Light leakage, how can you tell in real life?

[Rockdiamond]

Garry- are you speaking of this question, page 2?

Dave,
1) what is Fire for you?
your Comments about Fire looks very strange for me. Please Clarify you Fire definition

I have read the part of the paper where the phenomena is described-
I take it to mean the prism's that come off the diamond when the angular subtend between the pupil, light source and facet plane are properly aligned- is that correct?

Secondly, how did you ever get the idea that the 'fair' stone would be spready - that would not have been the case at all.

I have seen stones that were spready have similar ASET signatures. I didn't say "would" I said "could"

Thirdly, even if such a stone was 10% smaller for the same weight, a diamond like the Ex one will appear larger in most lighting.
Any idea why?

Part of what I have been doing for this discussion is spending time speaking to a few diamond cutters to further refine my understanding.
I have an idea the scientific observations you will point to to back up your statement- however I feel that there's too many variables on the non LP stones we would use to compare.
And why do you assume only 10%?
The difference could be far greater.

Hi Garry- did you see this post of mine?
Was that the answer about fire you were looking for?

 

[Serg]

Garry- are you speaking of this question, page 2?

Dave,
1) what is Fire for you?
your Comments about Fire looks very strange for me. Please Clarify you Fire definition

I have read the part of the paper where the phenomena is described-
I take it to mean the prism's that come off the diamond when the angular subtend between the pupil, light source and facet plane are properly aligned- is that correct?

Secondly, how did you ever get the idea that the 'fair' stone would be spready - that would not have been the case at all.

I have seen stones that were spready have similar ASET signatures. I didn't say "would" I said "could"

Thirdly, even if such a stone was 10% smaller for the same weight, a diamond like the Ex one will appear larger in most lighting.
Any idea why?

Part of what I have been doing for this discussion is spending time speaking to a few diamond cutters to further refine my understanding.
I have an idea the scientific observations you will point to to back up your statement- however I feel that there's too many variables on the non LP stones we would use to compare.
And why do you assume only 10%?
The difference could be far greater.

Hi Garry- did you see this post of mine?
Was that the answer about fire you were looking for?

Dave,
you just reprinted the reason of Fire from article. You did not answer on question "what is Fire for you?"
what do you see? How do you grade Fire in diamonds? how are You show Fire to your customers? How is important Fire for you and your customers
there is big difference between reason of Phenomena and appearance of Phenomena.

You did not clarify your opinion, your observation. You just gave link to article( which do not describe Fire from Consumer point of view)

 

[Texas Leaguer]

David,
when we finish discussion about Fire, Colorless Crushed Ice cuts, I am happy discuss Fancy Color diamonds.

where is your Fire definition ? what is Fire in diamond for you?

Hi Serg,
Thank you for responding.
I am constantly doing tests on diamonds- and appreciate the method you suggested.
In general I find the most important test is actually setting the diamond to see how it's light performance is affected.

My definition of fire:
To answer simply, what I see as fire in a diamond is the way it reflects the light back to my eye.
The ASET definitely can detect differences in the brilliance of the reflections, yet sometimes my eye is pleased more by reflections that ASET proves are less brilliant - such as the facets showing green in ASET.
So, if we say a round brilliant has more "fire" than a well cut radiant, we'd have to define fire better IMO

David,
Again, I don't want to speak for Serg, but I think we may have stumbled across a source of the problem in communication. Most in the industry understand "fire" to be associated with dispersion and the resulting individual colored flashes that diamonds can produce. ASET does not directly inform us of fire.

Here is the article describing science and methodology behind the AGS light performance system. See Gem Fire section 5.4
http://www.agslab.com/spie/spie_lo_res.pdf

Garry, He did answer the question. His response to Serg is in red. To which I suggested further reading.

 

[Serg]

David,
when we finish discussion about Fire, Colorless Crushed Ice cuts, I am happy discuss Fancy Color diamonds.

where is your Fire definition ? what is Fire in diamond for you?

Hi Serg,
Thank you for responding.
I am constantly doing tests on diamonds- and appreciate the method you suggested.
In general I find the most important test is actually setting the diamond to see how it's light performance is affected.

My definition of fire:
To answer simply, what I see as fire in a diamond is the way it reflects the light back to my eye.
The ASET definitely can detect differences in the brilliance of the reflections, yet sometimes my eye is pleased more by reflections that ASET proves are less brilliant - such as the facets showing green in ASET.
So, if we say a round brilliant has more "fire" than a well cut radiant, we'd have to define fire better IMO

David,
Again, I don't want to speak for Serg, but I think we may have stumbled across a source of the problem in communication. Most in the industry understand "fire" to be associated with dispersion and the resulting individual colored flashes that diamonds can produce. ASET does not directly inform us of fire.

Here is the article describing science and methodology behind the AGS light performance system. See Gem Fire section 5.4
http://www.agslab.com/spie/spie_lo_res.pdf

Garry, He did answer the question. His response to Serg is in red. To which I suggested further reading.

Bryan,

red Dave text has not any specific information about Fire, it just shows Dave misunderstanding about ASET

Seems Dave mixed Fire and "Life".

 

[Texas Leaguer]

David,
when we finish discussion about Fire, Colorless Crushed Ice cuts, I am happy discuss Fancy Color diamonds.

where is your Fire definition ? what is Fire in diamond for you?

Hi Serg,
Thank you for responding.
I am constantly doing tests on diamonds- and appreciate the method you suggested.
In general I find the most important test is actually setting the diamond to see how it's light performance is affected.

My definition of fire:
To answer simply, what I see as fire in a diamond is the way it reflects the light back to my eye.
The ASET definitely can detect differences in the brilliance of the reflections, yet sometimes my eye is pleased more by reflections that ASET proves are less brilliant - such as the facets showing green in ASET.
So, if we say a round brilliant has more "fire" than a well cut radiant, we'd have to define fire better IMO

David,
Again, I don't want to speak for Serg, but I think we may have stumbled across a source of the problem in communication. Most in the industry understand "fire" to be associated with dispersion and the resulting individual colored flashes that diamonds can produce. ASET does not directly inform us of fire.

Here is the article describing science and methodology behind the AGS light performance system. See Gem Fire section 5.4
http://www.agslab.com/spie/spie_lo_res.pdf

Garry, He did answer the question. His response to Serg is in red. To which I suggested further reading.

Bryan,

red Dave text has not any specific information about Fire, it just shows Dave misunderstanding about ASET

Seems Dave mixed Fire and "Life".

Serg,
He did specifically define what fire means to him (in bold). It is by no means a complete or gemologically accurate definition, but it is his definition I suppose.

Yes, it does seem like he is describing what is generally talked about in the trade as "life". And he clearly misunderstands ASET- what it tells you and what it does not tell you. Perhaps that is why he takes some of the positions he takes regarding the shortcomings of the tool.

With such a gulf in definitions and understandings, discussion is rather fruitless. It just goes in the same frustrating loop which, from reading the old threads, seems to have gone on for years. That is why I have said that I prefer not to be drawn into the same rabbit holes.

 

[Serg]

David,
when we finish discussion about Fire, Colorless Crushed Ice cuts, I am happy discuss Fancy Color diamonds.

where is your Fire definition ? what is Fire in diamond for you?

Hi Serg,
Thank you for responding.
I am constantly doing tests on diamonds- and appreciate the method you suggested.
In general I find the most important test is actually setting the diamond to see how it's light performance is affected.

My definition of fire:
To answer simply, what I see as fire in a diamond is the way it reflects the light back to my eye.
The ASET definitely can detect differences in the brilliance of the reflections, yet sometimes my eye is pleased more by reflections that ASET proves are less brilliant - such as the facets showing green in ASET.
So, if we say a round brilliant has more "fire" than a well cut radiant, we'd have to define fire better IMO

David,
Again, I don't want to speak for Serg, but I think we may have stumbled across a source of the problem in communication. Most in the industry understand "fire" to be associated with dispersion and the resulting individual colored flashes that diamonds can produce. ASET does not directly inform us of fire.

Here is the article describing science and methodology behind the AGS light performance system. See Gem Fire section 5.4
http://www.agslab.com/spie/spie_lo_res.pdf

Garry, He did answer the question. His response to Serg is in red. To which I suggested further reading.

Bryan,

red Dave text has not any specific information about Fire, it just shows Dave misunderstanding about ASET

Seems Dave mixed Fire and "Life".

Serg,
He did specifically define what fire means to him (in bold). It is by no means a complete or gemologically accurate definition, but it is his definition I suppose.

Yes, it does seem like he is describing what is generally talked about in the trade as "life". And he clearly misunderstands ASET- what it tells you and what it does not tell you. Perhaps that is why he takes some of the positions he takes regarding the shortcomings of the tool.

With such a gulf in definitions and understandings, discussion is rather fruitless. It just goes in the same frustrating loop which, from reading the old threads, seems to have gone on for years. That is why I have said that I prefer not to be drawn into the same rabbit holes.

Bryan,
for same reason I ignored Dave "answers" when he published its.
but from other side diamond industry can not be successful until most sales persons have Zero understanding about Fire, Brilliancy.
Most of sales persons just know such words , but can not define its, can not explain its to consumers, can not show its in Diamonds , can not explain real diamond USP( instead rarity ).
Neither GIA nor AGS gives clear, correct and helpful information about Brilliancy and Fire.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Bryan,
for same reason I ignored Dave "answers" when he published its.
but from other side diamond industry can not be successful until most sales persons have Zero understanding about Fire, Brilliancy.
Most of sales persons just know such words , but can not define its, can not explain its to consumers, can not show its in Diamonds , can not explain real diamond USP( instead rarity ).
Neither GIA nor AGS gives clear, correct and helpful information about Brilliancy and Fire.

Serg,
I think that GIA and AGS provide the basis for communication about diamonds- AGS much more so in the area of cut quality and light performance obviously. But they must continue to evolve. I understand that there are differences in approach, terminology and even conclusions and these are fair game for debate.

I agree that the trade need to be better able to communicate various value factors and guide consumers to appropriate choices. At the end of the day diamonds compete against other luxury items for the consumer dollar. Without confidence in the value driven by solid understanding of the characteristic and benefits, consumers will choose to spend their money elsewhere. I do believe it is getting better with wider dissemination of information, but the trade is not keeping up in some quarters. For instance, consumers that spend time here end up with understanding about certain aspects of diamond value that is essentially absent from the retail market. The prosumers here know more about diamonds than the majority of the "professionals" behind the showcase.

This is not just an anomaly. This is a huge trend. A new generation of consumers are climbing aboard who are aggressively self-educating. The information they are accessing is not always good, but they are very clever and able to navigate their way to solid products, services and merchants.

As a scientist I am sure you have a heightened sense of frustration when you encounter lack of understanding and misinformation. But the diamond market can be healthy without all consumers (or tradespeople) having an advanced degree in optics and neuroscience.

At the scientific level the competition of ideas through fruitful debate is what pushes along our understanding and results in progress towards a market with greater benefits for the consumer. As long as enough people in the trade are paying attention and not allowing themselves to be satisfied with the status quo, I think consumers will continue to appreciate diamonds. But, I also hear your cautionary advise along the lines that many in the trade are not expanding their knowledge at the same rate as a large portion of the future market that they will be attempting to serve.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Bryan,
for same reason I ignored Dave "answers" when he published its.
but from other side diamond industry can not be successful until most sales persons have Zero understanding about Fire, Brilliancy.
Most of sales persons just know such words , but can not define its, can not explain its to consumers, can not show its in Diamonds , can not explain real diamond USP( instead rarity ).
Neither GIA nor AGS gives clear, correct and helpful information about Brilliancy and Fire.

Serg,
I think that GIA and AGS provide the basis for communication about diamonds- AGS much more so in the area of cut quality and light performance obviously. But they must continue to evolve. I understand that there are differences in approach, terminology and even conclusions and these are fair game for debate.

I agree that the trade need to be better able to communicate various value factors and guide consumers to appropriate choices. At the end of the day diamonds compete against other luxury items for the consumer dollar. Without confidence in the value driven by solid understanding of the characteristic and benefits, consumers will choose to spend their money elsewhere. I do believe it is getting better with wider dissemination of information, but the trade is not keeping up in some quarters. For instance, consumers that spend time here end up with understanding about certain aspects of diamond value that is essentially absent from the retail market. The prosumers here know more about diamonds than the majority of the "professionals" behind the showcase.

This is not just an anomaly. This is a huge trend. A new generation of consumers are climbing aboard who are aggressively self-educating. The information they are accessing is not always good, but they are very clever and able to navigate their way to solid products, services and merchants.

As a scientist I am sure you have a heightened sense of frustration when you encounter lack of understanding and misinformation. But the diamond market can be healthy without all consumers (or tradespeople) having an advanced degree in optics and neuroscience.

At the scientific level the competition of ideas through fruitful debate is what pushes along our understanding and results in progress towards a market with greater benefits for the consumer. As long as enough people in the trade are paying attention and not allowing themselves to be satisfied with the status quo, I think consumers will continue to appreciate diamonds. But, I also hear your cautionary advise along the lines that many in the trade are not expanding their knowledge at the same rate as a large portion of the future market that they will be attempting to serve.

Thanks Bryan,
This is a key topic that we (the Cut Group) have written about in the one published and 2 soon to be published trade journal articles.
One widely distributed magazine we hope will create some widespread understanding by some of the more clever people in the trade. I guess they will be a bit like the consumers on PS who pick up on the tools and info that we discuss and use here on Pricescope. We hope to start an industry movement to create consumer friendly diamond language that can easily be taught and is also intuitive for salespeople. It will not and should not involve ASET, Ideal-scope, Sarin or Helium scans.
It should not involve GIA, AGS or our definitions of B,F and S.

As Sergey has written before - a slaesperson should be able to explain that a 2ct diamond has more visible fire than a 1ct diamond and that is a good reason to spend more and get more of the benefits that diamond uniquely provides. If we continue to push "diamonds are forever" a symbol of his commitment, everlasting love, rare and precious, investment etc then we do what Paul mentioned in the HRD thread - we create a market where diamond papers are traded and no one ever looks at the actual diamond.
A commodity is not a luxury product.

 

[Serg]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

 

[teobdl]

Pretty amazing stuff. These experiments are great. Having watched the videos first and ranked them first, I agree that those graphs (at least in terms of order) correspond to what my eyes saw.

Also, I noticed the tolk was the brightest diamond to my eyes. What does your program say?

 

[teobdl]

Quick question about ViBox--Garry a number of months back you had a survey with similar videos. Were the individual diamonds displayed there the resultant composite videos from stereo? Or were they one-eyed?

 

[Serg]

Pretty amazing stuff. These experiments are great. Having watched the videos first and ranked them first, I agree that those graphs (at least in terms of order) correspond to what my eyes saw.

Also, I noticed the tolk was the brightest diamond to my eyes. What does your program say?

we have not yet Subjective Brightness metrics based on Stereo movies.
Old DC LightReturn Stereo metric gives 0.98 ( Total), 0.94( Table only)
it is typical what you need increase Fire you have to reduce Brilliancy ( if Brilliancy was high as in Tolkowsky round)

 

[Rockdiamond]

We all have our own ideas about how the diamond industry can best utilize advances in cutting technology to serve consumers best. Just like the very best cutters have different ideas about how to best utilize a piece of rough. Thank goodness we have modern antique diamonds as well as modern pinfire or crushed ice diamonds.
My job involves evaluating specific examples for purchase- which as we all know can involve a lot of money. By all means I totally support the efforts of improving the state of the art in cutting.
But I'm talking about evaluating stones currently on the market.
The best result it seems to me is when the seller honestly represents the diamond- sells with a money back guarantee - and the consumer loves the diamond. Returns are undesirable for any business- and any consumer
Personally I have found methods of plainly describing what I see and back it up with pictures. Thank goodness, we have a low return rate.

I applaud sites that don't use cut grades lightly. This leads to a more open communication between seller and buyer. Let the buyer ask the cut grade which opens the discussion

 

[MelisendeDiamonds]

At the scientific level the competition of ideas through fruitful debate is what pushes along our understanding

I've read 7 pages of quite frankly a disjointed discussion and a whole range of topics and agendas. I don't find it a very fruitful debate thus far.

The ASET definitely can detect differences in the brilliance of the reflections, yet sometimes my eye is pleased more by reflections that ASET proves are less brilliant - such as the facets showing green in ASET.

A statement like this which mixes the objective ASET tools output which is intended to be used as a proxy for potential brightness and mixing that in with subjective comments about overall diamond beauty will never lead to a fruitful debate.

It does highlight a problem on Pricescope though as I've seen selection advice for Fancy shapes which appear to be solely based on an ASET image. I've even seen advice where a consumer had the diamond in hand and was told to validate their purchase with an ASET instead of their eyes in their viewing environment.

To answer simply, what I see as fire in a diamond is the way it reflects the light back to my eye.

Once again if a total lack of acceptance about the difference between brightness and fire is demonstrated where is a fruitful debate supposed to lead to?

fire = colored light return
brightness = white light return

So, if we say a round brilliant has more "fire" than a well cut radiant, we'd have to define fire better IMO

If a definition has to be obscured to fit a subjective preference or way of marketing diamonds then the ensuing discussion will be a farce. There are many positive aspects to the radiant cut design with steep lower girdle facets and shallow mains. However if the discussion is to be fair and honest, maximizing coloured light return is not one of them.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

Serg,
Could you explain a little more what the graph indicates?

I seem to notice in the videos that the top halves of the images are illuminated a little more than the bottoms. Is this modeling "body obstruction"?

Do the dual images come together in 3D or are they meant simply to show what each eye sees independently? What is the viewing distance simulated by the images?

 

[Rockdiamond]

At the scientific level the competition of ideas through fruitful debate is what pushes along our understanding

I've read 7 pages of quite frankly a disjointed discussion and a whole range of topics and agendas. I don't find it a very fruitful debate thus far.

The ASET definitely can detect differences in the brilliance of the reflections, yet sometimes my eye is pleased more by reflections that ASET proves are less brilliant - such as the facets showing green in ASET.

A statement like this which mixes the objective ASET tools output which is intended to be used as a proxy for potential brightness and mixing that in with subjective comments about overall diamond beauty will never lead to a fruitful debate.

It does highlight a problem on Pricescope though as I've seen selection advice for Fancy shapes which appear to be solely based on an ASET image. I've even seen advice where a consumer had the diamond in hand and was told to validate their purchase with an ASET instead of their eyes in their viewing environment.

To answer simply, what I see as fire in a diamond is the way it reflects the light back to my eye.

Once again if a total lack of acceptance about the difference between brightness and fire is demonstrated where is a fruitful debate supposed to lead to?

fire = colored light return
brightness = white light return

So, if we say a round brilliant has more "fire" than a well cut radiant, we'd have to define fire better IMO

If a definition has to be obscured to fit a subjective preference or way of marketing diamonds then the ensuing discussion will be a farce. There are many positive aspects to the radiant cut design with steep lower girdle facets and shallow mains. However if the discussion is to be fair and honest, maximizing coloured light return is not one of them.

If you read the thread, why rehash the definition of fire, yet again.

I'm glad the discussion of ASET has be renewed and glad I've asked the questions I have

 

[Serg]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

Serg,
Could you explain a little more what the graph indicates?

P41.75Cr34.5 is reference diamond . Reference diamond has value of any metric =1.
if value is bigger then 1 for some diamond the this diamond had more Fire.

I seem to notice in the videos that the top halves of the images are illuminated a little more than the bottoms. Is this modeling "body obstruction"?

Yes

Do the dual images come together in 3D

Yes

or are they meant simply to show what each eye sees independently? What is the viewing distance simulated by the images?

may be 350mm

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

Serg,
Could you explain a little more what the graph indicates?

P41.75Cr34.5 is reference diamond . Reference diamond has value of any metric =1.
if value is bigger then 1 for some diamond the this diamond had more Fire.

I seem to notice in the videos that the top halves of the images are illuminated a little more than the bottoms. Is this modeling "body obstruction"?

Yes

Do the dual images come together in 3D

Yes

or are they meant simply to show what each eye sees independently? What is the viewing distance simulated by the images?

may be 350mm

What is the distinction between between static and dynamic fire?

We only see a depiction of fire in the movies correct? So any differences in brightness in the stones is not modeled here?

 

[Serg]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

Serg,
Could you explain a little more what the graph indicates?

P41.75Cr34.5 is reference diamond . Reference diamond has value of any metric =1.
if value is bigger then 1 for some diamond the this diamond had more Fire.

I seem to notice in the videos that the top halves of the images are illuminated a little more than the bottoms. Is this modeling "body obstruction"?

Yes

Do the dual images come together in 3D

Yes

or are they meant simply to show what each eye sees independently? What is the viewing distance simulated by the images?

may be 350mm

What is the distinction between between static and dynamic fire?


Static does not account " Flash duration", it is just average Fire by all photos.( Static Fire considers Movie as separate photos, Dynamic Fire considers movie as continuing process )



We only see a depiction of fire in the movies correct?

yes. Saturation, size, quantity, duration

So any differences in brightness in the stones is not modeled here?

No, It is just about Fire

 

[luvdajules]

Hi there, I must admit I haven't read every reply and quite frankly, I don't understand all the diamond theory and design considerations, but so glad many of you do (especially the trades and experts). Well, I'm not one of those but still very interested in this topic so I've tried to follow the first couple of pages...however, I found a real, practical video GOG made that I found very helpful. Because we do see idealscopes and ASETs that aren't picture perfect, and as consumers are wondering if we can see that IRL and at point is it still acceptable. I hope this will help other novices as it did me. Thanks to those experts that post here so we can learn at our own pace.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MocNn5LgGCc

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

Serg,
Could you explain a little more what the graph indicates?

P41.75Cr34.5 is reference diamond . Reference diamond has value of any metric =1.
if value is bigger then 1 for some diamond the this diamond had more Fire.

I seem to notice in the videos that the top halves of the images are illuminated a little more than the bottoms. Is this modeling "body obstruction"?

Yes

Do the dual images come together in 3D

Yes

or are they meant simply to show what each eye sees independently? What is the viewing distance simulated by the images?

may be 350mm

What is the distinction between between static and dynamic fire?


Static does not account " Flash duration", it is just average Fire by all photos.( Static Fire considers Movie as separate photos, Dynamic Fire considers movie as continuing process )



We only see a depiction of fire in the movies correct?

yes. Saturation, size, quantity, duration

So any differences in brightness in the stones is not modeled here?

No, It is just about Fire

So dynamic fire would be a more relevant metric for predicting the potential for observing fire in real life?

What sort of velocity factor is used in the modeling? Do all the metrics stay consistent relative to one another if velocity is changed. I am thinking that smaller/shroter duration facets would stop yielding observable fire first as velocity increases.

 

[Serg]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

Serg,
Could you explain a little more what the graph indicates?

P41.75Cr34.5 is reference diamond . Reference diamond has value of any metric =1.
if value is bigger then 1 for some diamond the this diamond had more Fire.

I seem to notice in the videos that the top halves of the images are illuminated a little more than the bottoms. Is this modeling "body obstruction"?

Yes

Do the dual images come together in 3D

Yes

or are they meant simply to show what each eye sees independently? What is the viewing distance simulated by the images?

may be 350mm

What is the distinction between between static and dynamic fire?


Static does not account " Flash duration", it is just average Fire by all photos.( Static Fire considers Movie as separate photos, Dynamic Fire considers movie as continuing process )



We only see a depiction of fire in the movies correct?

yes. Saturation, size, quantity, duration

So any differences in brightness in the stones is not modeled here?

No, It is just about Fire

So dynamic fire would be a more relevant metric for predicting the potential for observing fire in real life?

What sort of velocity factor is used in the modeling?

2-4 degree per second, 12 FPS,..
Do all the metrics stay consistent relative to one another if velocity is changed. I am thinking that smaller/shroter duration facets would stop yielding observable fire first as velocity increases.

now resolution is 0.08 second( 1 frame), must color flashes in Round diamond has longer duration( same color flash is visible on few frames)
Flash become invisible if duration 0.01 or less.
so we are far away from threshold .

also we do not use absolute metrics, we always compare with reference diamond. it increase consistency .

Metric calibration ( verification) is very long and expensive process.
we design and polish new cuts to check our metrics .
if metric predict new design with higher Fire and consumer see more fire in real diamond with such design then we received valuable confirmation .

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

Serg,
Could you explain a little more what the graph indicates?

P41.75Cr34.5 is reference diamond . Reference diamond has value of any metric =1.
if value is bigger then 1 for some diamond the this diamond had more Fire.

I seem to notice in the videos that the top halves of the images are illuminated a little more than the bottoms. Is this modeling "body obstruction"?

Yes

Do the dual images come together in 3D

Yes

or are they meant simply to show what each eye sees independently? What is the viewing distance simulated by the images?

may be 350mm

What is the distinction between between static and dynamic fire?


Static does not account " Flash duration", it is just average Fire by all photos.( Static Fire considers Movie as separate photos, Dynamic Fire considers movie as continuing process )



We only see a depiction of fire in the movies correct?

yes. Saturation, size, quantity, duration

So any differences in brightness in the stones is not modeled here?

No, It is just about Fire

So dynamic fire would be a more relevant metric for predicting the potential for observing fire in real life?

What sort of velocity factor is used in the modeling?

2-4 degree per second, 12 FPS,..
Do all the metrics stay consistent relative to one another if velocity is changed. I am thinking that smaller/shroter duration facets would stop yielding observable fire first as velocity increases.

now resolution is 0.08 second( 1 frame), must color flashes in Round diamond has longer duration( same color flash is visible on few frames)
Flash become invisible if duration 0.01 or less.
so we are far away from threshold .

also we do not use absolute metrics, we always compare with reference diamond. it increase consistency .

Metric calibration ( verification) is very long and expensive process.
we design and polish new cuts to check our metrics .
if metric predict new design with higher Fire and consumer see more fire in real diamond with such design then we received valuable confirmation .

One would think dynamic fire would be more relevant to predicting real life performance than static fire, yes?

How adaptable is this particular system to fancy shapes? Have you made any fire movies of any other shapes?

 

[Serg]

Garry,
please find Fire stereo metrics results for P40.7, P41.2 and P42.2Cr33

1) Diamcalc Stereo movies for VIbox light
2) Tilting with different amplitudes
a) Axis X amplitude 3 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 5 Degree
b) a) Axis X amplitude 6 Degree-Axis Y amplitude 10 Degree


here DC movies
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g4iypxmmk2p4kzx/AAAPiYqtfS9CTCxqTIg2uRgga

Serg,
Could you explain a little more what the graph indicates?

P41.75Cr34.5 is reference diamond . Reference diamond has value of any metric =1.
if value is bigger then 1 for some diamond the this diamond had more Fire.

I seem to notice in the videos that the top halves of the images are illuminated a little more than the bottoms. Is this modeling "body obstruction"?

Yes

Do the dual images come together in 3D

Yes

or are they meant simply to show what each eye sees independently? What is the viewing distance simulated by the images?

may be 350mm

What is the distinction between between static and dynamic fire?


Static does not account " Flash duration", it is just average Fire by all photos.( Static Fire considers Movie as separate photos, Dynamic Fire considers movie as continuing process )



We only see a depiction of fire in the movies correct?

yes. Saturation, size, quantity, duration

So any differences in brightness in the stones is not modeled here?

No, It is just about Fire

So dynamic fire would be a more relevant metric for predicting the potential for observing fire in real life?

What sort of velocity factor is used in the modeling?

2-4 degree per second, 12 FPS,..
Do all the metrics stay consistent relative to one another if velocity is changed. I am thinking that smaller/shroter duration facets would stop yielding observable fire first as velocity increases.

now resolution is 0.08 second( 1 frame), must color flashes in Round diamond has longer duration( same color flash is visible on few frames)
Flash become invisible if duration 0.01 or less.
so we are far away from threshold .

also we do not use absolute metrics, we always compare with reference diamond. it increase consistency .

Metric calibration ( verification) is very long and expensive process.
we design and polish new cuts to check our metrics .
if metric predict new design with higher Fire and consumer see more fire in real diamond with such design then we received valuable confirmation .

One would think dynamic fire would be more relevant to predicting real life performance than static fire, yes?

Yes, of course dynamic metric has to be more relevant.

How adaptable is this particular system to fancy shapes?

Yes.

Have you made any fire movies of any other shapes?

mainly we work with fancy cuts. Round cut is boring cut for me.

see for example
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5dc2oxly6gwtnbw/Merged3VideosCush4Cushio10.mov

To see this movie in good quality You have to download it ( Dropbox web interface significantly reduce quality)
which Cushion has more fire for You?
What cushion do you prefer on this movie ?

to receive right appearance you have to check it in stereo

 

[Karl_K]

To me perfect dynamic fire would be:
Bright enough to stand out
Large enough to catch the eye
slow enough to be seen but fast enough to flash with small rotations.
longer on period than off.

The modern RB with its large range of different size VF's is kinda a fire kitchen sink and does not really show differences in fire the way a fancy cut can.

 

[Serg]

Bryan,

I have some toy for you.

Please pass below voting

http://expo.diamsort.dev.cutwise.com/qr/20

instead number 20 in the end of the link please use any other number between 20 and 100.( if many persons will use same link result may be any)

please publish which diamond was second and which diamond was third in your trial .

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Bryan,

I have some toy for you.

Please pass below voting

http://expo.diamsort.dev.cutwise.com/qr/20

instead number 20 in the end of the link please use any other number between 20 and 100.( if many persons will use same link result may be any)

please publish which diamond was second and which diamond was third in your trial .

Thanks Serg,
I will try it. I need to get some 3D glasses first!

 

[Serg]

Bryan,

I have some toy for you.

Please pass below voting

http://expo.diamsort.dev.cutwise.com/qr/20

instead number 20 in the end of the link please use any other number between 20 and 100.( if many persons will use same link result may be any)

please publish which diamond was second and which diamond was third in your trial .

Thanks Serg,
I will try it. I need to get some 3D glasses first!

it was link to mono version.
below link for stereo movies( same diamonds). all movies are for real diamonds in same light conditions

http://ts.cutwise.com/demos/79/6f100c5c33b513bdf4e15c21aed0d0c5/sort/try/53d17da3d9500/stereo/

I advice You to pass mono version firstly

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Bryan,

I have some toy for you.

Please pass below voting

http://expo.diamsort.dev.cutwise.com/qr/20

instead number 20 in the end of the link please use any other number between 20 and 100.( if many persons will use same link result may be any)

please publish which diamond was second and which diamond was third in your trial .

Thanks Serg,
I will try it. I need to get some 3D glasses first!

it was link to mono version.
below link for stereo movies( same diamonds). all movies are for real diamonds in same light conditions

http://ts.cutwise.com/demos/79/6f100c5c33b513bdf4e15c21aed0d0c5/sort/try/53d17da3d9500/stereo/

I advice You to pass mono version firstly

Question: When it says "like better" does that mean overall look or just which has more fire?

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Bryan,

I have some toy for you.

Please pass below voting

http://expo.diamsort.dev.cutwise.com/qr/20

instead number 20 in the end of the link please use any other number between 20 and 100.( if many persons will use same link result may be any)

please publish which diamond was second and which diamond was third in your trial .

Thanks Serg,
I will try it. I need to get some 3D glasses first!

it was link to mono version.
below link for stereo movies( same diamonds). all movies are for real diamonds in same light conditions

http://ts.cutwise.com/demos/79/6f100c5c33b513bdf4e15c21aed0d0c5/sort/try/53d17da3d9500/stereo/

I advice You to pass mono version firstly

Question: When it says "like better" does that mean overall look or just which has more fire?

I suppose it is a lighting environment that heavily favors the observation of fire (to the detriment of brightness). So my preferences might be quite different in a more normal (balanced) light environment. Anyway here is my vote for 2nd and 3rd, based on which had the most overall appeal to me. Admittedly I am a little biased towards rounds and princess. If I had been voting just on fire, my rankings would have been different.

Rank: 2
Name: MSSPRINCESS
Fire Integral Score: 1.64

Rank: 3
Name: MSSC04
Fire Integral Score: 2.93