Cone of beauty and light

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Steve I finally found the article.
Because it was in the issue about pink diamonds one of my staff snaffled the copy!!!

I feel sad about the politicss of politeness of the GIA.

They published a letter referring to GIA's research into diamond cut quality from a noted gentleman from the industry who is related to Tolkowsky. The letter referrs to the fisheye effect.

Fisheye effects are ugly, but seeing the girdle of a diamond has little if anything to do with fire or brilliance.

Of far more importance is the thickness and surface of the girdle as a variable in this case.

Given that there has been much criticism of substance written about these GIA studies, it seems sad that nothing of substance has been published by the GIA. (The only other letter they have published was also (in my opinion) a minor issue that was easily (although poorly) dispelled.

I am disappointed that this 'Cone of beauty' could be considered a study related to diamond validity of the GIA's study of diamond proportions and optical performance, especially since 65% tables scored badly in both published articles, Brilliance (199 and Fire (2001).

 

[StevL]

Garry,
We know about the politics Anyway I think Leonid is going to work on posting an article Michael Cowing did about this. I hope to see it in the near future so we can discuss the points Michael talks about.

I know how Michael writes and I hope it isn't over my head

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Yes, GIA refused to publish his work too. But they have a clear (and valid) policy of not publishing review articles. They have however refuse other letters to the editor that were in my opinion more meaty.

Is Mr Kaplan well considered as a diamond expert, or just a nice guy invloved in the most powerful best connected company in the US?

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Is this anything like the "cone of silence"?

Rich, senses another high tech debate coming on, while reaching for the Advil...

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thats the trouble Rich, the letter and its response are so low tech that we might expect it was a teenager magazine review of a soap opera, not a scientific journal.
But then we are just trinket floggers

 

[StevL]

Mr Kaplan was a very smart gentleman. They were one of the only three that consistantly sold nothing but ideals in a time when not many jewelers anywhere knew much about ideals.

I have no idea if Michael sent his article to GIA. I was more under the idea he just recently wrote it. We may see Michael's article here on pricescope for everyone to review and comment.

Maybe Leonid can chime in as to when it may appear.