Good read by Mike Botha, Model T & the RB.

[diagem]

'a diamond is only as good as it's worst facet'
Mb

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/time-paradigm-shift-mike-botha?trk=hp-feed-article-title-publish

 

[Texas Leaguer]

'a diamond is only as good as it's worst facet'
Mb

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/time-paradigm-shift-mike-botha?trk=hp-feed-article-title-publish

Thanks for posting Yoram. Interesting article.

So, let's see this round with the extra tiers of pavilion facets and the bigger light cone!

 

[Karl_K]

Fun rant but badly lacking in the science department in places.
There are no free lunches.
Add more facets to the pavilion and the average virtual facet size goes down.
That is a good thing in a 5ct diamond not so much in a .20ct.
You also lose the range of virtual facet sizes that make an RB a good design.

The cone of light is determined by the pavilion angles.

A diamond with leakage can be brighter than one without.
My design being one of them and we have cut them both ways to verify.

The critical angle is not reached in many areas of "leakage" in diamonds rather it is the result of a virtual facet primarily drawing light from the opposite pavilion area.

 

[diagem]

I actually liked Mike Botha's closing statement:

"FINAL THOUGHTS

New stunning designs have been and could be created by adhering to the principles of light return, and facet definition. These are sound scientific and mathematical principles which should form the paradigm in diamond design, rather than one of the products of this paradigm, which has been the Round Brilliant for so long. Having based all our criteria and research on the Round Brilliant instead of the principles mentioned has brought us to the cul-de-sac of the quality pursuit in Round Brilliants. After reaching the milestones of Triple Ideal and Triple Excellent, where do we go? In an attempt to de-commoditize diamonds, do we pursue Super Triple Ideal, Super Triple Excellent, or some other super-duper criteria yet to be formulated to try and get an edge in the marketplace? Or do we dare to be brave enough and step outside of the ‘Model T’ box and create real beauty with discernible differentiation? I place my money on the latter."


Fancy shapes is a good way to look outside of the Model T box....?