| Author | Topic: The Leo Diamond |
|
Graham rough rock Posts: 11 |
posted 08-30-2001 12:25 PM
I am intrigued by the Leo Diamond, it reminds me of the Eight star diamond. Go to this site, theleodiamond.com, or www.diamondaires.com and check out the info, and the scintillation and gemscope info on that page. Am I missing something or is this really a good diamond? I feel it would be nieve of people to think that diamond cutting cant be improved upon to produce more brillant stones, though, I may be nieve as well. thoughts!?! thanks for your time. |
 | |
| |
| |
|
lawmax cut rock Posts: 394 |
posted 08-30-2001 01:12 PM
I haven't seen the Leo diamond, but I imagine that it bears little resemblance to the EightStar diamond. It may be more scintillating but I'm sure that it is not as fiery and may not be as brilliant as an EightStar. For whatever the machine is worth, those Brilliancescope results are not at all impressive. The EightStar is cut in a unique way that includes perfect optical symmetry in the firescope. EightStar is the only diamond company that cuts with the aid of the firescope. The Leo may give more smaller flashes of white light, but it won't be able to provide the bigger flashes of colored and white light provided by an EightStar. Have you seen an EightStar? If not, you can go to the website www.eightstar.com and fill in your contact information at the order button link. You will be contacted with the name of someone who can help you. |
| |
| |
| |
|
StevL cut rock Posts: 192 |
posted 08-30-2001 01:16 PM
I remember several years back someone was cutting a 144(maybe 140) facet diamond. It was the thing for a short time, but I haven't seen one since they came out. ------------------ |
| |
| |
| |
|
jamesd cut rock Posts: 57 |
posted 08-30-2001 04:52 PM
The numbers aren't as good as the best of the regular ideals and the "conventional" diamond they use appears to be some set of median diamond properties, without the sample used to determine the median being disclosed. It might be the median of all results on the BrillianceScope or it might be some custom set they provided to make theirs look good. Can't tell from what is presented at their site. |
| |
| |
| |
|
Emrldforher cut rock Posts: 29 |
posted 08-31-2001 08:51 AM
Graham, I think I read either on Leo's site (actually I think it was Zale's several months ago) that the "commercial" diamond this is compared to is a "commerical" quality. If I recall from everything I've read, commercial quality is a term used in the industry and is not a high-quality diamond to say the least. If you look at the Zales website, they promote their own branded cut, the "Octillion". The results Zales shows from the b'scope are even better than the Leo Diamond and rival some of the ideal cut results that I've seen. That is the kind of thing that does make me nervous about the b'scope. I have a hard time believing that a Zales diamond rates so highly. (My own personal bias). With that being said, I think the b'scope is useful for a consumer as ONE tool of many (including your eyes!!) to evaluate a diamond. I have my own thoughts on diamonds like the Zales Octillion. Since its not quite a round, I wonder if the results are compared to other fancies and not rounds? Maybe that's what gives it higher results in the b'scope. Or, maybe its what others have been saying, that the b'scope can be cheated and you need to be careful with the results. All I know is the best advice I could give is look at as many diamonds as you can, utilize any and all tools available from the seller you choose and make an informed decision! Good luck.
|
| |
| |
| |
|
Emrldforher cut rock Posts: 29 |
posted 08-31-2001 08:51 AM
Graham,
[This message has been edited by Emrldforher (edited 08-31-2001).] |
| |
| |
| |
|
randomdan rough rock Posts: 1 |
posted 10-08-2001 03:13 PM
I just got back from looking at the "Leo" cut; I am also curious about this but still a little shaky on the details. The diamond has 66 facets instead of 58 and is cut in the words of my salesperson "with a different formula than Tolkowski" Using the aforementioned scope it’s off the chart. The question I have is I am I buying the equivalent of a "KIA" car when it first came out, or better yet a BETA versus VCR? From a looking at it lawmax has made a good assumption. The Leo gives more flashes of all color light but they are smaller than a traditional cut. The proportions of the diamond also seem to make it a little shallower and the crown to be more domed. The other thing I noticed is that the reflection of light on this stone made it difficult to see through. This gives it a darker appearance than a traditional cut. When looking at it under a gem scope the diamond was beautiful and completely clear. That’s all I got… I am interested but I think I need more information. [This message has been edited by randomdan (edited 10-08-2001).] [This message has been edited by randomdan (edited 10-08-2001).] |
| |
| |
| |
|
Cut Nut cut rock Posts: 288 |
posted 10-08-2001 04:34 PM
Good observations. The proportions work the same as on a traditional diamond. They wrongly compared on the BS to a differently proportioned diamond that was worse. There will be less fire, but more flashes of it as Lawmax and you have said. The BS result is not fantastic, and if you deand the proportions you can do a HCA analysis of the individual stone. S&N sell the better proportioned stones to Japan as 'Brilliant Rose'. The Japanese are fussier and more demanding about technical info than Americans. But if you get a well proportioned Leo, then go for it if you like the look, it is a personal preferencee issue. |
| |
| |
| |
