IS and ASET images - ideal, or just ok?

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:29:19 PM
Author: Allison D.


Storm, nice try.........but we aren''t talking about the whole of Expert Selection inventory here, and you know it.

We are talking about ONE stone.......and that stone has been visually inspected by Brian and given a thumbs up.

As for painting disappearing or not......does it ever occur to you demand for such stones might be down due to the same type of fear-mongering going on in this thread?

Let''s get back to the facts of this stone.

1. Brian has visually inspected the stone, and he''s said it''s a great stone in his learned, experienced, expert opinion.

2. No one else participating in this thread has laid his/her own eyes on this stone, so any other input (however
helpful) is purely speculative.

Which criteria was used in the evaluation?
quality or value.. you dont know and neither do I.

 

[Stephan]

2. No one else participating in this thread has laid his/her own eyes on this stone, so any other input (however
helpful) is purely speculative.

Sorry Alj, I understand your anger.
This stone is surely very nice, and Brian is very honnest.
Storm should not make new customers afraid.

But you can''t say that any other input is speculative.
Paul''s input is professional, for example. I don''t think he is "speculating".
And even other inputs are wellcome, this is a forum.

And when I say that I think this diamond isn''t painted, it is because of the comparison I do with the mine, the IS is attached below.
Am I wrong?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:27:29 PM
Author: strmrdr
The vendors opinion of the diamond and Brian''s in particular opinion(when buying from WF) on a diamond is an important part of the buying decision, teaching consumers which questions and when too ask them is our job.
See one post up.

strm, I really was going to stay out of this after my last post, but since you seem to be in it for the long haul, what the hell, I''m game!

The thing is, you didn''t tell the poster to ask about it, you said it was a stone that you wouldn''t buy. Moreless called it a yuck stone. That''s a far stretch from suggesting he ask about the IS.

And, I find it curious that you referred to Brian as a "good guy" (which he is), yet just a few short posts ago, you were moreless accusing him of trying to pawn off a crappy stone. Which is it?

 

[Stephan]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:43:05 PM
Author: QueenMum
Sorry Alj, I understand your anger.
This stone is surely very nice, and Brian is very honnest.
Storm should not make new customers afraid.

But you can''t say that any other input is speculative.
Paul''s input is professional, for example. I don''t think he is ''speculating''.
And even other inputs are wellcome, this is a forum.

And when I say that I think this diamond isn''t painted, it is because of the comparison I do with the mine, the IS is attached below.
Am I wrong?

Sorry, here is the file.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:35:53 PM
Author: Allison D.

I agree with this premise, but what you did earlier in this thread didn''t constitute either.

Stating unequivocally that the diamond is painted (definitely, I believe you said) AND stating that the diamond is deficient in scintillation is NEITHER ''teaching someone to ask a question'' or ''teaching him when to ask''.

To help you learn, Storm, here is an example of how that could have been accomplished.

''The IS/ASET/whatever image raises the possibility the diamond might be brillianteered. You should ask about that and any possible effects it might have on scintillation when you talk to the vendor about the diamond.''

I stated a personal opinion that I would not buy the stone in question.
Then a question was asked what effect does painting have,, I answered.
Then if the diamond is painted was raised, I presented proof that it was.
A vendor rep attempting too tell me what too say and how too say it.

tsk tsk not good. Wont work you don''t have that level of influence and frankly you never will.

 

[Stephan]

By the way, I think that painting a diamond could be good for steep/deep combos (35/41).
By painting such diamonds, you reduce the angle between upper and lower girdle.
Or am I missing something?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:48:57 PM
Author: QueenMum
By the way, I think that painting a diamond could be good for steep/deep combos (35/41).
By painting such diamonds, you reduce the angle between upper and lower girdle.
Or am I missing something?

With a larger table it can/may/could help in some configurations.

woops make that...

With a larger table it may/might/possibly help in some configurations.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:46:17 PM
Author: QueenMum

Sorry, here is the file.

different photo setup so not directly comparable and your stone is more evenly painted.

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:36:21 PM
Author: strmrdr
Which criteria was used in the evaluation?
quality or value.. you dont know and neither do I.

Storm, yes, I actually do know. As my predecessors before me were, I am privvy to that information because I work for Brian.

The stone is an almost-ACA. It just missed the brand and is in no way deficient in light performance, brilliance, scintillation, or any other performance-based result.

There is no painting on the pavilion.

There is slight painting on the crown. The average degree of painting is 4.2; none of the individual facets even rises to the level of 6 degrees; therefore, there is no reduction in performance under the table or on the girdle.

As a refresher for you or as new reading for those who''ve not yet read the journal article on Pricescope about painting, please refer to this: http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/45/9/Visible-Effects-of-Painting--Digging-on-Superideal-Diamonds.aspx.

As noted in this article, there is no visual impact until you reach 6-7 degrees.

Based on our extensive submission of similar goods to both AGS and GIA, we''re confident this stone would not incur any penalty under either grading system.

I''ll say it again.....Brian has visually inspected this stone and has given it a thumbs up for its superior performance.

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:43:05 PM
Author: QueenMum

2. No one else participating in this thread has laid his/her own eyes on this stone, so any other input (however
helpful) is purely speculative.

Sorry Alj, I understand your anger.
This stone is surely very nice, and Brian is very honnest.
Storm should not make new customers afraid.

But you can''t say that any other input is speculative.
Paul''s input is professional, for example. I don''t think he is ''speculating''.
And even other inputs are wellcome, this is a forum.

And when I say that I think this diamond isn''t painted, it is because of the comparison I do with the mine, the IS is attached below.
Am I wrong?

Stefan, no worries.....I''m not angry. I''m just a sticker for facts.

You''re right.......Paul''s input is absolutely professional, and what did Paul say?

"Not ''definitely'' painted.
Not necessarily the negative effects, that you described, and definitely not so in such a black/white-manner."

In other words, it is a responsible post that says ''it may or may not be painted, and even if it is, it may or may not have negative effects.''. That''s vastly different than a hobbyist saying ''it''s definitely painted" and stating with certainty that it will negatively affect scintillation.

Yes, I agree that the forum is a place for opinions and various inputs.....done RESPONSIBLY. Stating an opinion as fact on a diamond one has never seen just isn''t responsible in my opinion, and based on the many responses in this thread, I''d say I''m not the only one who feels that way.

The difference, Stephan, is that you''re saying "I think" instead of IT IS and DEFINITELY. Yours is framed as an opinion.

 

[strmrdr]

4+ is well inside the range of getting knocked down by GIA and depending on the combo AGS.
Btw I estimated 4.25 using DC within .05 pretty good for virtual eh :}
Anyway Im off too get some work done!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2008 4:38:57 PM
Author: Allison D.

Stefan, no worries.....I''m not angry. I''m just a sticker for facts.

You''re right.......Paul''s input is absolutely professional, and what did Paul say?

''Not ''definitely'' painted.
Not necessarily the negative effects, that you described, and definitely not so in such a black/white-manner.''

In other words, it is a responsible post that says ''it may or may not be painted, and even if it is, it may or may not have negative effects.''. That''s vastly different than a hobbyist saying ''it''s definitely painted'' and stating with certainty that it will negatively affect scintillation.

Yes, I agree that the forum is a place for opinions and various inputs.....done RESPONSIBLY. Stating an opinion as fact on a diamond one has never seen just isn''t responsible in my opinion, and based on the many responses in this thread, I''d say I''m not the only one who feels that way.

The difference, Stephan, is that you''re saying ''I think'' instead of IT IS and DEFINITELY. Yours is framed as an opinion.

hmmm and it was painted and I was within .05 degrees of getting the degree of painting right just by looking at ASET images. That is closer than some scanners can get actualy measuring the diamond.

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 4/22/2008 3:48:40 PM
Author: strmrdr
I stated a personal opinion that I would not buy the stone in question.

Storm, I actually don''t have a problem with you saying you wouldn''t buy it. That''s you expressing your buying preference, which is subjective and non-factually based. That''s not the issue.

Then a question was asked what effect does painting have,, I answered.

That''s not correct. You went beyond answering what effect painting has and opined on what effect painting has in this stone by implying you knew to what level the stone was painted and opining on how it''s affecting THIS stone.

The predicted AGS cut score goes from 0-1 border with no painting too a 3-4 border with that level of painting.

reduces contrast and on/off scint.
in some combos its not that big a deal in this one it is.


Since you haven''t seen the diamond or the scan files, you aren''t privvy to information about what degree this diamond was painted to. "That" level of painting is an average of 4.2 degrees....which has NO visible effect on the diamond''s performance as per the journal article referenced above.

A vendor rep attempting too tell me what too say and how too say it.

tsk tsk not good. Wont work you don''t have that level of influence and frankly you never will.

I''m not telling you what to say, Storm. I''m telling you that what you said goes beyond offering an opinion and goes beyond the mere suggestion that a given effect bears further homework.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2008 4:53:51 PM
Author: Allison D.

Date: 4/22/2008 3:48:40 PM
Author: strmrdr
I stated a personal opinion that I would not buy the stone in question.

Storm, I actually don''t have a problem with you saying you wouldn''t buy it. That''s you expressing your buying preference, which is subjective and non-factually based. That''s not the issue.

Then a question was asked what effect does painting have,, I answered.

That''s not correct. You went beyond answering what effect painting has and opined on what effect painting has in this stone by implying you knew to what level the stone was painted and opining on how it''s affecting THIS stone.

The predicted AGS cut score goes from 0-1 border with no painting too a 3-4 border with that level of painting.

reduces contrast and on/off scint.
in some combos its not that big a deal in this one it is.


Since you haven''t seen the diamond or the scan files, you aren''t privvy to information about what degree this diamond was painted to. ''That'' level of painting is an average of 4.2 degrees....which has NO visible effect on the diamond''s performance as per the journal article referenced above.

A vendor rep attempting too tell me what too say and how too say it.

tsk tsk not good. Wont work you don''t have that level of influence and frankly you never will.

I''m not telling you what to say, Storm. I''m telling you that what you said goes beyond offering an opinion and goes beyond the mere suggestion that a given effect bears further homework.

lol alj I was within .05 on the level of painting and the predicted AGS score did drop.

GIA will strongly agree with Brian''s opinion that there is no effect.
Actualy if there is no effect then why do it.
The fact that scint is effected by crown painting is a fact.
If I really cared I could find post after post of the much missed JohnQ saying so too :}

 

[TorontoBuyer]

Wow - look what I''ve started!

So I''ve spoken to WF, and they''ve re-re-confirmed (as posted here by Allison) that the level of crown painting will not impact performance, and Brian recommends the stone. I now feel good about things and have decided to proceed with the purchase. I will now move on to obsessing over setting choices and metals - another WG vs. platinum vs. palladium discussion, anyone?

I want to thank everyone again for the input and insight. I do value dissenting opinions (strm) and constructive debate, though would tend to agree with Allison that the choice of phrasing might have made the situation seem more dire than it may actually be. The fact that I read it at 2am might have been a factor, too.

Thanks again. And sorry if this has implied a lack of trust in Brian or WF... what can I say, it''s in my nature to question things, especially large purchases. Don''t get me started on how long it took me to buy my house!

Cheers all.

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 4/22/2008 5:42:15 PM
Author: TorontoBuyer
Wow - look what I''ve started!

So I''ve spoken to WF, and they''ve re-re-confirmed (as posted here by Allison) that the level of crown painting will not impact performance, and Brian recommends the stone. I now feel good about things and have decided to proceed with the purchase. I will now move on to obsessing over setting choices and metals - another WG vs. platinum vs. palladium discussion, anyone?

I want to thank everyone again for the input and insight. I do value dissenting opinions (strm) and constructive debate, though would tend to agree with Allison that the choice of phrasing might have made the situation seem more dire than it may actually be. The fact that I read it at 2am might have been a factor, too.

Thanks again. And sorry if this has implied a lack of trust in Brian or WF... what can I say, it''s in my nature to question things, especially large purchases. Don''t get me started on how long it took me to buy my house!

Cheers all.

Thanks, Toronto - you succinctly summed up what I and many others have been trying to say in this thread to no apparent avail.

Please, Toronto........do not apologize for asking questions.

Questions themselves are great tools; they help us learn and they benefit the many consumers here. I started out here just like you five years ago.....a consumer with a ton of questions designed to help me feel confident and at-ease with my judgment and buying decisions.

You''re doing all the right things to help yourself make a smart purchase, and I applaud that.

Questions are *never* the problem......and neither are responsible answers.

 

[Ellen]

TB, congrats on your purchase, you''ve got a great stone. All we ask is pics of the finished product!

And don''t worry that you started anything, you just got lucky.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2008 5:42:15 PM
Author: TorontoBuyer
Wow - look what I''ve started!

So I''ve spoken to WF, and they''ve re-re-confirmed (as posted here by Allison) that the level of crown painting will not impact performance, and Brian recommends the stone. I now feel good about things and have decided to proceed with the purchase. I will now move on to obsessing over setting choices and metals - another WG vs. platinum vs. palladium discussion, anyone?

I want to thank everyone again for the input and insight. I do value dissenting opinions (strm) and constructive debate, though would tend to agree with Allison that the choice of phrasing might have made the situation seem more dire than it may actually be. The fact that I read it at 2am might have been a factor, too.

Thanks again. And sorry if this has implied a lack of trust in Brian or WF... what can I say, it''s in my nature to question things, especially large purchases. Don''t get me started on how long it took me to buy my house!

Cheers all.

congrates!!
I answered at 1am here but would have said basicaly the same thing at any time but maybe in different words maybe not.

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 4/22/2008 4:53:51 PM
Author: Allison D.

Date: 4/22/2008 3:48:40 PM

Since you haven''t seen the diamond or the scan files, you aren''t privvy to information about what degree this diamond was painted to. ''That'' level of painting is an average of 4.2 degrees....which has NO visible effect on the diamond''s performance as per the journal article referenced above.

By the time I realized I had omitted the word negative, it was too late to edit, so I''ll edit here for the sake of posterity and correctness in this thread:

''That'' level of painting is an average of 4.2 degrees....which has NO negative visible effect on the diamond''s performance as per the journal article referenced above.

 

[Showmethefire]

Date: 4/22/2008 5:42:15 PM
Author: TorontoBuyer
Wow - look what I''ve started!

So I''ve spoken to WF, and they''ve re-re-confirmed (as posted here by Allison) that the level of crown painting will not impact performance, and Brian recommends the stone. I now feel good about things and have decided to proceed with the purchase. I will now move on to obsessing over setting choices and metals - another WG vs. platinum vs. palladium discussion, anyone?

I want to thank everyone again for the input and insight. I do value dissenting opinions (strm) and constructive debate, though would tend to agree with Allison that the choice of phrasing might have made the situation seem more dire than it may actually be. The fact that I read it at 2am might have been a factor, too.

Thanks again. And sorry if this has implied a lack of trust in Brian or WF... what can I say, it''s in my nature to question things, especially large purchases. Don''t get me started on how long it took me to buy my house!

Cheers all.

Hi Toronto,
Congrats! and all the best!
I think we can all lay this issue to rest already. If not, there will be no end to it.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/22/2008 9:00:12 AM
Author: TorontoBuyer
Thanks so much for all the responses. I really appreciate both positive and negative views... my take here is ''trust, but verify''. So I''ll ask Brian about the possible painting, just to be sure. Hope I don''t offend him by doing so. I did ask for the .srn file (Sarin) but was told it''s against WF policy.

I haven''t yet had time to re-read the digging/painting tutorial on GOG, but the info is in my head somewhere... swimming around with target lgf% figures, side stone proportion figures, and a ton of other info from this site. Honestly, it''s all great - I don''t mind being overwhelmed. It''s part of the fun.

For those interested, here is the stone: http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-60339.htm# Didn''t post it earlier for fear of having it snapped up before I could decide to buy. Angles are 34.9/40.8 (though the Sarin shows 35/41).

I''ll post back once/if I get a response regarding the potential painting.

Cheers

Well I am glad I arrived here a little too late!!!
For the record my opinion after a quick scan of the thread:

1. Naughty Storm, please use some more polite words
2. It is immediately apparent the stone is painted, but it is not as painted as the more extreme 8* examples that changed some peoples opinions.
3. Even those 8*''s often make AGS 0
4. Somone asked the reduction in scintillation etc - you would drop some appearance of a larger number of facets, but the overall contrast will become stonger between main and minor facets. It is not an either or answer.
5. the stone would appear larger than a non painted stone of the same proportions because the light return at the edges is enhanced.
6. stones that are deeper steeper than Tolkowsky benefit a little from painting in my opinion. (This stone is just a teensy bit steeper deeper depending on which you believe - the AGS 2004 scanner and the recent? WF scanner.)
7. I see no reason why AGS would not give this stone AGS 0 for performance today.
8. GIA has not ''tested'' painting and digging very well. Their rules are similar for top and bottom, and for painting as they are for digging, and that is wrong, so they ought not be cited in such debates.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2008 5:47:34 PM
Author: Allison D.

Date: 4/22/2008 5:42:15 PM
Author: TorontoBuyer
Wow - look what I've started!

So I've spoken to WF, and they've re-re-confirmed (as posted here by Allison) that the level of crown painting will not impact performance, and Brian recommends the stone. I now feel good about things and have decided to proceed with the purchase. I will now move on to obsessing over setting choices and metals - another WG vs. platinum vs. palladium discussion, anyone?

I want to thank everyone again for the input and insight. I do value dissenting opinions (strm) and constructive debate, though would tend to agree with Allison that the choice of phrasing might have made the situation seem more dire than it may actually be. The fact that I read it at 2am might have been a factor, too.

Thanks again. And sorry if this has implied a lack of trust in Brian or WF... what can I say, it's in my nature to question things, especially large purchases. Don't get me started on how long it took me to buy my house!

Cheers all.

Thanks, Toronto - you succinctly summed up what I and many others have been trying to say in this thread to no apparent avail.

Please, Toronto........do not apologize for asking questions.

Questions themselves are great tools; they help us learn and they benefit the many consumers here. I started out here just like you five years ago.....a consumer with a ton of questions designed to help me feel confident and at-ease with my judgment and buying decisions.

You're doing all the right things to help yourself make a smart purchase, and I applaud that.

Questions are *never* the problem......and neither are responsible answers.

Many congrats to you Toronto on a FABULOUS diamond in my opinion!!! In my opinion and that of some others obviously, it should be that the trusted vendor should always have the final say on a diamond he can physically see. With the greatest respect to my fellow consumers, and I will also be remembering this,

any opinions we consumer hobbyists offer, should always take a back seat to that of a trusted, known, expert vendor who can physically examine the diamond, and where he has offered an opinion to a potential buyer. Especially if our personal preference is influencing our opinion, and that opinion may scare a buyer away from a perfectly good stone. I truly believe this is the right approach which will serve those who come here in need of advice the best.

 

[Cleo]

Date: 4/23/2008 4:20:01 AM
Author: Lorelei

Many congrats to you Toronto on a FABULOUS diamond in my opinion!!! In my opinion and that of some others obviously, it should be that the trusted vendor should always have the final say on a diamond he can physically see. With the greatest respect to my fellow consumers, and I will also be remembering this,

any opinions we consumer hobbyists offer, should always take a back seat to that of a trusted, known, expert vendor who can physically examine the diamond, and where he has offered an opinion to a potential buyer. Especially if our personal preference is influencing our opinion, and that opinion may scare a buyer away from a perfectly good stone. I truly believe this is the right approach which will serve those who come here in need of advice the best.

Congratulations Toronto - I bet you and your future fiancee will absolutely LOVE it!!

Well said Lorelei, although I think the words ''trusted, known and expert'' cannot be emphasised enough.

x x x

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/23/2008 5:30:04 AM
Author: Cleo

Date: 4/23/2008 4:20:01 AM
Author: Lorelei

Many congrats to you Toronto on a FABULOUS diamond in my opinion!!! In my opinion and that of some others obviously, it should be that the trusted vendor should always have the final say on a diamond he can physically see. With the greatest respect to my fellow consumers, and I will also be remembering this,

any opinions we consumer hobbyists offer, should always take a back seat to that of a trusted, known, expert vendor who can physically examine the diamond, and where he has offered an opinion to a potential buyer. Especially if our personal preference is influencing our opinion, and that opinion may scare a buyer away from a perfectly good stone. I truly believe this is the right approach which will serve those who come here in need of advice the best.

Congratulations Toronto - I bet you and your future fiancee will absolutely LOVE it!!

Well said Lorelei, although I think the words ''trusted, known and expert'' cannot be emphasised enough.

x x x

Thanks Cleo