Assessing Cut for the Online Diamond Purchase

[WPSon20]

Date: 5/7/2009 2:46:13 PM
Author: 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

Sorry, so you''re saying this is more about having the expertise to know how these proportions relate with each other rather than just plugging in c/p/t/depth percentages into the HCA?

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/7/2009 2:50:11 PM
Author: QueenMum
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 (like the HCA).
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.

Interesting Stephan- Again, I''m not discouraging anyone from requesting or using IS ASET images- but you''ve identified a weakness in them.

That''s why we provide videos for almost all our stones as well.

BTW- it''s also quite possible that some of the stones one might reject due to ASET might be worth buying once they are seen in real life.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/7/2009 2:44:49 PM
Author: Ellen

You''re the only one who seems to have a problem with how PS works,

Ellen, I do not believe that is an accurate statement.
First of all, I don''t have a "problem" with how PS works- but discussing the ins and outs is interesting. Secondly there have been others who''ve expressed similar viewpoints to mine- but many go away as it is dangerous.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:02:03 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Interesting Stephan- Again, I''m not discouraging anyone from requesting or using IS ASET images- but you''ve identified a weakness in them.

That''s why we provide videos for almost all our stones as well.

Thank you, David!

BTW- it''s also quite possible that some of the stones one might reject due to ASET might be worth buying once they are seen in real life.

Yes, some of the stones.
But if you take some steep/deep GIA EX diamond, ASET will show us that there is too much leakage in the middle of the diamond, and that''s not what will please most of the people, even if they are not pricescopers.
But in fact, you are right, we don''t need a scope/viewer to see that problem.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/7/2009 2:58:30 PM
Author: 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''

Can you give me a for instance?

And maybe I did read your post wrong, but to me, you were saying that when we tell a poster a stone will be beautiful, that is only our opinion. Well, yes and no. The "personality" might appeal to us (but to be honest, I rarely inject my personal preferences on a stone), but if we see it has great light return from an IS, and we know the angles are cut so that it''s a well balanced stone in brilliance and fire, I doubt many would look at such a stone and call it ugly. Of course, the poster "might" not like it, but again, then they need to go shopping in a real shop and look at real stones.

You were talking about peoples perceptions here in this post below. Again, they are relying on us, yes. If they want to know what they truly like, go shopping in a real store. I honestly don''t feel I misinterpreted this message from you.

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

Now, one thing I did think of. If you are referring to the fact that we pick stones that are well balanced, and not 60/60 like you prefer, I get it. But as others have said, and even some 60/60 owners, those stones fall in the "definite personal preference" range. They do need to be seen, as the majority would most likely not pick them as opposed to a near Tolk. That''s why we don''t recommend them. (I''m not saying they can''t be nice though!)

 

[jet2ks]

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

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.

Not a machine yet, but this is called music theory. Great music was written long before the advent of theory, what has been done by music theory is an analysis of what good music has in common and then created a set of "rules" for beginners to follow when they look at writing a new piece. Yes, not every person has the same taste in music, but there are some chord progressions and note combinations that always sound good and some that almost never do. If you follow the "rules" of music theory, you will most likely have a piece that sounds good--it may not be a masterpiece, but it won''t kill the ears, either.

In the same way, it seems to me that what diamond cutters and those who are working with reflector technology have done is look at the best diamonds, figured out what they have in common and made a set of grading guidelines around that. ASET and IS are tools to show how well those parameters were followed.

In the same way that it is possible to create a great musical composition while still breaking many "rules" of music theory, it is possible to have a diamond that appeals to someone that doesn''t follow all the guidelines, but only personal taste and experience can tell. But if I am just starting out writing music, it is much safer to follow the guidelines of music theory until I have the experience to venture away from them, otherwise there is a much greater chance of having a song that just doesn''t sound good. If I am buying a diamond, it is safer staying within certain parameters until I have the experience and judgement to venture outside them, as well.

David, I recall the recent thread where you talked about your experiences starting out in the diamond industry. It was very interesting and I thank you for sharing those with us. I do wonder, however, if along the way you have forgotten what the beginning was like. You were given parameters to sort diamonds, correct? After sorting thousands of stones, you were given greater responsibility because you now had the judgement to make those decisions. As consumers, we don''t have the luxury of physically handling and viewing that number of stones and gaining that experience, so we use the tools at hand to make judgments.

There will always be beautiful diamonds that don''t fit within parameters and people will buy them, but those aren''t the people coming to pricescope, they are going into the shops and looking for themselves and are confident in their decisions.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:02:03 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 5/7/2009 2:50:11 PM
Author: QueenMum
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 (like the HCA).
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.

Interesting Stephan- Again, I'm not discouraging anyone from requesting or using IS ASET images- but you've identified a weakness in them.

That's why we provide videos for almost all our stones as well.

BTW- it's also quite possible that some of the stones one might reject due to ASET might be worth buying once they are seen in real life.

Yes, but this (PS) isn't real life!

See, this is the thing. You are trying to inject "real life" into online buying, it won't work! It's not the same thing.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:21:39 PM
Author: jet2ks
Not a machine yet, but this is called music theory. Great music was written long before the advent of theory, what has been done by music theory is an analysis of what good music has in common and then created a set of ''rules'' for beginners to follow when they look at writing a new piece. Yes, not every person has the same taste in music, but there are some chord progressions and note combinations that always sound good and some that almost never do. If you follow the ''rules'' of music theory, you will most likely have a piece that sounds good--it may not be a masterpiece, but it won''t kill the ears, either.

In the same way, it seems to me that what diamond cutters and those who are working with reflector technology have done is look at the best diamonds, figured out what they have in common and made a set of grading guidelines around that. ASET and IS are tools to show how well those parameters were followed.

In the same way that it is possible to create a great musical composition while still breaking many ''rules'' of music theory, it is possible to have a diamond that appeals to someone that doesn''t follow all the guidelines, but only personal taste and experience can tell. But if I am just starting out writing music, it is much safer to follow the guidelines of music theory until I have the experience to venture away from them, otherwise there is a much greater chance of having a song that just doesn''t sound good. If I am buying a diamond, it is safer staying within certain parameters until I have the experience and judgement to venture outside them, as well.

David, I recall the recent thread where you talked about your experiences starting out in the diamond industry. It was very interesting and I thank you for sharing those with us. I do wonder, however, if along the way you have forgotten what the beginning was like. You were given parameters to sort diamonds, correct? After sorting thousands of stones, you were given greater responsibility because you now had the judgement to make those decisions. As consumers, we don''t have the luxury of physically handling and viewing that number of stones and gaining that experience, so we use the tools at hand to make judgments.

There will always be beautiful diamonds that don''t fit within parameters and people will buy them, but those aren''t the people coming to pricescope, they are going into the shops and looking for themselves and are confident in their decisions.

Harmony and musical scales are cultural concepts. For example, our Western counterpoint is incomprehensible to some other cultures.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:21:25 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 5/7/2009 2:58:30 PM
Author: 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''

Can you give me a for instance?

And maybe I did read your post wrong, but to me, you were saying that when we tell a poster a stone will be beautiful, that is only our opinion. Well, yes and no. The ''personality'' might appeal to us (but to be honest, I rarely inject my personal preferences on a stone), but if we see it has great light return from an IS, and we know the angles are cut so that it''s a well balanced stone in brilliance and fire, I doubt many would look at such a stone and call it ugly. Of course, the poster ''might'' not like it, but again, then they need to go shopping in a real shop and look at real stones.

You were talking about peoples perceptions here in this post below. Again, they are relying on us, yes. If they want to know what they truly like, go shopping in a real store. I honestly don''t feel I misinterpreted this message from you.

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

Now, one thing I did think of. If you are referring to the fact that we pick stones that are well balanced, and not 60/60 like you prefer, I get it. But as others have said, and even some 60/60 owners, those stones fall in the ''definite personal preference'' range. They do need to be seen, as the majority would most likely not pick them as opposed to a near Tolk. That''s why we don''t recommend them. (I''m not saying they can''t be nice though!)

HI Ellen,
There''s your examle.
You are stating , as a "fact" that stones of 60 depth/60 table are not well balanced. That is by no means a fact. Many of the finest diamond cutters in the world prefer 60/60 over a smaller tabled "Near tolk"- THAT is a fact

 

[jet2ks]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:33:50 PM
Author: QueenMum

Harmony and musical scales are cultural concepts. For example, our Western counterpoint is incomprehensible to some other cultures.

Thanks for muddying the waters, Stephan.

What I was really trying to point out is that even though Beethoven, Brahms and the Beatles seem so different, they have much more in common than it would appear at first glance when analyzed through music theory, just as well cut diamonds of the same shape have certain characteristics, such as light return, in common, even when they appear different.

I would equate the different cultural concepts of music to variance of shape. If Western counterpoint is a round diamond, then traditional Japanese music might be an emerald. There are different "rules" within each concept. I don't fully understand what makes a Eastern pentatonic based song work, but someone who has studied them does. In like manner, I don't yet understand what makes Asschers & emeralds "work", but storm does and has guidelines he can apply.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:42:37 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 5/7/2009 3:21:25 PM
Author: Ellen

Can you give me a for instance?


Now, one thing I did think of. If you are referring to the fact that we pick stones that are well balanced, and not 60/60 like you prefer, I get it. But as others have said, and even some 60/60 owners, those stones fall in the ''definite personal preference'' range. They do need to be seen, as the majority would most likely not pick them as opposed to a near Tolk. That''s why we don''t recommend them. (I''m not saying they can''t be nice though!)

HI Ellen,
There''s your examle.
You are stating , as a ''fact'' that stones of 60 depth/60 table are not well balanced. That is by no means a fact. Many of the finest diamond cutters in the world prefer 60/60 over a smaller tabled ''Near tolk''- THAT is a fact

You are talking about "preference" in this statement. It may be a fact that some cutters prefer this type of stone, but it doesn''t make it a fact that they are as well balanced in fire and brilliance as a near Tolk.

What is a fact, is that 60/60''s are cut towards brilliance. They do not display a more equal amount of brilliance and fire. You absolutely agreed with me on this very point not too long ago. If you''d like me to pull it up, I''ll be glad to.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:21:39 PM
Author: jet2ks

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

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.

Not a machine yet, but this is called music theory. Great music was written long before the advent of theory, what has been done by music theory is an analysis of what good music has in common and then created a set of ''rules'' for beginners to follow when they look at writing a new piece. Yes, not every person has the same taste in music, but there are some chord progressions and note combinations that always sound good and some that almost never do. If you follow the ''rules'' of music theory, you will most likely have a piece that sounds good--it may not be a masterpiece, but it won''t kill the ears, either.

In the same way, it seems to me that what diamond cutters and those who are working with reflector technology have done is look at the best diamonds, figured out what they have in common and made a set of grading guidelines around that. ASET and IS are tools to show how well those parameters were followed.

In the same way that it is possible to create a great musical composition while still breaking many ''rules'' of music theory, it is possible to have a diamond that appeals to someone that doesn''t follow all the guidelines, but only personal taste and experience can tell. But if I am just starting out writing music, it is much safer to follow the guidelines of music theory until I have the experience to venture away from them, otherwise there is a much greater chance of having a song that just doesn''t sound good. If I am buying a diamond, it is safer staying within certain parameters until I have the experience and judgement to venture outside them, as well.

David, I recall the recent thread where you talked about your experiences starting out in the diamond industry. It was very interesting and I thank you for sharing those with us. I do wonder, however, if along the way you have forgotten what the beginning was like. You were given parameters to sort diamonds, correct? After sorting thousands of stones, you were given greater responsibility because you now had the judgement to make those decisions. As consumers, we don''t have the luxury of physically handling and viewing that number of stones and gaining that experience, so we use the tools at hand to make judgments.

There will always be beautiful diamonds that don''t fit within parameters and people will buy them, but those aren''t the people coming to pricescope, they are going into the shops and looking for themselves and are confident in their decisions.

When we learned how to judge cut at Harry Winston, it was done by eye.
We were never told specific numbers which were better and which were worse.
To my eye 60% looks perfect as a table size- but we weren''t told the size of the tables- when we were learning we were not using stones with GIA reports anyway, so it had to be done by eye.


Now, as far as music, and theory, yes a computer can write a song using established musical principles.
Will it be a song that strikes emotion to the listener- I seriously doubt it.
AS you said- "It may not be a masterpiece, but it won''t kill the ears"
When people are shopping for their diamond, they want the masterpiece, not something that is simply inoffensive.


By the way, do you believe we can quantitatively judge music based on well established musical theory?

 

[Stephan]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:43:29 PM
Author: jet2ks
I would equate the different cultural concepts of music to variance of shape. If Western counterpoint is a round diamond, then traditional Japanese music might be an emerald. There are different 'rules' within each concept. I don't fully understand what makes a Eastern pentatonic based song work, but someone who has studied them does. In like manner, I don't yet understand what makes Asschers & emeralds 'work', but storm does and has guidelines he can apply.

I still see the point of David.
Tolkowsky (even if he was Belgian like me) is at the beginning of the 'American Ideal Cut'.
But in Antwerp, you see much more 60/60, and if well cut some are really fantastic diamonds.
AGS 0 diamonds won't almost never be ugly, but it isn't sure that the most beautiful diamonds to YOUR eyes will be AGS 0: some prefer light return, other prefer fire, scintillation, more or less contrast...
As discussed in other threads, there is no tool at yet that can measure the intensity of fire.

 

[Stephan]

And oh yes, we all love symmetric IS/ASET pictures.
But I did read some experts who say that a less perfect symmetry could in some cases add beauty to a diamond.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:56:18 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
By the way, do you believe we can quantitatively judge music based on well established musical theory?

Good question, David!
Transgressions to the rules of composition often make music memorable.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:56:18 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 5/7/2009 3:42:37 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 5/7/2009 3:21:25 PM
Author: Ellen

Can you give me a for instance?


Now, one thing I did think of. If you are referring to the fact that we pick stones that are well balanced, and not 60/60 like you prefer, I get it. But as others have said, and even some 60/60 owners, those stones fall in the ''definite personal preference'' range. They do need to be seen, as the majority would most likely not pick them as opposed to a near Tolk. That''s why we don''t recommend them. (I''m not saying they can''t be nice though!)

HI Ellen,
There''s your examle.
You are stating , as a ''fact'' that stones of 60 depth/60 table are not well balanced. That is by no means a fact. Many of the finest diamond cutters in the world prefer 60/60 over a smaller tabled ''Near tolk''- THAT is a fact

You are talking about ''preference'' in this statement. It may be a fact that some cutters prefer this type of stone, but it doesn''t make it a fact that they are as well balanced in fire and brilliance as a near Tolk.

What is a fact, is that 60/60''s are cut towards brilliance. They do not display a more equal amount of brilliance and fire. You absolutely agreed with me on this very point not too long ago. If you''d like me to pull it up, I''ll be glad to.

Ellen-isn''t this all about preference?
When you label a 60/60 as "not well balanced" it really sounds like you are stating as a "fact" that a near tolk is "better".
The difference is personal preference.

 

[jet2ks]

Date: 5/7/2009 3:56:18 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
When we learned how to judge cut at Harry Winston, it was done by eye.
We were never told specific numbers which were better and which were worse.
To my eye 60% looks perfect as a table size- but we weren''t told the size of the tables- when we were learning we were not using stones with GIA reports anyway, so it had to be done by eye.


Now, as far as music, and theory, yes a computer can write a song using established musical principles.
Will it be a song that strikes emotion to the listener- I seriously doubt it.
AS you said- ''It may not be a masterpiece, but it won''t kill the ears''
When people are shopping for their diamond, they want the masterpiece, not something that is simply inoffensive.


By the way, do you believe we can quantitatively judge music based on well established musical theory?

Thank you for making my point. I will guarantee that the stones you graded as well cut for HW all had certain characteristics in common, even though you weren''t told the numbers and may not have been conciously aware of those characteristics. If a statistical analysis of the selected stones was done, they would have found that the vast majority of them would fall within certain parameters. What we are doing now is taking the parameters that you and others established and applying them in reverse. A diamond that falls in those has a much greater likelihood of being a very nice looking stone--of being the masterpiece.

Musical masterpieces have certain characteristics in common. Of the gazillion songs written since the dawn of man, if we eliminate those that don''t fall within certain theory guidelines, then we have to listen to a lot fewer pieces to find the ones that elicit that emotional response. Are there ones that were eliminated that would also appeal to us. YES, but with the number of songs you would have to listen to in order to find those, you would be long dead before finding a few you loved.

David, I am agreeing that there are great diamonds that don''t meet the "rules" as we apply them on PS. I am just saying that we don''t have the time and experience to go out and find them before some guy gets dumped for not proposing. How many times have posters recommended a person go to a store and look at what appeals to them before purchasing? Someone who knows what look they want, their own "masterpiece", is not the one who is posting asking for advice.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 5/7/2009 4:14:33 PM
Author: jet2ks
David, I am agreeing that there are great diamonds that don''t meet the ''rules'' as we apply them on PS. I am just saying that we don''t have the time and experience to go out and find them before some guy gets dumped for not proposing.

Yes and no.
I think the truth is even darker.
You could have plenty of time and walk shopping for days in Antwerp without finding YOUR diamond.
The problem is that most diamond dealers don''t care about beauty.
That is why I like to work with people like Paul Slegers, Brian Gavin, Jonathan Weingarten who are not only interested in money; people who love diamonds.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/7/2009 4:13:54 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 5/7/2009 3:56:18 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 5/7/2009 3:42:37 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 5/7/2009 3:21:25 PM
Author: Ellen

Can you give me a for instance?


Now, one thing I did think of. If you are referring to the fact that we pick stones that are well balanced, and not 60/60 like you prefer, I get it. But as others have said, and even some 60/60 owners, those stones fall in the ''definite personal preference'' range. They do need to be seen, as the majority would most likely not pick them as opposed to a near Tolk. That''s why we don''t recommend them. (I''m not saying they can''t be nice though!)

HI Ellen,
There''s your examle.
You are stating , as a ''fact'' that stones of 60 depth/60 table are not well balanced. That is by no means a fact. Many of the finest diamond cutters in the world prefer 60/60 over a smaller tabled ''Near tolk''- THAT is a fact

You are talking about ''preference'' in this statement. It may be a fact that some cutters prefer this type of stone, but it doesn''t make it a fact that they are as well balanced in fire and brilliance as a near Tolk.

What is a fact, is that 60/60''s are cut towards brilliance. They do not display a more equal amount of brilliance and fire. You absolutely agreed with me on this very point not too long ago. If you''d like me to pull it up, I''ll be glad to.

Ellen-isn''t this all about preference?
When you label a 60/60 as ''not well balanced'' it really sounds like you are stating as a ''fact'' that a near tolk is ''better''.
The difference is personal preference.

No, you''re just reading it that way (you seem to take it personally, again, I''ve said 60/60 can be beautiful). And now we''re talking about both facts and preference, because you''ve brought us around to both.

All I''m saying is that 60/60 is geared for brilliance, and near Tolk is a balance of fire and brilliance. And that when we are trying to help a poster find a diamond, we go for what the majority of people like (yes, based on preference). We play it safe. That doesn''t mean they wouldn''t like one, but we don''t know. We play it safe. Can''t stress that enough.

If you want to recommend 60''s to all your customers, have at it! You have a shop, and a forum to promote them.

Over and out!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/7/2009 4:14:33 PM
Author: jet2ks

Date: 5/7/2009 3:56:18 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
When we learned how to judge cut at Harry Winston, it was done by eye.
We were never told specific numbers which were better and which were worse.
To my eye 60% looks perfect as a table size- but we weren''t told the size of the tables- when we were learning we were not using stones with GIA reports anyway, so it had to be done by eye.


Now, as far as music, and theory, yes a computer can write a song using established musical principles.
Will it be a song that strikes emotion to the listener- I seriously doubt it.
AS you said- ''It may not be a masterpiece, but it won''t kill the ears''
When people are shopping for their diamond, they want the masterpiece, not something that is simply inoffensive.


By the way, do you believe we can quantitatively judge music based on well established musical theory?

Thank you for making my point. I will guarantee that the stones you graded as well cut for HW all had certain characteristics in common, even though you weren''t told the numbers and may not have been conciously aware of those characteristics. If a statistical analysis of the selected stones was done, they would have found that the vast majority of them would fall within certain parameters. What we are doing now is taking the parameters that you and others established and applying them in reverse. A diamond that falls in those has a much greater likelihood of being a very nice looking stone--of being the masterpiece.

Musical masterpieces have certain characteristics in common. Of the gazillion songs written since the dawn of man, if we eliminate those that don''t fall within certain theory guidelines, then we have to listen to a lot fewer pieces to find the ones that elicit that emotional response. Are there ones that were eliminated that would also appeal to us. YES, but with the number of songs you would have to listen to in order to find those, you would be long dead before finding a few you loved.

David, I am agreeing that there are great diamonds that don''t meet the ''rules'' as we apply them on PS. I am just saying that we don''t have the time and experience to go out and find them before some guy gets dumped for not proposing. How many times have posters recommended a person go to a store and look at what appeals to them before purchasing? Someone who knows what look they want, their own ''masterpiece'', is not the one who is posting asking for advice.

If we were talking about round diamonds, yes, there was tremendous consistency. Just so happens that I later learned that 60/60 were Winston''s desired proportions.

Do you guys remember AGS''s cut grade prior to 2006?
Back then, people on Pricescope were telling me that 60/60 was inferior to a near Tolk, and pointing to AGS to prove that.
Except, once GIA''s cut grade parameters were made public, and the top cut grade included 60/60 AGS changed their standards. I know there are folks here who will disconnect those two occurrences- but that is what happened.

But just being 60/60 does NOT make a diamond beautiful any more than simply being 55/61 does.
That''s why applying "reverse technology" does not work.
Especially when it comes to fancy shapes- where, even back in the 1970''s there were tremendous variations of the fancy shapes.

In terms of expediency- if a trusted vendor has looked at the stone and recommends it, wouldn''t that be quicker?


I am still interested in your opinion about a system to judge the quality of musical compositions...do you think such a thing is possible?

 

[jet2ks]

Date: 5/7/2009 4:22:46 PM
Author: QueenMum

The problem is that most diamond dealers don''t care about beauty.
That is why I like to work with people like Paul Slegers, Brian Gavin, Jonathan Weingarten who are not only interested in money; people who love diamonds.

No arguments! The people who stay on this board are also ones who love diamonds, we are just not doing it for a living and may not yet (or ever) have the experience or skill of those gentlemen. It is great to find those people that have genuine interest and talent in any field.

The further problem is that most consumers don''t really care about true art and beauty, either. If they did, then the mall jewelers would be out of business and Mozart would outsell Britney Spears in the music stores. I guess I see part of what we do on PS as introducing newcomers to the fabulous world of diamonds and try to raise their expectations so people like those you mentioned might be better appreciated. (I know that''s how I got started)

 

[Rockdiamond]

Ellen- we hardly sell round diamonds- that's not why I participate in such a discussion
As Stephan identified in others, I have a very real love for diamonds. My life's work ( along with Music). In large part, that's why I'm here.


If you believe that 60/60, as a design for the cutting of diamonds, is every bit as good as a near Tolk, you can simply say that.
You've said that a 60/60 " is not balanced"- I'm not exactly sure what that means, but it sounds like a knock.
You've also said " 60/60 is geared for brilliance, and near Tolk is a balance of fire and brilliance"
To me that sounds as though you're saying near tolk is better than 60/60. I mean, fire and brilliance must be better than plain old brilliance.
If you're not saying that 60/60 is somehow a faulted design, it's easy to clarify.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 5/7/2009 4:56:41 PM
Author: jet2ks
The further problem is that most consumers don't really care about true art and beauty, either. If they did, then the mall jewelers would be out of business and Mozart would outsell Britney Spears in the music stores. I guess I see part of what we do on PS as introducing newcomers to the fabulous world of diamonds and try to raise their expectations so people like those you mentioned might be better appreciated. (I know that's how I got started)

I disagree.
First time I went to Antwerp, I went into a jewelry with only diamonds deeper than 63% and with +/- 65% tables. Most of the people are like I was: they care about beauty but they don't know the importance of cut in matter of beauty.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 5/7/2009 5:01:57 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
As Stephan identified in others, I have a very real love for diamonds. My life''s work ( along with Music). In large part, that''s why I''m here.

Sorry that I didn''t mention you, but I never had the occasion to work on something with you.

 

[Rockdiamond]

It''s a big world out there.
Yes there are buyers who walk into a mall store- or a sub par website, and buy a piece of overpriced junk- and that is, for sure, a shame.
But there are also many discriminating shoppers.

IN terms of dealers, same story. There are good ones and ...less than good ones.


To me, it''s quite obvious which cutters are more interested in yield, and which ones balance yield with beauty. We LURVE the second kind- and they do exist.

Stephan- I LOVE your African Grey!! Does he talk...actually, I''m quite sure he does- but what does he say?

 

[jet2ks]

Date: 5/7/2009 4:43:54 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

In terms of expediency- if a trusted vendor has looked at the stone and recommends it, wouldn''t that be quicker?


I am still interested in your opinion about a system to judge the quality of musical compositions...do you think such a thing is possible?

First question. Might be quicker, but not better. Simple reason is that I wouldn''t just trust someone that I didn''t have some sort of working history with, especially if they were trying to get money from me. See Stephan''s post above. I know there are good, honest vendors out there that this would work with, but the majority just want to make the sale. After buying from someone several times and finding out that what they told me was in fact what happened, then I would be more inclined to let them make a judgement call in the future. There are several on PS that have that trust in certain vendors.

I wasn''t dodging the second question, just didn''t feel it was conducive to a discussion on a diamond forum. So quick answer is no, it is not possible. The basic reason stems from this. Music only happens once in time and cannot be repeated. The same composition is never played the exact same way twice, and also never exactly matches what the composer envisions in his head when writing. The composer''s vision may be perfect in his eyes, but cannot be executed exactly that way by the performers. The difference with visual art (and I am including diamonds in this) is that unless physically changed by outside forces, it is the same through time. If I look at a sculpture, painting or diamond today, it will be the same tomorrow and I will be able to find new things about it to appreciate the more I look at it. I can only enjoy music in the moment. Recordings never capture the emotion of a live performance. That is why some of my favorite music is jazz improv. The composer and performer are one in the moment.

David, we can agree to disagree about what makes a diamond masterpiece (it is after all personal preference, right?), but know that I do appreciate your experience and can appreciate that you have an eye for a certain beauty that you prefer.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 5/7/2009 5:08:14 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Stephan- I LOVE your African Grey!! Does he talk...actually, I''m quite sure he does- but what does he say?

LOL
David,
My parrot doesn''t stop talking, sometimes it is too much, especially when he sings.
One of his hobbies is to order my dog (a Cavalier King Charles) or to imitate him.
The dog and the parrot play to steal their respective toys.
Milou (my African Grey) hates to shower.
My shoulder is his favorite place.
From there, he tickles my ears.
I love them so much!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Thank you very much jet2ks.

The aspect of people taking things personally is an interesting one.
If this wasn''t a subject near and dear to my heart, there would be far less passion- and that surely goes for Ellen, Storm- and many of the people who post here regularly.
Yes, if I say I love 60/60 ( as a design for cutting a diamond) and someone describes a 60 60 as "not well balanced", I feel a response is in order- and will make the whole conversation more interesting.

I learned a long time ago...when someone comes asking for ASET, or IS images or interpretation, I don''t comment.

This thread seemed like a discussion about these reflector tools, hence a good place to discuss it.

Beyond the personal aspects, I am a diamond dealer.
If someone intimates that I prefer badly cut diamonds, a response seems necessary. It seems that many sellers do not participate- and thereby avoid the risk of "going against the flow".


Many people have let me know personally that they appreciate the fact I have been willing to take a stand on these issues.

jet- going back to the music analogy- I get your point about performance being difficult to judge over time, but what if we include recorded music?

I know you get my point- any system to judge the beauty in music will inevitably be designed based on the inventor''s own ear. To me, this seems like a valid analogy to judging diamonds.

 

[Judah Gutwein]

Friends,

Great thread with merit to multiple viewpoints.

Our experience and perspective is that there certainly isn''t any substitute for the human eye. Within this context, it is a given that people will choose and prefer 1 diamond over another based upon subjective and personal considerations. This is indeed a fact.

At the same time and as mentioned on this forum (and others) many times in the past, the majority of consumers who purchase diamonds on the net do not have the luxury of a personal inspection prior to purchase. It is therefore of crucial importance to these consumers that they get the very best shot at making an informed purchase sight unseen. This is where these scientific metrics come into play.

The beauty (imo) of developed technologies and tools like the MegaScope/Sarin machines, ASET, HCA, Ideal Scope, H&A, Gemex BrillianceScope, Diamcalc, etc., all of which assess a loose diamonds'' cut precision and/or light performance, is how they mesh, dovetail, confirm and corroborate with the physical properties and appearances of the diamonds tested and to the overwhelming majority of consumers who (subsequently) physically view the same diamonds previously tested by these tools. IMO and based on our personal experience with our own customers, this salient point is more important and practical than the actual scientific ramifications of this experience.

Certainly, this doesn''t mean that consumers won''t be able to do well with their purchases without the aid of these tools. In fact, most of these tools haven''t been around all that long and people have been happily buying diamonds forever! My Grandfather and Great Granfather who made their living in diamonds probably would have scoffed at these machines and tools since they and their customers were coming from a different time, standard, place and perspective.

In addition, many consumers may actually prefer the look of a diamond that perhaps wouldn''t score as well as another on these metrics and tools and those consumers are no less vindicated than the ones who would disagree.

Again, my own perspective and based upon our experience is that there is no substitute for actually physically viewing a diamond. If this is impossible (or even if it is), then the aforementioned tools do a wonderful cumulative job of empowering consumers to make an informed decision.

 

[Dancing Fire]

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.

RD
i don''t see the difference when you say to your customer..."this is a beautiful diamond" well...that''s only IYO.