H&A performance
- Thread starter DavR
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- May 1, 2008
- Messages
- 3,563
>
Right - it's not intended as one. It's promotional copy and so not over-technical. But the statements are based on research and observation. More importantly, they address the most frequent feedback heard from actual clients: "Great performance in soft lighting - more intense sparkle (esp from a distance) - and crisper performance."
It might be a "dream" if imagined by one person. But when thousands of consumers give the same firsthand feedback for many years it's a matter of record. It also explains the historic success of H&A diamonds.
As an example, I'm rather sure Marian did not base her purchase decision on "propaganda." She based it on what she took time to go out and observe. I believe what's described is in-line with her own past observations. By the way, many H&A owners have reported these things on the forum - so you shouldn't be surprised by these descriptors. They aren't new.
Cut precision isn't new either. Over the past 30 years Takanori Tamura, Richard von Sternberg, Brian Gavin, Paul Slegers and many other cut quality leaders - along with elite sellers focused on cut quality - have made the deliberate choice to focus on high precision with high performance. Since it's easier and cheaper to produce stones of lesser precision (and/or performance) those people must have felt strongly about the optics to make that "swimming upstream" decision. In fact we should give them credit...they were all committed to their paths before lab research ever validated their vision.
I have first-person experience in this. As a consumer shopping for a diamond in 2000 I knew nothing of the technical. My eye was drawn toward what it was drawn toward. The fascination with what I discovered and learned is why I'm here now.
Sure. It was already published here (second video)
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/interview-with-peter-yantzer-consumer-issues.117241/
Q: What do you think the industry can do to improve the look of all diamonds; not just rounds?
A: ...Precision diamond cutting is going to be key for making pretty diamonds on a consistent basis. The pavilion of the stone sets up the stone, good or bad, because the pavilion acts like a bunch of little mirrors. And if those mirrors aren't lined up exactly right you could lose a lot of the performance of that diamond... ...I believe our industry will be going through a period where we'll see some really fine diamond cutters step up to the plate and start producing diamonds on a really high level of precision much like the H&A type diamonds for round brilliants...
Mr. Yantzer's comments reflect our research and direction as a cutting company. He was the keynote speaker at our Symposium last year and there was fantastic discussion about cut precision and its benefits. We believe in these things - as strongly as you believe in your own endeavors.
John, I have not full information about Marty Haske'' research for EightStar company. Do you mean this research ?
what I know
1)he use a lot of LEDs( 5000 LEDs) and Photos what he received in direction perpendicular to diamond Table
2) He did not measure flatness of facet for Diamonds what he use in his comparison
Is it right ? Could you give link to His work where I can find details?
To cut High symmetry diamonds cutters use better cutting tools( for example vibration is less) . As one of consequences Flatness and polishing of facets are better.
Flatness of facets is very critical if you need receive Clear primary colors due dispersion.
Curved facets mix rays with different wavelength what reduce purity of color
if anybody wants proof what symmetry is main reason of clear colors in diamonds, he need compare diamonds with SAME facet flatness , with same average proportions and SIMILAR symmetry( it is not correct to compare diamonds if one has pavilion angles 40.75+_0.1 degree and other has pavilion angles 40-41.5degree )
Does it mean sense for you.
Btw. I have very good advice for Mr. Paul Slegers, he really needs learn a lot before try again to find mistakes in my statements
- Joined
- May 1, 2008
- Messages
- 3,563
See the above Garry. I believe Peter's position as it relates to "precision" has become more fluid as the lab has gotten deeper into studies of scintillation. Actually (and worth a chuckle) the person who has been most critical of H&A models at our trade gatherings has been...YOU.
Not everyone favors H&A. I get it. I often help consumers find non H&A and other shapes with enthusiasm. But there are plenty of people who do love H&A and cite performance reasons for loving them. You can't tell thousands of consumers who did side-by-side comparisons that they are wrong. Nor would I dismiss those with different opinions. Diversity is a good thing.
I understand that you and Serg are motivated to de-emphasize "H&A" and "Ideal" here. It's logically in-line with your (very cool) promotion of "designer diamonds" and I'm sure it reflects your honest beliefs. But we are just as honest in working to achieve the best possible performance in 57-facet round and (for Infinity) princess. Maybe we are crazy but to us part of this is precisely aligning all of the mirrors in the diamond.
We don't think we're crazy, since we're actively into the research and guidance of science and industry leaders - not to mention our own developments - and all-important feedback from consumers. You guys do great work but it's not the only valid research out there.
There's no shortage of smart people, passion or belief in these discussions. There are also (regrettably) some personal sidebars which seem to negatively color the exchanges. I suggest that we're more alike than apart, and united in a mutual desire to improve cut quality for consumers. In that spirit I hope we can refrain from chopping another's head off just to make oneself feel taller.
Divergent paths will have divergent opinions. More than one path can lead to cut-Nirvana. That's actually better for consumers, as it permits more choices.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,479
Hi John,
I have heard Peter say words to the effect that I wrote.
Perhaps that was prior to Marty''s multi pin hole lighting to display loads of fire?
At that time Marty claimed that high symmetry stones displayed more fire - however you may remeber when I modeled Marty''s concept in DC and imported the same stone I used here - the difference was not noticeable.
I do agree however that there is a certain ''snapiness'' in a higher sym diamond - but the unresolved question is - "at what level of symmetry deviation can humans see the difference?"
I have no doubt that really bad stones like this one - it is obvious even to untrained folk. But there are many issues here. Size being an important one. Facet flatness is not something I have studied - but if Sergey believes it is important, then I would not ignore his opinion.
I have a 5ct very fine stone and a slightly shallow 5ct with so so symmetry - (not terrible - just avergae) and the larger flashes of fire in the better stone are obvious. I will check the facet flatness tomorrow.
- Joined
- May 1, 2008
- Messages
- 3,563
#2 may be right - and it's a very cool area of study. I'm not sure if Marty's work is online. I may email him (or you can) but I'm at the limit of my day and must resume tomorrow, time permitting.
Yes, and I'm a fan of this avenue of research.
John,
of course asymmetry could easy reduce Cut performance.
for example if perfect symmetrical diamonds with Pav angle 40.6-40.8 has fine performance and diamonds with Pav 40 degree or 41.5 degree have low performance then diamond with low symmetry what produce big pavilion angle deviation as 40-41.5 Usually have low performance too. But it has nothing with number of VFs
please do not mix reasons and consequences
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2008
- Messages
- 14,708
Interesting conversation to bad about the under current...
We can discuss this while remaining civil.
My personal opinion is that optical symmetry can add a perception of crispness to the patterns and scintillation that is visible to some people.
But I do question at what point it makes a large difference.
I don''t know the answer to that one and don''t think anyone does.
Since it is a perception it will be extremely hard to prove.
What I do very strongly disagree with is that non-symmetry always produces smaller virtual facets and more ineffective virtual facets all the time.
Another problem is what size virtual facet is effective depends on the lighting and without the lighting being given saying effective/ineffective is meaningless.
In some lighting the only effective VF will be the table producing table glare and all the rest are ineffective.
Yes when the lighting is such that the pavilion can not work the glare off the table and sometimes crown facets is the only effective VF''s.
Take one of the badly cut EC''s on the market and in a lot of different lighting that will be the case because the pavilion is ineffective in a wide range of lighting.
We can discuss this while remaining civil.
My personal opinion is that optical symmetry can add a perception of crispness to the patterns and scintillation that is visible to some people.
But I do question at what point it makes a large difference.
I don''t know the answer to that one and don''t think anyone does.
Since it is a perception it will be extremely hard to prove.
What I do very strongly disagree with is that non-symmetry always produces smaller virtual facets and more ineffective virtual facets all the time.
Another problem is what size virtual facet is effective depends on the lighting and without the lighting being given saying effective/ineffective is meaningless.
In some lighting the only effective VF will be the table producing table glare and all the rest are ineffective.
Yes when the lighting is such that the pavilion can not work the glare off the table and sometimes crown facets is the only effective VF''s.
Take one of the badly cut EC''s on the market and in a lot of different lighting that will be the case because the pavilion is ineffective in a wide range of lighting.
re:
ABout Peter Y. statement. I know quite opposite him statement about H&A diamonds. I hope somebody will publish it here.
Sure. It was already published here (second video)
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/interview-with-peter-yantzer-consumer-issues.117241/
Q: What do you think the industry can do to improve the look of all diamonds; not just rounds?
A: ...Precision diamond cutting is going to be key for making pretty diamonds on a consistent basis. The pavilion of the stone sets up the stone, good or bad, because the pavilion acts like a bunch of little mirrors. And if those mirrors aren''t lined up exactly right you could lose a lot of the performance of that diamond... ...I believe our industry will be going through a period where we''ll see some really fine diamond cutters step up to the plate and start producing diamonds on a really high level of precision much like the H&A type diamonds for round brilliants...
Mr. Yantzer''s comments reflect our research and direction as a cutting company. He was the keynote speaker at our Symposium last year and there was fantastic discussion about cut precision and its benefits. We believe in these things - as strongly as you believe in your own endeavors.
---
John,
Did Peter say what H&A type round diamonds all times have better performance than non H&A type round diamonds?
in Peter statement what you have published just he told what Fancy cut diamonds will have same Precision as H&A round diamonds and he told what asymmetry can reduce performance.
This absolute correct statement has not any connections with Hypothesis what only H&A type diamonds could have Highest level performance
ABout Peter Y. statement. I know quite opposite him statement about H&A diamonds. I hope somebody will publish it here.
Sure. It was already published here (second video)
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/interview-with-peter-yantzer-consumer-issues.117241/
Q: What do you think the industry can do to improve the look of all diamonds; not just rounds?
A: ...Precision diamond cutting is going to be key for making pretty diamonds on a consistent basis. The pavilion of the stone sets up the stone, good or bad, because the pavilion acts like a bunch of little mirrors. And if those mirrors aren''t lined up exactly right you could lose a lot of the performance of that diamond... ...I believe our industry will be going through a period where we''ll see some really fine diamond cutters step up to the plate and start producing diamonds on a really high level of precision much like the H&A type diamonds for round brilliants...
Mr. Yantzer''s comments reflect our research and direction as a cutting company. He was the keynote speaker at our Symposium last year and there was fantastic discussion about cut precision and its benefits. We believe in these things - as strongly as you believe in your own endeavors.
---
John,
Did Peter say what H&A type round diamonds all times have better performance than non H&A type round diamonds?
in Peter statement what you have published just he told what Fancy cut diamonds will have same Precision as H&A round diamonds and he told what asymmetry can reduce performance.
This absolute correct statement has not any connections with Hypothesis what only H&A type diamonds could have Highest level performance
re:I understand that you and Serg are motivated to de-emphasize "H&A" and "Ideal" here. It's logically in-line with your (very cool) promotion of "designer diamonds" and I'm sure it reflects your honest beliefs. But we are just as honest in working to achieve the best possible performance in 57-facet round and (for Infinity) princess. Maybe we are crazy but to us part of this is precisely aligning all of the mirrors in the diamond.
John,
with all my highest respect your work on PS, you have very weak understanding my motivation.
For our current business( HP scanners, Diamcalc ...) and our future "designer diamonds" business the "H&A" promotion adea is very valuable.
We also can use same promotion principle for Fancy cuts( easy !)
we can develop a lot of sellable tools to grade symmetry,..
but our challenge is more difficult than just give new fancy cuts. We want return consumer confidence to diamond market, we want give tools to Consumer diamond comparison, we want give Fancy cuts which have much better Performance than any round diamond ( and we are doing a lot to help 3d parties DESIGN and CUT such cuts)
it is reason why I spend time here , it is reason why I am Enemy of "Ideal Cut" propoganda. Such propoganda kills consumer confidence in long term perspective, it kills diamond market. I do not like lost my job because "Ideal cut propoganda" reduce diamond market . My task is increase diamond market and consumer interest, my task is change needs to wants.
You know it very well, we discussed it early. But until now you prefer believe what I can not use "H&A" business philosophy for grooving my business , what AGS and OctoNus are competitors . Sorry but it is just add limitation in your business.
John,
with all my highest respect your work on PS, you have very weak understanding my motivation.
For our current business( HP scanners, Diamcalc ...) and our future "designer diamonds" business the "H&A" promotion adea is very valuable.
We also can use same promotion principle for Fancy cuts( easy !)
we can develop a lot of sellable tools to grade symmetry,..
but our challenge is more difficult than just give new fancy cuts. We want return consumer confidence to diamond market, we want give tools to Consumer diamond comparison, we want give Fancy cuts which have much better Performance than any round diamond ( and we are doing a lot to help 3d parties DESIGN and CUT such cuts)
it is reason why I spend time here , it is reason why I am Enemy of "Ideal Cut" propoganda. Such propoganda kills consumer confidence in long term perspective, it kills diamond market. I do not like lost my job because "Ideal cut propoganda" reduce diamond market . My task is increase diamond market and consumer interest, my task is change needs to wants.
You know it very well, we discussed it early. But until now you prefer believe what I can not use "H&A" business philosophy for grooving my business , what AGS and OctoNus are competitors . Sorry but it is just add limitation in your business.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
Garry..., are you talking about symmetric shapes only or are you including asymmetric shapes as well?
I would tend to agree with your ''snappiness'' comment perhaps in symmetric shapes (eg rounds & perfect squares in the brilliant faceting design) as the results are a more ''uniform'' face up appearance..., but in asymmetric shapes (eg most other fancy shapes), the ''snappiness'' gets lost a bit?
But I fully agree with you with this question:
''at what level of symmetry deviation can humans see the difference?''
Sounds like the answer might be "subjectivity"..., just like a part of ''beauty''...
risingsun
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2006
- Messages
- 5,549
Regular Guy
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2004
- Messages
- 5,962
Well, I''m slow to learn anything new, and still haven''t retained anything about minor facets.
But...re:
"Stones near the center of the red region (the lowest scores) are least affected by symmetry variations. Alternatively hearts and arrows diamonds, which have excellent optical symmetry, but often HCA scores around 2, may out-perform diamonds with lesser symmetry and lower HCA scores."
But...re:
There is still this embedded in the long standing HCA...
"Stones near the center of the red region (the lowest scores) are least affected by symmetry variations. Alternatively hearts and arrows diamonds, which have excellent optical symmetry, but often HCA scores around 2, may out-perform diamonds with lesser symmetry and lower HCA scores."
RG,
see map.
If your diamond near point A( on red plato), small asymmetry can not move this diamond in to yellow zone.( Big asymmetry can do it)
If your diamond near point B, even relative small asymmetry can move your diamond in to yellow zone from red zone
did you receive answer on your question?
Regular Guy
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2004
- Messages
- 5,962
I think you''re saying that for diamonds that would seem to perform well, based on a presentation of data showing, for example, cherry crown and pavilion characteristics...the presence of H&A and good optical symmetry will help insure the user that those measured proportions will actually, more reliably, apply to the diamond in hand.
I guess this is neither too sexy, nor exactly a kick in the pants...
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
SERG.. BEFORE you open your mouth and give out INCORRECT information, you could do a little basic research, like going to my website http://www.adamasgem.org and looking at the patent.
Marty, what is wrong? How many Light sources did you use?
I did not find link to this work from your fist page.
Should I check ALL links before I can open my mouth again?
Houpelly I have not flue now and can breathe even with closed mouth
you are very helpful again
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2008
- Messages
- 14,708
link to Marty''s patent:
http://www.adamasgem.org/7315356.pdf
http://www.adamasgem.org/7315356.pdf
Karl,
thanks for link, but it is link for patent. Patent has not any information about result comparison fire between H&A and non H&A diamonds.
Also patent is worst type document to understand technology. article is more relevant document if researcher wants publish and discuss results
what I see in patent , Lens axis is perpendicular to diamond table. I was right here.
Marty uses holes instead LEDs. yes it it better for spectrum but is not very important for our discussion about symmetry .
I did not find in Patent the number of holes( light sources). Did you find it?
5000 lights sources I remember from very old discussion with Marty
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,479
Dear Marty,
Perhaps, and perhaps my model is better? Who knows?
I hope that we could find some uses for your patented instrument?
Any new developments we are not aware of?
P: 6/16/2005 4:21:45 PM
adamasgem
Ideal Rock
Total Posts: 1,306
Last Post: 10/30/2009
Member Since: 5/23/2003
Find all posts | Pictures
Subscribe to this author
Date: 6/14/2005 1:12:53 AM
Author: Michael_E
When discussing this as a science based methodology it is often helpfull if the strategy behind the device is divulged so that others can test it''s validity and pry apart it''s strengths and weaknesses. Is there any way that you could toss a bone out here and explain how these images were created Marty ?
Thanks for any insight that you could share on these questions !
When the patent application is published, there will be full disclosure, other than that, the environment mimics a common physical environment which brings out the observability of fire, and is scientifically designed to try to ELIMINATE any potential aliasing or biasing of the results. The pictures I have published are the result ONE photo where the source has overr 5000 incident rays of WHITE light.
Marty Haske GG(GIA), Senior Member NAJA, ISA Appraisal Trained(past ISA), BS(MIT)/MS(MIT)
Adamas Gemological Laboratory
" The pictures I have published are the result ONE photo where the source has overr 5000 incident rays of WHITE light."
"When the patent application is published, there will be full disclosure"
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fire-performance-scope-and-other-questions.29352/page-2
adamasgem
Ideal Rock
Total Posts: 1,306
Last Post: 10/30/2009
Member Since: 5/23/2003
Find all posts | Pictures
Subscribe to this author
Date: 6/14/2005 1:12:53 AM
Author: Michael_E
When discussing this as a science based methodology it is often helpfull if the strategy behind the device is divulged so that others can test it''s validity and pry apart it''s strengths and weaknesses. Is there any way that you could toss a bone out here and explain how these images were created Marty ?
Thanks for any insight that you could share on these questions !
When the patent application is published, there will be full disclosure, other than that, the environment mimics a common physical environment which brings out the observability of fire, and is scientifically designed to try to ELIMINATE any potential aliasing or biasing of the results. The pictures I have published are the result ONE photo where the source has overr 5000 incident rays of WHITE light.
Marty Haske GG(GIA), Senior Member NAJA, ISA Appraisal Trained(past ISA), BS(MIT)/MS(MIT)
Adamas Gemological Laboratory
" The pictures I have published are the result ONE photo where the source has overr 5000 incident rays of WHITE light."
"When the patent application is published, there will be full disclosure"
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fire-performance-scope-and-other-questions.29352/page-2
adamasgem
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,338
First Sergy, I can''t see how you would have missed the link unless you were totally blind, since it is the second item on the page.
Secondly, based on the light baffle size and perforation pattern I wound up using, over 10000 points of light, to prevent anyone aliasing results.
And yes, I was incorrect, you did say that the photos were of a face up view, but the patent design also allows one to rotate the diamond, and then each facet lights up a different color, and also you can set the diamond at an angle, although I haven''t investigated that aspect ..
And I''d be happy to show you a comparison of photos I did using generic comparisons between older AGS cut grades on the stones I had used, as the patent covered the methodology to take the photos, and not a comparative grading system..
- Status
Did You Miss the April 2024 Jewels of the Weeks?
Did You Miss the April 2024 Jewels of the Weeks? - 04/26
Did You Miss The Throwback Thursdays For April 2024?
Did You Miss The Throwback Thursdays For April 2024? - 04/25
300x240.png)