Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Beta Diamond Videos Made in a Prototype Light Box

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Interesting turn to the conversation.
As a diamond designer I am very concerned with cutters being able to consistently reproduce my designs the way I want them.
Fancies in a lot of ways are cutters diamonds now.
The best ones require the skill of the best cutters.

Where a good process and good training can produce top end rounds in a more assembly line approach fancies require higher skilled workers. That is not to say the artisan approach cant be done with rounds it is just less common these days.

I am following Sergey''s work in this area with great interest because it is the next step in mass production of complex and precision designer diamonds.
Today the catch 22 of designer diamonds is the smaller artisan based shops have a very hard time getting the rough they need and the larger players lack the artisan cutters and or the incentive to produce smaller runs.
 

ChunkyCushionLover

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,463
Date: 9/27/2009 3:35:36 AM
Author: Serg


Date: 9/26/2009 7:41:49 PM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover


Date: 9/23/2009 9:49:18 AM

Author: Serg




Date: 9/21/2009 12:58:07 PM

Author: ChunkyCushionLover




Date: 9/14/2009 2:06:48 AM


Author: Serg


Neil,


I agree with all reasons what you mentioned



I want say similar from other point of view:



1) ASET is very specific language for communication, what is unknown and unclear for most professional and consumers. And even special trainings, documentations can not change it . Even current “old fashion” diamond sell language is far a way from consumer buying language . (VS1, VS2, SI clarity, D color( D is best), and now ASET.) Fruitful and confidence communication between sales person and consumer is not possible now. ASET are doing it even more difficult


2) Most people can not understand difference between selection and rejection . rejections sales tools are not common in other markets , at least its are not main instruments to sell goods . ASET is strongly rejection tool.


3) Who decide use ASET as main sales instruments, should completely change business model, communication language and forget about fancy cuts( or use contradictive sales model for RBC and Fancy cuts)



I think industry needs selections tools which do not destroy current sales technologies, but improves its.



Evolution in sales technologies could be much more helpful for diamond industries than revolutions as ASET
Serg,



1) You would get better adoption of this machine from PS vendors especially the major ones here and other online vendors this will help them.(If they can agree on the uniform conditions for comparison).


2) I don't see retailers ever wanting to use this device nor using an ASET because they just want to sell what they have in stock not provide a comparison so the consumer can get the best stone in its class.


3) I see this being used for the online PS type of shopper who wants the very best in optics and wants a comprehensive comparison tool to show different stones. The customers that Jon at GOG serves with his videos come to mind.


4) I think the key to making this work is a low pricepoint and most important ' 'A SIMPLE DIRECT PORT TO A COMPUTER for VIDEO UPLOAD' with no video editing required.



I think the major hurdle to even getting the other PS vendors to use video is the time consuming nature and high technical barrier to getting the files online or even getting them on a computer in any edited form.



Good-luck in the endeavour I think its a great attempt at doing something the consumers would love to have, perhaps even appraisor's would make use of this tool I hope it gets simplified enough to be adopted.



Regards,


CCL

re: I don't see retailers ever wanting to use this device nor using an ASET because they just want to sell what they have in stock not provide a comparison so the consumer can get the best stone in its class.


Of course. If we are speaking about best FANCY cut diamonds, retailers CAN NOT sell it because they Can not BUY its again and again!


for example somebody found nice Cushion , took comparison photos ( movies) and finally sold THIS nice Cushion with good margin.

How could he buy more such nice Cushions?

Even if he has 3D model, he usually has not information who had cut it. Even if he knows cutter, cutter usually can not repeat it with good accuracy( if we speak about complex cushion cuts( not about modified RBC for better yield))

So he can not buy again same nice cushion cut , and he can not do more good business with other Cushions( because he published movies with nice Cushion and new consumers do not like buy worse Cushions)
Well I disagree with not being able to repeat the same cut in fancy shapes.


GOG has been able to provide a signature line of OMC cushions with good uniformity and reproduceability in optics.

A cutter out in Antwerp produces a series of 8 main thin cushion brilliants with cookie cutter similarity and optics which bluenile offers most of them on their website search.

BGD is completing a line of modern cushions with very similar optics.

The square cushion hearts and arrows is a signature line cut in Japan of cushions with very repeatable optics.


Optimizing cuts in fancy shapes is the future I am happy to say
and you can be proud that your software will help enocourage more of this. I wouldn't be surprised if Storm's Asscher became a signature line at GOG in the future as well
.
re:OG has been able to provide a signature line of OMC cushions with good uniformity and reproduceability in optics.

A cutter out in Antwerp produces a series of 8 main thin cushion brilliants with cookie cutter similarity and optics which bluenile offers most of them on their website search.

BGD is completing a line of modern cushions with very similar optics.

The square cushion hearts and arrows is a signature line cut in Japan of cushions with very repeatable optics

1) Could Please publish any proof for good repeatability COMPLEX cushion cuts? ( please do not consider Cushion cuts what is just modify RBC ( as square cushion H&A)
2) I checked GOG, unfortunately I did not find 3D models for OMC cushions, but EVEN ASET is different

first problem is repeatability girdle shape . You need compare 3D models to check identity at least girdle shapes.
If girdle shapes are different , angles could nor be same. COmplex Cushion cuts are very sensitive to angle deviation , even 0.5 degree deviation could change optical appearance dramatically
There are certain tolerances that need to be accepted with Fancy Shapes. For the GOG OMC line for Jon all stones must have strong red in the ASET for all four leaves of the Maltese cross under the table. Jon can speak more about his stringent criteria but the girdle shape and table and depth % are not rejection criteria within broad tolerance ranges. Some of the stones have a very thin girlle while others have thin to thick so the girdle shape is not one of the constraints. Also the LW ratios are different but one constant is the requirement for good light return on the 3 6 9 12 major pavillion facets under the table.

However, as in the example Garry posted above if missing a set of crown or pavillion facet angle changes the optical symmetry and precision dramatically than a stone would not qualify to be part of a uniform Fancy Line.

If you try to apply the stringent criteria like in round ie "Edge to Edge Brilliance " etc than only the Square Cushion HA and other "Round Like" stones would fit this strict criteria. Despite these limitations in cutting the new comparison tool could show qualitatively(not quantitatively) performance comparison of two similar stones or of two very different types of cushions. I hope your new tool will change the selling process but I doubt it is going to change the cutting production process that quickly.
 

ChunkyCushionLover

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,463
Date: 9/28/2009 3:31:22 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 9/28/2009 12:01:13 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover
I hope your new tool will change the selling process but I doubt it is going to change the cutting production process that quickly.
You should know Sergey better by now CCL
Garry,

I''d love to see a well cut example of that cushion design you posted above!

I don''t know Sergey that well but I can appreciate his precise and scientific approach to diamond optics. I brought this same approach when I first joined PS and this has been shot down quite a bit as I faced reality. I am not in the diamond equipment business nor does my lab specialize in optics, we are spectroscopists first and foremost so without significant further reading and training some points that you guys discuss here are over my head. I can at least appreciate that with Fancy shapes a reasonable and controlled comparison of two examples given appropriate tolerances should be obtainable.
 

Garry H (Cut Nut)

Super_Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
14,580
Date: 9/28/2009 2:36:42 PM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

Date: 9/28/2009 3:31:22 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)


Date: 9/28/2009 12:01:13 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover
I hope your new tool will change the selling process but I doubt it is going to change the cutting production process that quickly.
You should know Sergey better by now CCL
Garry,

I''d love to see a well cut example of that cushion design you posted above!

I don''t know Sergey that well but I can appreciate his precise and scientific approach to diamond optics. I brought this same approach when I first joined PS and this has been shot down quite a bit as I faced reality. I am not in the diamond equipment business nor does my lab specialize in optics, we are spectroscopists first and foremost so without significant further reading and training some points that you guys discuss here are over my head. I can at least appreciate that with Fancy shapes a reasonable and controlled comparison of two examples given appropriate tolerances should be obtainable.
http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/foxymovies/MSS_9_diamonds_Daylight+LED.phtml
The stone I mentioned is in one corner (top left I think - new lap top and no quick time viewer yet) and the top center is the latest cushion(2) which is clearly better. there is a pin fire cushion to the top right.
The center stone is 57% 34 41 H&A''s from the MSS collection.
Cushion 3 is being planned at present.
Would love your opinion CCL
 

ChunkyCushionLover

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,463
Date: 9/28/2009 4:15:16 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 9/28/2009 2:36:42 PM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover


Date: 9/28/2009 3:31:22 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)



Date: 9/28/2009 12:01:13 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover
I hope your new tool will change the selling process but I doubt it is going to change the cutting production process that quickly.
You should know Sergey better by now CCL
Garry,

I''d love to see a well cut example of that cushion design you posted above!

I don''t know Sergey that well but I can appreciate his precise and scientific approach to diamond optics. I brought this same approach when I first joined PS and this has been shot down quite a bit as I faced reality. I am not in the diamond equipment business nor does my lab specialize in optics, we are spectroscopists first and foremost so without significant further reading and training some points that you guys discuss here are over my head. I can at least appreciate that with Fancy shapes a reasonable and controlled comparison of two examples given appropriate tolerances should be obtainable.
http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/foxymovies/MSS_9_diamonds_Daylight+LED.phtml
The stone I mentioned is in one corner (top left I think - new lap top and no quick time viewer yet) and the top center is the latest cushion(2) which is clearly better. there is a pin fire cushion to the top right.
The center stone is 57% 34 41 H&A''s from the MSS collection.
Cushion 3 is being planned at present.
Would love your opinion CCL
Gary impressive display. Although you have the top and bottom reversed as all the cushions are on the bottom.
I particularly like Cushion#2 in the middle really nice, the nicest 4 main I have seen. I recall that the 4 mains being produced(the ones I''ve seen on WF and elsewhere) have larger tables(63%) so those 4 mains continue unbroken even farther what are your thoughts on that?, the table on cushion #2 seems to be significantly smaller in the high 50s?.
The rectangular cushion is as you said more of the pinfire variety which doesn''t excite me, the one on the right(you said left as its upside down from your viewpoint) I assume that was the one that is still in design and didn''t come out as expected, too much obstruction under the table so far but this has promise once cut to your exact specs.

As far as the display that is really an excellent comparison!!! But it left me wanting the exact opposite tilt angle so I could see how the other half of the diamonds lit up.
I would feel so spoiled as a consumer being able to compare diamonds in that way, especially if you were able to add a more full range of tilt angles.
 

Garry H (Cut Nut)

Super_Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
14,580
Date: 9/29/2009 2:52:00 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

Date: 9/28/2009 4:15:16 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)


http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/foxymovies/MSS_9_diamonds_Daylight+LED.phtml
The stone I mentioned is in one corner (top left I think - new lap top and no quick time viewer yet) and the top center is the latest cushion(2) which is clearly better. there is a pin fire cushion to the top right.
The center stone is 57% 34 41 H&A''s from the MSS collection.
Cushion 3 is being planned at present.
Would love your opinion CCL
Gary impressive display. Although you have the top and bottom reversed as all the cushions are on the bottom. Explanation below with links to 2 other lighting types
I particularly like Cushion#2 in the middle really nice, the nicest 4 main I have seen. I recall that the 4 mains being produced(the ones I''ve seen on WF and elsewhere) have larger tables(63%) so those 4 mains continue unbroken even farther what are your thoughts on that?, the table on cushion #2 seems to be significantly smaller in the high 50s?. We would like a bit more fire in the center of that stone - but it is the best so far and actually has better light return than a round brilliant.
The rectangular cushion is as you said more of the pinfire variety which doesn''t excite me, the one on the right(you said left as its upside down from your viewpoint) I assume that was the one that is still in design and didn''t come out as expected, too much obstruction under the table so far but this has promise once cut to your exact specs. the one on the top left or bottom right is the stone in the wire frame with ideal-scope and ASET images example above - it was the example i used to show how difficult it is to get everything just right on a cushion.

As far as the display that is really an excellent comparison!!! But it left me wanting the exact opposite tilt angle so I could see how the other half of the diamonds lit up.
I would feel so spoiled as a consumer being able to compare diamonds in that way, especially if you were able to add a more full range of tilt angles. In the eventual rocking motion any video format that can be devised in DiamCalc will be programed thus. My preferred rocking motion is like this in degrees:
15 away, 5 towards running first away and toward, with then a motion with about 5 degrees of rocking to the left and then to the right - but finishing up at the same furtherest away and toward points. Hope that makes sense?
CCL here is the main page for all these movies.
http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/movies.phtml
And here is the page for the 9 stones filmed in different lights
http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/movies5.phtml#9d_daylight_led

You will see why I did not know which was where (its not just because i am in Australia) and new comp still does not have quick time viewer yet
 

ChunkyCushionLover

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,463
Date: 9/29/2009 3:43:00 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 9/29/2009 2:52:00 AM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover


Date: 9/28/2009 4:15:16 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)


http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/foxymovies/MSS_9_diamonds_Daylight+LED.phtml
The stone I mentioned is in one corner (top left I think - new lap top and no quick time viewer yet) and the top center is the latest cushion(2) which is clearly better. there is a pin fire cushion to the top right.
The center stone is 57% 34 41 H&A''s from the MSS collection.
Cushion 3 is being planned at present.
Would love your opinion CCL
Gary impressive display. Although you have the top and bottom reversed as all the cushions are on the bottom. Explanation below with links to 2 other lighting types
I particularly like Cushion#2 in the middle really nice, the nicest 4 main I have seen. I recall that the 4 mains being produced(the ones I''ve seen on WF and elsewhere) have larger tables(63%) so those 4 mains continue unbroken even farther what are your thoughts on that?, the table on cushion #2 seems to be significantly smaller in the high 50s?. We would like a bit more fire in the center of that stone - but it is the best so far and actually has better light return than a round brilliant.

I guess what you are saying is smaller table >>> greater crown depth >>> more fire. So this is a tradeoff you see less of the 4 mains but they show more fire with a smaller table. Probably why I like the optics of the stone better than the other 4 mains with larger tables I have seen.


The rectangular cushion is as you said more of the pinfire variety which doesn''t excite me, the one on the right(you said left as its upside down from your viewpoint) I assume that was the one that is still in design and didn''t come out as expected, too much obstruction under the table so far but this has promise once cut to your exact specs. the one on the top left or bottom right is the stone in the wire frame with ideal-scope and ASET images example above - it was the example i used to show how difficult it is to get everything just right on a cushion.

>>> Yeah thats what I figured I want to see the one when the cutter gets it right :).

As far as the display that is really an excellent comparison!!! But it left me wanting the exact opposite tilt angle so I could see how the other half of the diamonds lit up.
I would feel so spoiled as a consumer being able to compare diamonds in that way, especially if you were able to add a more full range of tilt angles. In the eventual rocking motion any video format that can be devised in DiamCalc will be programed thus. My preferred rocking motion is like this in degrees:
15 away, 5 towards running first away and toward, with then a motion with about 5 degrees of rocking to the left and then to the right - but finishing up at the same furtherest away and toward points. Hope that makes sense?

>>> It sounds like you will ultimately program what I would like to see with a 15 degree tilt away and towards and at each extreme rocking left and right. In looking at all the movies I really couldn''t get a good sense of the symmetry similarity of the upper and lower part of the diamond I just assumed it is there. But with the program you described above that should be more readily obvious.
CCL here is the main page for all these movies.
http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/movies.phtml
And here is the page for the 9 stones filmed in different lights
http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/movies5.phtml#9d_daylight_led

You will see why I did not know which was where (its not just because i am in Australia) and new comp still does not have quick time viewer yet

>> Yes you have quite a lot of videos and pictures with reverse angles.
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 9/29/2009 3:43:00 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
That is always the catch it is fairly easy to beat the brightness of a RB if that is all you care about, keeping reasonable contrast and fire while doing so is the issue.
Then even when you do that yield issues will bite you a lot of the time.
This is from a slightly modified princess cut...
Fire isn't going to be anything to write home about however.

princessHighLightReturn.jpg
 

Garry H (Cut Nut)

Super_Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
14,580
Date: 10/2/2009 2:29:05 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/29/2009 3:43:00 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
That is always the catch it is fairly easy to beat the brightness of a RB if that is all you care about, keeping reasonable contrast and fire while doing so is the issue.
Then even when you do that yield issues will bite you a lot of the time.
This is from a slightly modified princess cut...
Fire isn''t going to be anything to write home about however.
Actually Storm - the nice cushion - top center here has pretty good fire.
http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/foxymovies/MSS_9_diamonds_LED.phtml

Sergey is working on a method to measure the fire which would be far better than systems like the brilliancescope.
And for anyone who is interested here is a DiamCalc comparison using the free give away tool the DC team have added that shows fire intensity (not just fire potential).
The stones in DC are the actual round and actual cushion stone models.

- intensity weighted dispersion C2 MSS13.JPG
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!

JEWELRY BLOG

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.

New posts

Top