Performance and the p3 facets, a discussion about step cut diamonds.

[psadmin]

There is a new article on Pricescope journal by Karl K ( strmrdr ).

Performance and the p3 facets, a discussion about step cut diamonds.

http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/60/1/Performance-and-the-p3-facets%2c-a-discussion-about-step-cut-diamonds.aspxhttp://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/58/1/“Appraise-the-Appraiser”---Help-for-Consumers.aspx

I want to thank him for his contribution to the Pricescope community.

Andrey
PS Admin

 

[Skippy123]

Karl, great article

I love all the visuals since I learn best visually and makes it easier to understand, thank you and I am sure it will help many people looking for an Asscher!

 

[strmrdr]

Thank you Andrey for the time and effort spent putting it up and for the opportunity to publish it.

Thank you for the kind words Skippy!!!

 

[Regular Guy]

Storm,

As you''re revealing yourself to us, you''re making the world a better place, as well.

Karl, many thanks...

Having read your piece through for the sense...my sense is that for those shopping for asshers, you''ve provided some very practical tips to help them make better performance oriented decisions. And...that''s very much a tribute to your good efforts, and Pricescope''s place in the world.

Thanks again,

 

[denverappraiser]

Congratulations Karl. Very informative article.

It’s nice to see the man behind the curtain.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Excellent, Storm. I appreciate the hard work.


Rich, Independent GG Appraiser
Sarasota Gemological Laboratory

 

[beaujolais]

Storm - you are Amazing (and very cute,too). A true diamond genius.

Again, someone in this industry should scoop you up and . . .

Or, maybe someday we'll see Storm Designs, Inc.?

Fantastic, fantastic article. Keep it going. Yay Storm.

 

[partgypsy]

I enjoyed the article very much. For some reaon this article reminds me of the Hubble telescope.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

congrats Karl

So nice to now be able to use your real name - I often hit "submit" and had a dreadful fear that i might have written Karl instead of Storm

 

[purrfectpear]

Purrrfectly written Karl. You managed to make a very technical topic easily understood by the layman. Much appreciated

 

[mercoledi]

Great article Storm/Karl!
Nice clear examples! Now I finally have some idea how to asses an ASET for a step cut.
Thanks!

 

[jasontb]

Nice work.

A note to the admin: The byline lists the incorrect 'published' date.
OOPS, just realized you do not use the US date format.

 

[diagem]

Congrats on the good work...
You''re writing is even more informative for the pro''s or consumers (as one) than the major Laboratories attempted in the past... (and still trying with no great success

Keep up the excellent work...

 

[risingsun]

Good article. Looking forward to your piece on virtual facets.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/12/2008 8:32:07 PM
Author: risingsun
Good article. Looking forward to your piece on virtual facets.

Thanks!
The VF article is almost done but I keep thinking of things to add to it :}

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/10/2008 11:33:05 AM
Author: sonomacounty
Storm - you are Amazing (and very cute,too). A true diamond genius.


Again, someone in this industry should scoop you up and . . .


Or, maybe someday we''ll see Storm Designs, Inc.?


Fantastic, fantastic article. Keep it going. Yay Storm.

*blush* thank you for the kind words.
Someday I hope to be able to offer custom designed diamonds either through select dealers or direct on the net.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/12/2008 5:36:22 PM
Author: DiaGem
Congrats on the good work...

You''re writing is even more informative for the pro''s or consumers (as one) than the major Laboratories attempted in the past... (and still trying with no great success


Keep up the excellent work...

Thank you for the kind words and for the help!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/10/2008 8:50:50 PM
Author: part gypsy
I enjoyed the article very much. For some reason this article reminds me of the Hubble telescope.

Glad you enjoyed it!
Your comment about the Hubble cracked me up! lol

 

[adamasgem]

RE" In the market, it is common to use the term ''Asscher'' to refer to any cut cornered square step cut diamond regardless of origin or even geometry and to use the term ''Royal Asscher'' to refer to the products of the House of Asscher. "

One should note that an original "Asscher cut" was a early emerald cut (with typically small table), high crown, wide corners and deep paviliion, but the TRADE, seeking to capitalize on the growing popularity of the old cutting style, and because it was never trademarked or patented, started BASTARDIZING the Asscher name, and the cut parameters (much like the current H&A controversy), such that the Royal Asscher company had to patent (D453007) the "Royal Asscher", a squarish wide cornered emerald cut with five rows of pavilion facets, UNLIKE what everyone else tries to pass off now as an "asscher cut" (Note the correct use of a small "a" in asscher, which is the terminology that should be used, since few stones I''ve seen called "Asschers" bare any relationship to a true Asscher cut, and is an incorrect and possibly illegal play on the company''s name).


Rather than being really nit picking, I''ll compliment you on your effort, but start with the Critical Angle and your statement:

"In simple terms if the facet angle is below the critical angle it acts like a window and does not return light.", the statement is NEVER true as it depends on the angle of incidence of the light, and there is ALWAYS some light return.

While I admire your attempt, I suggest that if you are going to quote optics references for the subject a better reference on Wiki for you to read and understand is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_equations

It is a lot of work to try to understand what is really going on, and I admire that you are trying.

 

[strmrdr]

Thanks Marty the subject of naming is a complicated issue.
While I would like to just call them square emeralds I found it created confusion so I caved in and went with the industry standards such as they are.
I plan on doing a segment on the history of Asschers where I will cover it more.

I am aware of the page you linked.
I am also aware that a leaky p3 facets will likely return a fair amount of light at some degree of tilt.
As will some facets returning light start to leak.

A little latter down the article I covered secondary light return and showed some return in the ray trace.
I added the disclaimer because some areas are simplified for ease of understanding for that very reason.

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/15/2008 3:36:54 PM
Author: strmrdr

Thanks Marty the subject of naming is a complicated issue.

It is not complicated at all. It is intellectual property theft. Abuse of what should have been trademarked.

The use of the capital "A" in asscher to describe someone elses stone (or cut), is WRONG, period, let alone some of what people advertize as asschers or H&A, for that matter.

 

[diagem]

Marty..., didn''t the Asscher family only recently trademarked "Royal Asscher"???
Because their Historical patent on cut has long expired? No?

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/15/2008 5:51:08 PM
Author: DiaGem
Marty..., didn''t the Asscher family only recently trademarked ''Royal Asscher''???
Because their Historical patent on cut has long expired? No?

I know about the recent patent with 5 pavilion steps, but I don''t know about a trademark filing, perhaps they did on "Royal Asscher".

They should have trademarked the name Asscher a long time ago, but I guess didn''t, because of what some now call "asschers" today.

I don''t know whether they ever had a design patent per-se on their interpretation of the emerald cut, like they have now.

 

[diagem]

Date: 8/15/2008 6:05:23 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 8/15/2008 5:51:08 PM
Author: DiaGem
Marty..., didn''t the Asscher family only recently trademarked ''Royal Asscher''???
Because their Historical patent on cut has long expired? No?

I know about the recent patent with 5 pavilion steps, but I don''t know about a trademark filing, perhaps they did on ''Royal Asscher''.

They should have trademarked the name Asscher a long time ago, but I guess didn''t, because of what some now call ''asschers'' today.

I don''t know whether they ever had a design patent per-se on their interpretation of the emerald cut, like they have now.

I remember back in 1998..., I started cutting Asschers but made sure I identify them (myself) as SE''s..., (I was not responsible for further down the chain...

)
Back then no-one was cutting them yet..., and as soon as people started cutting them in early 2000..., at the beginning people were cautious what they were naming them..., but slowly the name Asscher started appearing everywhere and no (legal)resistant showed up..., thats why Asscher decided to trademark Royal Asscher..., but unfortunately for them the made a wrong business decision and partnered up with the wrong Company for exclusive production and marketing...

They could have made a wiser decision!

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/15/2008 6:14:24 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 8/15/2008 6:05:23 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 8/15/2008 5:51:08 PM
Author: DiaGem
Marty..., didn''t the Asscher family only recently trademarked ''Royal Asscher''???
Because their Historical patent on cut has long expired? No?

I know about the recent patent with 5 pavilion steps, but I don''t know about a trademark filing, perhaps they did on ''Royal Asscher''.

They should have trademarked the name Asscher a long time ago, but I guess didn''t, because of what some now call ''asschers'' today.

I don''t know whether they ever had a design patent per-se on their interpretation of the emerald cut, like they have now.

I remember back in 1998..., I started cutting Asschers but made sure I identify them (myself) as SE''s..., (I was not responsible for further down the chain...

)
Back then no-one was cutting them yet..., and as soon as people started cutting them in early 2000..., at the beginning people were cautious what they were naming them..., but slowly the name Asscher started appearing everywhere and no (legal)resistant showed up..., thats why Asscher decided to trademark Royal Asscher..., but unfortunately for them the made a wrong business decision and partnered up with the wrong Company for exclusive production and marketing...

They could have made a wiser decision!

I guess in hindsight, Fabricant was the wrong decision.

What do you mean by the term "SE''s".. and of course, you couldn''t possibly know what or how the knockoffs were going to be marketed... otherwise shame on you...

As to Asscher suing everyone who used their name, it would be an interesting suit, as there are a lot of deep pockets out there who capitalized on it. I''d cetainly, after looking into it, probably, at first glance, side with Asscher for the fradulant sale of "asschers", much like I''d support a suit against those who misrepresent the classic definitions of H&A''s, that which we have accepted for so long, that now wants to be changed.
.

 

[diagem]

Date: 8/15/2008 6:55:36 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 8/15/2008 6:14:24 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 8/15/2008 6:05:23 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 8/15/2008 5:51:08 PM
Author: DiaGem
Marty..., didn''t the Asscher family only recently trademarked ''Royal Asscher''???
Because their Historical patent on cut has long expired? No?

I know about the recent patent with 5 pavilion steps, but I don''t know about a trademark filing, perhaps they did on ''Royal Asscher''.

They should have trademarked the name Asscher a long time ago, but I guess didn''t, because of what some now call ''asschers'' today.

I don''t know whether they ever had a design patent per-se on their interpretation of the emerald cut, like they have now.

I remember back in 1998..., I started cutting Asschers but made sure I identify them (myself) as SE''s..., (I was not responsible for further down the chain...

)
Back then no-one was cutting them yet..., and as soon as people started cutting them in early 2000..., at the beginning people were cautious what they were naming them..., but slowly the name Asscher started appearing everywhere and no (legal)resistant showed up..., thats why Asscher decided to trademark Royal Asscher..., but unfortunately for them the made a wrong business decision and partnered up with the wrong Company for exclusive production and marketing...

They could have made a wiser decision!

I guess in hindsight, Fabricant was the wrong decision.

What do you mean by the term ''SE''s''.. and of course, you couldn''t possibly know what or how the knockoffs were going to be marketed... otherwise shame on you... SE = Square Emerald.

The rest of the sentence =

As to Asscher suing everyone who used their name, it would be an interesting suit, as there are a lot of deep pockets out there who capitalized on it. I''d cetainly, after looking into it, probably, at first glance, side with Asscher for the fradulant sale of ''asschers'', much like I''d support a suit against those who misrepresent the classic definitions of H&A''s, that which we have accepted for so long, that now wants to be changed.
.

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 8/15/2008 7:46:04 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 8/15/2008 6:55:36 PM
Author: adamasgem

I guess in hindsight, Fabricant was the wrong decision.

What do you mean by the term ''SE''s''.. and of course, you couldn''t possibly know what or how the knockoffs were going to be marketed... otherwise shame on you... SE = Square Emerald.

The rest of the sentence =

As to Asscher suing everyone who used their name, it would be an interesting suit, as there are a lot of deep pockets out there who capitalized on it. I''d cetainly, after looking into it, probably, at first glance, side with Asscher for the fradulant sale of ''asschers'', much like I''d support a suit against those who misrepresent the classic definitions of H&A''s, that which we have accepted for so long, that now wants to be changed.
.

The rest of the sentance was meant to tweek..

 

[diagem]

Date: 8/15/2008 8:00:46 PM
Author: adamasgem

Date: 8/15/2008 7:46:04 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 8/15/2008 6:55:36 PM
Author: adamasgem

I guess in hindsight, Fabricant was the wrong decision.

What do you mean by the term ''SE''s''.. and of course, you couldn''t possibly know what or how the knockoffs were going to be marketed... otherwise shame on you... SE = Square Emerald.

The rest of the sentence =

As to Asscher suing everyone who used their name, it would be an interesting suit, as there are a lot of deep pockets out there who capitalized on it. I''d cetainly, after looking into it, probably, at first glance, side with Asscher for the fradulant sale of ''asschers'', much like I''d support a suit against those who misrepresent the classic definitions of H&A''s, that which we have accepted for so long, that now wants to be changed.
.

The rest of the sentance was meant to tweek..

Prior to F&s the Asscher family descendants were approached by a good friend and colleague of mine to try to start some type of venture...
Obviously F&s made the Asscher potential future look rosier and brighter than their abilities or experiences...

Funny though..., my friend and colleague was able to bring the generic Asscher Cut to the level (cut and marketing) where it is at a maximum these days...
I could only imagine how good and successful it could have been with the exclusive rights to the Royal Asscher name!

I personally think pricing was the largest obstacle..., after came the lack of knowledge in marketing such a product by a mass-production manufacturer like F&s.

Pity

...