Regular Guy
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2004
- Messages
- 5,963
This could be said to be inspired by Garry, and his willingness to speak not out of two, but three sides of his mouth.
Readily, frequently, he’ll tell you he’s not one of those who ascribe to the value of H&A, that major houses don’t back it, and can’t find the research base for it, and he’ll even flip the logic for valuing it altogether, and encourage retailers to market “so called” H&A diamonds as IS diamonds, to make a win-win of their situation.
However, recently, he has also encouraged discussion of H&A, pulling discussion back from the brink in “True Hearts” a Technical discussion.
But, most recently, the flavor of a more pedantic effort seems in play, and BN is found to be criticized for not doing H&A the HRD way.
So..what is HRD doing? They are documenting, providing criteria, for what others have been perfecting here, like WF, and as has been documented in Japan, presumably.
Personally…I like what Infinity is doing. They are taking something of a more principled stand, calling the substance of what H&A is, and why it is valued, precision patterning, and representing that their diamonds are these. I think Jonathan in other ways has tried to do the same at GOG.
Regardless…what should a consumer want, and why should they want it.
With H&A, what is available is a set of criteria for diamonds to be matched up against. This, then, can be used by appraisers, and they can make a judgment…met or not met, and in this way, the appraiser can add value.
But, and despite the fact that a pattern was discovered in Asia, and the coincidence associated with it turned into a spin of marketing, the rigorous definition that has been associated with H&A is almost certainly not one that should be valued by a consumer who is looking for performance, and not for an image that goes away from site once it is set in a ring. The fact of the image may provide for a strategy for judging successful execution of the reasonable target of precision patterning, and this may provide something useful for experts to have and do…but keeping the eyes on the prize is what this post is intended to be about.
I do think that Garry questions even the foundations of seeking precision patterning. Maybe that is reasonable. Alternately, maybe it’s a worthwhile target to establish this in any make, whether round, or Princess, or other…and I would personally hope that if an agreement in principle were possible, a more worthwhile target for experts like appraisers would be for them to establish their own set of criteria, whereby precision patterning was identified and confirmed for any sort of make. It is possible this is not such an easy target, and why what HRD is doing is interesting. But the value of the target should be clear, despite the difficulty of the execution.
But…to linger about the empty value of finding whether a heart is muddied by a “tear” in the heart and such…seems to be missing the point of looking for such markers in the diamond in the first place.
P.S. I give Garry a hard time at the beginning of this thread, but I hope he sees the irony and affection. I further hope it becomes clear I do wish to give the appraiser community a hard time in this thread, because I believe their voice has been a quiet one of conservative support for a standard that has teeth enough so that they really, credibly, can be said to have done something worthwhile, but where really, the target for their effort will have been obscured...until it is clarified still.
Readily, frequently, he’ll tell you he’s not one of those who ascribe to the value of H&A, that major houses don’t back it, and can’t find the research base for it, and he’ll even flip the logic for valuing it altogether, and encourage retailers to market “so called” H&A diamonds as IS diamonds, to make a win-win of their situation.
However, recently, he has also encouraged discussion of H&A, pulling discussion back from the brink in “True Hearts” a Technical discussion.
But, most recently, the flavor of a more pedantic effort seems in play, and BN is found to be criticized for not doing H&A the HRD way.
So..what is HRD doing? They are documenting, providing criteria, for what others have been perfecting here, like WF, and as has been documented in Japan, presumably.
Personally…I like what Infinity is doing. They are taking something of a more principled stand, calling the substance of what H&A is, and why it is valued, precision patterning, and representing that their diamonds are these. I think Jonathan in other ways has tried to do the same at GOG.
Regardless…what should a consumer want, and why should they want it.
With H&A, what is available is a set of criteria for diamonds to be matched up against. This, then, can be used by appraisers, and they can make a judgment…met or not met, and in this way, the appraiser can add value.
But, and despite the fact that a pattern was discovered in Asia, and the coincidence associated with it turned into a spin of marketing, the rigorous definition that has been associated with H&A is almost certainly not one that should be valued by a consumer who is looking for performance, and not for an image that goes away from site once it is set in a ring. The fact of the image may provide for a strategy for judging successful execution of the reasonable target of precision patterning, and this may provide something useful for experts to have and do…but keeping the eyes on the prize is what this post is intended to be about.
I do think that Garry questions even the foundations of seeking precision patterning. Maybe that is reasonable. Alternately, maybe it’s a worthwhile target to establish this in any make, whether round, or Princess, or other…and I would personally hope that if an agreement in principle were possible, a more worthwhile target for experts like appraisers would be for them to establish their own set of criteria, whereby precision patterning was identified and confirmed for any sort of make. It is possible this is not such an easy target, and why what HRD is doing is interesting. But the value of the target should be clear, despite the difficulty of the execution.
But…to linger about the empty value of finding whether a heart is muddied by a “tear” in the heart and such…seems to be missing the point of looking for such markers in the diamond in the first place.
P.S. I give Garry a hard time at the beginning of this thread, but I hope he sees the irony and affection. I further hope it becomes clear I do wish to give the appraiser community a hard time in this thread, because I believe their voice has been a quiet one of conservative support for a standard that has teeth enough so that they really, credibly, can be said to have done something worthwhile, but where really, the target for their effort will have been obscured...until it is clarified still.
300x240.png)