Philosophic question about diamond advertising

[Serg]

Date: 2/16/2008 2:16:49 PM
Author: Diamond*Dana
Not me, I just roll my eyes and laugh it off.

Does it mean what you have not confidence to Diamond market at all?
If you have confidence what actually is your confidence?

 

[door knob solitaire]

I think it shores up their confidence with reliance in the phrase or the claim the word denotes. That is why it is so wrong. There are particular words that when used convey a sense of meaning.

Back to my car analogy...if I use the term showroom condition...what does that express to you? It may mean really clean...or it may mean there are no McDonalds french fries or army men on the floor.

If your consumer isn't informed or aren't educated to the extent say Storm and others here are...they are going to rely on that word, phrase or buzz word they have heard and put their confidence in the fact they made a good choice. Again the industry isn't using GOOD CUT or FAIR CUT for additional names...they are USING BRILLIANT AND IDEAL. Most people have heard of brilliant but many don't know it actually is a description of a type of shape or facet cut. They have heard IDEAL as being the cream de la creme. "Well honey I'm goin get you an Ideal stone..." so out he goes and when he sees the word Ideal used...he buys the stone.

It may be a fair cut...but the marketing claims it to be an Ideal Brilliantly Cut superior exceptional beautiful stone. But he sees the word IDEAL and he is snagged. That is WHY THE INDUSTRY is using the word. They know there is some percent of the consumer that will bite the hook and never think twice about it. "Look here Darlene, I got me a I-Deal cut stone! " No Bubba, you didn't...you got what was branded an ideal...you actually bought a fair cut.

It doesn't affect me at all as I am frightened out of my wits

to choose a diamond that the veterans here haven't blessed. I don't know what I am doing but I am CONFIDENT they do. Storm, Ellen, Kaleigh, and all the rest aren't going to let me buy something they wouldn't. So you can continue calling the stuff what you wish...my confidence won't be effected. But the normal consumer...your bread and butter...will be. And I think it will eventually catch up as they learn they have been douped.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/16/2008 2:23:29 PM
Author: Serg

Date: 2/16/2008 2:16:49 PM
Author: Diamond*Dana
Not me, I just roll my eyes and laugh it off.

Does it mean what you have not confidence to Diamond market at all?
If you have confidence what actually is your confidence?

sadly diamond sales people too most people are considered one step below used car salesman and with good reason.
I am not refering of course too the PS vendors and others who stand head and shoulders above the rest.
That is a huge reason people go online.
Id love too support my local people but with very very few exceptions they are pretty slimy.

I hear it all the time from guys: "She wants a new diamond so I guess I have to go get riped off and get her one..."
number one consumer complaint is bad sales people and a very confusing value picture.

 

[niceice]

Date: 2/16/2008 1:11:11 PM
Author: strmrdr
I have thought about this some more.
Bringing new or different in diamond cuts to market is good for the industry and consumers I think if done for the right reasons and the right way.
The problem is it was pushed by De Beers for all the wrong reasons and the wrong way.

I''ve said it before and I''ll say it again, the brand does not make the diamond. Every brand of diamond attempts to create a division for itself within the diamond industry, but most brands do not offer anything unique, created only by itself. Each diamond within a brand must be evaluated on its own merits, smart consumers look past the brand name to the specific features of each item.

The Big Bush for individual brands within the diamond industry came a few years back when the DTC pushed the Supplier of Choice program, slashed the number of sight holders dramatically and forced those who remained to embark on a quest to separate their production from that of other competitors by creating a brand. I remember that the cutters were staggering from the required capital investment required by the DTC to invest in the "R&D" (what R&D? Really...) and advertising of "their brand" which seemed to offer little if anything that couldn''t be found from another branded version of the very same thing.

Interestingly enough, the DTC slashed their advertising budget for the U.S. market a few weeks ago and it was reported at that time that The Diamond Promotion Service laid off eleven of their staff to compensate from the reduction in advertising expense. It seems that the DTC no longer wants to be held accountable for the marketing of diamonds within the United States beyond their own "brand" - the recently introduced "DeBeers Stores" which are infiltrating the U.S. market. I wonder what new and innovative, never before seen in the diamond industry features the "DeBeers brand" will offer to U.S. consumers?

 

[Modified Brilliant]

The CUT issue has been developed to the max.."my super super duper ideal is better than your duper excellent super ideal."

We''ve covered the 4 C''s. The "CUT" issue took a back seat for a long time as sellers sold diamonds based on carat weight, color, and
clarity. CUT was once a "non issue."

What''s next? What''s fresh, new and exciting AFTER the Ideal cut?

Jeff Averbook, GG
Graduate Gemologist since 1986

www.metrojewelryappraisers.com

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 2/16/2008 1:11:11 PM
Author: strmrdr
I have thought about this some more.
Bringing new or different in diamond cuts to market is good for the industry and consumers I think if done for the right reasons and the right way.
The problem is it was pushed by De Beers for all the wrong reasons and the wrong way.
They wanted too gear up a hype machine and that machine was greeted with a collective yawn by consumers as it should have been.

The problem they were facing is no one wants too spend millions of dollars on advertising that helps your competitors too who didn''t spend the money.
So the idea came up too have each one come up with their own cut and spend millions on advertising an exclusive product.

A diamond advertising council would have been a much better idea as is done in the milk and meat industries but De Beers would not support that because they would have a hard time controlling it.

You have made many good points storm.

One thing here is that there are brands statements from companies for generic cuts, and brand statements for new patented cuts.
I am most interested in the later.
The former is more like a claimed quality control brand. Maybe they do not do any damage if the product is better than average. LK and HoF would be examples? Although the claim of ''perfection'' is an ''absolute''.

But new cuts make often unsubstantiated claims that are very often false.

Sergey has long held that if people believe the absolute claims like "ideal" then there is no point in designing new cuts because they can only be less than ideal.
I am not sure how powerful that word is in that we grow up with such ridiculous claims bombarding us every day - is it water off a ducks back?
Or do these claims dent confidence and stymie development?

For example wine rating systems can give the same rating, eg 94, for 4 very different wines - all are good, but one is for steak and another for fish. It is even possible to rate a wine as 100, but very rare. such a wine should never be able to be bettered. By using ideal, perfect etc, are we giving 100 ratings and saying forget about trying to do better?

Could we have diamond ratings like wine - this one is the 94 night time and this other one is 95 for engagement rings and this 5 sided stone is 84, but will still be ranked very high within the ''art diamond'' series.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 2/16/2008 2:26:19 AM
Author: coatimundi
I don''t pay attention to marketing. It''s lame. I''m also not into patented cuts per se.

We''re inundated with advertising of this sort all the time. I actually find it irritating, if anything at all.

What other industries and goods companies irrite you Coatimundi?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 2/16/2008 1:24:33 AM
Author: whatmeworry
I think cut is probably the least one eroding consumer confidence. Non uniform grading of color/clarity seems to provide the most disappointment and anger on this forum. The ''I bought an F/VS2 and it came back a J/SI2'' post. As far as patented cuts being marketed as the most brilliant/firey/sparkly etc., I guess I''ve seen them mostly extolling the virtues of extra facets and not so much as belittling the competition. Probably the reason we haven''t seen posts complaining about false advertising on cut is that there is no standard grading of cut. You don''t see posts complaining about I bought this because it scored a 9 on the Tolkowsky scale but my appraiser said it only scored a 7. Except for rounds. Every now and then you see a post that goes '' my salesman said it was an ideal cut but the HCA gave it a 4.2.''

When companies build a strong brand they usually also try to protect it.
I do not need to question Zegna about the fabric quality. I expect it is of a certain standard.

We have very little of that in the diamond business i expect WhatMeWorry?

 

[elmo]

Garry, give me a break

. Which one of these statements is true:

James Allen - Only life is more beautiful.
Pearlman''s - The world''s leading luxury jewelry website.
Whiteflash - The world''s most visually balanced diamonds.
GOG - The ultimate diamond information site.

Is it that far off?

 

[Serg]

re:Storm, Ellen, Kaleigh, and all the rest aren''t going to let me buy something they wouldn''t. So you can continue calling the stuff what you wish...my confidence won''t be effected. But the normal consumer...your bread and butter...will be. And I think it will eventually catch up as they learn they have been douped


Yes, they advice you buy what they really like
But why do they like it?
What is coming from them and diamond nature and what are coming from GLOBAL advertisement "IDEAL CUT, IDEAL DIAMOND"
In beginning it was VERY good idea improve cut, but result is far from good enough. Now is to much BRAIN WASH.
I think all PS community had been shifted to "IDEAL SYMMETRY", IS, ASET
What works good enough for 1ct round cut( result come from long history attempts and mistakes),
does not work well for 10ct round , any size Emerald cut , cushion or even for princess .

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/16/2008 3:54:00 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 2/16/2008 1:11:11 PM
Author: strmrdr
I have thought about this some more.
Bringing new or different in diamond cuts to market is good for the industry and consumers I think if done for the right reasons and the right way.
The problem is it was pushed by De Beers for all the wrong reasons and the wrong way.
They wanted too gear up a hype machine and that machine was greeted with a collective yawn by consumers as it should have been.

The problem they were facing is no one wants too spend millions of dollars on advertising that helps your competitors too who didn''t spend the money.
So the idea came up too have each one come up with their own cut and spend millions on advertising an exclusive product.

A diamond advertising council would have been a much better idea as is done in the milk and meat industries but De Beers would not support that because they would have a hard time controlling it.

You have made many good points storm.

One thing here is that there are brands statements from companies for generic cuts, and brand statements for new patented cuts.
I am most interested in the later.
The former is more like a claimed quality control brand. Maybe they do not do any damage if the product is better than average. LK and HoF would be examples? Although the claim of ''perfection'' is an ''absolute''.

But new cuts make often unsubstantiated claims that are very often false.

Sergey has long held that if people believe the absolute claims like ''ideal'' then there is no point in designing new cuts because they can only be less than ideal.

Finally some words of wisdom...

I am not sure how powerful that word is in that we grow up with such ridiculous claims bombarding us every day - is it water off a ducks back?
Or do these claims dent confidence and stymie development?

For example wine rating systems can give the same rating, eg 94, for 4 very different wines - all are good, but one is for steak and another for fish. It is even possible to rate a wine as 100, but very rare. such a wine should never be able to be bettered. By using ideal, perfect etc, are we giving 100 ratings and saying forget about trying to do better?

There goes the AGS Triple 0 theory...

(unless there is a -1 etc..., grade coming up in the near future???)
Now people can understand (maybe) that the GIA''s Excellent scale is a more correct vocabulary...

Could we have diamond ratings like wine - this one is the 94 night time and this other one is 95 for engagement rings and this 5 sided stone is 84, but will still be ranked very high within the ''art diamond'' series.

Over the years I am here on PS..., I have pointed out numerous times the simple fact of the word "Ideal" is being abused!!!

But since this industry is still (in my eyes) considered (very) primitive..., innovation needs to be created not only in cuts..., but also in marketing! And some....

For some odd reason..., copying seems to be the easiest route..., either in cuts, jewelry designs or marketing!!! And this must change if we want to take this luxury product of ours into the next level...

Good thread Garry...

 

[coatimundi_org]

Date: 2/16/2008 3:55:52 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 2/16/2008 2:26:19 AM

Author: coatimundi

I don't pay attention to marketing. It's lame. I'm also not into patented cuts per se.


We're inundated with advertising of this sort all the time. I actually find it irritating, if anything at all.

What other industries and goods companies irrite you Coatimundi?

Most of them. All I have to do is walk outside and I'm being solicited. I live in LA, and advertising is a part of the general landscape. I understand that industries are trying to manipulate me into buying, and that's just life. I choose to ignore, but it IS irritating.

Not too serious, though--more like a pesky mosquito or something.

I don't own a television. I choose to shield myself from the deluge of advertising that encourages me to part with my sensibilities.

My newfound weakness is diamonds, though. I definitely avoid advertising in this arena. After all, on Pricescope there are many advertisments trying to lure me to buy, but I still have yet to purchase from a Pricescope vendor

What I do use when it comes to diamonds, are tools. Specifically the HCA and your idealscope

 

[door knob solitaire]

What works good enough for 1ct round cut( result come from long history attempts and mistakes),
does not work well for 10ct round

Serg, really? I didn''t know that. So the larger the stone the symmetry importance is not as important? I don''t understand that comment. I am not mocking your comment, just requesting more detail. Please explain. I understand the other shapes it is far harder...that part I understand.

As for taking the veterans consultation...I don''t know why they like what they like...I just know I can trust them to lead me in a purchase that I won''t regret my uninformed choice. I would not buy anything that didn''t speak to me too. But I have watched them for years, and know that one can obtain an objective opinion.

The vendors here I also believe I can rely on. They offer many stones, but I have noticed when you are specifically requesting a certain aspect, they will fore-go the sell if their stone doesn''t offer it. If you read this entire thread, there was a poster that noted a non ps SA telling her that the large feather in the table was a good thing and that she would always be able to recognize her stone. Arggh. It is that coupled with all the Names and brands and avalanche of information that blinds most consumers.

You guys know there is a lot of pie in the sky space and leeway in the retail of stones... color grades and clarities are interpreted by the human eye...whether it is GIA or EGL or any other lab right? Opinion in appraisals are opinions. Some are better than others...but boiled down it is ONE persons thought that directs the fate of the stone.

Back to a car analogy...a 67 Corvette is never going to be confused as 69 model. It isn''t left to interpretation...they look different. But diamonds are a different animal. How does the normal consumer wade through all the adjectives and brands and decide on the proper cuts if the same words as constantly being repeated?

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/16/2008 4:41:37 PM
Author: door knob solitaire
What works good enough for 1ct round cut( result come from long history attempts and mistakes),
does not work well for 10ct round

Serg, really? I didn''t know that. So the larger the stone the symmetry importance is not as important? I don''t understand that comment. I am not mocking your comment, just requesting more detail. Please explain. I understand the other shapes it is far harder...that part I understand.

I believe what Serg is saying is that (simply) not all Diamonds react the same on certain rules...

A 10 carat Diamond needs to be cut a bit different than its counterpart 1 carat and still different from its counterpart 0.10 carats...
Different sizes have different rules..., and react different to certain facet size, positions and angles etc...etc...

 

[door knob solitaire]

Dia Gem...Thanks

 

[saradbx]

Hi Gary and everyone else here,

A view from the bottom of the diamond ''food chain''...

I am a consumer, trying to buy a diamond in Dubai. I started researching a couple of weeks ago, online and in the local Diamond Park viewing stones. I am totally confused and don''t know who to trust. I thought if I research carefully and only consider diamonds with a top cut/proportion grade I would be on safe ground. I found a diamond with a HRD certificate that looked beautiful, but I have now found out that the top HRD grade of ''Very Good'' is not comparable to other top lab grade of ''Ideal''. However another diamond expert on another forum told me that the HRD was a well respected organisation and the European equivalent of the GIA! I am starting to feel that I need to become a gemologist to buy a ring without getting ripped off! In answer to your original question Gary, the result is that I am not buying.

 

[whatmeworry]

What seems to be the latest branded cut that seems to be getting a lot of buzz on this forum...Tiffany Legacy? Yet they''re not going with the most brilliant/most firey pitch. Seems like this would be a good case study in looking at introducing new cuts.

 

[Serg]

re:unless there is a -1 etc..., grade coming up in the near future???)

We discussed it with AGS start from IDCC1( 2004 year)

It was difficult fro AGS fix several years ago and looks it is impossible fix now

It was so simple 10 years ago start use SCORE* system Instead PENALTY system.

Good marketing tactic solution destroyed strategy for development diamond market ( and AGS lab itself)
Now consumers "vote by legs"
They too tired from conflict between Lab grading system, conflict between Brand advertisement. They are not so silly, like in dreams of "Diamond professionals"
O lot of High managers in big miner companies are thinking what consumer confidence is enough:
give Paper in shop what diamond is not "Blond" diamond, is not synthetic , is not child labor
Only negative. they have not mind about real consumer confidence at all

* ( without any limitation! Not like in wine system with highest score 100. 50ct round with same proportion like 1ct round should receive better score for Fire and less score for foolishness in using unique piece of rough. 50 ct and even 10ct should have other cut to show (open) all ability so big piece diamond. Ideal symmetry round cut for 10ct round is stupid for my test. But Labs can not grade other cuts and cutter should do such stupid work now to receive premium( for IDEAL cut) )

 

[rainydaze]

Date: 2/16/2008 1:41:00 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

But let me ask you all how these claims that involve absolute statements affect yours or other shoppers confidence?

i can only speak for one here.... prior to finding information on the internet, such statments simply served to underscore my lack of confidence. my eyes had already told me i wasn''t looking at something as spectacular as they were claiming, even if i didn''t yet have the resources to understand why or what else was available to me. offering some gratuitous sales pitch reinforced my confidence in what my eyes and my gut were telling me, not in the SA or the product. i mean, if they truly have something special why not present me with some real information about what makes it worth purchasing? the only answer i could come up with was there wasn''t anything meritous... and i was being taken for naive.

now that i am more informed, with many sources of information i can sink my teeth into, i personally have more confidence when shopping. i still don''t know enough/remember enough to have confidence in challeging SAs (i will just continue to smile weakly and continue on my merry way without a hint of a purchase), but i know enough to recongnize an SA who might actually be well-informed and thus likely to assist me in a manner i can appreciate and possibly even .... trust? .... purchase from? and now i know where to follow up to be sure my confidence has been well-placed, whereas before it was just a bottomless pit of ''gee, how am i ever going to buy jewelry and feel good about it?'' and i now have a foundation for understanding what i am looking at, why i like it, why i don''t..... and i can assure you it has nothing to do with Joe Corporate telling me what to think about it!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/16/2008 4:41:37 PM
Author: door knob solitaire
What works good enough for 1ct round cut( result come from long history attempts and mistakes),
does not work well for 10ct round

Serg, really? I didn''t know that. So the larger the stone the symmetry importance is not as important? I don''t understand that comment. I am not mocking your comment, just requesting more detail. Please explain. I understand the other shapes it is far harder...that part I understand.

10 ct round should have more facets
.10 less
Too be considered "ideal"

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/16/2008 4:07:16 PM
Author: Serg

re:Storm, Ellen, Kaleigh, and all the rest aren''t going to let me buy something they wouldn''t. So you can continue calling the stuff what you wish...my confidence won''t be effected. But the normal consumer...your bread and butter...will be. And I think it will eventually catch up as they learn they have been douped


Yes, they advice you buy what they really like
But why do they like it?

4+ years of research and thousands of hours spent on the subject.

In all that time not one consumer has asked about a 10ct diamond.
The biggest was an 8ct asscher that I can recall.

Around the 1ct range is the most common, so an answer that is suitable for the 1ct range is most of the time the proper answer.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 2/16/2008 5:14:37 PM
Author: saradbx
Hi Gary and everyone else here,

A view from the bottom of the diamond ''food chain''...

I am a consumer, trying to buy a diamond in Dubai. I started researching a couple of weeks ago, online and in the local Diamond Park viewing stones. I am totally confused and don''t know who to trust. I thought if I research carefully and only consider diamonds with a top cut/proportion grade I would be on safe ground. I found a diamond with a HRD certificate that looked beautiful, but I have now found out that the top HRD grade of ''Very Good'' is not comparable to other top lab grade of ''Ideal''. However another diamond expert on another forum told me that the HRD was a well respected organisation and the European equivalent of the GIA! I am starting to feel that I need to become a gemologist to buy a ring without getting ripped off! In answer to your original question Gary, the result is that I am not buying.

That is sad Sarabx.
We need to do something about that dont we.
(''we'' will, trust me, I am a jeweller

)

 

[door knob solitaire]

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 2/16/2008 7:07:52 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/16/2008 4:41:37 PM
Author: door knob solitaire
What works good enough for 1ct round cut( result come from long history attempts and mistakes),
does not work well for 10ct round

Serg, really? I didn''t know that. So the larger the stone the symmetry importance is not as important? I don''t understand that comment. I am not mocking your comment, just requesting more detail. Please explain. I understand the other shapes it is far harder...that part I understand.

10 ct round should have more facets
.10 less
Too be considered ''ideal''

Or deliberate variance in symmetry

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/16/2008 7:27:55 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 2/16/2008 7:07:52 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/16/2008 4:41:37 PM
Author: door knob solitaire
What works good enough for 1ct round cut( result come from long history attempts and mistakes),
does not work well for 10ct round

Serg, really? I didn''t know that. So the larger the stone the symmetry importance is not as important? I don''t understand that comment. I am not mocking your comment, just requesting more detail. Please explain. I understand the other shapes it is far harder...that part I understand.

10 ct round should have more facets
.10 less
Too be considered ''ideal''

Or deliberate variance in symmetry

that would be forcing the answer on the problem instead of actually solving it.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/16/2008 3:34:25 PM
Author: Modified Brilliant
The CUT issue has been developed to the max..''my super super duper ideal is better than your duper excellent super ideal.''

We''ve covered the 4 C''s. The ''CUT'' issue took a back seat for a long time as sellers sold diamonds based on carat weight, color, and
clarity. CUT was once a ''non issue.''

What''s next? What''s fresh, new and exciting AFTER the Ideal cut?

Jeff Averbook, GG
Graduate Gemologist since 1986

www.metrojewelryappraisers.com

For me a campaign for better cut asschers and leave "ideal" out of it please.
"ideal" is a disaster when it comes to diamonds that aren''t clones of each other.
Yep I said RB''s are clones of one another and that is the way I''m starting too see them.
That is what Serg is rallying against but I see it as the nature of the cut there is little you can vary in the design of the round compared too fancy cuts and get a great looking stone.

 

[whatmeworry]

Date: 2/16/2008 6:38:10 PM
Author: Serg

re:unless there is a -1 etc..., grade coming up in the near future???)

We discussed it with AGS start from IDCC1( 2004 year)

It was difficult fro AGS fix several years ago and looks it is impossible fix now

It was so simple 10 years ago start use SCORE* system Instead PENALTY system.

Good marketing tactic solution destroyed strategy for development diamond market ( and AGS lab itself)
Now consumers ''vote by legs''
They too tired from conflict between Lab grading system, conflict between Brand advertisement. They are not so silly, like in dreams of ''Diamond professionals''

O lot of High managers in big miner companies are thinking what consumer confidence is enough:
give Paper in shop what diamond is not ''Blond'' diamond, is not synthetic , is not child labor
Only negative. they have not mind about real consumer confidence at all


* ( without any limitation! Not like in wine system with highest score 100. 50ct round with same proportion like 1ct round should receive better score for Fire and less score for foolishness in using unique piece of rough. 50 ct and even 10ct should have other cut to show (open) all ability so big piece diamond. Ideal symmetry round cut for 10ct round is stupid for my test. But Labs can not grade other cuts and cutter should do such stupid work now to receive premium( for IDEAL cut) )

It''s really a shame the labs don''t use a no-limits scoring system. There was a poster who was disappointed with his AGS0, that it wasn''t bright enough. So he was asking if a branded H&A AGS0 would be brighter. Perhaps this poster would have been better served by buying a non-"ideal" diamond that was brighter but less fiery. In the GIA cut study, there was a test diamond that scored really high on brilliance but not so well on the other metrics. Perhaps he would have liked something llike that.

 

[strmrdr]

There will never be this kind of variance in appearance of rounds that would be considered well cut.
Nor can an "ideal" cut system deal with this kind of differences in appearance of top stones.
Then you can add super high crown, high crown, or too low crown too the list of variables with many right answers. The crown height can range from 10% too 33%+ and still make a top grade asscher.
Try putting that in a grading system, it don''t work......

 

[Serg]

Date: 2/16/2008 8:06:50 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/16/2008 7:27:55 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 2/16/2008 7:07:52 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/16/2008 4:41:37 PM
Author: door knob solitaire
What works good enough for 1ct round cut( result come from long history attempts and mistakes),
does not work well for 10ct round

Serg, really? I didn''t know that. So the larger the stone the symmetry importance is not as important? I don''t understand that comment. I am not mocking your comment, just requesting more detail. Please explain. I understand the other shapes it is far harder...that part I understand.

10 ct round should have more facets
.10 less
Too be considered ''ideal''

Or deliberate variance in symmetry

that would be forcing the answer on the problem instead of actually solving it.

Diamond Beauty base on compromise between average linear size virtual facets and number virtual facets .( Distribution virtual facets are important in bath spaces: in diamond image and ETAS sphere. For example NailHead diamonds have good facet distribution in diamond space , but very bad in ETAS sphere)

Symmetry shift it balance . For round diamonds 1ct- the 3D symmetry is very helpful to increase average size virtual facets. For 10ct+ round cut we could and need add more virtual facets to improve distribution in ETAS Sphere.
Best way is change the cut. It is not wise use round cut for 10ct+, but it is stupid to demand ideal symmetry for 10ct+ round cut( Again tilt destroy any symmetry and increase number virtual facets. You can not observe diamond only perpendicular to table . But it is other story)

In range 1ct+ and 10ct- BEST cut for YOU depends from YOUR TASTE( Age, culture, sex,..)

Because Labs can not give real cut grade specially for ANY cut( it is really hard task), they prefer create-support idea of IDEAL cut . Labs will happy if all cutters will cut exactly same diamonds and consumers will but its.

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/17/2008 7:55:11 AM
Author: Serg

Date: 2/16/2008 8:06:50 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/16/2008 7:27:55 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 2/16/2008 7:07:52 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/16/2008 4:41:37 PM
Author: door knob solitaire
What works good enough for 1ct round cut( result come from long history attempts and mistakes),
does not work well for 10ct round

Serg, really? I didn''t know that. So the larger the stone the symmetry importance is not as important? I don''t understand that comment. I am not mocking your comment, just requesting more detail. Please explain. I understand the other shapes it is far harder...that part I understand.

10 ct round should have more facets
.10 less
Too be considered ''ideal''

Or deliberate variance in symmetry

that would be forcing the answer on the problem instead of actually solving it.

Diamond Beauty base on compromise between average linear size virtual facets and number virtual facets .( Distribution virtual facets are important in bath spaces: in diamond image and ETAS sphere. For example NailHead diamonds have good facet distribution in diamond space , but very bad in ETAS sphere)

Symmetry shift it balance . For round diamonds 1ct- the 3D symmetry is very helpful to increase average size virtual facets. For 10ct+ round cut we could and need add more virtual facets to improve distribution in ETAS Sphere.

Serg..., virtual facets sizes (and I think the number of them) can be played with while changing facet angles and sizes plus depth...

Best way is change the cut. It is not wise use round cut for 10ct+, but it is stupid to demand ideal symmetry for 10ct+ round cut( Again tilt destroy any symmetry and increase number virtual facets. You can not observe diamond only perpendicular to table . But it is other story)Most Diamonds are looked upon when in the tilt position 99% of the time...

In range 1ct+ and 10ct- BEST cut for YOU depends from YOUR TASTE( Age, culture, sex,..)

Because Labs can not give real cut grade specially for ANY cut( it is really hard task), they prefer create-support idea of IDEAL cut . Labs will happy if all cutters will cut exactly same diamonds and consumers will but its.

I agree..., thats why fancy cuts are much more interesting...