HoF outshines unbranded H&A

[LovesKatie]

Date: 4/16/2009 8:59:17 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 4/16/2009 7:26:17 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 4/15/2009 8:33:15 PM
Author:LovesKatie

I took a chance and bought it. It''s an awfully pretty stone, just lovely, really, though I don''t have anything to compare it to before now. I''ve just never had the chance to play with and study a diamond before. Wanting the best, though, and knowing my ignorance, I tracked down a HoF dealer and took the stone there to compare it to the ''best.'' I''d never seen a HoF diamond. WOW! So beautiful. Prettiest little things EVER! And decidedly prettier than ''my'' stone.

One thought came to mind, after reading this. Did you handle the stone much with your bare hands? And if so, did you clean it afterwards? Diamonds are an absolute high powered magnet for grease and dirt, even if one doesn''t actually touch them, But if you handled it much without cleaning, that ''could'' have been part of the problem. Once the diamond starts getting dirty, it will decrease performance. Anyway, just a thought I had.

Also, you''re right, diamonds do have ''personalities'', and some are better than others.

I think Ellen is on the money.
It is very easy even for a nasty salesperson to wipe their nose and rub the table of your stone.
Your stone has a smallish table - that is a preference issue - it may have more fire and scintillation and not be quite as bright as say a stone with a 58-60% table.
Also one lighting type is not good - try under the desks and out of bright lights - near daylight windows etc, but not in direct sunlight

Thanks, Garry. I''ve been reading a lot here, and still didn''t know that a smaller table meant more fire and scintillation. I must say that the fire of "my" stone made it a wonderful toy for the time that I had it (posted it today back to BN). I loved playing with it in sunlight and with a white LED flashlight. I did compare it and the HOF stones in shadow, and did shine both with the LED light. (Not much different from the store lights, really.) All were beautiful in the different lighting, but the HOF stones were just prettier.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 4/16/2009 10:01:44 PM
Author: LovesKatie

Thanks, Ellen! I did have them clean the stone. They were cleaning one of the HOF stones anyway, so I asked them to clean 'mine' as well.

You're welcome! It was worth a shot to ask. Good luck in your continuing search!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 4/16/2009 2:44:31 PM
Author: DiamondFlame
I''ve seen HoF stones. They are very bright, even when you cup your hands over them to block out the light source, they still glow like embers. I wd like to think that any top of the range H&A performs similarly. But HOF selling point seems to be ''The HOF diamond is cut under 100x magnification''. Is it possible that HOF cut symmetry is just a tad superior thus minimising light leakage to a much greater extent than non-branded H&As? There''s certainly more mathematics to internal reflections/refractions than just crown/pavillion angles and crown height/ table depth.

It is of course a nice proposition, but do try to envision it.

When cutting, you have a wheel and a tang holding a stone. The wheel is covered with diamond powder and an oily substance that makes sure that the powder sticks to the wheel. In the process of cutting a facet, there is interaction between the powder on the wheel and the diamond being cut away from the stone. All this in an oily environment creates quite some dirt.

Now try to imagine which device would be necessary for the cutter holding the tang to examine the stone under magnification while the stone is being cut. This brings visions to me of the old movie ''Chittie-chittie-bang-bang''.

Even if such a device existed, I pity the poor cutter who not only needs to control the wheel and the tang, while smelling, feeling and listening how the cutting proceeds, and at the same time will need to visually inspect the precision of his cutting.

Reality is that precision is obtained by controlling your equipment and by careful planning, and it is controlled visually after the facet is finished or after part of the facet is finished. And the level of detail or magnification with which you control the operation afterwards has little effect to the product, if one does not know how to control the equipment during the process.

Live long,

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/17/2009 8:15:07 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 4/16/2009 2:44:31 PM
Author: DiamondFlame
I''ve seen HoF stones. They are very bright, even when you cup your hands over them to block out the light source, they still glow like embers. I wd like to think that any top of the range H&A performs similarly. But HOF selling point seems to be ''The HOF diamond is cut under 100x magnification''. Is it possible that HOF cut symmetry is just a tad superior thus minimising light leakage to a much greater extent than non-branded H&As? There''s certainly more mathematics to internal reflections/refractions than just crown/pavillion angles and crown height/ table depth.

It is of course a nice proposition, but do try to envision it.

When cutting, you have a wheel and a tang holding a stone. The wheel is covered with diamond powder and an oily substance that makes sure that the powder sticks to the wheel. In the process of cutting a facet, there is interaction between the powder on the wheel and the diamond being cut away from the stone. All this in an oily environment creates quite some dirt.

Now try to imagine which device would be necessary for the cutter holding the tang to examine the stone under magnification while the stone is being cut. This brings visions to me of the old movie ''Chittie-chittie-bang-bang''.

Even if such a device existed, I pity the poor cutter who not only needs to control the wheel and the tang, while smelling, feeling and listening how the cutting proceeds, and at the same time will need to visually inspect the precision of his cutting.

Reality is that precision is obtained by controlling your equipment and by careful planning, and it is controlled visually after the facet is finished or after part of the facet is finished. And the level of detail or magnification with which you control the operation afterwards has little effect to the product, if one does not know how to control the equipment during the process.

Live long,

It is always good to have someone explain the difference between technique / tools so that we can make distinctions between technology and marketing.

When we consider cutting accuracy we already have tools like scanners that measure in a range of microns and angles (with various accuracy) and optical symmetry devices that show the results that are at least as capabale of the current accuracy of cutting tools.

 

[icekid]

Date: 4/16/2009 9:18:10 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 4/16/2009 9:03:55 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/16/2009 8:59:17 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 4/16/2009 7:26:17 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 4/15/2009 8:33:15 PM
Author:LovesKatie

I took a chance and bought it. It''s an awfully pretty stone, just lovely, really, though I don''t have anything to compare it to before now. I''ve just never had the chance to play with and study a diamond before. Wanting the best, though, and knowing my ignorance, I tracked down a HoF dealer and took the stone there to compare it to the ''best.'' I''d never seen a HoF diamond. WOW! So beautiful. Prettiest little things EVER! And decidedly prettier than ''my'' stone.

One thought came to mind, after reading this. Did you handle the stone much with your bare hands? And if so, did you clean it afterwards? Diamonds are an absolute high powered magnet for grease and dirt, even if one doesn''t actually touch them, But if you handled it much without cleaning, that ''could'' have been part of the problem. Once the diamond starts getting dirty, it will decrease performance. Anyway, just a thought I had.

Also, you''re right, diamonds do have ''personalities'', and some are better than others.

I think Ellen is on the money.
It is very easy even for a nasty salesperson to wipe their nose and rub the table of your stone.
Your stone has a smallish table - that is a preference issue - it may have more fire and scintillation and not be quite as bright as say a stone with a 58-60% table.
Also one lighting type is not good - try under the desks and out of bright lights - near daylight windows etc, but not in direct sunlight

LOL!!!!

<------- stolen, as Ellen is cooking her brekkie. Thanks Gar.

ohhhhhhhh gross! hahaha

 

[icekid]

Date: 4/16/2009 10:35:21 PM
Author: LovesKatie
Thanks, Garry. I''ve been reading a lot here, and still didn''t know that a smaller table meant more fire and scintillation. I must say that the fire of ''my'' stone made it a wonderful toy for the time that I had it (posted it today back to BN). I loved playing with it in sunlight and with a white LED flashlight. I did compare it and the HOF stones in shadow, and did shine both with the LED light. (Not much different from the store lights, really.) All were beautiful in the different lighting, but the HOF stones were just prettier.

It sounds like you are sold on HoF! If so, go for it. However, I suspect that more likely the case is that your blue nile stone is very nice, but not quite up to what folks around here usually buy. I''ve compared my whiteflash stone to HoF in person, favorably. I don''t personally find them better, just more expensive.

 

[LovesKatie]

Date: 4/17/2009 10:23:40 PM
Author: icekid

Date: 4/16/2009 10:35:21 PM
Author: LovesKatie
Thanks, Garry. I''ve been reading a lot here, and still didn''t know that a smaller table meant more fire and scintillation. I must say that the fire of ''my'' stone made it a wonderful toy for the time that I had it (posted it today back to BN). I loved playing with it in sunlight and with a white LED flashlight. I did compare it and the HOF stones in shadow, and did shine both with the LED light. (Not much different from the store lights, really.) All were beautiful in the different lighting, but the HOF stones were just prettier.

It sounds like you are sold on HoF! If so, go for it. However, I suspect that more likely the case is that your blue nile stone is very nice, but not quite up to what folks around here usually buy. I''ve compared my whiteflash stone to HoF in person, favorably. I don''t personally find them better, just more expensive.

I''m sold on everything about them except for the price! When I buy again, it''ll be from a PS vendor.

 

[LovesKatie]

Date: 4/16/2009 8:12:39 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/15/2009 8:56:24 PM
Author: LovesKatie
Thanks, diamondseeker2006 and stonecold. I knew that anyone could have anything inscribed on the girdle. I knew I was taking a gamble buying the Blue Nile stone, with no photos or H&A, ASET or IS images. But it did indeed turn out to be a true H&A stone. It just wasn''t as pretty as the HoF! So I''m sure I''ll be taking your advice when I buy again -- I''m just now kind of curious about why one AGS0 H&A stone, with what should be a top HCA score, isn''t as pretty as another one.

Hi LovesKatie,

The depth of your original diamond is not going to be the problem, it is the angle ranges which could have been. The crown and pavilion 35/ 40.8 combo is getting towards the steep zone where it is possible that the diamond could leak a bit of light and or look a little dark in some lights - even with an AGS0. Idealscope is very useful to show this if available however BN do not provide these. Also Ellen has a point that the diamond could have been dirty. But don''t worry, you have a good eye by the sound of it and will find a stunning diamond!

Lorelei,

I was thinking back on how the diamonds looked side-by-side. One thing that stands out in retrospect is that the body of "my" diamond looked brighter than any of the HOF stones. Maybe it is a bit leaky, as you suggest, and was letting some light in through the pavilion?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/17/2009 10:23:40 PM
Author: icekid

Date: 4/16/2009 10:35:21 PM
Author: LovesKatie
Thanks, Garry. I''ve been reading a lot here, and still didn''t know that a smaller table meant more fire and scintillation. I must say that the fire of ''my'' stone made it a wonderful toy for the time that I had it (posted it today back to BN). I loved playing with it in sunlight and with a white LED flashlight. I did compare it and the HOF stones in shadow, and did shine both with the LED light. (Not much different from the store lights, really.) All were beautiful in the different lighting, but the HOF stones were just prettier.

It sounds like you are sold on HoF! If so, go for it. However, I suspect that more likely the case is that your blue nile stone is very nice, but not quite up to what folks around here usually buy. I''ve compared my whiteflash stone to HoF in person, favorably. I don''t personally find them better, just more expensive.

I guess that is an issue in regards that BN do not have the same selection criteria as the best of the vendors top stones - the ones that list here and have established reknown brand names within this domain.

BN is a big mass operation with some good business rules that has built its brand from the marketing side which is always going to be easier for a company with millions to invest than messing around with worst fussy customers like some of those here on PS.

 

[Jelly]

I own several pieces from Whiteflash and their ACA's and Expert Selection diamonds are wonderful. The HOF brand is comparable in beauty to the ACAs.

In a heartbeat, I would buy from Brian Gavin, formerly of Whiteflash.

Here's an infinity diamond from winfield's in your price range if you would consider a warmer diamond:

http://www.highperformancediamonds.com/index.php?page=view-id-diamond-infinity&id=575

I would recommend doing your comparison taste test by purchasing another diamond loose and bringing it back to your jeweler.

 

[risingsun]

I don't know if this will help, but I didn't choose my HOF due "romancing the stone" marketing. I looked at it under the microscope, H&A viewer, IS, in a variety of types of light, ran the stats through the HCA and used my eyes. I also compared it to other diamonds. I bought my ACA much the same way, but used Brian Gavin's eyes/stats for the preliminary examination. When you are satisfied that you have found "the one," it's time to pull out your checkbook