Is a pendant less reflective than a ring?

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

LOL! If you ever get up into this part of the world during our "freezing winter" you will see on a sunny day some of the best rays of sunshine in the world as they reflect back off the snow and give you a great tan, provided you are using at least 50 sunscreen so they don't crispy your critter!

Wink

That makes it rather flood lit Wink.
Sunshine in outer space would make the top cut diamond all black, except for the one to 3 bright sparkles.
A diamond with poor symmetry and bad proportions can appear much brighter and have many more sparkles.

 

[WinkHPD]

LOL! If you ever get up into this part of the world during our "freezing winter" you will see on a sunny day some of the best rays of sunshine in the world as they reflect back off the snow and give you a great tan, provided you are using at least 50 sunscreen so they don't crispy your critter!

Wink

That makes it rather flood lit Wink.
Sunshine in outer space would make the top cut diamond all black, except for the one to 3 bright sparkles.
A diamond with poor symmetry and bad proportions can appear much brighter and have many more sparkles.

Not interested in living in space, now THAT is a cold place. I have walked some of my diamonds out in the sun to see what you were talking about, hurt my eyes they were so bright. You can keep the wonky ones, I just like mine the way they are...

Wink

 

[Hospatogi]

Thanks Diamondseeker ! Don't I just love to complicate things hehe! I'm excited to see how it turns out too! And most importantly I hope mom loves her bday present!

Can I adopt you???? (I will if she doesn't love the pendant! )

I'd have AVR's in earrings, pendant, and everything else I can think of it that money tree starts growing in the backyard! So you can't go wrong with a gorgeous excellent cut OEC for any piece of jewelry!

(I'll add one thing...there's a gorgeous .99 AVR right now that I'd like to have which was cut by another fabulous cutter, and I was thinking how I'd love to have it in a pendant or as one of a pair of earrings!)

Haha Diamondseeker , one can never have too many mummys ! Does the .99 AVR have the same faceting pattern as your current AVR? I love its petal like appearance !

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thanks Diamondseeker ! Don't I just love to complicate things hehe! I'm excited to see how it turns out too! And most importantly I hope mom loves her bday present!

Can I adopt you???? (I will if she doesn't love the pendant! )

I'd have AVR's in earrings, pendant, and everything else I can think of it that money tree starts growing in the backyard! So you can't go wrong with a gorgeous excellent cut OEC for any piece of jewelry!

(I'll add one thing...there's a gorgeous .99 AVR right now that I'd like to have which was cut by another fabulous cutter, and I was thinking how I'd love to have it in a pendant or as one of a pair of earrings!)

Haha Diamondseeker , one can never have too many mummys ! Does the .99 AVR have the same faceting pattern as your current AVR? I love its petal like appearance !

Thanks! I think both are the newer style cut. Your mom will have to let you borrow her pendant because I think it will look lovely with your AVC!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Reading this thread, I could not help but chuckle. In that sense, I come to the defense of the poor diamond, being accused of being less reflective, while all circumstantial evidence produced points at the diamond just being the victim of circumstances.

A diamond is a diamond, and light is light, and since the diamond is always going to work in the same way with light, it is not the diamond's fault if light-circumstances are different. The topic is thus not in line with the replies, as the replies hint at light-circumstances being different, and thus another kind of diamond might be more appropriate.

It is funny when I think about it.
Like I always say the first 5 things that affect a diamond performance are:
lighting
lighting
lighting
lighting
lighting

Hey Karl,

I do think that we are not on the same page here, or at least, your chosen wording leaves room for incorrect interpretation.

Yes, lighting affects how a diamond performs, but in the same lighting, a better cut is likely to perform better. If random bypassers compliment somebody about their diamond, it is generally not because of the light-conditions being perfect, it is because the cut of that diamond is better. I am stating the example of bypassers giving compliments, as it is entirely different from checking out a ring at arm's length, often without head-obstruction and from a distance, with light-sources situated in the same area as in a pendant.

Live long,

Hey Paul
a better cut looks worse in direct bright sunlight

Hey mate ,

Does it? Or are you too focused on brightness and the number of sparkles? Not saying that you are wrong in this specific light-condition, but the question about focus remains.

Live long,

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Reading this thread, I could not help but chuckle. In that sense, I come to the defense of the poor diamond, being accused of being less reflective, while all circumstantial evidence produced points at the diamond just being the victim of circumstances.

A diamond is a diamond, and light is light, and since the diamond is always going to work in the same way with light, it is not the diamond's fault if light-circumstances are different. The topic is thus not in line with the replies, as the replies hint at light-circumstances being different, and thus another kind of diamond might be more appropriate.

It is funny when I think about it.
Like I always say the first 5 things that affect a diamond performance are:
lighting
lighting
lighting
lighting
lighting

Hey Karl,

I do think that we are not on the same page here, or at least, your chosen wording leaves room for incorrect interpretation.

Yes, lighting affects how a diamond performs, but in the same lighting, a better cut is likely to perform better. If random bypassers compliment somebody about their diamond, it is generally not because of the light-conditions being perfect, it is because the cut of that diamond is better. I am stating the example of bypassers giving compliments, as it is entirely different from checking out a ring at arm's length, often without head-obstruction and from a distance, with light-sources situated in the same area as in a pendant.

Live long,

Hey Paul
a better cut looks worse in direct bright sunlight

Hey mate ,

Does it? Or are you too focused on brightness and the number of sparkles? Not saying that you are wrong in this specific light-condition, but the question about focus remains.

Live long,

Try it.
I would be rich if I got a $1 every time someone on this board posted about their lovely new supadupa cut round diamond looking dark in sunlight.

 

[WinkHPD]

Reading this thread, I could not help but chuckle. In that sense, I come to the defense of the poor diamond, being accused of being less reflective, while all circumstantial evidence produced points at the diamond just being the victim of circumstances.

A diamond is a diamond, and light is light, and since the diamond is always going to work in the same way with light, it is not the diamond's fault if light-circumstances are different. The topic is thus not in line with the replies, as the replies hint at light-circumstances being different, and thus another kind of diamond might be more appropriate.

It is funny when I think about it.
Like I always say the first 5 things that affect a diamond performance are:
lighting
lighting
lighting
lighting
lighting

Hey Karl,

I do think that we are not on the same page here, or at least, your chosen wording leaves room for incorrect interpretation.

Yes, lighting affects how a diamond performs, but in the same lighting, a better cut is likely to perform better. If random bypassers compliment somebody about their diamond, it is generally not because of the light-conditions being perfect, it is because the cut of that diamond is better. I am stating the example of bypassers giving compliments, as it is entirely different from checking out a ring at arm's length, often without head-obstruction and from a distance, with light-sources situated in the same area as in a pendant.

Live long,

Hey Paul
a better cut looks worse in direct bright sunlight

Hey mate ,

Does it? Or are you too focused on brightness and the number of sparkles? Not saying that you are wrong in this specific light-condition, but the question about focus remains.

Live long,

Try it.
I would be rich if I got a $1 every time someone on this board posted about their lovely new supadupa cut round diamond looking dark in sunlight.

I still think it is the blood running to your head hanging upside down there down under. I just walked outside with one of my rocks and it did NOT look dark...

Wink

 

[Karl_K]

I still think it is the blood running to your head hanging upside down there down under. I just walked outside with one of my rocks and it did NOT look dark...

Wink

Rofl but Garry is right, it happens and the better cut stones more so and there are a lot of threads where people are concerned about it.
I am so busy looking at the light show that I don't notice it much unless I'm out in the open with nothing around for it to reflect on so I can see the light show.

 

[teobdl]

Hmm, I think Garry and Paul are arguing different points, and neither would actually disagree with the other.

Garry's point is described well by Rhino: "Many people, when viewing their diamond for the first time in direct light conditions often become concerned because of the darkness that appears and oftentimes confuse this as being inferior in color when that in fact is not the case. Even a "D" colored diamond will appear dark in direct lighting..."

Paul's point is described well by Rhino: "...In a well cut stone however ... get your sunglasses ready because amidst the darker facets will appear beautiful flashes of colored light."


Same paragraph (below the 4th picture of this page http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/NewCutGrading/FireDispersion/).

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Well said Teobdl
But:

Hmm, I think Garry and Paul are arguing different points, and neither would actually disagree with the other.

Paul agreed with me once, I think it was june 3rd 2003

 

[WinkHPD]

Oh boy, it is going to be fun going to dinner with you two in Vegas this year...

Wink

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Oh boy, it is going to be fun going to dinner with you two in Vegas this year...

Wink

http://www.icis.com/blogs/wp-conten...mical-connections/arm wrestlers wrestling.jpg
John beat me last year, but I challenge you Paul.
You have 5.5 months to workout Paul!
Meanwhile my PT nearly killed me with 1/2 hour of side jumps, squats and assorted ski training exercises this morning!

 

[iLander]

I have noticed this will happen with colored stones; the color and effect will be COMPLETELY different in a vertical (pendant) versus a horizontal (ring laying flat) setting. I think it's noticeable in colored stones because the dispersion is so much lower than a diamond (well, most of them, anyway). I had an emerald laying flat in a box for 2 years, pretty, but nothing special, just flat green. I tried laying it in several ring settings at a store. Meh. But when it was finally set in a pendant, it glowed all to heck! I was just shocked, actually. I think, under my chin, it gets indirect light from the front only, and it works differently with the crystalline structure than direct light. I'm including a pic, just so you can see what I mean.

As for diamonds, I think it's negligible, because they have so much dispersion. They are cut to return light from all angles, and their crystalline structure lends itself to that.

I'm not a big diamond expert (mostly CS is my thing), but your question reminded me of my pendant surprise.

 

[Karl_K]

They are cut to return light from all angles, and their crystalline structure lends itself to that.

Actually that is mine and Garry's point diamonds are not cut to return light from all angles to the same degree.
They are directional to an extent and you can get cases where they are not looking where the light is coming from and it changes in a pendant where the best place to draw light is from in relation to the diamond.
That there are secondary in the AGS model light sources(green) that are stronger than AGS credits them for makes it less of an issue than ASET and modified ASET would make it appear.

 

[teobdl]

...
That there are secondary in the AGS model light sources(green) that are stronger than AGS credits them for makes it less of an issue than ASET and modified ASET would make it appear.

Not sure I understand that last sentence. Could you please state it another way?

 

[Karl_K]

...
That there are secondary in the AGS model light sources(green) that are stronger than AGS credits them for makes it less of an issue than ASET and modified ASET would make it appear.

Not sure I understand that last sentence. Could you please state it another way?

There is more light and light sources in the 0 to 45 degree range than AGS gives credit for in their ASET system. Windows, lamps, tv sets, computer monitors, strong reflections and other light sources.
In many people's house the primary lighting is in the 0 to 45 range.
In a ring people will move their hand to catch the best light when you bend your hand back towards you at 1/2 to full arm length the degree range and obstruction the diamond is drawing light from is different than looking at the diamond from up close.
Tilt your hand a little side to side and it changes again.
Move your hand back and forth and it is constantly changing creating scintillation.