|
|
|
|
| ||
Diamond Jewelry Forums
 Picture Gallery
 Video Gallery
 Journal
|
|||
|
|  Search
|  Posted Today
|  Most Active
|  Help
|
||
 »
Home
»  » Diamond Prices and Grading »
 » RockyTalky
»  » Let's get into angles!
|
|
 |
Let's get into angles! |
 |
| P: 2/29/2008 12:56:34 PM | |
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
Ok, I have been reading on this forum for over 6 months. I have been searching for a diamond for 4 months. Two of those months have been spent with Todd @ Nice Ice. Many of the basic questions are asked, but no one ever seems to ask about angles. If angles are talked about, it is usually a, "will this diamond be nice" type of thread. From my understanding here is what is ideal: Depth: 60-62% Crown: 34-35% Pavilion angle: 40.5-41% Table: 53-57% I would like to know how much I can deviate from these angles while still maintaining brilliance. Can someone please advise? Thank you to all those that have helped me so far  |
| Posted: 2/29/2008 12:56:34 PM | |
|
There are 27 replies to this message. There are 27 replies on this page. |
|
| P: 2/29/2008 1:01:23 PM | |
kcoursolle Ideal Rock Total Posts: 10,344 Last Post: 10/14/2009 Member Since: 1/21/2006 |
Date: 2/29/2008 12:56:34 PM Author:DS Ok, I have been reading on this forum for over 6 months. I have been searching for a diamond for 4 months. Two of those months have been spent with Todd @ Nice Ice. Many of the basic questions are asked, but no one ever seems to ask about angles. If angles are talked about, it is usually a, 'will this diamond be nice' type of thread. From my understanding here is what is ideal: Depth: 60-62% Crown: 34-35% Pavilion angle: 40.5-41% Table: 53-57% I would like to know how much I can deviate from these angles while still maintaining brilliance. Can someone please advise? Thank you to all those that have helped me so far A good guide is to reject any stones that have an HCA score of over two. From there use other selection criteria like images. I guess I would say you can deviate from these angles as long as it still gives you an HCA of under two.
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:01:23 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 1:07:15 PM | |
|
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
Thank you. Most of the diamonds that I have been looking at are in the 1.1-1.4 range. I would assume that there are no "preferred" amounts then, rather a combination of all the angles?
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:07:15 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 1:12:26 PM | |
|
kcoursolle Ideal Rock Total Posts: 10,344 Last Post: 10/14/2009 Member Since: 1/21/2006 |
Date: 2/29/2008 1:07:15 PM Author: DS Thank you. Most of the diamonds that I have been looking at are in the 1.1-1.4 range. I would assume that there are no 'preferred' amounts then, rather a combination of all the angles? 1.1-1.4 is excellent! Basically crown/pavillion angles need to be "compatible" with eachother for great performance. However, there are many many compatible combinations that look good. From there you have to consider preferences in slight differences and other aspects of the stone.
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:12:26 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 1:22:59 PM | |
|
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
Great! At least I am doing something right. I am just worried that Todd is a little bit of a perfectionist! I've personally seen a stone that rated at 1 and it was beautiful. It is at the higher end of my price range but when compared to other stones it seems like a pretty good deal. Right now he is trying to locate similar stones so that I can make a visual comparrison. Here is the diamond: http://www.niceice.com/certcopies2008/ags0009015501/index.htm http://www.craftedbyinfinity.com/index.php?pid=63&lang=eng&sid[]=195&src=loupe Here is the HCA: Factor Grade Light Return Excellent Fire Excellent Scintillation Excellent Spreador diameter for weight Very Good Total Visual Performance 1 - Excellent within TIC range
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:22:59 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 1:29:56 PM | |
|
kcoursolle Ideal Rock Total Posts: 10,344 Last Post: 10/14/2009 Member Since: 1/21/2006 |
The stone looks amazing, it should be incredible in person!!! You don't have to worry about the angles, they are very compatible!
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:29:56 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 1:34:17 PM | |
|
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
Yeah, it is very pretty. Honestly I thought that a 1.7 carat diamond would look a little bigger though, hahaha. It is amazing what 13k in your hand looks like! Maybe it is time to make another call to Todd. Does the price look acceptable? Also how much can I deviate from 1 before I notice a difference? 1.6? 1.8?
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:34:17 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 1:41:56 PM | |
diamondseeker2006 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 17,609 Last Post: 11/18/2009 Member Since: 1/11/2006 |
A 1.9 is not worse than a 1.0 on the HCA. The lowest number is not better than a higher number under 2.0. When you are dealing with AGS0 Ideal stones, you don't even need to use the HCA! AGS has already determined that the stone is ideal in light performance!
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:41:56 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 1:47:50 PM | |
|
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
Sweet! That makes it a little easier since I have been only looking at AGS0 stones. Any more comments? Specifically about price or angles?
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:47:50 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 1:52:25 PM | |
|
diamondseeker2006 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 17,609 Last Post: 11/18/2009 Member Since: 1/11/2006 |
I have an H VS1 that is almost the same size, and it was a few hundred more than that over a year ago. So the price looks good to me.
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 1:52:25 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 3:22:28 PM | |
lisa1.01fvs1 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 1,101 Last Post: 9/4/2009 Member Since: 1/17/2008 |
A good guide is to reject any stones that have an HCA score of over two. From there use other selection criteria like images. I guess I would say you can deviate from these angles as long as it still gives you an HCA of under two. I don't know mine scored 2.5 BUT is AGSO & AGA 1B and GIA EX/EX/EX. 
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 3:22:28 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 7:59:01 PM | |
|
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
Thank you, any more opinions?
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 7:59:01 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 8:06:35 PM | |
JulieN Ideal Rock Total Posts: 7,144 Last Post: 11/22/2009 Member Since: 7/25/2005 |
Infinity makes top cut stones.
|
| Posted: 2/29/2008 8:06:35 PM | |
| P: 2/29/2008 8:23:50 PM | |
strmrdr Ideal Rock Total Posts: 23,296 Last Post: 10/9/2009 Member Since: 11/1/2003 |
Date: 2/29/2008 8:06:35 PM bingo, and that one is a top cut.Author: JulieN Infinity makes top cut stones. Id buy it. ........... Karl has joined the diamond trade and is now posting as Karl_K |
| Posted: 2/29/2008 8:23:50 PM | |
| P: 3/1/2008 2:05:13 AM | |
|
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
Guess when you got Todd on your side it is hard to go wrong. Thank you everyone. I think that a 1.7 will look nice on her size 5-6 finger.
|
| Posted: 3/1/2008 2:05:13 AM | |
| P: 3/1/2008 2:28:41 AM | |
|
strmrdr Ideal Rock Total Posts: 23,296 Last Post: 10/9/2009 Member Since: 11/1/2003 |
Date: 3/1/2008 2:05:13 AM yep it will look awesome!Author: DS Guess when you got Todd on your side it is hard to go wrong. Thank you everyone. I think that a 1.7 will look nice on her size 5-6 finger. Todd is a good guy even when we disagree which isnt that often :} ........... Karl has joined the diamond trade and is now posting as Karl_K |
| Posted: 3/1/2008 2:28:41 AM | |
| P: 3/1/2008 4:08:21 AM | |
Lorelei Ideal Rock Total Posts: 34,212 Last Post: 11/22/2009 Member Since: 4/30/2005 |
Date: 2/29/2008 12:56:34 PM Author:DS Ok, I have been reading on this forum for over 6 months. I have been searching for a diamond for 4 months. Two of those months have been spent with Todd @ Nice Ice. Many of the basic questions are asked, but no one ever seems to ask about angles. If angles are talked about, it is usually a, 'will this diamond be nice' type of thread. From my understanding here is what is ideal: Depth: 60-62% Crown: 34-35% Pavilion angle: 40.5-41% Table: 53-57% I would like to know how much I can deviate from these angles while still maintaining brilliance. Can someone please advise? Thank you to all those that have helped me so far Also crown and pavillion angles which are on the steeper end ( cr 35 - pav 41) and shallower ( cr 34 - pav 40.4) as examples, need further evaluation to make sure the angles on each end are complimentary, so a trusted vendor's eyes and Idealscope image are useful for this.  Nothing is more sacred as the bond between horse and rider...no other creature can ever become so emotionally close to a human as a horse. When a horse dies, the memory lives on because an enormous part of his owner's heart, soul, very existence dies also...but that can never be laid to rest, it is not meant to be... - Stephanie M Thorn |
| Posted: 3/1/2008 4:08:21 AM | |
| P: 3/5/2008 3:33:28 PM | |
|
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
Thanks for the comments guys/gals. I have an email into Todd. Visually how do you think that these will compare to the Infinity diamond? http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1122762.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131 http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1105598.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131 http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1122760.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131 Do you think that the difference in angles will change the diamond enough making it not worth purchasing?
|
| Posted: 3/5/2008 3:33:28 PM | |
| P: 3/5/2008 5:41:36 PM | |
|
kcoursolle Ideal Rock Total Posts: 10,344 Last Post: 10/14/2009 Member Since: 1/21/2006 |
Date: 3/5/2008 3:33:28 PM Author: DS Thanks for the comments guys/gals. I have an email into Todd. Visually how do you think that these will compare to the Infinity diamond? http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1122762.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131 http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1105598.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131 http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1122760.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131 Do you think that the difference in angles will change the diamond enough making it not worth purchasing? Yucky inclusions in #2 and #3, so I would pass. Number one is fine, but I prefer the combination of the other stone you picked out personally.
|
| Posted: 3/5/2008 5:41:36 PM | |
| P: 3/5/2008 6:40:39 PM | |
Rhino Ideal Rock Total Posts: 4,865 Last Post: 11/22/2009 Member Since: 3/29/2001 |
Date: 2/29/2008 1:01:23 PM Author: kcoursolle Date: 2/29/2008 12:56:34 PM Author:DS Ok, I have been reading on this forum for over 6 months. I have been searching for a diamond for 4 months. Two of those months have been spent with Todd @ Nice Ice. Many of the basic questions are asked, but no one ever seems to ask about angles. If angles are talked about, it is usually a, 'will this diamond be nice' type of thread. From my understanding here is what is ideal: Depth: 60-62% Crown: 34-35% Pavilion angle: 40.5-41% Table: 53-57% I would like to know how much I can deviate from these angles while still maintaining brilliance. Can someone please advise? Thank you to all those that have helped me so far A good guide is to reject any stones that have an HCA score of over two. From there use other selection criteria like images. I guess I would say you can deviate from these angles as long as it still gives you an HCA of under two. I have seen (and possess) some diamonds with the rarest optics and cut qualites in the world that are over 2.0 so I don't necessarily agree. A diamond with a 41.0 pavilion angles and a crown angle = or slightly over 34.6 when combined with superior optical symmetry will be as beautiful as any HCA <=2.0 and even more beautiful than alot of those combos. DS ... on the pavilion angle front I'd be more cautious with the shallower end you've listed regardless of great HCA score. Pavilion angles around that 40.5 zone stand a greater chance of reflecting back darkness depending on the length of the lower girdles and there are folks who just don't prefer the appearance. Only way to know for sure is to *see*. One thing that helps alleviate that darkness is longer lower girdles which will add brightness off the lower halves. Also, the closer you get around the 41.0 zone the greater the chance the diamond has to grab light from around the viewer rather than reflect the viewer himself into the diamond. Just reading through the rest of this thread ... good advice on down the line. 
Rhino |
| Posted: 3/5/2008 6:40:39 PM | |
| P: 3/5/2008 6:47:12 PM | |
Garry H (Cut Nut) Ideal Rock Total Posts: 11,577 Last Post: 11/22/2009 Member Since: 8/16/2000 |
Date: 3/5/2008 6:40:39 PM Did you make a typo Rhino?Author: Rhino Date: 2/29/2008 1:01:23 PM Author: kcoursolle Date: 2/29/2008 12:56:34 PM Author:DS Ok, I have been reading on this forum for over 6 months. I have been searching for a diamond for 4 months. Two of those months have been spent with Todd @ Nice Ice. Many of the basic questions are asked, but no one ever seems to ask about angles. If angles are talked about, it is usually a, 'will this diamond be nice' type of thread. From my understanding here is what is ideal: Depth: 60-62% Crown: 34-35% Pavilion angle: 40.5-41% Table: 53-57% I would like to know how much I can deviate from these angles while still maintaining brilliance. Can someone please advise? Thank you to all those that have helped me so far A good guide is to reject any stones that have an HCA score of over two. From there use other selection criteria like images. I guess I would say you can deviate from these angles as long as it still gives you an HCA of under two. I have seen (and possess) some diamonds with the rarest optics and cut qualites in the world that are over 2.0 so I don't necessarily agree. A diamond with a 41.0 pavilion angles and a crown angle = or slightly over 34.6 when combined with superior optical symmetry will be as beautiful as any HCA <=2.0 and even more beautiful than alot of those combos. DS ... on the pavilion angle front I'd be more cautious with the shallower end you've listed regardless of great HCA score. Pavilion angles around that 4.05 zone stand a greater chance of reflecting back darkness depending on the length of the lower girdles and there are folks who just don't prefer the appearance. Only way to know for sure is to *see*. One thing that helps alleviate that darkness is longer lower girdles which will add brightness off the lower halves. Also, the closer you get around the 41.0 zone the greater the chance the diamond has to grab light from around the viewer rather than reflect the viewer himself into the diamond. 4.05 = 40.5 degrees? Would you like to take a 41 35 stone and an 40.5 34 and make the pavilions dirty, then compare them and report back? (BTW I like that combination too, especially when it is painted slightly, and of course super symmetrical) Garry Holloway FGAA DipDT |
| Posted: 3/5/2008 6:47:12 PM | |
| P: 3/5/2008 6:53:41 PM | |
|
Rhino Ideal Rock Total Posts: 4,865 Last Post: 11/22/2009 Member Since: 3/29/2001 |
Date: 3/5/2008 6:47:12 PM Author: Garry H (Cut Nut) Date: 3/5/2008 6:40:39 PM Did you make a typo Rhino?Author: Rhino Date: 2/29/2008 1:01:23 PM Author: kcoursolle Date: 2/29/2008 12:56:34 PM Author:DS Ok, I have been reading on this forum for over 6 months. I have been searching for a diamond for 4 months. Two of those months have been spent with Todd @ Nice Ice. Many of the basic questions are asked, but no one ever seems to ask about angles. If angles are talked about, it is usually a, 'will this diamond be nice' type of thread. From my understanding here is what is ideal: Depth: 60-62% Crown: 34-35% Pavilion angle: 40.5-41% Table: 53-57% I would like to know how much I can deviate from these angles while still maintaining brilliance. Can someone please advise? Thank you to all those that have helped me so far A good guide is to reject any stones that have an HCA score of over two. From there use other selection criteria like images. I guess I would say you can deviate from these angles as long as it still gives you an HCA of under two. I have seen (and possess) some diamonds with the rarest optics and cut qualites in the world that are over 2.0 so I don't necessarily agree. A diamond with a 41.0 pavilion angles and a crown angle = or slightly over 34.6 when combined with superior optical symmetry will be as beautiful as any HCA &lt;=2.0 and even more beautiful than alot of those combos. DS ... on the pavilion angle front I'd be more cautious with the shallower end you've listed regardless of great HCA score. Pavilion angles around that 4.05 zone stand a greater chance of reflecting back darkness depending on the length of the lower girdles and there are folks who just don't prefer the appearance. Only way to know for sure is to *see*. One thing that helps alleviate that darkness is longer lower girdles which will add brightness off the lower halves. Also, the closer you get around the 41.0 zone the greater the chance the diamond has to grab light from around the viewer rather than reflect the viewer himself into the diamond. 4.05 = 40.5 degrees? Would you like to take a 41 35 stone and an 40.5 34 and make the pavilions dirty, then compare them and report back? (BTW I like that combination too, especially when it is painted slightly, and of course super symmetrical) Haha... yes and corrected.  What I have trouble understanding about the HCA Garry is that it assumes precise optical symmetry yet hits 34.8/41.0 combos that are perfectly fine. Admittedly most diamonds do not have precise optical symmetry but the HCA is assuming this. Dirty diamonds: When I'm out rolling around the mud next time I'll be sure to bring those combos with me.  
Rhino |
| Posted: 3/5/2008 6:53:41 PM | |
| P: 3/6/2008 8:32:21 AM | |
|
Garry H (Cut Nut) Ideal Rock Total Posts: 11,577 Last Post: 11/22/2009 Member Since: 8/16/2000 |
Date: 3/5/2008 6:53:41 PM It is not a joke Rhino. Diamonds are dirty far more than they are clean. Author: Rhino Date: 3/5/2008 6:47:12 PM Author: Garry H (Cut Nut) Date: 3/5/2008 6:40:39 PM Did you make a typo Rhino?Author: Rhino Date: 2/29/2008 1:01:23 PM Author: kcoursolle Date: 2/29/2008 12:56:34 PM Author:DS Ok, I have been reading on this forum for over 6 months. I have been searching for a diamond for 4 months. Two of those months have been spent with Todd @ Nice Ice. Many of the basic questions are asked, but no one ever seems to ask about angles. If angles are talked about, it is usually a, 'will this diamond be nice' type of thread. From my understanding here is what is ideal: Depth: 60-62% Crown: 34-35% Pavilion angle: 40.5-41% Table: 53-57% I would like to know how much I can deviate from these angles while still maintaining brilliance. Can someone please advise? Thank you to all those that have helped me so far A good guide is to reject any stones that have an HCA score of over two. From there use other selection criteria like images. I guess I would say you can deviate from these angles as long as it still gives you an HCA of under two. I have seen (and possess) some diamonds with the rarest optics and cut qualites in the world that are over 2.0 so I don't necessarily agree. A diamond with a 41.0 pavilion angles and a crown angle = or slightly over 34.6 when combined with superior optical symmetry will be as beautiful as any HCA &amp;lt;=2.0 and even more beautiful than alot of those combos. DS ... on the pavilion angle front I'd be more cautious with the shallower end you've listed regardless of great HCA score. Pavilion angles around that 4.05 zone stand a greater chance of reflecting back darkness depending on the length of the lower girdles and there are folks who just don't prefer the appearance. Only way to know for sure is to *see*. One thing that helps alleviate that darkness is longer lower girdles which will add brightness off the lower halves. Also, the closer you get around the 41.0 zone the greater the chance the diamond has to grab light from around the viewer rather than reflect the viewer himself into the diamond. 4.05 = 40.5 degrees? Would you like to take a 41 35 stone and an 40.5 34 and make the pavilions dirty, then compare them and report back? (BTW I like that combination too, especially when it is painted slightly, and of course super symmetrical) Haha... yes and corrected. What I have trouble understanding about the HCA Garry is that it assumes precise optical symmetry yet hits 34.8/41.0 combos that are perfectly fine. Admittedly most diamonds do not have precise optical symmetry but the HCA is assuming this. Dirty diamonds: When I'm out rolling around the mud next time I'll be sure to bring those combos with me. You love your customers don't you? You love researching the effects of various cuts etc, don't you? Why not take 30 minutes to test what I am suggesting to you? Garry Holloway FGAA DipDT |
| Posted: 3/6/2008 8:32:21 AM | |
| P: 3/6/2008 11:24:59 AM | |
niceice Ideal Rock Total Posts: 1,792 Last Post: 7/22/2008 Member Since: 1/29/2003 |
Date: 2/29/2008 1:22:59 PM Author: DS I am just worried that Todd is a little bit of a perfectionist! Heh heh, this observation always cracks me up "I want you to find a diamond for me as if you were buying it for yourself" and then people are surprised when it takes awhile because I'm a perfectionist... Well, yea! Five minutes on the web site should have given somebody that impression. I seem to recall that I told you I might be a bit nuts when it comes to our selection process, but it makes for happy clients! The 1.70 from Paul (Infinity) is cut to the center range of the parameters for the zero ideal cut rating, it really doesn't get any better than that. It's gorgeous, the fluorescence isn't affecting the diamond in a negative manner and it's as lively as can be - if it wasn't, I would have rejected it - because I'm a perfectionist. I had to laugh a little while ago when one of my primary suppliers sent me an email that said "you might be a diamond snob!" and I'm happy to say that I am, but I don't feel bad about it because there are plenty of people out there who are willing to buy the rejects. The reality is that there simply aren't that many really well cut diamonds out there, especially in the 1.70 - 1.99 carat range because the cutters are simply better off financially to produce a mediocre cut 2.00+ because of the price increase that occurs between the 1.99 - 2.00 carat marks. The primary dilemma here has been trying to find a suitable comparision for DS to compare to the gorgeous 1.70 that I found for him, I haven't been able to locate something that I consider to be comparable to show him as an alternative to the 1.70 - I can find plenty of stuff that I wouldn't sell him and that creates an obvious quandry. I'm out of town this weekend DS, but we can get together mid-week if you want to take it for a walk in the Seattle Sun - yea, it's been kind of sunny lately. It might be too cold to wake board still though. Strmrdr: I'm really glad that we're able to play so well together even when we disagree, it is one of the things that I really enjoy about the people who contribute to PS. It's nice to see somebody else recognize it  Rhino Playing in the Mud! All right, so I'm thinking that we might be able to televise this as an event on ESPN. Mud Bowl 2008! Diamond Professionals in the Ring battling for the brilliance! Todd L. Gray, President |
| Posted: 3/6/2008 11:24:59 AM | |
| P: 3/6/2008 12:00:19 PM | |
|
strmrdr Ideal Rock Total Posts: 23,296 Last Post: 10/9/2009 Member Since: 11/1/2003 |
Date: 3/5/2008 6:53:41 PM I like playing in the mud send em too me and I will report back in say 2 or 3 years heheheheheheAuthor: Rhino Haha... yes and corrected. What I have trouble understanding about the HCA Garry is that it assumes precise optical symmetry yet hits 34.8/41.0 combos that are perfectly fine. Admittedly most diamonds do not have precise optical symmetry but the HCA is assuming this. Dirty diamonds: When I'm out rolling around the mud next time I'll be sure to bring those combos with me. ........... Karl has joined the diamond trade and is now posting as Karl_K |
| Posted: 3/6/2008 12:00:19 PM | |
| P: 3/6/2008 12:11:12 PM | |
|
strmrdr Ideal Rock Total Posts: 23,296 Last Post: 10/9/2009 Member Since: 11/1/2003 |
The biggest thing too keep in mind is that one you get out of the mid-range the minor facets become much more important. Take a stone that's 40.8/34.7 and the difference between lgf% 76 and 80 is comparatively minor. Take a stone with a shallow or deepish pavilion and the difference is much more. 40.5/34 with long lgf% is a different kettle of fish than a 40.5/34 with short lgf% for a ring. In a pendant the difference is less due too viewing distance. This is a flaw in ASET that ETAS may account for. ASET does not take into account the modifying effect of the lgf% because of the fixed head shadow and static nature it just shows them as blue. In the real world it isn't that simple. ........... Karl has joined the diamond trade and is now posting as Karl_K |
| Posted: 3/6/2008 12:11:12 PM | |
| P: 3/6/2008 8:47:56 PM | |
|
Garry H (Cut Nut) Ideal Rock Total Posts: 11,577 Last Post: 11/22/2009 Member Since: 8/16/2000 |
Date: 3/6/2008 12:11:12 PM Good points Storm.Author: strmrdr The biggest thing too keep in mind is that one you get out of the mid-range the minor facets become much more important. Take a stone that's 40.8/34.7 and the difference between lgf% 76 and 80 is comparatively minor. Take a stone with a shallow or deepish pavilion and the difference is much more. 40.5/34 with long lgf% is a different kettle of fish than a 40.5/34 with short lgf% for a ring. In a pendant the difference is less due too viewing distance. This is a flaw in ASET that ETAS may account for. ASET does not take into account the modifying effect of the lgf% because of the fixed head shadow and static nature it just shows them as blue. In the real world it isn't that simple. LGF need to be quite long in the other combo - firey stones - which typically have smaller tables and smaller table refelctions. Garry Holloway FGAA DipDT |
| Posted: 3/6/2008 8:47:56 PM | |
| P: 3/10/2008 5:42:28 PM | |
|
DS Rough Rock Total Posts: 9 Last Post: 3/10/2008 Member Since: 2/29/2008 |
I can understand completely! I just have to be difficult, it is in my nature. :) Thank you to all that have commented in this thread. Todd, I will see you tomorrow or Wednesday. Any more comments or suggestions are welcome!
|
| Posted: 3/10/2008 5:42:28 PM | |
 Previous Page
|
Next Page 
|
| « Any Good diamond? Ideas/Suggestions/Others? « | » Opinions on this stone please » |
Contact Us | Back Home | Privacy Statement | Forum Agreement | Forum Policies | |
| Ideal BB Version: 0.1.5.4.beta1 | Message forum software powered by the Ideal BB |
| |
Pricescope -
Knowledge -
Diamond Prices -
Tools -
Resources -
About
© 2000-2009 Pricescope. Terms of Use Privacy Policy Disclaimer
forum archives
