great white light return. the fire is lower than some stones i''ve seen, but still is nice. think i''m gonna buy it. thanks a ton

 

[Regular Guy]

Quick...name 3 ways Dave Atlas and Garry Holloway are alike!

1) both appear in this thread...

2) both create systems of cut measurement (AGA cut charts and HCA cut advisers) that they will themselves stomp on with vigor with newly created systems of cut evaluation (Idealscope).

3) (who will help me here.....?)

 

[oldminer]

#4, We both try to do what we do with integrity. I am the US distributor of the Ideal-Scope, but Garry and I do not aexactly gree on several things, too. We hope to see progress being made and I believe we both want this progress to lead to better and more useful results. Garry is a close part of the Russian Helium project besides the HCA too and the Ideal-Scope.

I don't think we want to be viewed as "stomping" on anything worthy that might be in competition with our various ideas and efforts. I support progress that is being made, even it is my competitor. I have Sarin and Ogi tools in my offices and use them constantly..... They are valuable assets.

Soirry if I seem to be in a promotional mode sometimes. I think Garry and I push our best ideas, but we are not doing it to hold back anyone else with good ideas. In the past, I contributed to Martin Haske to do research on diamonds when he needed funding. There was no promise of any return. It was done for the good of the industry and ultimately for consumers.

 

[Regular Guy]

Actually, I was only intending good fun...

Where you say...

Date: 4/13/2005 11:40:19 AM
Author: oldminer.

I don't think we want to be viewed as 'stomping' on anything worthy..., even it is my competitor...

...I was more going for the observation that 1/2 to 8/10s of a degree on a couple of dimensions on your own AGS Charts, and you're going from 1A to 2A.

Similarly, when I've tried to invoke the HCA in other contexts, Garry has told me to "give it a break!"

Anyway, to your main point, that for you both, your work is...

Date: 4/13/2005 11:40:19 AM
Author: oldminer
....done for the good of the industry and ultimately for consumers...

...I'm in full agreement, and I'll cast my vote for #3 here.