GIA Software and Grading Reports

[Serg]

from Rapaport
http://www.rapaport.com/news/newsitem.asp?num=10883&type=all&topic=all

"GIA Software and Grading Reports

To aid all levels of the diamond trade, including manufacturers, retailers and appraisers, GIA is developing reference system software that will soon be available to provide predicted overall cut grades based on proportion information (such as crown angle or table size) and other quality factors (such as finish) input by the user.

GIA intends to provide simplified versions of this software (which will be available on the GIA website) free to consumers and members of the diamond trade. More detailed versions will also be available for those involved in diamond manufacturing. In addition, GIA plans to offer the software as an embedded function in optical measuring devices (such as those offered by Sarin and OGI).

Versions of the software will also provide the ability to compare the results from two different proposed diamonds, view “wire frame” diamond profiles for proposed diamonds, and print the calculated results..."

 

[oldminer]

I am glad that the GIA will offer some software for others to use that might give us a clue as to how GIA will grade the Cut of a diamond. It will also be good that the devices in common use, Ogi and Sarin, will also have this software built in at some future time.

The "devil is in the details", so it is said. How accurately and completely the stone is measured will dictate the final computational prediction of brilliancy. The elements not measured are going to be an issue, the elements computed, but not actually measured will be another. The clarity of the stone might effect outcome. The degree of transparency and UV fluorescence will also have an effect on light performance which measurments alone cannot address. Dealers and retailers always tell people how truly unique every diamond is. This is TRUE. Every diamond is unique in some small way, if you measure properly. The smallest details can and do have an effect on visual light performance. I don''t doubt the depth of study GIA has put into their efforts, but it is my belief that directly measuring light perfomance has the potential to be precisely accurate where computing performance from even extensive measurements is a flawed scheme. Using the present day tools for measurment such as what is offered by Ogi and Sarin, are very inadequate to the task of predicting light performance. Even with highly sophisticated devices that will measure with greater precision, the computation of light return will be innaccurate or incorrect.

To be fair, these new software programs combined with better devices, will be better than where we are today. It is progress, but does not solve the problem with a true and total result. I would say that direct measurement of light behavior in a controlled and acceptable environment will prove more trustworthy and accurate.

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 12/1/2004 12:32:19 PM
Author: oldminer
I am glad that the GIA will offer some software for others to use that might give us a clue as to how GIA will grade the Cut of a diamond. It will also be good that the devices in common use, Ogi and Sarin, will also have this software built in at some future time.

The ''devil is in the details'', so it is said. How accurately and completely the stone is measured will dictate the final computational prediction of brilliancy. The elements not measured are going to be an issue, the elements computed, but not actually measured will be another. The clarity of the stone might effect outcome. The degree of transparency and UV fluorescence will also have an effect on light performance which measurments alone cannot address. Dealers and retailers always tell people how truly unique every diamond is. This is TRUE. Every diamond is unique in some small way, if you measure properly. The smallest details can and do have an effect on visual light performance. I don''t doubt the depth of study GIA has put into their efforts, but it is my belief that directly measuring light perfomance has the potential to be precisely accurate where computing performance from even extensive measurements is a flawed scheme. Using the present day tools for measurment such as what is offered by Ogi and Sarin, are very inadequate to the task of predicting light performance. Even with highly sophisticated devices that will measure with greater precision, the computation of light return will be innaccurate or incorrect.

To be fair, these new software programs combined with better devices, will be better than where we are today. It is progress, but does not solve the problem with a true and total result. I would say that direct measurement of light behavior in a controlled and acceptable environment will prove more trustworthy and accurate.




David, I agree that measurement is not always accurate for light return. I''ve been saying that for a long time. Direct proportion measurement is certainly useful and indictive in many cases, there are far attributes for light return than what the numbers reveal.

Relying on just the "numbers" and not further tests is NOT reliable as far as light return is concerned. Stones have to be looked at in many positions and many types of light to determine their "sparkle".


Cut grading based on proportional results only can be very misleading. I''m sure you''ll agree that the stone must be seen.


Regards


Rockdoc

 

[Serg]

Date: 12/1/2004 12:32:19 PM
Author: oldminer
I am glad that the GIA will offer some software for others to use that might give us a clue as to how GIA will grade the Cut of a diamond. It will also be good that the devices in common use, Ogi and Sarin, will also have this software built in at some future time.

The ''devil is in the details'', so it is said. How accurately and completely the stone is measured will dictate the final computational prediction of brilliancy. The elements not measured are going to be an issue, the elements computed, but not actually measured will be another. The clarity of the stone might effect outcome. The degree of transparency and UV fluorescence will also have an effect on light performance which measurments alone cannot address. Dealers and retailers always tell people how truly unique every diamond is. This is TRUE. Every diamond is unique in some small way, if you measure properly. The smallest details can and do have an effect on visual light performance. I don''t doubt the depth of study GIA has put into their efforts, but it is my belief that directly measuring light perfomance has the potential to be precisely accurate where computing performance from even extensive measurements is a flawed scheme. Using the present day tools for measurment such as what is offered by Ogi and Sarin, are very inadequate to the task of predicting light performance. Even with highly sophisticated devices that will measure with greater precision, the computation of light return will be innaccurate or incorrect.

To be fair, these new software programs combined with better devices, will be better than where we are today. It is progress, but does not solve the problem with a true and total result. I would say that direct measurement of light behavior in a controlled and acceptable environment will prove more trustworthy and accurate.

Hi David,

re:
I would say that direct measurement of light behavior in a controlled and acceptable environment will prove more trustworthy and accurate.

why?

Only direct measurement of light behavior can not model human perception .

The main task to model human perception and it is main place for mistakes.

to use direct measurement of light behavior for modeling human perception is very hard task for current level of technic.

Set should have size like big room. I am sure the indirect modeling has better chance now.

But in any case good luck.

 

[oldminer]

RocKDoc: First, welcome back. That was surely not a vacation you were on. I hope your good health will return. I do agree that one must see the stone to grade it fairly. Parameters are good predictors or screening tools, but the looks of a diamond need to be physically examined to appreciate them.


Sergey: The inventor and main force behind the development of the ImaGem unit is highly educated in the field of human perception and its implementation into computer systems. This was one of the reasons why he chose to go down the pathway of having a computer imitate human perception and did not choose to go down the modeling pathway. Surely, this is a most simplistic answer. There are reasons that are not put forth here that encouraged him to use the methodology he chose versus other available ones such as GIA have chosen. GIA had the huge database of diamonds to work the numbers, but no one else had this. The problems with what they chose to do with those numbers and the innaccuracy of their measurements has me quite concerned, but we will see how all this works out.

Obviously, the more thorough and accurate the measurments of the diamond, the better possible predictions that could be made. The issues of clarity, transparency, fluorescence, unmeasured elements, and any calculated elements all come into question in a modeled, computed scenario.

It is an exciting time. A time of new efforts and new information.

 

[RockDoc]

David


Thanks for the well wishes. Certainly it wasn''t a vacation being in the hospital for 5 months. I did get an awakening of how troubled the health care industry is. Depressing to say the least. THe last six weeks was in a rehab center, where many of the patients are in wheel chairs with many of the same surgeries. Too many to be conincidental. The medical practiioners seem to take a pro approach to surgery much to quickly and too often. That''s too depressing and sad a subject to bring to this forum, but it certainly was an intense learning experience.

THe hurricanes here caused a lot of damage to electrical and telephone lines as well. Took seven weeks to tranfer the phone lines and get back on DSL. Finally DSL is working and the websites are back up again. I am updating a lot of equipment and looking to have the most advanced lab out there for verifying consumer purchases.

Rockdoc

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

My Patent Attorney will be intersted too.