There's not much fire in my diamond

[dtb520]

I posted a while back requesting evaluation of a diamond we were considering upgrading to. Brilliant Earth didn't have an ASET or ideal scope image, but all the cut proportions fell into the super ideal category and so we went forward with the upgrade because I couldn't find another stone in our desired size and price range that had those super ideal cut proportions.

Before the upgrade, I had a 0.61, E, VVS2, GIA xxx, and we bought it before I knew anything about complimenting crown and pavilion angles. I can't remember the exact angles now, but my diamond sparkled like crazy. Even guys at work would compliment how sparkly it was, and I feel like guys don't usually pay attention to that. These compliments were in the worst fluorescent office lighting too.

Well, I knew my crown angle and pavilion angle on the new stone both fell on the shallower end but it was the only stone I could find in our price range with any proportions that fell in the ideal CA/PA proportions. Here's what we got:

0.90 carats, GIA XXX
F Color
VS1 Clarity
Measures 6.23 x 6.21 x 3.79
57% table
60.9% depth
No fluorescence
34% crown angle
40.6% pavilion angle
42.5% pavilion depth
50% star facet length
80% lower girdle half
No culet
Medium-Slightly Thick Girdle (faceted 4.0%)

I love that I can see the arrows on it, but I'm slightly disappointed at how dull it is. I took it with me everywhere yesterday to play around with it in all lighting, and I got fire out of it like twice. I'm pretty bummed.

You all are so knowledgable with diamonds so I'm posting to see if there's anything wrong with these dimensions. I've attached some photos.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

A 35 crown angle goes better with a 40.6 pavilion angle. Higher crown angle usually results in more fire. But unless you are in the sun a lot, you just don't see fire in most other lighting.

 

[dtb520]

Yes, I said I understood that the CA/PA on this stone weren't 100% complimenting (both shallower), but figured that it'd still be an excellent stone in comparison to one whose angles don't even fall into the ideal proportion range. I am just surprised and bummed at just how dull this stone is

 

[marymm]

Are you within the return period? Maybe hold off on your upgrade until an ideal-cut diamond that better fits your prereqs (smaller table, higher crown = more fire)?

 

[Tourmaline]

Yes, I said I understood that the CA/PA on this stone weren't 100% complimenting (both shallower), but figured that it'd still be an excellent stone in comparison to one whose angles don't even fall into the ideal proportion range. I am just surprised and bummed at just how dull this stone is

Actually, for every acceptable pavilion angle, there is a narrow range of crown angles that would complement that particular pavilion angle most ideally. The "ideal proportion range" does not account for this specific relationship.

 

[WinkHPD]

There are a couple of things that may be working against you here.


With a 40.6 pavilion angle being the average of 8 measurements, a lot depends on the variance between the averages. If some of the measurements are as low as 40.4 then you are going to be getting poor light return from those lower halves. Add in the 80% lower half length and now you have longer skinnier lower halves which means you are getting smaller flashes of both white and colored light.

If you go back to your childhood, perhaps you remember playing with a prism and seeing something like this on your wall.



The dispersion from this prism is easy to see because it is HUGE. However, coming out of a smaller prism, such as a diamond, the ray of light that is dispersed must be larger than the pupil of your eye when it reaches your eye, or it will all enter the pupil at the same time and be perceived as white light. Only when one side of the ray, or the other, or both is clipped as it enters the eye will you see the wonderful flashes of color that we call dispersion, or fire. Small starting facets and smaller virtual facets means smaller rays of light coming out of the diamond, thus more of the flashes being perceived as white sparkle, and fewer large enough to be perceived of as colored sparkle.

Now throw in the fact that you are holding the diamond in your hand and thus imparting the natural body oils and any dirt or detritus that you may have on your fingers to your diamond. Without going into the science involved in how the critical angle within an optically dense media is determined between the speed of light in that optically dense media and air, and how the optical density between diamond and finger gookie is less than that between diamond and air and that results in a ....

Oops, sorry, put myself to sleep just thinking of all of that stuff.

Short version. If you are going to pick up your diamond in your fingers, wipe it often with a soft cloth to take the oils and other detritus off of the diamond. A clean diamond sparkles MORE than a dirty diamond.

Hint: ladies, clean your rings daily if you want them to dazzle! The better the starting cut and the cleaner the diamond, the better the dazzle factor!

So, to our OP, it seems your diamond has issues or you would not be disappointed. A portion of those may be due to your holding the diamond in your fingers, but certainly some of them will be due to the longer lower halves and the pairing of the crown and pavilion angles not producing the effects that you are looking for. Once again proving the concept that YOU must look at the diamond with YOUR eyes to be sure it is the diamond that YOU like.

Wink

 

[dtb520]

Yes, I said I understood that the CA/PA on this stone weren't 100% complimenting (both shallower), but figured that it'd still be an excellent stone in comparison to one whose angles don't even fall into the ideal proportion range. I am just surprised and bummed at just how dull this stone is

Actually, for every acceptable pavilion angle, there is a narrow range of crown angles that would complement that particular pavilion angle most ideally. The "ideal proportion range" does not account for this specific relationship.

That makes sense but there's no way for me to research each PA/CA relationship I come across as far as I know, and especially since I can't see Brilliant Earth's stones in real life, so I was just aiming to stick to the 40.6-41 PA/34-35 CA

 

[dtb520]

There are a couple of things that may be working against you here.


With a 40.6 pavilion angle being the average of 8 measurements, a lot depends on the variance between the averages. If some of the measurements are as low as 40.4 then you are going to be getting poor light return from those lower halves. Add in the 80% lower half length and now you have longer skinnier lower halves which means you are getting smaller flashes of both white and colored light.

If you go back to your childhood, perhaps you remember playing with a prism and seeing something like this on your wall.



The dispersion from this prism is easy to see because it is HUGE. However, coming out of a smaller prism, such as a diamond, the ray of light that is dispersed must be larger than the pupil of your eye when it reaches your eye, or it will all enter the pupil at the same time and be perceived as white light. Only when one side of the ray, or the other, or both is clipped as it enters the eye will you see the wonderful flashes of color that we call dispersion, or fire. Small starting facets and smaller virtual facets means smaller rays of light coming out of the diamond, thus more of the flashes being perceived as white sparkle, and fewer large enough to be perceived of as colored sparkle.

Now throw in the fact that you are holding the diamond in your hand and thus imparting the natural body oils and any dirt or detritus that you may have on your fingers to your diamond. Without going into the science involved in how the critical angle within an optically dense media is determined between the speed of light in that optically dense media and air, and how the optical density between diamond and finger gookie is less than that between diamond and air and that results in a ....

Oops, sorry, put myself to sleep just thinking of all of that stuff.

Short version. If you are going to pick up your diamond in your fingers, wipe it often with a soft cloth to take the oils and other detritus off of the diamond. A clean diamond sparkles MORE than a dirty diamond.

Hint: ladies, clean your rings daily if you want them to dazzle! The better the starting cut and the cleaner the diamond, the better the dazzle factor!

So, to our OP, it seems your diamond has issues or you would not be disappointed. A portion of those may be due to your holding the diamond in your fingers, but certainly some of them will be due to the longer lower halves and the pairing of the crown and pavilion angles not producing the effects that you are looking for. Once again proving the concept that YOU must look at the diamond with YOUR eyes to be sure it is the diamond that YOU like.

Wink

Thanks for all this info!! You're right and I wish I didn't go the online retailer route. Definitely will keep cleaning this one to ensure I'm getting the most dazzle out of it!

 

[WinkHPD]

If you are buying online, and there is no reason not to provided you have a reasonable inspect and return policy with your chosen vendor, then I would recommend that you narrow your pavilion angle slightly to 40.7 - 40.9 degrees as this will greatly improve your odds of not having some of the measurements going into "bad" territory. (Both too deep and too shallow are to be avoided.)

Wink

 

[JDDN]

Yes, I said I understood that the CA/PA on this stone weren't 100% complimenting (both shallower), but figured that it'd still be an excellent stone in comparison to one whose angles don't even fall into the ideal proportion range. I am just surprised and bummed at just how dull this stone is

Actually, for every acceptable pavilion angle, there is a narrow range of crown angles that would complement that particular pavilion angle most ideally. The "ideal proportion range" does not account for this specific relationship.

That makes sense but there's no way for me to research each PA/CA relationship I come across as far as I know, and especially since I can't see Brilliant Earth's stones in real life, so I was just aiming to stick to the 40.6-41 PA/34-35 CA

You can look at each stone's GIA report which will have the CA and PA. That's what I did when I was thinking of upgrading my original Brilliant Earth diamond. It's exhausting but you can do it. Also FWIW, I think your CA/PA is fine. It sounds like you want "sparkle" which you may find more of in a different diamond.

You can ask if they can get an IS or ASET for a diamond you are interested in. I was able to get a few from them.

 

[MollyMalone]

Are you beyond Brilliant Earth's 30-day return-refund period? Their inventory is always changing, so even tho' this stone seemed to be the best of what they were offering at the time, that doesn't mean there won't be another stone coming along you could upgrade to & which pleases you more.

 

[dtb520]

Are you beyond Brilliant Earth's 30-day return-refund period? Their inventory is always changing, so even tho' this stone seemed to be the best of what they were offering at the time, that doesn't mean there won't be another stone coming along you could upgrade to & which pleases you more.

Yes, thankfully we just received it on Thursday. I've been looking all morning, but man -- looking at every single GIA report is exhausting! It took me almost a month of analyzing GIA reports to select this one and I still made the wrong decision

 

[dtb520]

Yes, I said I understood that the CA/PA on this stone weren't 100% complimenting (both shallower), but figured that it'd still be an excellent stone in comparison to one whose angles don't even fall into the ideal proportion range. I am just surprised and bummed at just how dull this stone is

Actually, for every acceptable pavilion angle, there is a narrow range of crown angles that would complement that particular pavilion angle most ideally. The "ideal proportion range" does not account for this specific relationship.

That makes sense but there's no way for me to research each PA/CA relationship I come across as far as I know, and especially since I can't see Brilliant Earth's stones in real life, so I was just aiming to stick to the 40.6-41 PA/34-35 CA

You can look at each stone's GIA report which will have the CA and PA. That's what I did when I was thinking of upgrading my original Brilliant Earth diamond. It's exhausting but you can do it. Also FWIW, I think your CA/PA is fine. It sounds like you want "sparkle" which you may find more of in a different diamond.

You can ask if they can get an IS or ASET for a diamond you are interested in. I was able to get a few from them.

I did ask for an ASET image of the diamond we purchased, but they didn't have one. Thankfully, I am still in the return window, just still not finding something that is in our price range and falls into those idea CA/PA relationships. I did look at the GIA reports for almost a month to even select this one. I've been looking at their inventory all morning for hopefully something more fiery. Thanks for the info

 

[dtb520]

What do y'all think of these three?

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2019481/

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2061397/

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2099131/

 

[Elepig]

A 35 crown angle goes better with a 40.6 pavilion angle. Higher crown angle usually results in more fire.

Is there a thread on this point somewhere? That is the info I was looking for/wondering about when I was searching for my diamond. I did read a lot about the range in dimensions in which to find that ideal stone (which meant excellent fire, dispersion, etc.) and always wondered which angle and how it related to others, brought about more of those things. Somehow I missed 'higher crown angle results in more fire'.

I did exchange a diamond because it didn't knock my socks off in the 'fire' department, for a diamond that did...both AGS ideal and within 'the range'. Other than the size, there was little difference on paper. Which goes to Wink's point of seeing it with your own eyes before sealing the deal. After being underwhelmed with the one, I took a road trip to Texas to look at others where another sang my song. (Had I not been able to take that trip, I would have made use of their (WF) excellent return policy to get the second OR switch to a vendor who does videos in different lighting conditions. Had I known some will do such videos, I would have gone that route from the beginning.)

Returned diamond
.96ct, okay in sparkle, meh in fire
table - 55.2
CA - 34.9
PA - 40.6
depth - 61.8
lower girdle half - 76%
no culet, thin to medium girdle

Knocked my socks off diamond
1.23ct, nice balance in sparkle and fire
table - 56
CA - 34.8
PA - 40.6
depth - 61.8
lower girdle half - 76%
no culet, thin to medium girdle


Don't think it was the size that wow'd me as I did look at other stones within the range between the two, higher/lower colors, and bigger, and none sang like the one I chose.

 

[denverappraiser]

It may seem like a tiny detail but I see in the picture that you're holding it in your fingers. That can get oil onto the stone and make it appear dull, especially for a critical evaluation. Make sure you clean it thoroughly and try to keep your fingers off of it.

 

[dtb520]

A 35 crown angle goes better with a 40.6 pavilion angle. Higher crown angle usually results in more fire.

Is there a thread on this point somewhere? That is the info I was looking for/wondering about when I was searching for my diamond. I did read a lot about the range in dimensions in which to find that ideal stone (which meant excellent fire, dispersion, etc.) and always wondered which angle and how it related to others, brought about more of those things. Somehow I missed 'higher crown angle results in more fire'.

I did exchange a diamond because it didn't knock my socks off in the 'fire' department, for a diamond that did...both AGS ideal and within 'the range'. Other than the size, there was little difference on paper. Which goes to Wink's point of seeing it with your own eyes before sealing the deal. After being underwhelmed with the one, I took a road trip to Texas to look at others where another sang my song. (Had I not been able to take that trip, I would have made use of their (WF) excellent return policy to get the second OR switch to a vendor who does videos in different lighting conditions. Had I known some will do such videos, I would have gone that route from the beginning.)

Returned diamond
.96ct, okay in sparkle, meh in fire
table - 55.2
CA - 34.9
PA - 40.6
depth - 61.8
lower girdle half - 76%
no culet, thin to medium girdle

Knocked my socks off diamond
1.23ct, nice balance in sparkle and fire
table - 56
CA - 34.8
PA - 40.6
depth - 61.8
lower girdle half - 76%
no culet, thin to medium girdle


Don't think it was the size that wow'd me as I did look at other stones within the range between the two, higher/lower colors, and bigger, and none sang like the one I chose.

Yeah, I am not as concerned with size as quality of the stone. I have really small fingers so under a carat looks just fine on my hand

BUT, I just clicked through to your posts and saw your upgrade. WOW...it is stunning! I don't think I've seen such a pretty round!!

 

[newjourney]

Are you willing to shop at other vendors beside Brilliant Earth, ones where reflective imaging is available? As you can attest, numbers alone can only go so far. You need to use all the tools available, i.e. IS/ASET/3D video clips, to make a more informed decision with online purchases. At the size and price you're looking at, surely there are other routes besides BE.

Edit: my apology, please disregard my comment above. I just found your original post and now understand your reason for sticking with BE.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

I hate to spoil the party, but if Fire is your major concern (and I do not mean Dispersion coming out of the diamond, but you actually observing Fire reaching your brain through your eyes), all important factors mentioned going from CA/PA-angles, IS, ASET and 3D-videos only give you a small and very limited clue.

By far, the most important factor in observing Fire is precision-cutting, as it increases the size of the virtual facets, as a result increases the likelihood of Fire being observed. And for the sake of clarity, precision-cutting is not H&A, and the way it is taught to be analyzed.

Unfortunately, this cannot really be analyzed online. That obviously makes your quest difficult, but you can better know the hard truth than a comforting untruth.

Live long,

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I was just about to say, do you have to buy from Brilliant Earth? Because if you do desire a stone with superior performance, you need to look at the superideal cuts carried by (in alphabetical order) Good Old Gold (Ascendancy), High Performance Diamonds (Infinity), Victor Canera (H&A), Whiteflash (ACA). All top cut stones with outstanding light performance. They cost a little more, but as they say, you get what you pay for! Ordering online is EASY when you are shopping at vendors who stock the best cut stones!

 

[Dancing Fire]

I was just about to say, do you have to buy from Brilliant Earth? Because if you do desire a stone with superior performance, you need to look at the superideal cuts carried by (in alphabetical order) Good Old Gold (Ascendancy), High Performance Diamonds (Infinity), Victor Canera (H&A), Whiteflash (ACA). All top cut stones with outstanding light performance. They cost a little more, but as they say, you get what you pay for! Ordering online is EASY when you are shopping at vendors who stock the best cut stones!

Ditto! . Ex. advise as usual DS !..

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I was just about to say, do you have to buy from Brilliant Earth? Because if you do desire a stone with superior performance, you need to look at the superideal cuts carried by (in alphabetical order) Good Old Gold (Ascendancy), High Performance Diamonds (Infinity), Victor Canera (H&A), Whiteflash (ACA). All top cut stones with outstanding light performance. They cost a little more, but as they say, you get what you pay for! Ordering online is EASY when you are shopping at vendors who stock the best cut stones!

Ditto! . Ex. advise as usual DS !..

Thanks, DF! I had to kind of laugh rereading my post...kinda sounds like a commercial! But it's true!!!

 

[Gypsy]

DS, I think you forgot to include BGD in your list. Brian Gavin also has super ideals and is a fantastic vendor as well.

I agree with DS. You need to include other vendors.

 

[BeekeeperBetty]

I hate to spoil the party, but if Fire is your major concern (and I do not mean Dispersion coming out of the diamond, but you actually observing Fire reaching your brain through your eyes), all important factors mentioned going from CA/PA-angles, IS, ASET and 3D-videos only give you a small and very limited clue.

By far, the most important factor in observing Fire is precision-cutting, as it increases the size of the virtual facets, as a result increases the likelihood of Fire being observed. And for the sake of clarity, precision-cutting is not H&A, and the way it is taught to be analyzed.

Unfortunately, this cannot really be analyzed online. That obviously makes your quest difficult, but you can better know the hard truth than a comforting untruth.

Live long,

I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on this. I wonder if something here explains why my old cut oval throws more fire than my friend's ACA from Whiteflash. Her diamond is pretty and looks very white, almost like a mirror, but it doesn't have much with regards to multi-colored flashes of light.

 

[marymm]

What do y'all think of these three?

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2019481/

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2061397/

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2099131/

Okay, assuming you need to stick with Brilliant Earth, I ran both the HCA tool (https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca) and the AGA Cut Class tool (https://www.pricescope.com/tools/AGA_NAJA_Cut_Class_Grader) on each of the 3 diamonds you listed above.

#1 http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2019481/
HCA = 2.6 Very Good (Very Good, Very Good, Very Good, Very Good)
AGA TotalGrade = IB (all 1A except Crown Angle = 2B)

#2 http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2061397/
HCA = 0.8 Excellent (Excellent, Excellent, Excellent, Very Good)
AGA TotalGrade = 1A (solid 1A, meaning all 9 categories scored 1A)

#3 http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2099131/
HCA = 1.8 Excellent (Very Good, Excellent, Excellent, Very Good)
AGA TotalGrade = IA (all 1A except Crown Angle = 1B)

IMHO, a GIA XXX stone that scores under-2-Excellent on the HCA tool and scores an AGA TotalGrade of 1A (particularly if all 9 categories each score 1A as well) on the AGA tool is going to be a great performer (barring clarity issues).

In your list above, the #2 diamond scored 0.8-Excellent HCA and a solid 1A on the AGA... in my book, that's definitely worth inspecting in person.

I wouldn't bother with diamond #1 at all; and that by the number diamond #3 could be worth following up on, because it only scored Very Good on the Light Return category of the HCA), for me I'd toss that one out of consideration too.

 

[dtb520]

What do y'all think of these three?

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2019481/

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2061397/

http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2099131/

Okay, assuming you need to stick with Brilliant Earth, I ran both the HCA tool (https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca) and the AGA Cut Class tool (https://www.pricescope.com/tools/AGA_NAJA_Cut_Class_Grader) on each of the 3 diamonds you listed above.

#1 http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2019481/
HCA = 2.6 Very Good (Very Good, Very Good, Very Good, Very Good)
AGA TotalGrade = IB (all 1A except Crown Angle = 2B)

#2 http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2061397/
HCA = 0.8 Excellent (Excellent, Excellent, Excellent, Very Good)
AGA TotalGrade = 1A (solid 1A, meaning all 9 categories scored 1A)

#3 http://www.brilliantearth.com/loose-diamonds/view_detail/2099131/
HCA = 1.8 Excellent (Very Good, Excellent, Excellent, Very Good)
AGA TotalGrade = IA (all 1A except Crown Angle = 1B)

IMHO, a GIA XXX stone that scores under-2-Excellent on the HCA tool and scores an AGA TotalGrade of 1A (particularly if all 9 categories each score 1A as well) on the AGA tool is going to be a great performer (barring clarity issues).

In your list above, the #2 diamond scored 0.8-Excellent HCA and a solid 1A on the AGA... in my book, that's definitely worth inspecting in person.

I wouldn't bother with diamond #1 at all; and that by the number diamond #3 could be worth following up on, because it only scored Very Good on the Light Return category of the HCA), for me I'd toss that one out of consideration too.

Huh, never heard of the AGA Cut Glass tool-- thank you! My current stone is a 3A (all 1A except Pavilion Depth is 3B), and it scores a 0.7 on the HCA. Now I'm seriously considering exchanging my current stone for #2, but the only thing holding me back is the color difference. Current stone is F; stone #2 is H.

 

[dtb520]

I was just about to say, do you have to buy from Brilliant Earth? Because if you do desire a stone with superior performance, you need to look at the superideal cuts carried by (in alphabetical order) Good Old Gold (Ascendancy), High Performance Diamonds (Infinity), Victor Canera (H&A), Whiteflash (ACA). All top cut stones with outstanding light performance. They cost a little more, but as they say, you get what you pay for! Ordering online is EASY when you are shopping at vendors who stock the best cut stones!

I learned about all these other vendors after my fiancé purchased my first stone. We're not married yet, but he is amazing and agreed to upgrade my stone to just a little bigger. Brilliant Earth has a lifetime upgrade policy, and since we already chose an "upgrade" diamond, we can't return it. We can only exchange it. Plus, even if we went with another vendor prior to beginning the upgrade process, we wouldn't be able to afford the 0.9 carat, as the cost of my original diamond is going toward a new, larger one. I tried selling my old ring to a few jewelers, but they were only offering 1/4 what he paid for it. Idk why I was so set on Brilliant Earth when we were ring shopping!

 

[lb0424]

And for the sake of clarity, precision-cutting is not H&A, and the way it is taught to be analyzed.

I'm perplexed by this statement. Precision-cutting =\= H&A?? I thought you can only get H&A with near perfect symmetry.
How do you define precision-cut?

Thanks!!

 

[flyingpig]

And for the sake of clarity, precision-cutting is not H&A, and the way it is taught to be analyzed.

I'm perplexed by this statement. Precision-cutting =\= H&A?? I thought you can only get H&A with near perfect symmetry.
How do you define precision-cut?

Thanks!!

My interpretation of Paul's statement is that all H&As are precision-cut. But not all precision-cut diamonds are not H&As
Precision cutting is A requirement for H&A; there are other requirements as well.

Definition of precision-cut? I am not sure if there is one definition that everyone can agree on.
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/precision-cut-what-does-this-mean.164265/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/precision-cut-what-does-this-mean.164265/[/URL]

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

That interpretation is incorrect, I fear. At least, it is not what I want to say.

I need to choose my words carefully though, hoping that no users will use only part of my reasoning or twist it to meaning something else.

Attempting to define precision-cut, I would say it is the result of precision-cutting, controlling your equipment and the diamond during the cutting-process to such extent, that facets are positioned and inclined in such a way that the virtual-facet-delineation is crisp and straight, resulting in fewer and bigger virtual facets.

Not all precision-cuts are H&A, simply because precision-cutting is theoretically possible in every shape and facet-arrangement. Shape and facet-arrangement logically limit what one can achieve with precision-cutting.

In the same way, not all H&A are precision-cuts. The definition of H&A in my view focuses too much on post-factum analysis. On top of that, so many entities use different definitions of H&A, as well as individual persons exercising different guidelines as what they accept under H&A.

Live long,