Which of these two cushions would you choose?

[Hest88]

Huh, I''m glad I''m not the only one. I stared at both stones for a long time before reading the other comments and felt a little stupid because I couldn''t tell the difference between the two. I know CCL likes to be provocative so I wouldn''t put it past him to use the same stone, but the poll clearly says it''s two stones from two diff vendors, doesn''t it?

 

[Dreamer_D]

ccb You are coming accross as a little loopy here, maybe a persecution complex?

Even if it is your diamond, who cares? Images posted on the internet are free to be used however. How about we stop derailing this thread and see what happens?

I for one am very curious to see what the purpose was of the comparison.

 

[yssie]

Date: 6/23/2010 11:24:50 PM
Author: Hest88
Huh, I''m glad I''m not the only one. I stared at both stones for a long time before reading the other comments and felt a little stupid because I couldn''t tell the difference between the two. I know CCL likes to be provocative so I wouldn''t put it past him to use the same stone, but the poll clearly says it''s two stones from two diff vendors, doesn''t it?

I''m betting same cushion from two vendors. The darkened white image looks way too similar to the black-bkgrd photo!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 6/23/2010 11:50:16 PM
Author: yssie

Date: 6/23/2010 11:24:50 PM
Author: Hest88
Huh, I''m glad I''m not the only one. I stared at both stones for a long time before reading the other comments and felt a little stupid because I couldn''t tell the difference between the two. I know CCL likes to be provocative so I wouldn''t put it past him to use the same stone, but the poll clearly says it''s two stones from two diff vendors, doesn''t it?

I''m betting same cushion from two vendors. The darkened white image looks way too similar to the black-bkgrd photo!

Good thining Yssie!

 

[ccb0x45]

Date: 6/23/2010 11:50:16 PM
Author: yssie

Date: 6/23/2010 11:24:50 PM

Author: Hest88

Huh, I''m glad I''m not the only one. I stared at both stones for a long time before reading the other comments and felt a little stupid because I couldn''t tell the difference between the two. I know CCL likes to be provocative so I wouldn''t put it past him to use the same stone, but the poll clearly says it''s two stones from two diff vendors, doesn''t it?

I''m betting same cushion from two vendors. The darkened white image looks way too similar to the black-bkgrd photo!

Ugh haha, I can see how I am coming off as loopy. I dont have a persecution complex. However there is no "even if" it is my diamond, the one on the right is definitely my diamond, and I have no problem with anyone using the picture I posted, thats why I posted it. I just feel that if he did a bunch of work to track down a white aset of my diamond 3 weeks after I bought it, then hes a weirdo. Maybe I am the weird one for thinking thats weird, but to each their own. If the white one is a totally different diamond, then I apologize, and that is extremely crazy cause they look VERY similar.

 

[clgwli]

Date: 6/23/2010 8:54:14 PM
Author: ccb0x45

Date: 6/23/2010 8:45:30 PM
Author: clgwli
Honestly I wouldn''t choose either based just on an ASET. I''d want pictures and video to help me to decide. Really there is no good way for me to decide something like a cushion without seeing more of it than just this.

If it matters, when my GF picked this stone, she had it shipped out and had seen it in person which is where she liked it so much.

Please don''t think I was talking bad about your stone. He asked what would I pick based on the ASET and I wouldn''t because it is only an ASET. In person, video, pictures of the stone in different types of lighting and angles... all that would help me decide. This? It''d be impossible for me to pick. In all honesty if you only gave me one option for picking a stone out of different types of pictures, I''d have to pick just one picture of a stone in ''normal'' lighting. ASETs can''t tell me anything about the stone''s personality which I definitely need in something like a cushion!

As for the rest of it, I took his question at face value. Two stones from two vendors. I haven''t bothered to take either into photoshop to see if I can make them look a like or not, but for the purpose of the question I will assume he''s not lying about the fact that these are supposed to be two stones from two vendors.

I am not defending CCL because I am not a friend of his. I doubt he even knows who I am even though we had a small "battle" on another thread. I just am assuming he isn''t lying and trying to mess with people. If he is lying and these are not two cushions from two vendors and really one cushion with pictures from two vendors, I admit I won''t appreciate trying to trick people just to prove some point.

 

[LadyBlue]

What happen with CCL? Are you going to put your input in this thread?

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

The two images were taken with different orientations from two PS vendors. The white(backlit) ASET being taken some time before the black one. I do not feel it is important nor educational to discuss the history of this stone nor the two vendors, it is a rare example of backlit(white) versus non backlit black ASET and the differences between the two.

From the two images and the strikingly similar virtual facet patterns I beleive they they are indeed the same stone(to the best guess I can make without handling the stone). To illustrate this I have rotated the two so that they are in the same orientation.

What concerns me most and the reason for posting this poll is that the black non backlit ASET image looks better than the white backlit one. As can be seen from the poll the majority chose the black background image as well.

i) The leakage under the table is not as apparent
ii) There are larger more intense areas of light return(ASET red). (I highlighted the most important areas that appear different in neon green)

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Now in understanding the the reason for the suttle differences(some may say they are negligible) it has already been pointed out quite well by Yssie, DD, Cehrahberah and Charmpoo that Black ASET looks better as the leakage can not be seen as easily and obstruction and leakage can be difficult to seperate.

The black ASET image has less sharply defined virtual facets. This may be potentially due to the lighting setup and the larger aperture(less depth of field, thus less sharp focus) of the the AGS ASET camera being used.

Overall though the differences aren't with the two ASET camera setups, I agree with Yssie it is just a matter of the stone being slightly tilted in the black background image.

To illustrate this, here is a simulated image from a sarin scan of this stone showing what happens with a slight tilt in the N-S axis, although the scan and this image is not perfect it does show what happens with slight tilt.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

In addition based on looking at an ASET video some caution should be taken when viewing just the faceup image. One cannot assume that the stone will show leakage over a modest tilt range from just viewing one static position. A majority of these vintage cushions remain leaky or obstructed throughout the normal tilt range and viewing conditions while a few do not.

This stone is one of the few that actually performs much better than what it would appear from just the faceup image. Although all regions will not return light intensely in any one position, upon slight tilting a much larger region of the table will be capable of returning light to the viewer.

To illustrate this here is the .gem video file generated from a sarin scan and Diamcalc which can be viewed with the free gemadvisor program found here.

Edit: The .gem file is 312kb so it cannot be attached, I have asked for help from admin to link to the file.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Very interesting comparison CCL. And how lucky to find two different images of (probably) the same stone.

One of the challenges I have always seen with using ASETs here on PS is that there is a fair amount of variance in their appearance depending on the set up of the vendor. Some vendors clearly have the technique down pat, wheras others do not and offer images that are less useful.

In my opion, with fancies we really need ASETs to be able to buy diamonds sight unseen online so I would like to see more uniformity in ASET photography set up from vendors.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 6/23/2010 9:31:39 PM
Author: ccb0x45

Date: 6/23/2010 9:15:49 PM

Author: yssie

Nah. I can say that I for one don't know the man at all, and we're definitely not friends, I just firmly believe he is a total diamond-nut and have every confidence this thread is a testament to his diamond-nuttitude rather than an attack on you, because he's too much of a diamond-nut to waste valuable time attacking you.


You, on the other hand, seem somewhat paranoid about this

log off PS, relax, and go contemplate almost having your new ring, who cares what we're doing on here? I'm sure it's going to be a beauty, and I hope you come back just long enough to post pics

Haha,

Ok I may be paranoid IF its not the same diamond, I never said he was out to get me, I just said it was really weird... You honestly don't find it weird at all?

if someone is able to offer an alternative explanation then I would love to hear it. I also didn't think it as an attack on me, I think his 'diamond-nuttatitude' caused him to do something very strange, like seeking the hell out of the diamond I bought to try and justify his argument, which I find very strange.

CCL yeah I think it's weird but I think he is ocd about the diamond and not you.
ETA - by weird I guess maybe impolite. I understand his excitement, but it implies questioning your judgment and I think most would agree that it would be better to use an unattached diamond to illustrate these principles.

 

[ccb0x45]

Maybe I came off as the weird one in this thread, but as you can see I was correct, it was my stone. It was the stone that there had just been a long and drawn out argument about(when I was just trying to make a purchase), and he obviously did a bunch of research to seek out a white aset of my rock, in which *I think* was an attempt just to prove his point. I think its weird as a person to go through all that trouble with a picture I posted in a thread of actual real world time comparing and tracking it down, but I guess I already thought the dude is strange for not even owning any chunky cushions yet having such an obsession with them in the first place.

So in the end I'm sure I over reacted to already being very annoyed with this guy and I just found the whole concept of him doing that very strange and annoying to me. What would have REALLY annoyed me is since I posted the guy setting my ring, he would have called him up and requested an ASET of the diamond, that just would have really pissed me off because at this point its like, I made a decision, mind your own business. To his credit he did not do that, although he says he found the aset *somewhere*(I highly doubt the thing fell in his lap consider its been sold for a month). Also if anyone is really worried if the two comparisons are of the same stone, I would guess since he has an ASET he has a GIA cert number, and I also have the GIA cert(real one) in my drawer. It is easy to match them up. But its a 1.71 H/VS2 Old Mine Brilliant.


As for your debate about the white ASET, I had already stated in the first argumentative thread, that I could see all the mains light up depending on the angle the stone is held, they were are not as perfectly formed and shaped as the AVC stones, and each main has different parts that light up based on the tilt, but they all definitely do light up. The style and pattern of this is something my GF liked over the AVC style of being almost too uniform to look antique for her tastes. I had already stated this, I also had said that the aset wasn't that important to me especially on shapes like this because I don't know how well it was taken, how well someone very profficient in ASET's could have made it look, and that its much more important to see what it looked like in person, which this one looked great.

I am done with this till my ring is done, if my GF wants to post some pics, but I can just say, from someone coming in trying to decide on a purchase and not knowing a whole lot, people like CCL make this whole thing kind of a lame experience. I recommend new buyers to find pricing information, check out the videos, definitely compare round diamonds based on the numbers, get good advice on which vendors to go to, but skip the debates on these kinds of stones. Especially these cushions where there is only a few vendors who do it and nobody knows what the hell each one really looks like in person because they can all be so different(just like cushions in general, I saw probably 10 different cushions side by side and they all look completely different). Judge with your eyes and what is comfortable to you, all this ASET/perfect light performance stuff is really not that useful, considering as this thread just showed, the ASET might look better in one case versus another depending on the type, whose taking it, what the tilt is, etc etc etc. Obviously the ASET helps if you cant see the rock in person, I probably wouldn't buy a chunky cushion without seeing it in person or at least on a video.

My 2 cents. Argue if you want, but I wont be back to argue for fear someone might look me up on facebook and show up at my house to take detailed pics of my girlfriends rock(just joking).

 

[Dreamer_D]

edit

 

[CharmyPoo]

CCB - You provide sound advice in terms of the importance of judging with your eyes and understanding the differences between cushions. Yes, they are all very different and very unique. Personally, I am stiill very stuck on the modern cushion and love the chunky ones too.

At the risk of looking like I am coming to CCL''s defense again, I really don''t want to see this thread turn into something about being against you (let''s leave all that behind us). Most of us just took this as an educational thread comparing ASETs with a black and white background. It is rare that I have seen the same diamond taken in both backgrounds so I am glad this was shared. Overall, there are many people on this board that still don''t understand ASETs or how to read them so the more we talk about it .. the more we understand.

In terms of attacking CCL because he doesn''t have an AVC doesn''t seem fair. He bought what his fiance wanted - a larger diamond - and that is perfectly fine. If more AVCs were available at that time, she may have went the other way too. You also bought what you gf wanted - if she liked the AVC better .. would you be saying something else? I respect the decision you made for your intended''s diamond and I personally can''t wait to see the finished product.

 

[Cehrabehra]

CCB - at some point justifying yourself just makes it look to some as though you need to justify yourself, which you do not.

I think an unattached stone would have been a wiser choice. I''m sure there is a stone out there somewhere that he could ASK to have photographed with both colors of background. Given your history with him it is all the more inappropriate that he chose your stone for this exercise.

I agree with you completely and I wouldn''t blame you if you didn''t want to share the finished product. I feel very aligned with you philosophically and I do not blame you for your discomfort. I do understand the need to defend science over emotions, especially on this message board (rocky talky) but an ounce of compassion for you wouldn''t have been inappropriate to give either.

Bottom line - none of this dialog matters to you anymore... you are embarking on a journey with a woman and I hope you never, ever, think of this years down the road when you look at her finger

 

[ccb0x45]

Date: 6/26/2010 11:35:29 PM
Author: Cehrabehra
CCB - at some point justifying yourself just makes it look to some as though you need to justify yourself, which you do not.


I think an unattached stone would have been a wiser choice. I'm sure there is a stone out there somewhere that he could ASK to have photographed with both colors of background. Given your history with him it is all the more inappropriate that he chose your stone for this exercise.


I agree with you completely and I wouldn't blame you if you didn't want to share the finished product. I feel very aligned with you philosophically and I do not blame you for your discomfort. I do understand the need to defend science over emotions, especially on this message board (rocky talky) but an ounce of compassion for you wouldn't have been inappropriate to give either.


Bottom line - none of this dialog matters to you anymore... you are embarking on a journey with a woman and I hope you never, ever, think of this years down the road when you look at her finger

This was very nice and I will respond, I think my last message was written hastily because I was so thoroughly ignored throughout the thread especially by CCL when I asked where that aset came from(I was very curious for several reasons, like who was selling it, what was the price, etc... I realized it doesnt matter now so I am better off not knowing . That I felt like I came off like a crazy person with a persecution complex. I did I guess feel the need to justify myself since I felt I looked crazy, maybe it was unneeded.



Also to Charmy, believe me I was not attacking him because he didn't have an AVC if thats how it sounded haha. I have stated SEVERAL times that I like them both and really could care less which is "better", I don't wear diamonds or have much of a preference at all except getting my money's worth and getting my GF what she wanted. If I was attacking him for anything it was being so obsessed with something that to me just seems very irrelevant to him in general(and note I didnt even say AVC's I said Chunky Cushions, whatever type that might be), considering hes not a dealer, a cutter, a buyer, or someone who is even wearing that kind of diamond for himself but trying to gather that information only to be an "expert" in the field of chunky cushions, which I would say isnt possible just from doing a bunch of internet research. I'd say the only way to be a real expert in them is being a dealer like Jon/Mark/Perry etc who is handling the things every day and seeing tons come in and tons come out. Case in point this thread only proved that the white aset wasn't really any better than the black one because the angle of the white one might have made it look worse, and the angle of the black one might have made it look better, so really just having a well taken aset is whats important and how do you tell if its well taken or not from the picture??

To let the record straight I have ONLY said I think both AVCs and the one I bouht are great diamonds, I would have bought whatever my GF picked, I don't trust asets completely(white or otherwise) from all the ones I looked at based on what I saw in person and looking at a bunch of asets on the internet and then watching video comparisons(the best I could do considering no stores around here stocked any chunky style cushions).

I take back some of what I said, the board in general was very helpful considering they helped me find a great diamond for a great price and fit exactly what my GF wanted, and also a great person to create the custom ring that she is very excited about. So thanks, my only advice is not to be so argumentative with newbies about what is right and what is wrong(ie Charmy telling someone the diamond they just bought is a honda civic compared to your porsche 911 I found extremely rude). I never once said AVCs suck, they are awesome and I appreciate the work that has gone into them, some people here however implied that I was just not knowledgable at all if I picked my diamond over a smaller AVC(or flat out said it at some points).


I will say I shouldn't have even gotten into it with CCL about this post, I posted the image, it is free for him to use, I would have appreciated him not trying to prove a point with my stone by basically saying "look at this one that you think looks good? well when taken with a white background it might actually be a lot crappier!" considering I had just bought it, but when you offer your stuff on the internet that comes with the territory. Anyways I will say thanks to the people that helped me through the process because I am really happy with what I got!

 

[yssie]

Great writeup CCL.

What is the angle of tilt on the simulation?

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Max tilt of the whole video was 3 degrees in N/S axis. This is a guess but 2 - 3 degrees top up.

Here it is +/- 5 Degrees attached below.

The faceup position still is the most significant.Tilting only improves the appearance in some positions while making it look worse in others. The assymetry in the cut is apparent from the tilting.

There is a difference between backlit and non backlit images.
It isn''t just the color of the background.

i) A closed self lit chamber allows lighting control, the open conditions like most setups with the new AGS ASET camera are less ideal as the images are affected by ceiling and background light and you see much more variation depending on the lighting.

ii) Careful attention to focus and lense aperture (which affects depth of field) results in sharper more consistant images. If one is just using the default AGS camera setup the results are often less sharp or consistant unless carefully tweaked.

iii) Secondary and Tertiary rays exiting the crown although lower in intensity can change the appearance of the images. Even if a diamond''s facet receives light from the red region and returns it to the viewer this may be mixed with lower intensity rays that back trace from green or blue regions.

Backlighting or lack threof causes a change in the relative contribution of these secondary rays.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Image.

 

[yssie]

Date: 6/28/2010 5:39:21 PM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

There is a difference between backlit and non backlit images.
It isn't just the color of the background.

iii) Secondary and Tertiary rays exiting the crown although lower in intensity can change the appearance of the images. Even if a diamond's facet receives light from the red region and returns it to the viewer this may be mixed with lower intensity rays that back trace from green or blue regions.

Backlighting or lack threof causes a change in the relative contribution of these secondary rays.

YES


Primary output refractions contain the vast majority of the output energy so whatever colour these rays have inherited from the aset scope is going to be the colour of that area in the picture, but primary refraction is obviously not the whole story and ignoring that those secondary/tertiary refractions exist is going to yield biased 'observations'


In a backlit environment the original input energy is higher, thus the energy contained in primary, secondary, and tertiary refractions is also necessarily higher, resulting in bright rays that are able to travel to the viewer intact (and interfere with the results of that primary output).. in a non-backlit setup the primary refractions show clearly but tertiary refractions are so low-energy they are comparatively of negligible importance - rather like driving a car at 80 vs 20mph - you're still going to be badly injured if you stand in front of one, but at 20 vs 5mph your odds of sustaining serious damage are very different


Same real-world application when personA chooses to encase his/her stone in metal vs personB who chooses to leave the pavilion open to view and light - even ignoring the fact that the 'best cut' diamonds will benefit from direct refraction through the open pavilion

On the plus side there will never be different frequencies of primary and secondary refractions of the same intensity in any one region, and there will always be an overpowering region of primary refraction proximal to an area of such potential tertiary combination so we don't have to worry about the ASET showing false "white" leakage in either setup

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 6/24/2010 12:05:05 AM
Author: ccb0x45

Date: 6/23/2010 11:50:16 PM
Author: yssie

Date: 6/23/2010 11:24:50 PM

Author: Hest88

Huh, I''m glad I''m not the only one. I stared at both stones for a long time before reading the other comments and felt a little stupid because I couldn''t tell the difference between the two. I know CCL likes to be provocative so I wouldn''t put it past him to use the same stone, but the poll clearly says it''s two stones from two diff vendors, doesn''t it?

I''m betting same cushion from two vendors. The darkened white image looks way too similar to the black-bkgrd photo!

Ugh haha, I can see how I am coming off as loopy. I dont have a persecution complex. However there is no ''even if'' it is my diamond, the one on the right is definitely my diamond, and I have no problem with anyone using the picture I posted, thats why I posted it. I just feel that if he did a bunch of work to track down a white aset of my diamond 3 weeks after I bought it, then hes a weirdo. Maybe I am the weird one for thinking thats weird, but to each their own. If the white one is a totally different diamond, then I apologize, and that is extremely crazy cause they look VERY similar.

CCB0X45 I wish you well with your new ring purchase, the intention of my thread was not to question your purchase, or highlight the flaws or virtues of your diamond.

The images were e-mailed to me, nothing exotic like detective work was necessary

. I do not want to hurt or promote one PS vendor over another so that aspect of this discussion is being ignored.

I frequently discuss diamonds with several PS tradesmembers and two of the top rated grading laboratories and the exchange of images is quite common for me.

I am writing another article on cushion optics (the first to be published in late July here) so I take an interest in diamond optics and use the limited examples I have access to.
You never know when a CCL designed cushion may popup in the future.

All the best on receiving your ring may it bring your GF/Fiance great happiness.

CCL

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

..

 

[Resonance.Of.Life]

"You never know when a CCL designed cushion may popup in the future. "

Looking forward to that possibility

 

[ccb0x45]

Date: 6/28/2010 7:10:19 PM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

Date: 6/24/2010 12:05:05 AM

Author: ccb0x45

Date: 6/23/2010 11:50:16 PM

Author: yssie

Date: 6/23/2010 11:24:50 PM


Author: Hest88


Huh, I''m glad I''m not the only one. I stared at both stones for a long time before reading the other comments and felt a little stupid because I couldn''t tell the difference between the two. I know CCL likes to be provocative so I wouldn''t put it past him to use the same stone, but the poll clearly says it''s two stones from two diff vendors, doesn''t it?

I''m betting same cushion from two vendors. The darkened white image looks way too similar to the black-bkgrd photo!

Ugh haha, I can see how I am coming off as loopy. I dont have a persecution complex. However there is no ''even if'' it is my diamond, the one on the right is definitely my diamond, and I have no problem with anyone using the picture I posted, thats why I posted it. I just feel that if he did a bunch of work to track down a white aset of my diamond 3 weeks after I bought it, then hes a weirdo. Maybe I am the weird one for thinking thats weird, but to each their own. If the white one is a totally different diamond, then I apologize, and that is extremely crazy cause they look VERY similar.

CCB0X45 I wish you well with your new ring purchase, the intention of my thread was not to question your purchase, or highlight the flaws or virtues of your diamond.


The images were e-mailed to me, nothing exotic like detective work was necessary

. I do not want to hurt or promote one PS vendor over another so that aspect of this discussion is being ignored.



I frequently discuss diamonds with several PS tradesmembers and two of the top rated grading laboratories and the exchange of images is quite common for me.


I am writing another article on cushion optics (the first to be published in late July here) so I take an interest in diamond optics and use the limited examples I have access to.

You never know when a CCL designed cushion may popup in the future.

All the best on receiving your ring may it bring your GF/Fiance great happiness.


CCL

Thank you for the kind words, however I just don''t buy it that out of the clear blue sky someone emailed you pictures of my diamond 4 weeks after it was sold completely randomly and you didn''t do any seeking of it after that huge long winded discussion you had about it. Strange that the vendors are such a secret right now, I would think it would be more forthcoming to let people know more about your "research" since you consistently do promote certain vendors over others in the threads. However I do hope your obsession with these diamonds does pan out into something for you.