Assessing Cut for the Online Diamond Purchase

[TalkDoc]

Sorry to revisit a tired subject, but I don''t understand why most every thread on pricescope ends with some request for Idealscope or ASET imaging, but then every appraiser I have approached in my corner of the country has pooh-poohed the notion of using such equipment.

How far should I go to track down an appraiser who can perform such analysis? Can an experienced appraiser eyeball cut for me without Idealscope/ASET equipment, in your humble opinions? Again, I am contemplating getting my own scope, but, still, if cut is the least negotiable C, what is the correct way to make an online purchase and have a third party verify cut?

This seems to be the central dogma of online diamond spelunking... I really would like to here y''all''s thoughts.

Thank you kindly.

 

[stone-cold11]

Because we can''t see the stone personally. The only way to judge a stone''s performance online objectively and not be swayed by photo taking techniques is through ASET/IS image.

 

[jet2ks]

I think you've got a couple of issues here.

#1 is that a good, experienced appraiser, based on proportions from a scanner (such as a Sarin) and examining the diamond in controlled and familiar lighting conditions can make an accurate assessment of cut. The reason we here on PS ask for IS and ASET images is that we can't eyeball the actual diamond and have no idea of what the specific conditions were when photos were taken.

#2 is how well the appraiser can translate that to the customer. While someone who looks at thousands of diamonds can make accurate assessments, how do they explain that to the customer other than "take my word for it"? An appraiser that has additional tools, such as ASET and/or IS can use these tools to show the customer the same thing they are judging through experience.

For myself, I would feel much more comfortable about an appraisal if the person can show me why they graded a stone a certain way. I'm not going to just trust someone who I just met and who I've never dealt with before. The ASET &/or IS can make that reassurance easier. Personally, I think an appraiser who is pooh-poohing these is missing the (inexpensive) boat on customer service.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 5/6/2009 1:20:51 PM
Author: jet2ks
For myself, I would feel much more comfortable about an appraisal if the person can show me why they graded a stone a certain way. I''m not going to just trust someone who I just met and who I''ve never dealt with before. The ASET &/or IS can make that reassurance easier. Personally, I think an appraiser who is pooh-poohing these is missing the (inexpensive) boat on customer service.

Agreed, I would not want to work with one that don''t have access to ASET scope too.

Just use USPS insured mail to a independent appraiser with a scope, lots of people done it this way when they don''t have an independent appraiser near them.

 

[icekid]

Date: 5/6/2009 12:54:36 PM
Author:TalkDoc
Sorry to revisit a tired subject, but I don't understand why most every thread on pricescope ends with some request for Idealscope or ASET imaging, but then every appraiser I have approached in my corner of the country has pooh-poohed the notion of using such equipment.


Thank you kindly.

People have this odd tendency to put down things when they don't understand. Unforunatately, many diamond folks are not up to date on the latest in analyzing diamond cut. I would not let this deter me, personally.

 

[John P]

Good topic.

The diamond business as a whole has been extremely slow to adapt to change.

It may be shocking to the Pricescope-educated, but a great many appraisers don't even know the difference between what a H&A viewer shows and what performance viewers like IS or ASET show. The ASET was only formally introduced in 2005 and the scientific paper presenting it in Optical Engineering didn't appear until 2007. Ideal-Scope has been in use for longer (cut-research using reflectors have been done since the 1980s) but such reflector performance tools have remained exclusive to certain niche manufacturers and sellers...and as a way for people without the diamond in-hand to predict performance quality on sites like this - as has been mentioned.

You may ask - what about appraiser coursework/education? The GIA GG diploma does not address reflectors. In fact the GIA proportions-based system didn't evolve until 2006 and (in my opinion) what we learn about technical cut as GIA diamonds diploma graduates is extremely lacking. Those who pursue AGS training all the way through ICGA learn much more, but there are less than 20 ICGA-certified appraisers on the planet (!). Fortunately we have one who posts here on Pricescope (Neil Beaty). He is an example of a professional who maintains use of Ideal-Scope, ASET, DiamCalc and all modern tools that, in my opinion, "pro appraisers" of diamond cut quality should at least have familiarity-with.

Sadly there's no continuing education requirement for appraisers. What was learned 30 years ago may be the most recent for those who studied then. Actually formal training isn't necessary. Anyone can become a jewelry appraiser without so much as a hairdresser's license. This is what makes those great appraisers who have diligently pursued their craft so special - a round of applause, please, for the contributors here and their like-minded peers.

This may be of interest:

http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/58/1/%e2%80%9cAppraise-the-Appraiser%e2%80%9d---Help-for-Consumers.aspx

 

[jet2ks]

Thanks for the insight, John.

Just curious, do you see much difference in generational approach to these tools?

I'm just wondering if some of the younger people that have grown up with computers and rapidly changing technologies are more inclined to accept and use the newer "stuff", even if their coursework doesn't provide familiarity. You mentioned lack of continuing ed requirements, so I'm thinking that most people are going to use what they are familiar and comfortable with until forced to change.

 

[Rockdiamond]

HI All,
The use of reflector technology is by no means accepted by the diamond industry at large. The fact that GIA does not use or accept this technology should tell you something.
It is quite possible to understand reflector technology and disagree with it.
It is comletely reasonable to accept modern technology, yet disagree with relector technology.

We are dealing with diamonds- therefore people''s taste and individual preferences come into play. One diamond might be better on an ASET, yet appeal less to someone''s eye. This is not an uncommon occurance.

Making statments such as those in this post are risky here on PS.
The prevailing attitude here on PS is that anyone who does not accpet the use of these tools is totally uneducated- or refusing to accpet science.
It''s a shame becasue the discussion is a valid one. It seems that most of those who promote the use of this technology simply insult anyone who disagrees- all due respect to John- who is always a gentleman.



A good digital photo is far more informative IMO.

 

[Rockdiamond]

This reminds me of a "factoid"- IN the early 20th century, when cars were new to the market, one of the main selling points was that they''d eliminate pollution!
If you envision a city like New York with 100,000 horses pulling carriages, and the resulting piles of ...doody, the reason they thought this seems clear.
But looking at where cars have gotten us today, it''s clear that blindly accepting a new technology, simply because it seems newer and better can lead to unanticipated results.

Maybe not the best example, as I LOVE cars- but it does seem relevant

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/6/2009 2:18:36 PM
Author: John Pollard
Good topic.

The diamond business as a whole has been extremely slow to adapt to change.

Sadly there's no continuing education requirement for appraisers. What was learned 30 years ago may be the most recent for those who studied then. Actually formal training isn't necessary. Anyone can become a jewelry appraiser without so much as a hairdresser's license. This is what makes those great appraisers who have diligently pursued their craft so special - a round of applause, please, for the contributors here and their like-minded peers.

This may be of interest:

http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/58/1/%e2%80%9cAppraise-the-Appraiser%e2%80%9d---Help-for-Consumers.aspx

Whoa, that's scary!

 

[dimonbob]

A subject deat to my heart.

Most jewelry appraisers have no appraisal training at all. There are a few organizations that offer appraisal training and I think only two of them do annual or semi-annual testing.
to be a jewelry appraiser one should be at least a GIA GG...many are not
have taken formal appraisal courses...most have not
taken the USPAP course...most do not know what that is
In addition to the above a good appraiser needs to keep up with the latest information like diamond cut which most never bother to do. Learning diamond and colored stone cut is something that one needs to learn on your own. The best education on diamond cut is found right here on Pricescope.
A license...that is a joke. Real Estate appraiser are the few appraisers that need a license. Anybody can open a jewelry appraisal business, just hang out a sign "I R an appraiser".

There are a number of very good appraisers in the U.S. but there are areas of the country where there are none. If you want a good appraisal you might have the diamond sent to someone like Neil in Denver. Let them do their job and have them send the diamond on to you or back to the vendor.

dimonbob

 

[oldminer]

Anyone can say they are a "jewelry appraiser", but the litigious nature of the US consumer is a highly controlling factor. Liability takes care of a lot of fools. Of course, anyone can say they are a diamond dealer and the same rules apply to the unqualified.

Acceptance of the virtue of the reflector "technologies" makes very good sense and I do not connect it with some generational divide. I have made an effort to keep up technically and have made the substantial investments required in equipment, such as a high-end Sarin, Verigem and DiamCalc, to keep up with the new game. Providing ASET, IS, and H&A images is not a problem. Being able to "grade" diamonds with these tools is not done to some International standard, but people can make meaningful judgments from the images.

It is right for consumers to want to assess cut quality on diamonds. No matter how many times a seller advocates "trust me, I''m the professional" you just have to grin and know that you just don''t have to place blind faith in a salesman. Even idiots have slowly learned that trust must be earned, and that the more someone declares their trustworthiness, the more one must use caution.

I do sympathize with diamond merchants in that the grading of cut is still in its relative infancy. Although we have some grading that the trade accepts, there is much more that has yet to be developed or to be learned by those in control of grading, such as the GIA and AGS. I still expect some strong influence will be felt from the technology side, outside of the major two labs, when it comes to advancements in grading cut. Many times in other fields, surprising advancements come from small players who no one initially paid attention to. The big guys progress like whales, while smaller technology firms can swim more like flying fish.

Most appraisers just don''t have the money to buy the costly tools to provide the most recent support products ha Internet clients are demanding. That''s the principal reason you get the cold shoulder from them.

 

[Rockdiamond]

We all agree- many people who hang out an "Appraiser" shingle have no business doing so.
It''s a far more complex task than many realize.

Dave- I don''t believe that the grading of cut is in it''s infancy.

I do believe that it''s possible to analyze aspects of the cut of a diamond in such a way as it makes something seem "right" and something to be "wrong". Of course there are badly cut diamonds. But there have been many cases of a diamond being critisized that may have been extremely well cut IRL.
I am by no means advocating lessening the standards of cutting. We all agree that the way a diamond is cut is crucial to it''s beauty.

If one wanted an H&A type of diamond, that would be one area where tighter parameters work. But that''s because the very idea of round diamonds involves consistency.
Even in round diamonds, if you want to look at AGS- they have become far more inclusive in their 0 cut grade as compared to 2005 and before.


But once we go to fancy shapes, even those parameters fall by the wayside.

Grading cut will never be as simple as checking the reflector images.
Nor am I suggesting people take the word of a slick salesperson- or a website calling their emerald cuts- or any fancy shape "Ideal".

Part of the challenge of running a successful jewelry business- be it Tiffany, Graff, or Joe''s jewelry store- is the buying of diamonds.
There is an art to it.
It''s not brain surgery- and it can be learned by those with a discriminating eye. But it''s always going to require a human eye- and furthermore there will always be something of a "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" aspect to this as well.

For those who use reflector technology, it''s a great tool. The argument about trying to buy diamonds online, using refelctor technology is a good one- but I still think buyers should get a "hands on" report from a trusted seller.

I feel it''s important to remember that there''s other ways of judging diamonds. Valid ways of selecting incredibly fine cut diamonds and never using a reflector.

 

[strmrdr]

For round brilliant diamonds reflectors are pretty fool proof when combined with a little knowledge to eliminate combos with contrast issues. say 95%

For princess cuts they are about 90%

For other fancies it depends...
For example on asschers the reflectors show the patterns under one degree of head shadow each, they change in appearance with different head shadow.
Figuring out how they will change and if they will stay with in acceptable limits is a huge challenge.
With a picture, IS and ASET you have 3 different head shadow configurations and have a solid idea of how it will look in many conditions.
That covers diffused lighting and somewhat mixed lighting.
For direct lighting the clues are there when combined with the crown height and table size but getting from point A to B is hard to explain.

 

[neolith]

So far in my search, I have only seen IS and ASET images posted on GOG. Is it common for the other online vendors (e.g. bluenile) to provide these on request?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/7/2009 1:18:04 AM
Author: neolith
So far in my search, I have only seen IS and ASET images posted on GOG. Is it common for the other online vendors (e.g. bluenile) to provide these on request?

Whiteflash and high performance diamonds and diamondexpert.com and exceldiamonds provide IS and ASET
JA and a few others provide IS on request.

bluenile refuses to provide any images at all.

 

[jstarfireb]

Add ID Jewelry to the list of vendors willing to provide ASETs. They pleasantly surprised me when I was giving someone advice for buying a princess cut.

 

[TalkDoc]

Incredible discussion. Thanks to all who participated.

Even though there's no true consensus, I can appreciate the different viewpoints. I understand why the gentlemen and gentlewomen of the pricescope forums, who basically volunteer their time and expertise to help lost strangers navigate the confusing and costly ocean that is diamond purchasing, would rely very much upon reflector imaging.

In the same vein, I appreciate what appears to be the minority opinion within the borders of this site that reflector imaging cannot in every instance predict the subjective nature of appreciating cut.

As a consumer, I am apt to want as much information as possible before finalizing a purchase as emotionally (and actually) taxing as this one. Unfortunately, given the limitations of availability of the technology both amongst the full spectrum of online vendors and amongst the appraisal community at large, it is not yet practical to pursue reflector imaging in the final analysis of every purchase. Some maybe, but not every one. Not in 2009 at least.

I think the bottom line for me will be to fallback on that old tired line... buy the diamond, not the paper... or in this instance the picture. Trusting to an extent the various lab certs grading standards and armed with the HCA, itself controversial even among the respected appraisers of this board, I can hopefully narrow down my options to a few potentially well cut diamonds. Upon receipt, if it sparkles like nothing else, well, then, voila. I can be satisfied with the cut subjectively and get my old-school appraisal ASET-less and all. But if it is anything between "mind-ideal" (?) and "frozen spit," I guess I would still consider finalizing a sale if an appraiser in some far-off distant land like exotic Philadelphia or scandalous Denver could vouch for the diamond's value.

Risking obviousness, I wish it would be clearer. And I wish there could be one accepted standard. This too shall be market-drive, I suppose. If thousands of me's demonstrate a demand or preference for vendors and appraisers who can provide reflector data to back-up a diamond's value, then it shall be so.

Until then, I hope I have formulated a strategy that won't fail me.

However, I never like to confuse hope for a plan so... I appreciate y'all's non-sugar-coated thoughts on this approach...

 

[strmrdr]

I would not really agree I would take a couple reflector images and the c/p/t/lgf% for an RB over any labs cut grade any day.
Also...
There isn't a lab that does an effective job of grading cut for emerald and asscher cuts for example.
The one that does exist does not take into account the patterns which is critical and cant be automated yet.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 5/7/2009 12:15:20 PM
Author: strmrdr
I would not really agree I would take a couple reflector images and the c/p/t/lgf% for an RB over any labs cut grade any day.
Also...
There isn''t a lab that does an effective job of grading cut for emerald and asscher cuts for example.
The one that does exist does not take into account the patterns which is critical and cant be automated yet.

Ditto

 

[oldminer]

I provide reflector images for clients who want them, but I do not grade these images nor grade diamonds based on these images. I always tell these folks to go to Pricescope and related links to make their own subjective comparisons. Also, I tell them to post the images here for critiques by participants. Past a certain point of considerable experience, the eyes alone do a great job in deciding which diamonds are the ones which perform the best or look the best out of a group. However, experienced eyes are not "grading tools" and experienced eyes are not in the heads of most consumers. I am convinced that consumers want to convert what human perception now tells experts about beauty and quality and make it into technological equipment which will confirm the exact classsification of diamond light return and possibly a beauty quotient, as well.

This is an ongoing effort, not just a wish. We''ll see technology objectively grade light performance in ways approximating human perception. It is done in other fields and will evntually come to diamond grading, too. I see this as an aid to improving commerce and communication although the old school fellows will rage about it because things are not the way they used to be. I''d reply, "What is?"

 

[Rockdiamond]

It IS an interesting conversation, and I am glad for the ability to participate.


What would you folks think of a machine that can grade music?
Plug in Beethoven, Brahms and The Beatles, and the machine tells us which one is best. Surely we can point to statistical facts to prove which is the best music.


That''s kind of the way I feel about this conversation.
Of course there are horribly cut diamonds, and of course it makes sense to avoid those. For the purposes of this conversation, let''s eliminate those.

Suggesting that a stone is "better" because someone else likes it seems to overlook the fact that each of us perceives things in our own way.
In fact, a lot of folks agree with Storm ( for example) - they come here and ask his opinion. I have no doubt that Storm- and others here- can use reflector images to pick exactly what they love best.
If a shopper wants ASET and IS images, they should NOT compromise.
if we were attempting to sell that type of diamond to that type of consumer we would have to use IS and ASET.

Just as some participants here depend on Storm and others to tell them what they like, way other people depend on Tiffany''s, Cartier, Zales.... or me , for that matter.
If one has a good eye, and has proven it over time, consumers can benefit from that.

But each of us has our own style and taste.

We''ve sold many diamonds other sellers would not even consider. Maybe it''s due to the color- some jewelers tell people to only buy stones above H color for example.
Maybe it was a stone with an unusual cut- some sellers carry only Round Marquise and Pear Shape..

But our hard learned experience is that what some people find attractive, others do not. Some people hate the look of a round diamond- no matter how well it''s cut.
Are they wrong?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/7/2009 12:34:39 PM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 5/7/2009 12:15:20 PM
Author: strmrdr
I would not really agree I would take a couple reflector images and the c/p/t/lgf% for an RB over any labs cut grade any day.
Also...
There isn't a lab that does an effective job of grading cut for emerald and asscher cuts for example.
The one that does exist does not take into account the patterns which is critical and cant be automated yet.

Ditto

Thritto. Added with, an experienced vendor who can tell me all about a potential stone and answer all my questions. (Videos are a huge plus, as they convey the types of personalities, which are important. I hope to see this with more vendors, only one right now) That's the most one can hope for, when buying online.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/7/2009 2:01:46 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

In fact, a lot of folks agree with Storm ( for example) - they come here and ask his opinion. I have no doubt that Storm- and others here- can use reflector images to pick exactly what they love best.

That is a very insulting accusation.

It is also very wrong, I help people all the time buy diamonds that are beautiful diamonds that I would never buy.
Every time I answer a princess cut question for one example of many.

I sure don't appreciate being insulted by a trade member.

 

[Rockdiamond]

My apologies Karl as it was meant as a compliment.
I truly believe that you do a very good job advising folks.

But a person''s taste can not be simply negated.
When you assist folks in buying a princess cut, for example, what you like still affects how you see things. If you think it''s beautiful, that''s your opinion, even if you don''t love princess cuts.

 

[WPSon20]

Date: 5/7/2009 12:15:20 PM
Author: strmrdr
I would not really agree I would take a couple reflector images and the c/p/t/lgf% for an RB over any labs cut grade any day.

Also...

There isn't a lab that does an effective job of grading cut for emerald and asscher cuts for example.

The one that does exist does not take into account the patterns which is critical and cant be automated yet.

Interesting topic... when you say 'c/p/t/lgf%,' does that = HCA? Or is it a little more than that?

Sorry to threadjack with a 'new-guy question.'

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/7/2009 2:26:32 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
My apologies Karl as it was meant as a compliment.
I truly believe that you do a very good job advising folks.

But a person's taste can not be simply negated.
When you assist folks in buying a princess cut, for example, what you like still affects how you see things. If you think it's beautiful, that's your opinion, even if you don't love princess cuts.

A large majority of people that come here to buy don't know what they like (besides sparkle), many have never even looked at diamonds. Many don't want to take the time TO look at stones to find out what they do like, they just want a nicely cut stone (for the most part), and to be done with it. What we do here is help them find the nicest stone we can within their budget. That means well cut with nice light return. (and that is where reflector technology helps us, help them)

What do you want us to do David, tell them to go out and figure out exactly what it is they like/what they find beautiful, and then get back to us? They don't want to do that, that's why they are here in the first place. If they want more than what we give, they need to go shopping in real shops. And not one of us is stopping them from doing just that.

You're the only one who seems to have a problem with how PS works, the tons of happy posters aren't complaining. And in fact, we have repeat customers. I think that speaks for what we do, and what they end up with.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/7/2009 2:43:32 PM
Author: WPSon20

Interesting topic... when you say ''c/p/t/lgf%,'' does that = HCA? Or is it a little more than that?

c=crown angle
p=pavilion angle
t=table
lgf=lower girdle facet

 

[Stephan]

Hi David!
Today, I wouldn't buy a diamond without IdealScope/ASET picture.
I think that IS/ASET are rejection tools to avoid bad light return in face-up position.
HCA is another rejection tool but only for rounds.
When the IS/ASET are nice, than I have to see the stone in action (like in Jonathan's videos).
Because IS/ASET don't tell me a lot about fire/scintillation.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Ellen- it''s interesting how we see this differently- even intepreting what I wrote!

I am saying that for those people in the category you identified ( less experienced shoppers), PS is very good at advising these folks.
You, and others who are frequent contributors have more expeience looking at diamonds- others with less experience want to "use your eyes" to assist them. I believe you and others do a very good in these cases. I''m not saying that PS regulars are not good at what they do- just the opposite.

As you''ve pointed out, people have come back on repeated occasions.


I have no problem with that whatsoever- I''m here particiapting!

My point is that many times opinon is presented as "facts"