The rough for my Octavia (pics)...

[Dancing Fire]

DF, how did you feel when you first saw the pics?

What does Mrs. DF say?
You did tell her about this, didn't you?
Or, will she find out when she notices it on your finger?

..not yet.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Kenny, Does the windmills look narrower compared to your stone?
Yoram , Do you have any comments about the windmills?

 

[kenny]

Kenny, Does the windmills look narrower compared to your stone?

Hold on.
I'll post a side by side pic comparing windmills of yours and mine.

 

[kenny]

DF here's a windmill comparison you asked for in a side by side pic.

My Octavia is smaller than yours, but I made them the same size since this is to compare windmills.
I also made both images Black and White to eliminate distraction.

DF's Octavia is on the left.
Kenny's is on the right.

 

[Dancing Fire]

DF here's a windmill comparison you asked for in a side by side pic.

My Octavia is smaller than yours, but I made them the same size since this is to compare windmills.
I also made both images Black and White to eliminate distraction.

DF's Octavia is on the left.
Kenny's is on the right.

Kenny, Take a look at the windmills of both stones yours are definitely wider, maybe it is the new version?

 

[kenny]

DF here's a windmill comparison you asked for in a side by side pic.

My Octavia is smaller than yours, but I made them the same size since this is to compare windmills.
I also made both images Black and White to eliminate distraction.

DF's Octavia is on the left.
Kenny's is on the right.

Kenny, Take a look at the windmills of both stones yours are definitely wider, maybe it is a new version Octavia?

Yeah I've noticed Octavia windmills have not all been identical over the years.
Above are the five currently on GOG's website.
Their windmills look more like yours than mine.
Mine seems to be the oddball and is closer to a stop-sign shape.
I do recall mine was in stock for a long time so maybe it was an earlier Octavia iteration.

Karl, what was the story on windmill width again?
Didn't you conduct a poll about it?

 

[Dancing Fire]

Kenny
Can you please post a Pic of your SO's Octavia?

 

[kenny]

Coming right up.

My SO's 1.34 H VS2 Octavia is on the left, set in a ring, and my loose 1.51 G VS2 Octavia is on the right.
Both rocks were side by side in this pic ... it's one pic not two.
His windmills are more narrow than mine.

After looking at his for 5 years and mine daily for 1 year in every lighting scenario, I can testify that the quality of light performance is identical!
Often while in a restaurant with good bling light I'll put his next to mine and I can't tell them apart besides mine is a hair larger.

This makes me believe the windmill width is more aesthetic than something that determines light performance.
It makes sense though that longer sides (thinner) windmills gives longer bars of light ... but at the expense of the size of the flashes coming from the thinner windmills.
IOW, a wash.

I'd be happy with either a Maserati or a Ferrari.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Yup, you have the "FATTEST" windmills of all the Octavias!...

 

[kenny]

Yup, you have the "FATTEST" windmills of all the Octavias!...

They match my butt.

 

[Dancing Fire]

DF,

Absolutely beautiful
Congrats.

Thanks, but not officially mine until I paid in full...

 

[Karl_K]

Karl, what was the story on windmill width again?
Didn't you conduct a poll about it?

Yes I did a poll about it and the slightly smaller corners were preferred by many.
The main reason was the first gen was impossible to control the p3 angles to get the appearance we wanted under the table consistently. The overall performance was as good on any of them just more variation than we liked under the table.
Luckily the poll went the way we needed to move.
Even with the newer design the precision needed is on the edge to over the edge of what the scanners can measure(the new scanner is much better than the older one used on gen1) . The final tuning is still done based on real optics not scan based images and takes extreme precision cutting to achieve.
Yours is the last one cut of gen1.
DF's is gen3.
The changes from gen2 to gen3 were minor changes to the girdle area without any appearance difference.
They still have what I consider to be wide corners and I love both. :}

 

[gregchang35]

That is pure bling ****!

Woo hoo!!!
Can't wait to see what AGS tells you/us about this awfully performing stone!

 

[thecat]

All Octavias in this thread are stunning!

 

[missy]

Gorgeous! Fat or skinny windmills-all gorgeous.
DF I can only imagine how excited you must be right now...looking forward to the day you will be wearing your new beauty and sharing it here with us.

 

[diagem]

Kenny, Does the windmills look narrower compared to your stone?
Yoram , Do you have any comments about the windmills?

Hello DF and cut friends, I am impressed and happy on the technical direction this thread is moving towards, answering technical queries is much easier for us than subjective questions on the issue of beauty.

Over the years as technology evolves so does the products we design and offer.
Octavia is one of a plurality of cuts which reflect these advancements.
In order to beat technological limitations we needed to formulate each Octavia we cut.
With a few years of R&D work behind Octavia, we noticed in order to achieve consistent results each time over, we had to lock in each facet of the cut to assemble a (as close to perfect) 3D precision model. (Cutting & polishing a three dimensional puzzle is actually what we are doing).

The corner break ratio vs the mains are critical in order for us to achieve the exact appearance we are looking for at the P3 main & corner step facets (table view).

Since we are talking about a step cut design, the sensitivity of each step facet size, location and position affects the appearance by a slight change of a tenth of a degree or in its mm measurements. In the P3 step area it's sensitivity is magnified manifolds!

As complicated as it may sound, we even cut one Octavia (whole) pavilion staring at the P3's (culet) completing at the girdle plane (99.999% it's done the opposite way.)
This reverse engineering procedure taught us a lot, two extremely important factors were the specific corner break size and pavilion depth required to achieve the appearance we wanted in a consistent matter.

Once I get my act together (soon I hope) a recorded article revealing such cutting procedures and techniques will be posted on our website (and if allowed on PS as well). We have been collecting a lot of material reflecting these innovative processes of cutting Diamonds.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all these cuts are being cut & polished completely by human hands. No part of the cutting process is done by machinery except the sawing procedure. To achieve such cuts time is essential and incomparable to all other cuts currently offered on the market.

 

[kenny]

As complicated as it may sound, we even cut one Octavia (whole) pavilion staring at the P3's (culet) completing at the girdle plane (99.999% it's done the opposite way.)

Let me see if I understand; correct me if I'm wrong.
After polishing a few windows to see into the diamond and learn where the inclusions are so you can either cut/polish them away or minimize their visibility, you start with a cutting plan that is like a recipe.
Every facet's location, size and angle is in the original recipe but the Octavia (especially that P3 row of facets) requires precision that technology can't meet or can't take into account natural properties of the individual diamond rough so the diamond cutter must baby it along.

So, you polish some facets, stop, and measure what you've done with your laser Sarin machine.
Now you can either leave the polished facets alone and proceed with a new and BETTER plan for the rest of the facets based on knowing precisely where the already-polished facets are instead of assuming where they were 'supposed' to be.
Or
You can go back and polish previously-polished facets.

BTW, since the plan to polish future facets can change based on already-polished facets wouldn't tweaking the P1 facets last result in larger sacrifices in carat weight compared to polishing the P3s last?

 

[kenny]

I also wanted to elaborate on something I posted.
I said the light performance of my Octavia and my SO's (one with the older wider windmills and one with the newer thinner ones) was identical.

I should have said it looks identical to me with eyes that are over half a century old.
I suspect educated, experienced experts like Karl, Jon and Yoram may see the difference, and I assume the current design is an improvement.
I also can't see my stones black cloud without a loupe, but at a GTG a younger viewer could.

Since Karl and Yoram changed the windmill width it must be an improvement.
I did not mean to challenge that with my 'identical' comment.

But hey DF, if you like fatter windmills ya wanna trade?
I wouldn't mind an Octavia that's almost a carat larger.

 

[Karl_K]

Kenny,
A cutter can hide weight in the the p1 facets of any step cut with little impact on light performance except at extreme tilt and many do. They have the widest range of allowable angles without effecting performance.
The placement of the p2 facets and angle have a far smaller range. The placement of the p3 and angle have an even smaller range if you want top performance.
Which is why you see a lot of generic asschers with p3 issues. The cutter runs the p1 and p2 facets too steep and to far down the pavilion and cant cut optimal p3 facets or they just don't hit the sweet spot because they cant cut the precision needed to pull it off.
Take all those factors and reduce the allowable variation that works by 10-100 depending on facets and that is what we deal with on every one all while getting AGS ideal polish/symmetry.

 

[Dancing Fire]

But hey DF, if you like fatter windmills ya wanna trade?
I wouldn't mind an Octavia that's almost a carat larger.

I don't know what I would prefer, b/c I have never seen an Octavia IRL. You can always ask Yoram to recut your Octavia into skinny windmills...

 

[kenny]

Maybe some day we'll meet and we can compare our little critters.
That would be nice.

 

[isaku5]

....almost a carat larger than Kenny's. Kenny's is 1.51c so DF's must be coming in between 2.00 and 2.5c. WOWZA

 

[pyramid]

I love the new Octavia DF. I don't know what it is but the light in the face up view on picture no 2 looks very
balanced looking to my eye.

 

[diagem]

As complicated as it may sound, we even cut one Octavia (whole) pavilion staring at the P3's (culet) completing at the girdle plane (99.999% it's done the opposite way.)

Let me see if I understand; correct me if I'm wrong.
After polishing a few windows to see into the diamond and learn where the inclusions are so you can either cut/polish them away or minimize their visibility, you start with a cutting plan that is like a recipe.
Every facet's location, size and angle is in the original recipe but the Octavia (especially that P3 row of facets) requires precision that technology can't meet or can't take into account natural properties of the individual diamond rough so the diamond cutter must baby it along.

So, you polish some facets, stop, and measure what you've done with your laser Sarin machine.
Now you can either leave the polished facets alone and proceed with a new and BETTER plan for the rest of the facets based on knowing precisely where the already-polished facets are instead of assuming where they were 'supposed' to be.
Or
You can go back and polish previously-polished facets.

BTW, since the plan to polish future facets can change based on already-polished facets wouldn't tweaking the P1 facets last result in larger sacrifices in carat weight compared to polishing the P3s last?

Hi Kenny,

With our planning techniques, windowing is an integral part of the planning process. We window based on a designed plan. We wouldn't want to find ourself in a situation where we are missing material somewhere due to a misplaced polished window.

Cutting Octavia or other cuts to such high 3D precision levels is like playing a game of chess.
You must think numerous steps (literally) ahead. So when you near completion according to plans, all facets run into their geometric required placements. At the end of the polishing process we must find the last facet meeting points join together as perfect as can be.  

 

[Dancing Fire]

Yoram, besides the feather on the pavil were there any other surprises? how strong is the fluorescence?

 

[thecat]

I know you guys went to a poll and the result was in the direction of a smaller windmill. What if someone likes a wider windmill, can he requests for a gen 1 cut?

 

[Karl_K]

I know you guys went to a poll and the result was in the direction of a smaller windmill. What if someone likes a wider windmill, can he requests for a gen 1 cut?

not at this time.
The technical problems are still there.

 

[Acinom]

Congrats DF!!!
And what a fascinating journey it has been.
I love the Youtube video you posted in your other thread.

 

[pyramid]

There was thread in the last week talking about hearts and arrows round diamonds, where someone was wondering how they have evolved over time and did the random look become something that was desired at some point. During that discussion I wrote about hearts and arrows having optical symmetry and I said 3 dimensional but was corrected by I think it was Serg that H&A diamonds did
not have 3d symmetry, rather that the hearts I think if I have got it right were symmetrical with one pair being symmetrical to another. So the question I was wondering was is the Octavia 3d symmetrical, I see it mentioned before in the discussion here?

 

[Karl_K]

There was thread in the last week talking about hearts and arrows round diamonds, where someone was wondering how they have evolved over time and did the random look become something that was desired at some point. During that discussion I wrote about hearts and arrows having optical symmetry and I said 3 dimensional but was corrected by I think it was Serg that H&A diamonds did
not have 3d symmetry, rather that the hearts I think if I have got it right were symmetrical with one pair being symmetrical to another. So the question I was wondering was is the Octavia 3d symmetrical, I see it mentioned before in the discussion here?

That is a complex subject.
Yes they have optical symmetrical but there is not a universal pattern like hearts to show it with asschers.
I also think that what hearts show you is more complex than what you thought Serg said but this is not the thread for it.