Why doesn''t Whiteflash provide pictures?

Whiteflash doesn't provide pictures of the actual stone and it's inclusions -
A picture of an inclusion means ntohing, they can be made to look better or worse wit t turn of a lamp etc. That is what a grading report is for.


Idealscope images:
Christian alis CP is working on a standardised sausage factory Ideal-scope photography system so all vendors get the same results. Currently the Firescope is touted as a standard. it has been designed to make one stone look great and other cuts look bad.

or brilliancescope images like some of their competition?
Brian Gavin has sent , or is sending his BS back to Gemex, he has tested it and found the results vary day by day and can be easily tricked by simple means. You can find discussions with the search feature about this.

I just wish everyone had the same level of information up, so I could compare apples to apples.

it takes a lot of work to photograph and file all these pics etc. And sometimes the stone is sold for a few hudnred dollars profit - it is simply not worth it. But I am sure if you are prepared to pay for the service on specified stones - they will do it for you - ask them :)

Much of the time the stonesare not in-house. It also takes time, and many stones are said to sell very fast. It would be nice...

Garry;

I have to take issue with your comments.

Sierra is asking a very good question, i.e;
for a consumer diamond-shopping over the Internet,
how does he/she obtain information on-line to make an
educated decision. IMO, it is to provide as much quantitative,
qualitative, and visual information as possible.

Digital pictures highlighting inclusions is of
great value and the way we do them are very accurate;
as the plotting diagrams provided on
Lab Reports are very difficult to decipher. Taking several
pictures under different lighting conditions
will give you a good indication of what's going on.

BrillianceScope reports are important as they provide
visual data and information regarding the amount and
quality of brilliance, fire , and scintillation
emanating from the diamond. We've found these results
to be repeatable and consistent according to Gemex
designed tolerances within and across machines.
In order for a vendor to obtain a Gemex Report for a diamond
they have run on the machine, the "run" must be first submitted to
Gemex for evaluation and analysis. The Gemex software can
and does detect any manipulation that skews results.
Even just to send a gif of the "run" to a prospective client,
that "run" must be first submitted to Gemex. Upon their approval,
the complete set, including gif is returned to you.
Refer to the FAQ on the gemex website (www.gemex.com).

I do agree with you that it's alot of work for us
and very time-consuming (especially for the SI stones) to take these
digi-pics, but disagree with you that it's not worth it.
The quality of our pictures on our website speak for
themselves.

The fact is that everytime we have introduced
a new informational feature to our website, it has
been enthusiastically received ( that includes your HCA and excellent tutorial).
...And we don't charge extra,

Barry
www.superbcert.com

Barry you certainly do go out of your way to provide truck loads of infomation. And it is great that you do - please do not get me wrong - I would prefer every merchant did, but I also wanted to explain that not every vendor will or might, and the reasions why = lots of extra effort. But your point is well taken that buying on-line means the info has more value.

Re "Digital pictures highlighting inclusions is of
great value and the way we do them are very accurate;
as the plotting diagrams provided on
Lab Reports are very difficult to decipher. Taking several
pictures under different lighting conditions
will give you a good indication of what's going on." barry my concern is :
1. Adequate operator skill.
2. Honesty of the operator - it is easy to take a photo and disguise the inclusions. Then a shot you put up would be disadvantaged by a shot from an unscrupulous vendor. Who can prove what level of magnification was used for example?

Re the BrillianceScope, i was purely commenting on what I believe to be the WhiteFlash take on the instrument. As you know I have resevations about reliance on the Brilliancescope. It is however another tool that has its place in an arsenal like yours Barry.

Your comments barry about the Gemex process are all the more reason why I believe Randy should publish or have published in an open domain so that the community can review all these well meaning but secret processes.

All power to you for full disclosure Barry. Maybe one day the world will come to expect this level of service. Certainly the gIA is aware of its failure to provide an adequate level of diamond quality information. If they had solved all the cut problems already then maybe we would not need all these additional services. They really should be what a cert is for :)

Garry;

I appreciate your comments and concerns.

BTW, I've received your PM and shall
take care of the matter this week.

Barry
www.superbcert.com