Asscher diamond search

[sanfranciscoellen]

Wow! The silence is deafening!

I agree that there are many asschers that may get the thumbs down around here that would be just gorgeous in real life. Sometimes I am glad that I didn''t post here before selecting mine, or I still might be looking for something better! Some us are happy with "perfect for me" rather than "perfect".

I just wanted to tell you how much I like the 1.15ct. It is drop dead gorgeous, and that''s not even its real setting? Wow.

She''ll love it. I''d love it. Can I have it?

Congratulations!

 

[KtIceRN]

Storm
I do love my asscher.
I think it sparkles wonderfully.
I see no dead center.
I realized after posting about my stones that you were not the right person to ask about it. You may have some knowledge about asschers but the best place to get my advice was from a diamond expert. You have posted some very good guidelines of what to look for in an asscher but you are not an expert.
You are a peson on this site just like the rest of us and you should learn to be kind and happy for people when they have found something that they and others believe is beautiful. Being rude and sarcastic only shows how unprofessional you are.
I hope that other people who intend to buy asschers read this and see how you react when a stone is purchased that you don''t feel is worthy. Then they can see the pictures and judge for themselves as we all should do.
I am happy that I got a expertly picked stone....I intend to enjoy it for a very long time.
Skeletor8...please also enjoy your asscher no matter which one you chose....this should be a fun experience for everyone involved.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/13/2006 2:54:29 PM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 7/13/2006 2:02:07 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 7/12/2006 5:12:21 PM
Author: KtIceRN
WF Assher

kewl ya love it, id reject it and the picture there shows why. 2 of the culet facets are at bad angles and there is practically no light return dead center.
That''s good enough for you then congrates!!

Storm,

May I tell you that some level of modesty would suit you better.

I know that you have been a fan of Asschers for a long time already, and that you have always paid attention to any detail that you could get to know about these stones, while other consumers were struggling to understand ''simple'' rounds.

But it is not because you always have an opinion about Asschers, that your opinion is right.

I honestly think that you reached the point where you have kept exhibiting your limited knowledge, without anyone attacking it, and that you have started to believe that you truly are ''the king of Asschers''. And honestly, we professionals have given you this stage, because we ourselves are struggling to understand the Asscher-beast, to see what makes it tick, and what doesn''t. And remember, we need to know before we cut it, not judging the result afterwards.

As such, may I personally ask you to show some more modesty in future? Honestly, your status in Asschers is over-rated, and it is best that you realise this.

I do hope that you take this friendly advice as it is, just friendly advice. It is not my intention to de-grade you, or to speak down on you. You are a very valuable contributor on this forum, and I am amazed by the energy that you put in here. Just your over-confident position when it comes down to Asschers disturbs me, from a professional point of view.

Just an opinion of a friend,

Any one else id just tell em to get bent, but since its ya I will just wait and see what ya come up with.
I''m looking forward too it.
I always go for technical perfection and your one of the few cutters that strives to achieve it so ill be nice.
Besides im in a good mood today

I had came back to this thread to apoligise for being a bit rude so im going to go do that now.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/13/2006 7:35:35 PM
Author: KtIceRN
Storm
I do love my asscher.

kewl then enjoy it and be happy :}
Sorry for being a bit rude earlier in this thread.
Some diamonds while not technically perfect can still be pretty and that may well be the case with your diamond.
Some of us search for technical perfection.
Enjoy! :}

 

[KtIceRN]

Thank you Storm.
I only hope that you will rememer this next time someone is looking for a asscher.
My stone my not be perfection in your mind but when I look at it I smile cause it makes me happy.
Please don''t take that away from people...that is why we are all here..to love and enjoy diamonds.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 7/13/2006 8:08:58 PM
Author: strmrdr

Any one else id just tell em to get bent, but since its ya I will just wait and see what ya come up with.
I''m looking forward too it.
I always go for technical perfection and your one of the few cutters that strives to achieve it so ill be nice.
Besides im in a good mood today

I had came back to this thread to apoligise for being a bit rude so im going to go do that now.

Hey Storm, we both are cool, and it is because I know that you respect my opinion, that I just give it to you. After all, friends are there to tell you the truth, even if it might hurt sometimes.

As you, I am always striving for technical perfection, but specifically in the case of emeralds, you have no idea how far apart are the world of the design-table (the architect) and the world of the actual execution (the constructor). Unlike rounds, we are talking about finishing each facet, based upon inspection of the eye only. Therefore, it is very dangerous to compare virtual stones to finished ones.

On top of that, we are working with an extremely expensive rough material, and our job is to destroy a big part of that expensive material (let it go up in dust), while improving the remaining part in such a way, that it becomes more valuable. When working on virtual stones, you do not have that problem.

Therefore, you must be careful to not create unrealistic expectations, which cannot be met technically and/or economically.

Personally, I do not know where our limitations are in emeralds. You can rest assured that we will go upto that limit. If the result will be ''stormworthy'' is an open question. If not, the notion ''stormworthy'' becomes unrealistic.

Live long,

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/14/2006 7:01:36 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 7/13/2006 8:08:58 PM
Author: strmrdr

Any one else id just tell em to get bent, but since its ya I will just wait and see what ya come up with.
I''m looking forward too it.
I always go for technical perfection and your one of the few cutters that strives to achieve it so ill be nice.
Besides im in a good mood today

I had came back to this thread to apoligise for being a bit rude so im going to go do that now.

Hey Storm, we both are cool, and it is because I know that you respect my opinion, that I just give it to you. After all, friends are there to tell you the truth, even if it might hurt sometimes.

As you, I am always striving for technical perfection, but specifically in the case of emeralds, you have no idea how far apart are the world of the design-table (the architect) and the world of the actual execution (the constructor). Unlike rounds, we are talking about finishing each facet, based upon inspection of the eye only. Therefore, it is very dangerous to compare virtual stones to finished ones.

On top of that, we are working with an extremely expensive rough material, and our job is to destroy a big part of that expensive material (let it go up in dust), while improving the remaining part in such a way, that it becomes more valuable. When working on virtual stones, you do not have that problem.

Therefore, you must be careful to not create unrealistic expectations, which cannot be met technically and/or economically.

Personally, I do not know where our limitations are in emeralds. You can rest assured that we will go upto that limit. If the result will be ''stormworthy'' is an open question. If not, the notion ''stormworthy'' becomes unrealistic.

Live long,

Paul, I''m not going to pretend I can tell you how to cut diamonds but if you pay attention to the angles and just as important the depth of each pavilion facet you will cut stormworthy asschers. Im confident in you doing it.
The biggest mistake I see is bad angles on the culet facets, by running the second set of steps on the pavilion too close to the culet it saves weight but also makes for a less lively diamond.
Spready asschers would be a plus but the rough wont allow it as you stated in another thread, that''s ok I''m game up to 70% depth and with a discount 75%. I think that is reasonable/realistic.

 

[elmo]

Strm is one of the last folks here who needs someone else defending him

. But I feel I need to say something, in case someone in the future reads this out of context.

My impression at least of what is "stormworthy" involves primarily optical symmetry, reducing undesirable leakage, and a "pleasing" appearance. I think this is something that everyone here holds in high esteem regardless of shape, Paul included.

Also, there are in fact special cases where cutters have made a successful business setting unrealistically high expectations and charging accordingly. I still laugh at the thought of Richard von Sternberg grinding away until nothing is left where a couple of minor facets somehow didn't result in a worthy 8*. Even if I'm not a fan, I think he was an important pioneer who has significantly influenced what is state of art today.

I think that folks like Strm who insist on precision cutting for Asschers will drive improvements to what's done today. If customers don't demand it, producers will almost always do what's cheapest and easiest.

 

[sanfranciscoellen]

As another defense of Storm, he often states that the "storm-worthy guidelines" are more to help people weed out stones MORE LIKELY to be not great, since we are often working with the fact that people pay to call in these stones and don''t want to throw loads of money at loads of asscher options. He would probably be the first to say that there are dogs within his perfect specs, and gorgeous stones outside of his perfect specs. It''s all about SEEING them, and here we are trying to figure out how to best select an asscher that can''t be seen before purchase, often.

Everyone, including Storm, knows that the first best way is to see them. The second best way is to use expert eyes to give you their opinion, as many of you (and I) have. Then, and only then, come the storm-worthy specs.

And people also have to know themselves enough to feel comfortable disagreeing with storm, or anyone else, when they seek their rubber-stamp of approval and don''t get it. When you ask for opinions around here, you GET THEM! Like what they say or not.

But yes, niceness and sensitivity should always be the rule around here

.

Cheers, asscher lovers!

 

[pricescope]

Interesting discussion.

There are several issues about technical/geometrical perfectionalism. Although it may move the technology but also dismiss many beautiful diamonds and standardise their look.

It can especially be true for fancy shapes. Sergey, for instance, thinks that at certain sizes, princess can look more brilliant than a round stone even with less light return and symmetry. It is not because of the geometrical symmetry/perfection but because of the features of the human vision and brain.

All round diamonds cut to the same exact proportions look identical, characterless, and become a commodity. Yes they may have perfect symmetry on the magnified photographs and "ideal" proportions. However, human eyes (stereo vision, constant motion, etc) see the diamonds differently then still photo-camera, microscope, ideal-scope, etc.

I've seen ideal cut stones in some environment. They look like light-bulbs - very bright but characterless. Not interesting, not intriguing at all.

With fancy shapes it is even more serious because they have character on their own. Limited light leakage, and/or darkness on ideal-scope image might not undercut (pun) real life appearance of the stone but on the contrary to add certain charm, and contrast, and scintillation, and fire.

That is where craftsmanship of a cutter come to play, not a robot, which can cut to precise angles. As Gabi Tolkowski wrote something like this: "I looked at the stone and stone looked back at me"...

You have to look at the stone, not the photo. Photo won't look back at you.

It just reminds me that back in 19th century, French Academy of Art haven't approved impressionism paintings because they were not "technically" perfect

Bottom line, there probably should be a balance between technical/theoretical perfection and real person observation of particular stone. Our personal taste and ability to make personal decisions vs. what others (even very high authority) telling you to do...

Just some random thoughts

 

[skeletor8]

I believe storm doesn''t need my help in defending him either, but here goes.

I look at him as a resource, and a demanding one at that. He has what appears to be a good idea of what will make a great stone based on images and specs and also what will probably result in a less than perfect stone. Now could he be wrong? Of course. And could a stone be less than "stormworthy" but still be very good looking? I imagine so.

But he is another set of eyes who has no stake in the outcome of a decision. He is invaluable as a resource for people who are seeing asscher''s for the first time and not familiar with their nuances and ideal specs. I guess the moral of the story (for those who don''t think this way already) is to use storm and other resources on this board (and in life in general) as just that...a resource...an opinion...another nugget of information to use in making an informed decision. Don''t take their word as the final say on whether a stone is right for you...use their advice as a guideline and make your own mind up.

Anyways, I would like to thank everyone for their advice here, including stormy. My ring arrived from WF today and it looks pretty great. I needed it very quick (they basically set the stone and shipped it out to me all yesterday) so I just put it into a simple setting, but it still looks great! The stone looks amazing, and I really do like the way it shows some blue in outdoor light...very cool, my girl will love it methinks. May end up doing a custom designed setting later if the gf wants to.

Hopefully I can take some pictures and post them later...going to try to go get it appraised today.

Thanks again everyone.

 

[KtIceRN]

I would like everyone to understand that I was not trying to bad mouth Storm. I believe that he has some VERY good guidelines about asschers that anyone who wants to buy one should read. I did my research and by the numbers picked what I thought was a very nice asscher. I did ask his opinion on the stones that I picked out. And I took into consideration what he had to say. But I aslo decided to ask Brian about it since he is the one who was seeing the stone. I could not just sit around and let a stone that potentially was beautiful pass me by without having Brian look at it and seeing it for myself.
I felt that almost any stone I would have brought in and taken pics of that it would not be storm worthy. I guess in a lot of ways I was right. He strives for techinical profection, I was striving to have a beautiful stone.
My whole point of even saying anything at all was so other "noobies" like me would understand that even though a stone may not be quite storm worthy that it may infact be very beautiful.
Storms opinion is valuable when it comes to asschers....I just think that alot of people including myself get wrapped up in the "storm worthyness" of a stone and may miss out on some wonderful asschers.
I guess if Storm had said it''s not technically perfect but it may be still be pretty. Look at it and see for yourself I would have felt alot better. He would have gotten his point across about his idea of a worthy asscher and I wouldn''t have almost missed out on a beautiful stone.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 7/14/2006 12:52:10 PM
Author: Pricescope
Interesting discussion.

There are several issues about technical/geometrical perfectionalism. Although it may move the technology but also dismiss many beautiful diamonds and standardise their look.

It can especially be true for fancy shapes. Sergey, for instance, thinks that at certain sizes, princess can look more brilliant than a round stone even with less light return and symmetry. It is not because of the geometrical symmetry/perfection but because of the features of the human vision and brain.

All round diamonds cut to the same exact proportions look identical, characterless, and become a commodity. Yes they may have perfect symmetry on the magnified photographs and ''ideal'' proportions. However, human eyes (stereo vision, constant motion, etc) see the diamonds differently then still photo-camera, microscope, ideal-scope, etc.

I''ve seen ideal cut stones in some environment. They look like light-bulbs - very bright but characterless. Not interesting, not intriguing at all.

With fancy shapes it is even more serious because they have character on their own. Limited light leakage, and/or darkness on ideal-scope image might not undercut (pun) real life appearance of the stone but on the contrary to add certain charm, and contrast, and scintillation, and fire.

That is where craftsmanship of a cutter come to play, not a robot, which can cut to precise angles. As Gabi Tolkowski wrote something like this: ''I looked at the stone and stone looked back at me''...

You have to look at the stone, not the photo. Photo won''t look back at you.

It just reminds me that back in 19th century, French Academy of Art haven''t approved impressionism paintings because they were not ''technically'' perfect

Bottom line, there probably should be a balance between technical/theoretical perfection and real person observation of particular stone. Our personal taste and ability to make personal decisions vs. what others (even very high authority) telling you to do...

Just some random thoughts

Sometimes my dear friend you are so profound and good at clarifying and simplifying complex issues.

AGS will soon release their best Asscher and emerald cut grading system, and their guidelines and methods for cutting to get the best results. I wonder if the stones will look back at us?

I think there is a fair chance they will be a little too bright to be Storm Worthy?
The appeal of an asscher - and I must say I really understand why people like them - far more so than colorless radiant fans - is the ''falling into a wishing well'' vertigo thing they do to you. But if they become too good at returning light - maybe they will loose that?

So as Paul says - there is lots of stuff to know about each cut - and we should be wary of being "too expert".

From my own point of view - I thought we would solve round diamond grading by 2000. But here we are and there is more disagreement than ever!!!

 

[Mara]

I personally think that 1.15 pattern looks amazing in the pictures...!! I have seen some really beautiful asschers in person...to me they are definitely one of the cuts where to me the numbers don't tell near to the whole story...and pictures are easily misleading of any type of stone but esp the step cuts. In any case...I would definitely trust Brian's hawk eyes and expert opinion as he has never steered me wrong. Good luck and please post pictures!!

PS..KT your stone looks verra nice as well!!! Gotta love those mesmerizing mile deep looks.

 

[KtIceRN]

Thanks Mara!!

I am having a custom halo/pave setting done by WF for it...I sould get the wax on monday!!
I''ll post pics when I get them!!