Differences in Sarin and AGS???

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 8/20/2006 4:04:14 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 8/20/2006 3:55:55 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I really sorry, but as an outside observer, it looks to me that the only behavior desired of Rhino on this forum is to agree with all the views of Garry and WhiteFlash. Anytime he presents another view, he gets a barrage of posts that seem more than a little like personal attacks. He has a right to his opinion (as we all do) and to express it regardless of whether he agrees with anyone else here. I got excellent customer service from him and have seen nothing but the highest integrity from him in months of email contact. He certainly does more for diamond education than any other vendor here does considering his website, videos, and time answering posts on here. And I totally agree with what Storm said...the technology gets better over time, so I hope he and others take the time to experiment with the new technology and change as the progress warrants.
I teach dyslexic children and what I said was the best reading program 5 years ago is not what I''d say today. But that does not mean that I was wrong then, it means I have found something new that is better.

I hate to write this as I am not desiring to ''take sides'' as much as I''d like to express how all this looks to others casually reading the forum.

DS, I highlighted the most important parts of your post. For those who are not just casually reading the forum, things may appear differently.

Thank you Mara. We are discussing an on going issue that takes a lot of all of our time as Rhino does get up many peoples noses and illicit frustrated responses. how many people need to be marching out of step mate - before you decide to change your stride?

Diamondseeker I am not a supporter of any vendor. I have good relationships with many vendors and have never to my knowlledge disparaged Rhino or his invetory or tried to talk a consumer out of dealing with him.

I would also add that I have never had a behind the scenes politics or games with Rhino as it appears some of the ladies have. I only have the same frustrations that I have aired here.

I am also happy that Rhino changes his attitude and opinion about techniques and technologies - but it is galling that when he does so he has never acknowledged the previous threads and disputes that he flairs up - just as the one we are discussing here - problems surrounding the GIA cut grade system.

e.g. he went nuts over painting - and after GIA changed their response to painting - we get no comments. typically Rhino you are condescending in your response - as pointed out to you many times - but you lack humility (hence the Rhino''s thick hide).

I have had countless arguements with Sergey and lost just about every one of them. They were the points where my learning happened. I live for it.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 8/20/2006 4:04:14 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 8/20/2006 3:55:55 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I really sorry, but as an outside observer, it looks to me that the only behavior desired of Rhino on this forum is to agree with all the views of Garry and WhiteFlash. Anytime he presents another view, he gets a barrage of posts that seem more than a little like personal attacks. He has a right to his opinion (as we all do) and to express it regardless of whether he agrees with anyone else here. I got excellent customer service from him and have seen nothing but the highest integrity from him in months of email contact. He certainly does more for diamond education than any other vendor here does considering his website, videos, and time answering posts on here. And I totally agree with what Storm said...the technology gets better over time, so I hope he and others take the time to experiment with the new technology and change as the progress warrants.
I teach dyslexic children and what I said was the best reading program 5 years ago is not what I''d say today. But that does not mean that I was wrong then, it means I have found something new that is better.

I hate to write this as I am not desiring to ''take sides'' as much as I''d like to express how all this looks to others casually reading the forum.

DS, I highlighted the most important parts of your post. For those who are not just casually reading the forum, things may appear differently.

Mara, I consider myself an outside observer to this thread because I have absolutely ZERO to contribute to a debate on sarin, helium, or xyz scan, for that matter. I really do not care whatsoever that there are differences of opinion on certain technology. I''m neutral on that. I just see alot of people jumping on a bandwagon to accuse someone of poor behavior, and there are many of us here who do not have a clue as to why Jonathan would be treated with such hostility. I just don''t see his posts being in the same tone at all.

 

[belle]

Date: 8/20/2006 5:35:41 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 8/20/2006 4:04:14 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 8/20/2006 3:55:55 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I really sorry, but as an outside observer, it looks to me that the only behavior desired of Rhino on this forum is to agree with all the views of Garry and WhiteFlash. Anytime he presents another view, he gets a barrage of posts that seem more than a little like personal attacks. He has a right to his opinion (as we all do) and to express it regardless of whether he agrees with anyone else here. I got excellent customer service from him and have seen nothing but the highest integrity from him in months of email contact. He certainly does more for diamond education than any other vendor here does considering his website, videos, and time answering posts on here. And I totally agree with what Storm said...the technology gets better over time, so I hope he and others take the time to experiment with the new technology and change as the progress warrants.
I teach dyslexic children and what I said was the best reading program 5 years ago is not what I''d say today. But that does not mean that I was wrong then, it means I have found something new that is better.

I hate to write this as I am not desiring to ''take sides'' as much as I''d like to express how all this looks to others casually reading the forum.

DS, I highlighted the most important parts of your post. For those who are not just casually reading the forum, things may appear differently.

Mara, I consider myself an outside observer to this thread because I have absolutely ZERO to contribute to a debate on sarin, helium, or xyz scan, for that matter. I really do not care whatsoever that there are differences of opinion on certain technology. I''m neutral on that. I just see alot of people jumping on a bandwagon to accuse someone of poor behavior, and there are many of us here who do not have a clue as to why Jonathan would be treated with such hostility. I just don''t see his posts being in the same tone at all.

perhaps the portion of your post i highlighted above has a little something to do with your feeling on this?

for those of us who have already been on jonathan''s ''dear friend'' list (bandwagon?) it''s a little more clear.
i believe that here, just as in life, there aren''t too many innocent victims.

but just like diamonds, you have to see for yourself.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 8/20/2006 5:35:41 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 8/20/2006 4:04:14 PM

Author: Mara

Date: 8/20/2006 3:55:55 PM

Author: diamondseeker2006

I really sorry, but as an outside observer, it looks to me that the only behavior desired of Rhino on this forum is to agree with all the views of Garry and WhiteFlash. Anytime he presents another view, he gets a barrage of posts that seem more than a little like personal attacks. He has a right to his opinion (as we all do) and to express it regardless of whether he agrees with anyone else here. I got excellent customer service from him and have seen nothing but the highest integrity from him in months of email contact. He certainly does more for diamond education than any other vendor here does considering his website, videos, and time answering posts on here. And I totally agree with what Storm said...the technology gets better over time, so I hope he and others take the time to experiment with the new technology and change as the progress warrants.

I teach dyslexic children and what I said was the best reading program 5 years ago is not what I'd say today. But that does not mean that I was wrong then, it means I have found something new that is better.


I hate to write this as I am not desiring to 'take sides' as much as I'd like to express how all this looks to others casually reading the forum.

DS, I highlighted the most important parts of your post. For those who are not just casually reading the forum, things may appear differently.

Mara, I consider myself an outside observer to this thread because I have absolutely ZERO to contribute to a debate on sarin, helium, or xyz scan, for that matter. I really do not care whatsoever that there are differences of opinion on certain technology. I'm neutral on that. I just see alot of people jumping on a bandwagon to accuse someone of poor behavior, and there are many of us here who do not have a clue as to why Jonathan would be treated with such hostility. I just don't see his posts being in the same tone at all.

I agree DS. I consider myself and outsider here but interpret the tone's the same way.

ETA: obviously there is a lot more to this that only a select few know

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 8/20/2006 4:37:58 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 8/17/2006 8:27:23 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
The point here about GIA rounding proportion data is that they set the rounding data based on what accuracy appraisers and other stake holders can measure to with reticules on microscopes and straight out visual estimation.

GIA''s well looked after and callibrated Sarins can achieve beter accuracy - John the + - 0.2 degeees includes the crown angle which is the shortest and hardest to measure. Thier pavilion accuracy is much better - and this is the most critical angle for cut grading system that is parametric (proportion based). Rounding table to + - 1% is fine, and crown at .5 degrees - is almost OK - but pavilion counts 5 times more than crown - and =+ - 0.2 pavilion is like having + - 1.0 for crown - it is too much.

To run a system based on outside levels of accuracy seems stoopid

No, Garry, It IS STOOPID!!!!!!

OK then Marty...... how do we get this system improved?

What do we need to do to help GIA come to understand they have a less than desirable system to protect consumers?

Rhino - you still have not tested a steep deep GIA Excellent, and a slightly shallow GIA Very Good in Diamond dock have you?

It would be the first thing you could do to arrive at an adjusted conclusion.
There are about 1/3rd of the worlds GIA graded diamonds within a short distance of where you live. Would you like us to help you track some down on Rapnet and Poly etc?

 

[kenny]

Rhino
I buy diamonds over the Internet.
I'm a good customer.

I won't buy from GOG just because of how you behave here.

You must think the way you post helps GOG's sales.
I think it hurts.

You've lost me as a customer, and probably many more who are too polite to speak up.

HOW you come across is more important to me, as a customer, than WHAT you post.
Other vendors have figured this out, to their advantage.
They are getting my bank wires.

Buyers base their decisions on funny things.

(I have nothing against you personally, and post this only because I sincerely hope it helps.)

Also, I feel it would be appropriate to list your high-level position in the GIA in your sig line.
Free disclosure increases credibility.

 

[belle]

Date: 8/20/2006 6:06:56 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

What do we need to do to help GIA come to understand they have a less than desirable system to protect consumers?

therein lies the problem garry.
what are gia''s interests and what is their mission?
perhaps consumer protection is not on the agenda?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 8/20/2006 6:14:49 PM
Author: belle

Date: 8/20/2006 6:06:56 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

What do we need to do to help GIA come to understand they have a less than desirable system to protect consumers?

therein lies the problem garry.
what are gia''s interests and what is their mission?
perhaps consumer protection is not on the agenda?

Marty subscribes to a conspiracy theory - but I do not.

I think GIA is a genuine and ethical org.

But even Marty agrees they do more good than harm

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 8/20/2006 6:22:27 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 8/20/2006 6:14:49 PM

Author: belle

Date: 8/20/2006 6:06:56 PM

Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)


What do we need to do to help GIA come to understand they have a less than desirable system to protect consumers?

therein lies the problem garry.

what are gia''s interests and what is their mission?

perhaps consumer protection is not on the agenda?

Marty subscribes to a conspiracy theory - but I do not.


I think GIA is a genuine and ethical org.


But even Marty agrees they do more good than harm

Here here!

As frustrated as I get with them (GIA) sometimes I am really wanting for them to act the way the "leading" gemological institution should. I think right now that AGS has clearly taken the lead in actual science, even though GIA still has the popular vote due to name recognition. What would be best for the trade, and for the consumer, would be for both of them (GIA and AGS)to be working with the science, and leave the protection of the vendors to them (the vendors) doing what is right rather than what they can get away with.

Wink

P.S. All the initials and other things in parenthesis added for clarity...

 

[Mara]

mrs s...i don't know about a 'select few'...but kenny's post said it better than i really could have...intelligent people figure things out.

IMO these posts are sincere observations, and rhino can do whatever he wishes with them. bottom line is how many times do people have to say the same thing to someone before they SHOULD start to go 'hmmmmm'. as a vendor i would imagine losing sales due to the way one conducts themselves online would be bothersome...then i would imagine that they'd stop for a second and go 'wow am i really shooting myself in the foot here and i don't even realize it?'.

also, with all due respect, whether or not you or ds agree or 'see it' is really not relevant in my opinion. quite obviously others do see it. and whatever rhino wishes to do with that knowledge...it's all him.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 8/20/2006 7:22:56 PM
Author: Mara
mrs s...i don''t know about a ''select few''...but kenny''s post said it better than i really could have...intelligent people figure things out.

IMO these posts are sincere observations, and rhino can do whatever he wishes with them. bottom line is how many times do people have to say the same thing to someone before they SHOULD start to go ''hmmmmm''. as a vendor i would imagine losing sales due to the way one conducts themselves online would be bothersome...then i would imagine that they''d stop for a second and go ''wow am i really shooting myself in the foot here and i don''t even realize it?''.

also, with all due respect, whether or not you or ds agree or ''see it'' is really not relevant in my opinion. quite obviously others do see it. and whatever rhino wishes to do with that knowledge...it''s all him.

Mara, I am really disappointed to see you saying something like this. Your inference is insulting to others as well as to me.

 

[Mara]

Date: 8/20/2006 8:11:30 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 8/20/2006 7:22:56 PM
Author: Mara
mrs s...i don't know about a 'select few'...but kenny's post said it better than i really could have...intelligent people figure things out.

IMO these posts are sincere observations, and rhino can do whatever he wishes with them. bottom line is how many times do people have to say the same thing to someone before they SHOULD start to go 'hmmmmm'. as a vendor i would imagine losing sales due to the way one conducts themselves online would be bothersome...then i would imagine that they'd stop for a second and go 'wow am i really shooting myself in the foot here and i don't even realize it?'.

also, with all due respect, whether or not you or ds agree or 'see it' is really not relevant in my opinion. quite obviously others do see it. and whatever rhino wishes to do with that knowledge...it's all him.

Mara, I am really disappointed to see you saying something like this. Your inference is insulting to others as well as to me.

So, because I put in intelligent, and you disagree with me then somehow I mean you are stupid? That's a leap.

When I said it's not relevant, let me clarify. Whether or not you or anyone else agrees with something I believe or say, it doesn't matter to me. I don't need agreement on an opinion. I also don't need to agree with everyone all the time. If you somehow feel insulted by me saying that, well I'm sorry. The opinion was given to Rhino, so really what he wants to do with it is his business. You guys jumping in to say 'I don't see it', doesn't matter to me. We disagree.

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/20/2006 6:06:56 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 8/20/2006 4:37:58 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 8/17/2006 8:27:23 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
The point here about GIA rounding proportion data is that they set the rounding data based on what accuracy appraisers and other stake holders can measure to with reticules on microscopes and straight out visual estimation.

GIA''s well looked after and callibrated Sarins can achieve beter accuracy - John the + - 0.2 degeees includes the crown angle which is the shortest and hardest to measure. Thier pavilion accuracy is much better - and this is the most critical angle for cut grading system that is parametric (proportion based). Rounding table to + - 1% is fine, and crown at .5 degrees - is almost OK - but pavilion counts 5 times more than crown - and =+ - 0.2 pavilion is like having + - 1.0 for crown - it is too much.

To run a system based on outside levels of accuracy seems stoopid

No, Garry, It IS STOOPID!!!!!!

OK then Marty...... how do we get this system improved?

Well they made a start at it by getting rid of BB

What do we need to do to help GIA come to understand they have a less than desirable system to protect consumers?

Expose it for what it is, becoming a low end retailer''s selling tool, and ask them to stop laminating it so the paper would have an alternative use..

 

[Regular Guy]

So...I'll add a few cents here (I can reliably counted on for doing that).

Seems like there are at least 2 sayings that are relevant here:

1) The proof is in the pudding

2) It's not whether you win, but how you play the game.

The problem is, you can apply either saying to a happy face or sad face, I think. Maybe someone else will apply them.

I think my best thought was actually contributed in the very last post on this thread here, but nobody responded to it. Must be that Bayesian thing.

More readably, perhaps, for anyone who has simply read this thread, you will see I am not one who will not take a jab at Rhino. Look at how the title of this thread has turned from its original intention now, but the latter turn was not his doing. From reviewing this thread earlier, do I think correctly a post from Al was actually removed, and what got this going (edited to add...no, I guess it's there on page 2)? I'm not sure how this tail has gotten moving exactly. Nevertheless, and particularly from the point of view of another current thread here from Fire and Ice...Stop the Insanity...independent of what Diamonseeker reasonably points out...

Date: 8/20/2006 3:55:55 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
He certainly does more for diamond education than any other vendor here does considering his website, videos, and time answering posts on here.....

...minimally, what Rhino provides, somewhat uniquely, on the east coast, is a place where you can do a lot of visual inspection yourself, without having to depend on the internet and stats for doing your shopping...allowing F&I to make the kind of reasoned comparisons she would like. Not that Rhino doesn't provide the best of some of that data, as well.

Words count, for better or worse. Actions do, too.

I'll continue to be grateful of his continuing to not only post here...which too few vendors do (and from a utilitarian point of view, readers with me, we should consider this, and consider what kind of message we would like to send to vendors who would care to take the time to post here), but also, for his continuing to provide a rich environment for shopping, because I think we can all potentially benefit from this.

Maybe next, I'll pay more attention, myself, to get the words right. Perhaps others will follow. One can only hope.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 8/20/2006 8:28:45 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 8/20/2006 8:11:30 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 8/20/2006 7:22:56 PM
Author: Mara
mrs s...i don''t know about a ''select few''...but kenny''s post said it better than i really could have...intelligent people figure things out.

IMO these posts are sincere observations, and rhino can do whatever he wishes with them. bottom line is how many times do people have to say the same thing to someone before they SHOULD start to go ''hmmmmm''. as a vendor i would imagine losing sales due to the way one conducts themselves online would be bothersome...then i would imagine that they''d stop for a second and go ''wow am i really shooting myself in the foot here and i don''t even realize it?''.

also, with all due respect, whether or not you or ds agree or ''see it'' is really not relevant in my opinion. quite obviously others do see it. and whatever rhino wishes to do with that knowledge...it''s all him.

Mara, I am really disappointed to see you saying something like this. Your inference is insulting to others as well as to me.

So, because I put in intelligent, and you disagree with me then somehow I mean you are stupid? That''s a leap.

When I said it''s not relevant, let me clarify. Whether or not you or anyone else agrees with something I believe or say, it doesn''t matter to me. I don''t need agreement on an opinion. I also don''t need to agree with everyone all the time. If you somehow feel insulted by me saying that, well I''m sorry. The opinion was given to Rhino, so really what he wants to do with it is his business. You guys jumping in to say ''I don''t see it'', doesn''t matter to me. We disagree.

You clearly stated that "intelligent people figure things out". Doesn''t that logically result in the alternative point that people who don''t "figure it out" are NOT intelligent??? I don''t see how that''s a leap....but whatever. I''ll drop it and assume you didn''t mean it exactly the way it sounded.

 

[Mara]

Ira, no post was removed and all of this started when Rhino asked Alj why she 'hated' him....what kind of question is that?! What are we 10 years old? No one hates anyone here. Alj responded quite succinctly as to why she simply had no respect for him. To which he replied something about how well everyone else has issues too, and he'd like to post them. From that point on...well it's what it is. Nothing fun.

Bottom line is that IN MY OPINION, as a vendor, Rhino shouldn't have asked a consumer why she 'hates him', and regardless of what she said, shouldn't have them said, 'well I have seen behavioral issues too and I'm requesting permission to post them'. That's just not in his best interest! It can only be a negative thing for him first to ask a question where it might be personal, and a continued negative thing to want to rebut someone's opinion of him.

I personally am not questioning Rhino's passion for his work or the diamonds or his dedication to the consumer or the technology. I think it's fabulous he's so driven. He stocks wonderful stones, has an eye for beauty, and is an unquestionable assset to PS's education bank. But...conduct yourself like a real professional if you want people to view you that way. There are some really professional vendors on here who never let it get personal and plain and simple, know when to just back off and let it die. They know when to stop talking and just move on...sometimes having to leave negative information about themselves out there and I'm sure it's hard but they can see the big picture. The long-term view. The 'we dont want to alienate customers' view. We're not talking consumer to consumer here. This is vendor to consumer interaction.

So really, yes this thread is off-topic from the original, and yes it's sad, and no I don't think that anyone likes where it has gone (or where it's continued to go) but where did it start? With Rhino's post about why Alj hates him. It wasn't anyone else's doing. What's that saying...if you bang on the hive, you might get stung? Appropriate here IMO.

And honestly WHY am I even still posting?! Man I hate threads like this. They just suck you in. I need to go work on my banana chocolate parfaits.

Oh and DS...it was a leap.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 8/20/2006 9:03:45 PM
Author: Mara
Ira, no post was removed

yes, late I saw that...

I need to go work on my banana chocolate parfaits.

And I need to start to put my kids to bed, and start to unpack boxes...my wifes'' been doing it all.

Hey, Mara, can I steal your avatar. No...maybe not pink for me.

Regards,

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 8/20/2006 8:28:45 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 8/20/2006 8:11:30 PM

Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 8/20/2006 7:22:56 PM

Author: Mara

mrs s...i don't know about a 'select few'...but kenny's post said it better than i really could have...intelligent people figure things out.



IMO these posts are sincere observations, and rhino can do whatever he wishes with them. bottom line is how many times do people have to say the same thing to someone before they SHOULD start to go 'hmmmmm'. as a vendor i would imagine losing sales due to the way one conducts themselves online would be bothersome...then i would imagine that they'd stop for a second and go 'wow am i really shooting myself in the foot here and i don't even realize it?'.


also, with all due respect, whether or not you or ds agree or 'see it' is really not relevant in my opinion. quite obviously others do see it. and whatever rhino wishes to do with that knowledge...it's all him.

Mara, I am really disappointed to see you saying something like this. Your inference is insulting to others as well as to me.

So, because I put in intelligent, and you disagree with me then somehow I mean you are stupid? That's a leap.

intelligent people figure it out and DS and I didn't...i wouldn't say that's too big of leap either

I do hope all this gets sorted out so we can get back to talking about diamonds....

enjoy your parfaits...i think i'll go make some brownies

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Mmmm...or maybe some lemon pie????

 

[Mara]

well mrs salvo, since i consider both you and ds to be intelligent, i guess you guys still have time...

lemon pie would be wonderful with the chocolate banana parfaits.

but only if it's made with REAL cream.

 

[belle]

hahahaha.....ds
YES!
lemon pie....
the best.

(are the brownies chewy with walnuts? perhaps some nice overdone edges?

)

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 8/20/2006 10:43:45 PM
Author: belle



(are the brownies chewy with walnuts? perhaps some nice overdone edges?

)

of course, must have the chewy nuts....i might just have to add some of that real whipped cream I love so much too

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 8/20/2006 10:46:49 PM
Author: mrssalvo

Date: 8/20/2006 10:43:45 PM
Author: belle



(are the brownies chewy with walnuts? perhaps some nice overdone edges?

)

of course, must have the chewy nuts....i might just have to add some of that real whipped cream I love so much too

Oh yummy, make sure to save some for me

 

[Serg]

re:My question stands Serg. What exactly have I changed positions about???


http://goodoldgold.com/4Cs/NewCutGrading/GIAExAGSIdeal/

"This isn't the first time human observation contradicted the results from technology. It just so happens that this observation happens to contradict every technology we are aware of and I would stress once again ... The only technology the consumer goes home with at the end of the day is their own eyeballs. Not a Hearts & Arrows viewer, not an IdealScope, BrillianceScope, Isee2, etc.
This research and observation help all of us to understand the logic behind the GIA Cut Grading system and why human observation testing took precedence in GIA's final outcome. Surely I'm not without my criticisms but we'll cover that on our final page.
"

Rhino It is one simple example for BS. Do you remember your 2-3 years old position about BS ?

Your old position more close to other your current page

/www.goodoldgold.com/Technologies/BrillianceScope/BrillianceScopeStrengths/]http://www.goodoldgold.com/Technologies/BrillianceScope/BrillianceScopeStrengths/[/url]">

I hope you can see difference. The difference with your real old position is much more significant.

You are trying combining your old and current position . But you can not do it well because these positions are quite opposite.

 

[Serg]

P: 9/27/2004 2:04:18 PM



Rhino

Ideal Rock

Total Posts: 3,553
Last Post: 8/20/2006
Member Since: 3/29/2001
Find all posts | Pictures

Subscribe to this author
Give specific examples. The link you gave takes you to a generic page on their site and not to an individual diamond with it''s proportions. I have been using the technology for roughly 3 years now and find it to be amazingly accurate to human eye observation and correlation.
Rhino
GoodOldGold.com

Rhino,

Please check below ( not very old) threads.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/gemex-accurate-science-or-smoke-mirrors.19632/

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-brilliancescope-reliable.11841/page-3

 

[Rhino]

Hi Sergey,

Thank you kindly for bringing up this example. I am running out for the day but upon my return would love to clarify for you regarding the above examples. I greatly appreciate you pointing this out. If there are others on your mind, please bring them to my attention and I''ll clarify as well.

Kindest regards,
Jonathan

 

[Serg]

Date: 8/21/2006 9:35:31 AM
Author: Rhino
Hi Sergey,

Thank you kindly for bringing up this example. I am running out for the day but upon my return would love to clarify for you regarding the above examples. I greatly appreciate you pointing this out. If there are others on your mind, please bring them to my attention and I''ll clarify as well.

Kindest regards,
Jonathan

Rhino,

I spent 3 hours for refresh my mind today and read old posts. I do not like spend more time right now. I have a lot of work for my poster.
If we can come to one opinion with BS example it will great and enough for me.

 

[Serg]

Rhino,

Are you waiting more info from me?

 

[Rhino]

Hi Serg,

Please forgive the delay in my response. Some of my responses I like to give more thought to than others.

Date: 8/21/2006 3:37:03 AM
Author: Serg

re:My question stands Serg. What exactly have I changed positions about???


http://goodoldgold.com/4Cs/NewCutGrading/GIAExAGSIdeal/

''This isn''t the first time human observation contradicted the results from technology. It just so happens that this observation happens to contradict every technology we are aware of and I would stress once again ... The only technology the consumer goes home with at the end of the day is their own eyeballs. Not a Hearts & Arrows viewer, not an IdealScope, BrillianceScope, Isee2, etc.

This research and observation help all of us to understand the logic behind the GIA Cut Grading system and why human observation testing took precedence in GIA''s final outcome. Surely I''m not without my criticisms but we''ll cover that on our final page.
''

Rhino It is one simple example for BS. Do you remember your 2-3 years old position about BS ?
Your old position more close to other your current page

<http://www.goodoldgold.com/Technologies/BrillianceScope/BrillianceScopeStrengths/>

I hope you can see difference. The difference with your real old position is much more significant.

You are trying combining your old and current position . But you can not do it well because these positions are quite opposite.

I understand they may appear opposite to you but that is not the case Serg. Please allow me to expound for you so it is crystal clear.

The very first tool I was introduced to for observing critical details about light return/leakage was the FireScope. Since value in diamonds has generally always been determined in the critical analysis (ie. clarity & color) we have always sought to acquire tools that help us in this regard. When we would find the existence of leakage under the table in FS this became a personal criteria of ours for the diamonds we selected. Any kind of steep/deeps were generally always ruled out. When we started investigating BrillianceScope technology we found amazing corellation in the critical exam regarding steep/deep combos as well. Ie... the more leakage that existed and could be observed in reflector technologies such as the FS/IS/Dxray were also reflected in BrillianceScope results as well. I had published our findings on this on our website demonstrating how reflector technologies corellate to BrillianceScope results.

So ... our inventory (even till this day) primarily consist of diamonds that do not exhibit leakage under the table. Amongst these kind of diamonds there is a comparison we had showed over the course of our years selling on the net featuring 2 different kinds of reflector images, both of which did not show leakage under the table. Between these stones one had higher BrillianceScope results than the other and in our surveys amongst H&A stones that did not exhibit leakage under the table the greater majority of these observers would consistently pick the diamond with the higher BrillianceScope results even when prices were comparable or money was not the issue. This was a simple observation we were noting by sending out the same or similar comparison to people all over the country. It was this observation that caused us to carry less of one cutting style over another. During that time I thought the primary differences were lower girdle and star meaurements. Lower girdle and star measurements do indeed impact face up appearance but I was to learn, with later research that that wasn''t necessarily the primary difference seperating this comparison.

BTW ... a great strength of many of the technologies we employ is their ability to detect stones exhibiting leakage. Bscope. Isee2. ASET. etc.

Fast forward to 2005-2006. GIA releases more and more info on their cut grading system. Results of their observation testing, their new diamond grading lab maual with lots of updated info on grading cut and the DiamondDock. AGS released their ASET and the science of Dr. Sassian explaining the reasons/logic behind it. All this while writing our new cut tutorial. We acquire Helium and are able to observe critical degrees of azimuth angles, how they may or may not impact optics, etc. Lots of new information to digest and write about.

The inclusion of GIA Ex steep/deeps is perhaps the biggest thing I had a problem with during this time of research for me. AGS was adopting the exclusion of these which I have (and still do) applaud due to the critical analysis. I had expressed these concerns to my contacts at GIA. The response ... When was the last time you actually observed one of these types of stones to those that weren''t making the Ex grade? Since the GIA Cut Grading System was primarily based on observation testing and was the angle with which they were approaching the situation the question made sense to me. I had excluded ANY kind of stone exhibiting leakage under the table for all the years we''ve been selling via the net so never bothered to make this comparison. Well ... I love a good challenge so I decided to try to acquire one of these (which I did) and perform observation testing alongside an AGS Ideal that didn''t make the GIA Ex grade and put this all to the test. I was all but prepared to point out this seemingly gaping HOLE in the GIA system and base it upon their own research as well. That of observation testing. Well ... as you linked above I published the results of that both here on the forum to help consumers learn what I was and also as a teaching on our own site. Needless to say (and as I also expressed in the thread I had posted) the results of that threw me for a loop and helped me to understand the logic and research behind their system.

For the most part technologies do indeed corellate to human observation. I will not purchase for my inventory stones that are not displaying the highest optical properties. At the same time, no technology is perfect and anyone who is going to employ them should also understand the limitations to them as well. The more I work with technologies the more I learn both of their strengths and their limitations and I make it a point to publish both.

So there is no contradiction Sergey. Just a learning example of how technology can suggest one thing and the human psyche perceives differently.

That ... IMO is a problem with experts. We want to suggest what people will like. We like to foster our personal opinions. There is nothing wrong with offering our opinion but when our opinion runs counter to their perception of beauty that''s the problem. Ie. Technology should not dicate what a person perceives as beautiful. That''s putting the cart before the horse. First a person should identify what they love or don''t love ... then find out the stats.

Ie ... take the person who loves steep/deep old mine or european cuts. Their stats STINK compared to super ideals. Symmetry is all over the place. Proportions and polish nothing to get excited about. The person seeking rarity in cut would have this as a last consideratoin. However to the person who loves these stones they could give a rats behind about Bscope, Isee2, IS image etc. That is what appeals to their eyes. This is why observation testing is so important IMO and why I sympathize with GIA''s approach to the subject. Rod loves his GIA VG. Garry loves his shallow stones. Outside of the ideal range I TOO love shallow stones (though not as much as those that are Ex/ID) even though both GIA and AGS do not deem them as ideal.

In the case of the GIA Ex vs the AGS Ideal, the GIA Ex fails in a critical exam (as demonstrated with the technologies), however human observation of the same two stones revealed...

a. That the leakage that was present under the table, although detectable by all the technologies was not visible to humans using stereo vision and...
b. GIA was correct in that this stone was brighter to most observers than the non GIA Ex (which happened to be an AGS ideal) 90% of the 30 observers we took opinions from agreed. In that study, before I started using the DD the first 10 observers were shown under natural diffuse daylight AND the DD. When I found all their answers to be identical I then stuck to DD lighting as I didn''t see it necessary to walk back and forth to our front window with a security guard.

In fact, when I posted that comparison study on the forum you were the lone voice that said "Rhino, that diamond is a bright diamond and demonstrates the weakness in the AGS system.". (maybe not those exact words but to that effect). Also ... of all the technological data we have shown on those 2 particular stones it was the Gem Advisor/DiamCalc results that suggested more closely the results of that 35.1/41.2 combo as being the brighter stone as compared to the stone featuring painted girdle cutting.

In a nutshell ... technologies are GREAT for finding stones exhibiting the rarest characteristics of both cut (super dooper loopers) and beauty. Solasfera is one great example of this as well as AGS/GIA zenith stones. Observation testing doesn''t always necessarily agree with technologies. I acknowledge both of these truths. I can accept one without having to reject the other. I accept both of these realizations and there is no contradiction.

That is why I will always encourage folks, when considering diamonds outside the GIA Ex/AGS Id zenith range to see and compare what it is they are buying and give them plenty of time to compare whatever product it is they are getting alongside any comparison they''d like to see so they are making an intelligent, informed choice based on what their eyes tell them is the right choice. In F&I''s "Stop the Insanity" thread, I tried to emphasize my agreement with balance and the peaceful co-existence between the two.

I hope I have made myself clear. If you have any other questions Sergey I''ll do my best to help.

Kind regards,

 

[Serg]

re:I understand they may appear opposite to you but that is not the case Serg.

Rhino,

You think these points are not opposite, I think these points are quite opposite.

Such situation is not problem for me , I do not like spend time more for such unhelpful discussion.

I think if your change your mind sometime its not bad event and you can be more happy.
Thanks for your post.