Peter Yantzer on diamond cutting

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/25/2009 5:58:07 PM
Author: Wink
In this video both Peter Yantzer and Paul Slegers of Infinity Diamonds talk about the importance of weight ratio


http://www.screencast.com/t/fDyvyMDw


It is not too long, but the next one, it is too long, about 28 minutes. It is rendering and uploading it may be an hour or two before I get a chance to post it. Storm, you will love that one, it has huge amounts of information in it and I will go get a screen capture of the slides that are a bit blury in my video to post up. Fascinating!


Wink

looking forward to it.

Weight ratio is a double edged sword, it cuts some combos with good reason but hurts some others.

It simply does not work with asschers.
Some of the most beautiful asschers in the world would get a 10%-15% penalty on the AGS system.
They face up large for their mm size due to the amazing crowns.

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/25/2009 6:02:00 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 4/25/2009 5:51:13 PM
Author: DiaGem
What was Peter''s last sentence in this video?
I had a hard time understanding although I replayed it a few times.

Thanks,

''The numbers are scientifically based, and they are going to be a real boone to this industry in the long run.''

You''re welcome.

Wink

Thanks..., whats the meaning of boone? Sorry if it is a silly Q...

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 4/25/2009 6:08:04 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/25/2009 6:02:00 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 4/25/2009 5:51:13 PM
Author: DiaGem
What was Peter's last sentence in this video?
I had a hard time understanding although I replayed it a few times.

Thanks,

'The numbers are scientifically based, and they are going to be a real boon to this industry in the long run.'

You're welcome.

Wink

Thanks..., whats the meaning of Boon? Sorry if it is a silly Q...

Not at all, I lack thousands of words in each of the languages that I speak other than English, and I would never dare to try to post in a language other than English. I am constantly amazed at how well so many of you post who are writing in English as a second, third or fourth language.

A Boone is a benefit, something good for the industry. If he had said, "It will be a real blessing to the industry in the long run," it would have meant the same thing.

Wink

P.S. It might also have been easier for you had I spelled boon correctly.

P.S. By speak I mean knowing enough to order food, beer, find the toilet and ask simple directions. I am conversational in Portuguese and Spanish, provided you do not mind me mixing in many Portuguese words with my Spanish but not at all conversational in French or Mandarin Chinese which I will study diligently this summer as I have Chinese speaking guests coming in early September for my daughter's wedding. I will consider myself to have done well in Mandarin if I can welcome them to my home and properly greet them without overly embarrassing myself. If I continue to have a good year I may even be fortunate enough to butcher their language in Taiwan later in the month. Come on economy, turn around!

 

[WinkHPD]

Sigh, it is uploading now, must be a huge file, only 40% uploaded... and it has been well over half an hour since it started rendering.

Wink

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/25/2009 6:25:06 PM
Author: Wink
Sigh, it is uploading now, must be a huge file, only 40% uploaded... and it has been well over half an hour since it started rendering.


Wink

Thank you for your hard work Wink.

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/25/2009 6:07:04 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/25/2009 5:58:07 PM
Author: Wink
In this video both Peter Yantzer and Paul Slegers of Infinity Diamonds talk about the importance of weight ratio


http://www.screencast.com/t/fDyvyMDw


It is not too long, but the next one, it is too long, about 28 minutes. It is rendering and uploading it may be an hour or two before I get a chance to post it. Storm, you will love that one, it has huge amounts of information in it and I will go get a screen capture of the slides that are a bit blury in my video to post up. Fascinating!


Wink

looking forward to it.

Weight ratio is a double edged sword, it cuts some combos with good reason but hurts some others.

It simply does not work with asschers.
Some of the most beautiful asschers in the world would get a 10%-15% penalty on the AGS system.
They face up large for their mm size due to the amazing crowns.

Since Paul was involved (with Peter) in explaining weight ratio on Princess cuts (a concern I am familiar with on other shapes)..., I would dare ask why Paul doesnt get involved into a dialect with AGS in regards to approaching a new (more correctly) depth % calculations on fancy shapes which should be calculated differently than calculated on rounds...

GIA doent take us (professionals) into consideration as much..., but AGS (Peter) sounds like they might be more open minded on this ''important'' issue!

Measuring non-rounds for weight ratio should not be calculated the same as rounds are..., after all, nothing else can/is?


Just thinking out loud

.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 4/25/2009 6:33:47 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/25/2009 6:25:06 PM
Author: Wink
Sigh, it is uploading now, must be a huge file, only 40% uploaded... and it has been well over half an hour since it started rendering.


Wink

Thank you for your hard work Wink.

LOL! You are welcome. Good heavens, this one is 98megs, no wonder it took so long to render and upload, and I stopped the quality way down or it would have been three or four times as big...

This one is for serious students of the diamond cutting studies. It will bore the casual observer crazy and feed the hunger of the cut nuts...

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

The next three posts will be pictures that came later in the presentation, or were poorly visible during the obviously non professional filming that I did. As you will sadly see, I was watching the intended target of my filming on more than one occassion while I actually filmed a bowl of candy and the side of a young lady''s head. Sigh.

Unfortunately for my appearance as a videographer it was too interesting what was being said to edit out...

Wink

P.S. I find the numbers on this slide incredible. Look specifically at the size of the inconsequential scintillation events and how few medium and large events there are in comparrison. The old cuts really rocked when it came to large and very large events.

 

[WinkHPD]

I also found it interesting in how few changes there were in the TOTAL events, while there were major changes in the visible events!

This is where I got my comment about optical symmetry that I made in my first post. For those of you who slogged through the entire video you can hear Peter be emphatic about he is not making judgements and recommendations, just providing the information. For me, I LIKE BIGGER virtual facets as I LOVE LOVE LOVE more dispersion. I give you all permission to like what you like.

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

And finally one last picture then I go home. I have another half hour's worth of video, but not the strength to face it at this moment... I also have a business to run and I have more things I want to video here in my office. Maybe more tomorrow, or maybe that will be that for this video. Still there is a whole 'nother topic of scintillation in princess cuts. So much to do, so little time...

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 4/25/2009 6:40:14 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/25/2009 6:07:04 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/25/2009 5:58:07 PM
Author: Wink
In this video both Peter Yantzer and Paul Slegers of Infinity Diamonds talk about the importance of weight ratio


http://www.screencast.com/t/fDyvyMDw


It is not too long, but the next one, it is too long, about 28 minutes. It is rendering and uploading it may be an hour or two before I get a chance to post it. Storm, you will love that one, it has huge amounts of information in it and I will go get a screen capture of the slides that are a bit blury in my video to post up. Fascinating!


Wink

looking forward to it.

Weight ratio is a double edged sword, it cuts some combos with good reason but hurts some others.

It simply does not work with asschers.
Some of the most beautiful asschers in the world would get a 10%-15% penalty on the AGS system.
They face up large for their mm size due to the amazing crowns.

Since Paul was involved (with Peter) in explaining weight ratio on Princess cuts (a concern I am familiar with on other shapes)..., I would dare ask why Paul doesnt get involved into a dialect with AGS in regards to approaching a new (more correctly) depth % calculations on fancy shapes which should be calculated differently than calculated on rounds...

GIA doent take us (professionals) into consideration as much..., but AGS (Peter) sounds like they might be more open minded on this ''important'' issue!

Measuring non-rounds for weight ratio should not be calculated the same as rounds are..., after all, nothing else can/is?


Just thinking out loud

.

Thinking is good. That is an excellent question for you to ask Paul, I have no idea of these things, I just like my rocks...

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/25/2009 6:59:35 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 4/25/2009 6:40:14 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/25/2009 6:07:04 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/25/2009 5:58:07 PM
Author: Wink
In this video both Peter Yantzer and Paul Slegers of Infinity Diamonds talk about the importance of weight ratio


http://www.screencast.com/t/fDyvyMDw


It is not too long, but the next one, it is too long, about 28 minutes. It is rendering and uploading it may be an hour or two before I get a chance to post it. Storm, you will love that one, it has huge amounts of information in it and I will go get a screen capture of the slides that are a bit blury in my video to post up. Fascinating!


Wink

looking forward to it.

Weight ratio is a double edged sword, it cuts some combos with good reason but hurts some others.

It simply does not work with asschers.
Some of the most beautiful asschers in the world would get a 10%-15% penalty on the AGS system.
They face up large for their mm size due to the amazing crowns.

Since Paul was involved (with Peter) in explaining weight ratio on Princess cuts (a concern I am familiar with on other shapes)..., I would dare ask why Paul doesnt get involved into a dialect with AGS in regards to approaching a new (more correctly) depth % calculations on fancy shapes which should be calculated differently than calculated on rounds...

GIA doent take us (professionals) into consideration as much..., but AGS (Peter) sounds like they might be more open minded on this 'important' issue!

Measuring non-rounds for weight ratio should not be calculated the same as rounds are..., after all, nothing else can/is?


Just thinking out loud

.

Thinking is good. That is an excellent question for you to ask Paul, I have no idea of these things, I just like my rocks...

Wink, thank you for the footage..., anything on step-cuts on the subject of scintillation and VF's?

 

[strmrdr]

Im stopping at the 17min point for comments and because I am extremely upset.
So far it is what I presented in my article here:
http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/61/1/Virtual-Facets-and-patterns%2c-a-Discussion-about-step-cuts-.aspx

What very very badly upsets me is that the part that I was forced to remove from my article the AGS presentation proves to be correct.
Look at the frequency of flash vs moment where they separated out the small/med/large/vlarge virtual facets.
It takes far more movement to get a on/off flash from the large and v-large virtual facets.

 

[strmrdr]

lol the next part is changes in lighting driving the lower girdle changes.
Wonder where I heard that before.....

 

[strmrdr]

I am not sure I should post this here but there is a huge hole in the presentation so far.
I was waiting and waiting and waiting for it to come out.
Maybe it is in the last section??

Effective virtual facet size is 100% lighting dependent!
This is why changes in lighting has driven the evolution of diamond cuts from oec to the modern RB.
Brighter more direct light makes smaller virtual facets effective.

This is also why the huge change in lighting that is happening right now at a very fast pace because of the new laws will forever change diamond cut.
The only question is how long will it take for the industry to react to it.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/25/2009 8:57:12 PM
Author: strmrdr
lol the next part is changes in lighting driving the lower girdle changes.

Wonder where I heard that before.....

This post was snarky and I wanted to apologize was upset about the other stuff when I posted it.

 

[strmrdr]

Peter wouldn''t say it but I can.
I feel the most beautiful diamonds are well balanced with different virtual facet sizes.
Each diamond design has its own balance point but a diamond with just one size of virtual facet will only be at its best in one lighting condition where a diamond that is more balanced with be beautiful across a wider range of lighting.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/25/2009 9:34:07 PM
Author: strmrdr
Peter wouldn''t say it but I can.
I feel the most beautiful diamonds are well balanced with different virtual facet sizes.
Each diamond design has its own balance point but a diamond with just one size of virtual facet will only be at its best in one lighting condition where a diamond that is more balanced with be beautiful across a wider range of lighting.

Totally and absolutely agree Storm.
Sergey said that or wrote it here many years ago.

One more thing about lighting and VF size - a facet that is too small to "see" is easily seen when it dircts a strong light to us - in this case what we "see" is a flare that extends past the facet and can even extend outside the diamond.

I am not sure AGS software has caught on to that yet - it is part of the problems with "fire potential" too. Intensity can be way more important - especially when we are discussing contrast

 

[Lula]

"This is also why the huge change in lighting that is happening right now at a very fast pace because of the new laws will forever change diamond cut."

Okay, maybe I''m dense, Karl, but what huge change in lighting are you referring to here? CFLs?
(I understand that the antique EC diamonds respond beautifully to low light or candle light (since that was the common mode of lighting 100 years ago) but what''s the modern lighting condition?.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/25/2009 10:55:34 PM
Author: sarap333


''This is also why the huge change in lighting that is happening right now at a very fast pace because of the new laws will forever change diamond cut.''


Okay, maybe I''m dense, Karl, but what huge change in lighting are you referring to here? CFLs?

(I understand that the antique EC diamonds respond beautifully to low light or candle light (since that was the common mode of lighting 100 years ago) but what''s the modern lighting condition?.

cfl is only the tip of the iceberg.
passive/active light pipe technology is the future.
The entire ceiling will become the light source by a 1/8 inch thick plastic film.
There are about 20-30 companies working on this technology.

LED arrays will be the next step from cfl until the light pipe technology matures.
It has about a 3-5 year lead right now.
LED arrays are showing up first in lcd tv sets and monitors as the backlight.

Incandescent bulbs, fluorescent tubes and tungsten bulbs and halogen flood is the current modern lighting that is giving way to new technology.

Candles, oil lamps and fireplaces was the old technology which gave way to arc lamps and then to incandescent bulbs.
If you go back far enough it was torches and fires.

 

[Lula]

Okay, thanks, Karl, I understand the change you''re talking about now. So if I can make the assumption that Tolkowsky was essentially trying to maximize a diamond''s performance under the light sources of his time (candlelight, firelight, early incandescent lighting) what are your thought on the cut (or cut combos) that will maximize a diamond''s performance under these new lighting conditions? (I can maybe guess where you''re going with this, based on previous posts).

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/25/2009 11:23:34 PM
Author: sarap333
Okay, thanks, Karl, I understand the change you're talking about now. So if I can make the assumption that Tolkowsky was essentially trying to maximize a diamond's performance under the light sources of his time (candlelight, firelight, early incandescent lighting) what are your thought on the cut (or cut combos) that will maximize a diamond's performance under these new lighting conditions? (I can maybe guess where you're going with this, based on previous posts).

More med vf or larger.
But you have to be real careful about head shadow in flat lighting so it is a tough challenge.
For the RB I see the lower girdles getting shorter but not likely as short as 55.
Maybe in the 70-75 range.
This will require very careful c/p angle selection to avoid obstruction issues.
I feel the princess will eventually start to lose popularity in sizes under 3ct.
Those that will be cut will be 2 chevron designs.
Step cuts will likely make a comeback as they are actually the best performers in flat lighting because the VF's get larger as it is tilted.

 

[Lula]

Hmm, interesting. Maybe I should go for the emerald cut I''ve always wanted instead of the RB''s I''ve been looking at for my new ring!
Thanks, Karl, your posts are always "food for thought"

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/26/2009 12:27:25 AM
Author: sarap333
Hmm, interesting. Maybe I should go for the emerald cut I''ve always wanted instead of the RB''s I''ve been looking at for my new ring!

Thanks, Karl, your posts are always ''food for thought''

If you have always loved EC''s and they make your heart sing that is what you should get.
If RB''s make your heart sing more then go that route.

 

[Stephan]

Thank you Wink, Karl and Garry for this captivating discussion.
It''s interesting to learn VF size changes with the lighting.

Date: 4/25/2009 10:17:26 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
One more thing about lighting and VF size - a facet that is too small to ''see'' is easily seen when it dircts a strong light to us - in this case what we ''see'' is a flare that extends past the facet and can even extend outside the diamond.

I am not sure AGS software has caught on to that yet - it is part of the problems with ''fire potential'' too. Intensity can be way more important - especially when we are discussing contrast

I also think that fire intensity is THE question that requires further investigation.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/26/2009 3:54:00 AM
Author: QueenMum
Thank you Wink, Karl and Garry for this captivating discussion.

It''s interesting to learn VF size changes with the lighting.

The actual size of the VF doesn''t change, which size is effective changes.

 

[strmrdr]

What is interesting about VF''s is that 3 people standing side by side looking at a diamond the center person is holding will see totally different virtual facets.
Hence they will see different sparkles and different patterns all at the same time.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/26/2009 9:36:18 AM
Author: strmrdr
What is interesting about VF''s is that 3 people standing side by side looking at a diamond the center person is holding will see totally different virtual facets.
Hence they will see different sparkles and different patterns all at the same time.

Actually we each see something like that because we have 2 eyes that form one version. So a single VF is rarely seen that way.

I tried to capture the concept here to show that leakage is not as easily seen as is indicated in the ideal-scope.
It is one reason why I am happy to accept HCA results abit over 2 in very symetrical round diamonds.

 

[WinkHPD]

The video on the princess cuts portion will have to wait. I was working on an article and then I took the afternoon off to see Monsters VS Aliens with my grandkids. As busy as we are it will likely be next weekend before this is continued...

Wink

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/26/2009 8:26:59 PM
Author: Wink
The video on the princess cuts portion will have to wait. I was working on an article and then I took the afternoon off to see Monsters VS Aliens with my grandkids. As busy as we are it will likely be next weekend before this is continued...


Wink

that''s kewl
I will try and not hijack it to bad
Don''t know if I can resist because I love talking about VF''s. lol