Learning to understand 360 degree videos

[Gav]

hi all

I was hoping to get some advice/schooling from the community as to how to interpret the 360 degree videos that come with diamonds online ( often this is the only thing I get aside from the GIA certificate ). What purpose do these videos serve and what features can you find out about a stone simply studying the video ? For example can you tell if a stone will be hazy/ dull based on a 360 degree video?

I attach an example of one video I’ve been shown. I have no idea how to interpret it but when i compare it to some other videos I see on say Blue Nile, the diamond looks a bit dull (not sure if it’s the lighting used).

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

http://118.143.133.146/GemKOnline/D...ision360.html?d=6292494470&sm=1&btn=1,2,3,4,5

 

[icy_jade]

I used mine (from AGS) to look at the inclusions. Really helpful since I got a SI2 stone.

I think different vendors use different lighting which affects how the diamond will look in the video? Some vendors do explain the lighting used for those videos so may be worth checking.

 

[Rockdiamond]

There's a number of systems available on the market.
In most cases, the user does not control lighting.
This has pluses and minuses.
It's good because it takes operator judgment out of the picture.
It's bad for the same reason.

Sometimes a stone reacts to the lighting in ways that are not consistent with what you'll see in real life.
That's where using judgment would be a positive thing.

Same for imperfections- sometimes the video makes them look far worse than they do in person.
The most commonly used systems have the diamond laying on the pavilion.
IMO, this is not a good angle in terms of perspective.
Important to remember that the whole idea of mass marketing means they need to take lots of videos, and quickly.
Al this means that comparing one system to another is difficult at best.
There's plenty of reasons a stone might appear dull- and not all of them due to an actual dullness....

 

[John P]

Pros
-Confidence builder
-Extremes may get revealed
-Diamonds in same setup, same camera settings, same lighting can potentially be compared

Cons
-Camera settings and lighting vary, even day to day in the same setup
-Differences in obstruction (proximity of lens) change appearance notably
-Translating clarity implications to real-life is impossible due to single focal depth
-3D elements get flattened to 2D
-Graining/clouds/haze or fingerprints/grease?
-Pinpoints/crystals or dust/detritus?

Unknown environments are also at-play. Diamonds reflect-back what surrounds them. Ceilings and walls influence appearance. If it's an open area and the photographer is wearing a yellow shirt the diamond will show some element of yellow. Conversely there are ways to change the environment so the diamond shows less of its body color.

 

[Gav]

Pros
-Confidence builder
-Extremes may get revealed
-Diamonds in same setup, same camera settings, same lighting can potentially be compared

Cons
-Camera settings and lighting vary, even day to day in the same setup
-Differences in obstruction (proximity of lens) change appearance notably
-Translating clarity implications to real-life is impossible due to single focal depth
-3D elements get flattened to 2D
-Graining/clouds/haze or fingerprints/grease?
-Pinpoints/crystals or dust/detritus?

Unknown environments are also at-play. Diamonds reflect-back what surrounds them. Ceilings and walls influence appearance. If it's an open area and the photographer is wearing a yellow shirt the diamond will show some element of yellow. Conversely there are ways to change the environment so the diamond shows less of its body color.

Hi John
When you mentioned graining/clouds /hazy as a con, did you mean these features would not typically be detected in one of these types of videos?

Thanks
Gavin

 

[sledge]

Hi John
When you mentioned graining/clouds /hazy as a con, did you mean these features would not typically be detected in one of these types of videos?

Thanks
Gavin

@John Pollard is much smarter than me and I wouldn't speak on his behalf; however, I interpreted that statement to mean the con was you couldn't tell if a stone was truly grainy / cloudy / hazy or the stone just had grease or fingerprints on it from handling and it made it appear that way.

As I'm sure you know, it matters not how well cut and beautiful of a stone you buy -- it will look bad if it isn't squeaky clean.

 

[Gav]

@John Pollard is much smarter than me and I wouldn't speak on his behalf; however, I interpreted that statement to mean the con was you couldn't tell if a stone was truly grainy / cloudy / hazy or the stone just had grease or fingerprints on it from handling and it made it appear that way.

As I'm sure you know, it matters not how well cut and beautiful of a stone you buy -- it will look bad if it isn't squeaky clean.

Thanks for the expert comments. so basically a grain of salt and the video is again more of a screen for the more obvious flaws eg coloured inclusions that may not be obvious or otherwise mentioned in verticals

 

[Serg]

Pros
-Confidence builder
-Extremes may get revealed
-Diamonds in same setup, same camera settings, same lighting can potentially be compared

Cons
-Camera settings and lighting vary, even day to day in the same setup
-Differences in obstruction (proximity of lens) change appearance notably
-Translating clarity implications to real-life is impossible due to single focal depth
-3D elements get flattened to 2D
-Graining/clouds/haze or fingerprints/grease?
-Pinpoints/crystals or dust/detritus?

Unknown environments are also at-play. Diamonds reflect-back what surrounds them. Ceilings and walls influence appearance. If it's an open area and the photographer is wearing a yellow shirt the diamond will show some element of yellow. Conversely there are ways to change the environment so the diamond shows less of its body color.

Hi John,

re:-3D elements get flattened to 2D

Dibox2.0 movies you can see in stereo( by Google cardboard for example)
https://cutwise.com/widget/v1/6_T898?template=media-metrics-v1

please check Darkfield movie


Camera settings , light are same each time
you can easy compare different clarity grades in same conditions


SI1/SI2 samples
https://cutwise.com/~KqKK

VVS1-I3 samples
https://cutwise.com/~-9jO


re:-Graining/clouds/haze or fingerprints/grease?

Sometimes we see even graining , Twinning wisp even better than in loupe .
VVS inclusions are not always visible , but if it is necessary we can show even VVS1( it is necessary open aperture and use 4K 3DTV stereo)

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

hi all

I was hoping to get some advice/schooling from the community as to how to interpret the 360 degree videos that come with diamonds online ( often this is the only thing I get aside from the GIA certificate ). What purpose do these videos serve and what features can you find out about a stone simply studying the video ? For example can you tell if a stone will be hazy/ dull based on a 360 degree video?

I attach an example of one video I’ve been shown. I have no idea how to interpret it but when i compare it to some other videos I see on say Blue Nile, the diamond looks a bit dull (not sure if it’s the lighting used).

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

http://118.143.133.146/GemKOnline/D...ision360.html?d=6292494470&sm=1&btn=1,2,3,4,5

If you are experienced with individual systems, maybe, although most are devoid of short wavelength light so will not show if a diamond is dull because of fluorescence.
In this image I have taken 2 halves split vertical of 2 VS2 diamonds. The one on the right is an 'HONEST' VS2 with near visible inclusions. On the left is what GIA should be subjected to a class action for not protecting consumers rights. It is essentially loupe clean at 10X and hazy. These diamonds were both filmed in ViBox as video's. Sergey has posted mark II version of this photographic system below with huge leaps forward. However one doubts sales companies and labs have much incentive to kill sales.

Would you like to post the GIA report if there is one for the sont video you posted - it does appear a little hazy.

 

[Gav]

Hi Garry

The GIA is attached, the stone has been sold but I was contemplating it for a while until I learnt 33.5 was too shallow a crown

On paper I’m would have thought it was ok but the image seemed a bit dull compared to a few I’ve seen out there

 

[Gav]

Thanks for sending through the pictures, I can see the difference between the two halves, the contrast is apparent and the left is clearly a different appearance!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Should not be cloudy

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Who said 33.5 was too shallow?
With 40.8. Some one may be analy attentive

 

[Todd Gray]

You can tell plenty about a diamond from an HD video, but I still prefer to have access to ASET, Ideal Scope, and H&A Scope images just to verify what I'm seeing.

Drag the diamond in the video into the face-up position and what do you see?


I'll give you a hint.

Look at 11 o'clock.

 

[Gav]

Who said 33.5 was too shallow?
With 40.8. Some one may be analy attentive

So 33.5 does work with 40.8? A couple of forum members mentioned it would be too shallow leading to dullness up close?

 

[Gav]

You can tell plenty about a diamond from an HD video, but I still prefer to have access to ASET, Ideal Scope, and H&A Scope images just to verify what I'm seeing.

Drag the diamond in the video into the face-up position and what do you see?


I'll give you a hint.

Look at 11 o'clock.

Hi Todd
Are u referring to the black under the table? How do I interpret that?
Thanks

 

[Todd Gray]

Hi Todd
Are u referring to the black under the table? How do I interpret that?
Thanks

I am referring to the black asymmetrical triangles that appear underneath the table facet.

So, whatever is going on in that region of the diamond (yes, I know what it is) is making that region of the table facet darker than the rest, is that really what you want in a diamond?

With regards to whether a 33.5 degree crown angle is too shallow, it depends on the type of sparkle and light performance YOU prefer in an ideal cut diamond.

A shallower crown angle is likely to produce a higher amount of brilliance, whereas a steeper crown angle is likely to produce more dispersion, but the sweet spot that delivers a virtual balance of both is between 34.3 - 35.0 degrees in my experience.

At the same time, if the diamond isn't polished to exhibit a higher degree of optical precision (which the labs don't account for) it might still leak light, so be sure to get ahold of ASET, Ideal Scope, and H&A Scope images if you want to make a more informed decision.

 

[HDer]

@Serg I love the design of cutwise.com. Looks like a PriceScoper's dream!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I am referring to the black asymmetrical triangles that appear underneath the table facet.

So, whatever is going on in that region of the diamond (yes, I know what it is) is making that region of the table facet darker than the rest, is that really what you want in a diamond? Todd the stone is tilted
More interesting is you can see one of the clouds over the dark facets and that is reassuring because it is too small to have much impact on light performance.
With regards to whether a 33.5 degree crown angle is too shallow, it depends on the type of sparkle and light performance YOU prefer in an ideal cut diamond.

A shallower crown angle is likely to produce a higher amount of brilliance, whereas a steeper crown angle is likely to produce more dispersion, but the sweet spot that delivers a virtual balance of both is between 34.3 - 35.0 degrees in my experience. Todd I do not see a huge difference between owning a dianomd with more brilliance or one with more fire. But what I do see is this stone has a big spread, and I think this buyer would choose this stone over a 40.6/35 6.8mm stone.

At the same time, if the diamond isn't polished to exhibit a higher degree of optical precision (which the labs don't account for) it might still leak light, so be sure to get ahold of ASET, Ideal Scope, and H&A Scope images if you want to make a more informed decision. Agree, but from the slightly tilted image it looks pretty good to me. Have I ever offered you the $1,000 bet? I choose 10 stones, some are H&A's some are not (I will make sure the not ones are clearly not HA B grades) - you have to pick all 10 with just your eyes.

 

[Karl_K]

I going to agree with Todd and disagree with him.
Some of my favorite diamonds have 34 crowns and 33.5 can be ok with the right pavilion but it is on the line.
As to what he is seeing in the image from the video, there is a good chance this is another one with wide ranging pavilion facets and twisted lowers to bring it into gia EX symmetry. An ASET or IS would confirm it.
The video is not conclusive but it strongly points to it.
There is at least one cutter that used to cut a lot of nice h&a stones that is cutting a lot of these twisted lower gia ex stones.

 

[HDer]

Has anyone won your $1000 bet yet?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Has anyone won your $1000 bet yet?

No one is game to take it HDer

 

[yssie]

No one is game to take it HDer

I will.
Send 'em over. Make them nice and big and clean please - easier to see optical patterning in larger less-included stones, obviously.
Don't worry if you don't hear back for a few years. I'll take good care of them.

 

[Gav]

Hi all

How does the above image compare to this one? There also appears to be substantial black at 11 o’clock

The crown is 34 pavilion 40.6 table 58

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Going back to the original question, let me share how I feel about videos of diamonds.

On the one hand, it is a marketing-tool, and with more and more suppliers offering the video, it becomes kind of a necessity to also offer them.

However, I do have mixed feelings about them. At the end of the day, the presence of videos and consumers trying to check them out creates far more attention to the C of Clarity. Now, of the 4 C's, my feeling is that the C of Clarity is one of lesser importance. And with more attention to Clarity, the likelihood of attention for the C of Cut-quality diminishing, is high. Thus, I see a risk of the video detracting consumers from what is more important to what is less important.

All in all, I am not a huge fan, I guess.

Live long,

 

[Gav]

So what do you think of the above picture? Does it tell much?

It’s a VS2 G 1.3 with faint fluorescence

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Going back to the original question, let me share how I feel about videos of diamonds.

On the one hand, it is a marketing-tool, and with more and more suppliers offering the video, it becomes kind of a necessity to also offer them.

However, I do have mixed feelings about them. At the end of the day, the presence of videos and consumers trying to check them out creates far more attention to the C of Clarity. Now, of the 4 C's, my feeling is that the C of Clarity is one of lesser importance. And with more attention to Clarity, the likelihood of attention for the C of Cut-quality diminishing, is high. Thus, I see a risk of the video detracting consumers from what is more important to what is less important.

All in all, I am not a huge fan, I guess.

Live long,

Paul I agree.
I doubt even the best PS observer's can see all the inclusions as most of the videos are single focal length (not stacked) and identification of dulling clouds is very hard if not impossible.
Because lighting is unkown or unknowable I am not happy about people making cut quality recommendations or warnings. Especially with fancy shapes.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

So what do you think of the above picture? Does it tell much?

It’s a VS2 G 1.3 with faint fluorescence

Hi Gav,

The info aside from the pic tells me the following: GIA graded it, and determined that they see it as weighing 1.30 Ct., with a G-color and a VS2 Clarity, Faint fluo. The video, nor the picture lead me to call any of this incorrect.

On top of that, GIA measured certain angles, averaged them and rounded them in a way that few find to make sense, leading to you stating that the pavilion angle is 40.6, crown angle 34.0 and table size is 58%. I know that while the info is largely insufficient, these measurements are promising enough to further investigate the diamond, with regards to cut-quality. Unfortunately again, the video or the pic do not really help in that further investigation.

As you can see, I personally have little use for the pic or the video. In comparison, I find the value of working with a trusted vendor far higher than such videos.

Live long,

 

[OoohShiny]

Paul I agree.
I doubt even the best PS observer's can see all the inclusions as most of the videos are single focal length (not stacked) and identification of dulling clouds is very hard if not impossible.
Because lighting is unkown or unknowable I am not happy about people making cut quality recommendations or warnings. Especially with fancy shapes.

Hi Garry,

I hear what you are saying!

I'm not sure there is a better method at present, though, is there? Other than bringing stones in for individual assessment in-person?

That would get expensive for consumers!