Philosophic question about diamond advertising

[WinkHPD]

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

Jeff,

I have to take minor exception to this. I do not think that the cut issue has been developed any where near the max. The public does not yet begin to understand just how important this is. I have long ago switched from educating my clients about the 4 C''s of diamond quality. I now educate them about the three C''s of diamond rarity and the ONE C of Diamond quality, that of CUT. (One C to Rule them all, sounds like there could be a movie in there somewhere...)

When my clients are in house I show them one putrid cut that I own just for that purpose, and a couple of so so cuts that I have here one consignment. Then I show them the well cut diamonds and show them all of the above on the ASET. What a wonderful device, it is inconceivable to me that any retailer would be without one. Do you know that AGS has sold fewer than 100 of them in two years?

To me it seems that maybe the trade is asking what is new and exciting, but the public has only just begun to get a glimmer of what is available in the cutting world. MOST retail jewelers do themselves NOT UNDERSTAND the inticracies of cutting, let alone know how to present it to the public.

While I see some of this I see more and more cooperation between the better cutters and dealers. For example, John Pollard and I have been strong friends for many years, while supposedly we were competitors. In reality we were partners in bringing understanding to the world about diamond cutting. I can say the same about Paul and Brian. Supposedly competitors, but in reality also stronger friends than competitors. All of us realize that it is the cutters of less well cut diamonds who are are our main competitors. As long as they get away with cutting a diamond for a little more weight retention and a little less brilliance, they will do it.

Once the public starts to truly demand that diamonds be cut better, then they will be cut better. At that point you may see more cutters taking the absurd position of HOF that thier diamonds are the most (enter in superlative words here) cut diamonds in the world. Hopefully by then the courts will stop the insanity and not allow the patenting of perfectly good words in advertizing puffery, but I will not hold my breath that they ever will.

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

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.
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.

I sure hope not. It is too confusing already without purposely muddying the waters even more.

Wink

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/18/2008 12:58:30 PM
Author: Wink

If I might comment. Disclaimer, I am a Dealer of Paul''s stones, if you did not know that, please do and take my comment with the appropriate grain(s) of salt.

First, Storm, thank you for the kind words about both lines.

Second. Storm, would you agree that both lines not only keep the hype down, a LOT, but that they consistantly deliver what they promise?

I think the damage to the industry in the mind of the consumer is with the puffery often comes lack of consistency in delivery of promise. That is what worries me. Most consumers will not do the homework necessary to know that some lines deliver and some don''t, so they will feel that all the lines are a bunch of over puffing jerks if they have one bad experience. Sigh.

Wink

Yes I would agree that both deliver what they promise on a consistent basis within the brand.
I''d also have too agree that a lot of brands don''t and its damaging.

But that don''t mean I will give them a pass either because everyone needs someone too hold their feet too the fire when there is huge sums of money involved.
I think the thought that someone out there on a huge source of sales is willing to jump all over them and can back it up keeps vendors on their toes and that is good for consumers and the vendor and the industry. :}

Lack of accountability is a huge problem in the industry as a whole.
At every level it is missing other than a few small pockets and is very apparent at the consumer level.
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/what-do-you-like-the-least-about-the-diamond-industry.78950/
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/diamondstudsonly-com-and-americangemlab-fruad.79013/

As DiaGem touched on above it is what has led too the mess the industry is in now at higher levels too.

 

[WinkHPD]

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''

Having seen a 13ct EightStar that was magnificent and one of the most incredible gems I have ever beheld I can not agree that this is iron clad true. It may be true in some cases, but I can not agree that more facets are necessary as a rule, but accept that they may well be beautiful as a choice.

Wink

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/18/2008 1:35:49 PM
Author: Wink

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

Jeff,

I have to take minor exception to this. I do not think that the cut issue has been developed any where near the max. The public does not yet begin to understand just how important this is. I have long ago switched from educating my clients about the 4 C''s of diamond quality. I now educate them about the three C''s of diamond rarity and the ONE C of Diamond quality, that of CUT. (One C to Rule them all, sounds like there could be a movie in there somewhere...)

When my clients are in house I show them one putrid cut that I own just for that purpose, and a couple of so so cuts that I have here one consignment. Then I show them the well cut diamonds and show them all of the above on the ASET. What a wonderful device, it is inconceivable to me that any retailer would be without one. Do you know that AGS has sold fewer than 100 of them in two years?

To me it seems that maybe the trade is asking what is new and exciting, but the public has only just begun to get a glimmer of what is available in the cutting world. MOST retail jewelers do themselves NOT UNDERSTAND the inticracies of cutting, let alone know how to present it to the public.

While I see some of this I see more and more cooperation between the better cutters and dealers. For example, John Pollard and I have been strong friends for many years, while supposedly we were competitors. In reality we were partners in bringing understanding to the world about diamond cutting. I can say the same about Paul and Brian. Supposedly competitors, but in reality also stronger friends than competitors. All of us realize that it is the cutters of less well cut diamonds who are are our main competitors. As long as they get away with cutting a diamond for a little more weight retention and a little less brilliance, they will do it.

Once the public starts to truly demand that diamonds be cut better, then they will be cut better. At that point you may see more cutters taking the absurd position of HOF that thier diamonds are the most (enter in superlative words here) cut diamonds in the world. Hopefully by then the courts will stop the insanity and not allow the patenting of perfectly good words in advertizing puffery, but I will not hold my breath that they ever will.

Wink

For this purpose..., I rarely give any of my work out on consignment to other dealers....

 

[niceice]

Date: 2/18/2008 1:35:49 PM
Author: Wink


I do not think that the cut issue has been developed any where near the max. The public does not yet begin to understand just how important this is.

Wink

I have to agree, I believe that the precision of diamond cutting can always be improved. So many cutters seem to focus more on weight retention than they do beauty. Why else would we see "ideal cut" diamonds cut to the outer edges of the spectrum, when it is common knowledge that those cut within the tighter range are more lively? The reality is that so few consumers bother to look past the marketing hype and actually do their homework in advance of completing their purchase - which is why marketing works.

But this isn''t really a thread about improving cut quality, right? It''s a thread about marketing and marketing slogans which are accurate? The funny thing is that there wouldn''t really be a diamond market to the middle class of America if it weren''t for marketing and ridiculous claims... The diamond engagement ring was practically unheard of in the U.S. prior to 1938 with exception of those purchased by the very rich, the ring of the day was a simple metal ring. DeBeers hired N.W. Ayer & Sons of N.Y. in 1938 to create a market for their product. A report issued to DeBeers by Ayer in 1939 read "For it is the public, particularly those millions in the middle income group, who must be influenced in their thought, taste, habits and fashions, if the sale of diamonds is to be increased."

Early advertisements kind of crack me up...

"Your diamond, though it may be modest in cost, should be chosen with care, for nothing on earth can take its place"

"Diamonds are the most imperishable record a man can leave of his personal life"

I love this one from 1944:

"Through all their wartime parting, this shining symbol, their engagement diamond, so close to her, by him so well remembered, inspires an inward courage that disdains all doubt and fear"

The summary of early diamond advertising? Nothing on earth can take the place of a diamond (buy it, this is what is expected of you)... Nothing leaves your mark upon the planet like a diamond, better buy one before you croak... And lastly, my personal favorite - buy her a diamond before you go off to war, it will serve as the connecting point between you while you are apart and will provide her with the inner strength not to run off with "Johnny" while you''re away defending your country.

"A Diamond is Forever" came on the scene in 1948. What effect has advertising had upon the diamond market?

Prior 1938, very few diamonds were used in bridal jewelry, today it seems to be expected. I think that it is reasonable to expect any company, selling any service or product, to try and distinguish themselves apart from their competitors by using superlatives to describe their offerings. It is also reasonable to expect consumers to use good judgement and reason to decide for themselves whether such statements are an accurate representation of the service or product that they are interested in. Say what you want about every brand of diamond available in the current market... It''s the brightest, the most brilliant, the most vivid, the most carefully selected, the best crafted, the most precise, the best value, the best price, the lowest price, exclusively by, and whatever... In the end, the true value of the product at hand will be in the web of personal experience that each person weaves around the diamond of their dreams... Lady X will believe that her diamond is more beautiful than yours, because it was presented to her by her beloved, on bended knee, beneath a starry sky, overlooking the crashing waves on a starlit beach, a view, a moment so special, so memerable, that it can never be repeated - yet but in one very specific way, only by the moment when she looks upon her diamond, to catch the sparks and the twinkles that help her to remember that moment (when her husband is being an @ss, or is away on a trip, or has passed on, etc.) and that is the magic of a diamond that DeBeers has spent uncounted millions to create a market for a rock, in which to store your memories... Now who wants to buy a rock

(from anybody, anywhere, this isn''t a plug, but if it were... we''d have the most brilliant, most impressive, most incredible, most perfectly cut (oops!), most, bestest, incredulistic, shiny - actually make that, SHINY cut rocks on the planet, the galaxy, the universe! - and so would a few of our friends here on PS, because we''re (the collective group) the only ones around who truly understand cut and focus on selling it - the "only ones" - get it?

We might be going to hell for that last part, but while we''re there we''ll be looking for the root of a Kimber pipe or two, so not to worry.

 

[strmrdr]

Todd good thing I use a model M keyboard or you would owe me a keyboard.
fyi Pepsi does not make a pleasant nose rinse when expelled out forcefully.
off too get some paper towels....

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 2/18/2008 2:07:57 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 2/18/2008 1:35:49 PM

Author: Wink

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

Jeff,


I have to take minor exception to this. I do not think that the cut issue has been developed any where near the max. The public does not yet begin to understand just how important this is. I have long ago switched from educating my clients about the 4 C''s of diamond quality. I now educate them about the three C''s of diamond rarity and the ONE C of Diamond quality, that of CUT. (One C to Rule them all, sounds like there could be a movie in there somewhere...)


When my clients are in house I show them one putrid cut that I own just for that purpose, and a couple of so so cuts that I have here one consignment. Then I show them the well cut diamonds and show them all of the above on the ASET. What a wonderful device, it is inconceivable to me that any retailer would be without one. Do you know that AGS has sold fewer than 100 of them in two years?


To me it seems that maybe the trade is asking what is new and exciting, but the public has only just begun to get a glimmer of what is available in the cutting world. MOST retail jewelers do themselves NOT UNDERSTAND the inticracies of cutting, let alone know how to present it to the public.


While I see some of this I see more and more cooperation between the better cutters and dealers. For example, John Pollard and I have been strong friends for many years, while supposedly we were competitors. In reality we were partners in bringing understanding to the world about diamond cutting. I can say the same about Paul and Brian. Supposedly competitors, but in reality also stronger friends than competitors. All of us realize that it is the cutters of less well cut diamonds who are are our main competitors. As long as they get away with cutting a diamond for a little more weight retention and a little less brilliance, they will do it.


Once the public starts to truly demand that diamonds be cut better, then they will be cut better. At that point you may see more cutters taking the absurd position of HOF that thier diamonds are the most (enter in superlative words here) cut diamonds in the world. Hopefully by then the courts will stop the insanity and not allow the patenting of perfectly good words in advertizing puffery, but I will not hold my breath that they ever will.


Wink

For this purpose..., I rarely give any of my work out on consignment to other dealers....

You and I are using the word consignment differently. What you are referring to I would call a memo. I am referring to stones that clients of mine have consigned to me to sell for them because of divorce or what ever reason. I have told them that these are not normally stones that I would sell, but that I will show them. I also show them what I normally sell so that they understand why I often do not sell what they consign.

I would never bring in a wholesaler''s stone to sell against. I would consider it unethical to tie up his/her inventory in such a manner.

Wink

 

[niceice]

Date: 2/18/2008 2:42:25 PM
Author: strmrdr
Todd good thing I use a model M keyboard or you would owe me a keyboard.
fyi Pepsi does not make a pleasant nose rinse when expelled out forcefully.
off too get some paper towels....

Sorry Buddy, shall I overnight you a roll of Bounty paper towels? They''re the quicker picker upper

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/18/2008 2:47:17 PM
Author: niceice

Date: 2/18/2008 2:42:25 PM
Author: strmrdr
Todd good thing I use a model M keyboard or you would owe me a keyboard.
fyi Pepsi does not make a pleasant nose rinse when expelled out forcefully.
off too get some paper towels....

Sorry Buddy, shall I overnight you a roll of Bounty paper towels? They''re the quicker picker upper

lol got it thanks :}
But now Iv got that slogan going thru my head!

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/18/2008 2:44:48 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 2/18/2008 2:07:57 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 2/18/2008 1:35:49 PM

Author: Wink

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

Jeff,


I have to take minor exception to this. I do not think that the cut issue has been developed any where near the max. The public does not yet begin to understand just how important this is. I have long ago switched from educating my clients about the 4 C''s of diamond quality. I now educate them about the three C''s of diamond rarity and the ONE C of Diamond quality, that of CUT. (One C to Rule them all, sounds like there could be a movie in there somewhere...)


When my clients are in house I show them one putrid cut that I own just for that purpose, and a couple of so so cuts that I have here one consignment. Then I show them the well cut diamonds and show them all of the above on the ASET. What a wonderful device, it is inconceivable to me that any retailer would be without one. Do you know that AGS has sold fewer than 100 of them in two years?


To me it seems that maybe the trade is asking what is new and exciting, but the public has only just begun to get a glimmer of what is available in the cutting world. MOST retail jewelers do themselves NOT UNDERSTAND the inticracies of cutting, let alone know how to present it to the public.


While I see some of this I see more and more cooperation between the better cutters and dealers. For example, John Pollard and I have been strong friends for many years, while supposedly we were competitors. In reality we were partners in bringing understanding to the world about diamond cutting. I can say the same about Paul and Brian. Supposedly competitors, but in reality also stronger friends than competitors. All of us realize that it is the cutters of less well cut diamonds who are are our main competitors. As long as they get away with cutting a diamond for a little more weight retention and a little less brilliance, they will do it.


Once the public starts to truly demand that diamonds be cut better, then they will be cut better. At that point you may see more cutters taking the absurd position of HOF that thier diamonds are the most (enter in superlative words here) cut diamonds in the world. Hopefully by then the courts will stop the insanity and not allow the patenting of perfectly good words in advertizing puffery, but I will not hold my breath that they ever will.


Wink

For this purpose..., I rarely give any of my work out on consignment to other dealers....

You and I are using the word consignment differently. What you are referring to I would call a memo. I am referring to stones that clients of mine have consigned to me to sell for them because of divorce or what ever reason. I have told them that these are not normally stones that I would sell, but that I will show them. I also show them what I normally sell so that they understand why I often do not sell what they consign.

I would never bring in a wholesaler''s stone to sell against. I would consider it unethical to tie up his/her inventory in such a manner.

Wink

OK...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/18/2008 12:36:05 PM
Author: Mediterranean
wherefore art thou, Jubilee cut??

killed by De Beers SOC, The original cutter got cut off by De Beers and closed down.
The cut however is rising from the ashes in a limited fashion right now.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Todd that was fantastic

Argyle are doing just that now - mining the pipe from hell upwards (it was an open cut till now)

Date: 2/18/2008 4:56:50 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/18/2008 12:36:05 PM
Author: Mediterranean
wherefore art thou, Jubilee cut??

killed by De Beers SOC, The original cutter got cut off by De Beers and closed down.
The cut however is rising from the ashes in a limited fashion right now.

That would be the phoenix cut then Storm?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Moti Ganz http://rough-polished.com/en/news/14565.html made a fabulous speech recently. He talks about the need to go to just in time diamond cutting and added value by becoming a luxury market.

Todd your story shows how De beers esablished diamonds as a ''need'' not a want.

Here is some of wehat Moti Ganz said:

However, before addressing the issue of distribution, I would like to contest a so-called truth – something everyone says: “There is no rough” – we are told, day in and day out. The headlines report gloomy forecasts about rough production, and we often read about the search for the next large mine. I want to refute this false claim. There is rough. There is no shortage of rough.

But even more than that – we also have plenty of polished. We have tremendous stockpiles of polished. The polished diamond manufacturers have accumulated stock in an unprecedented volume of some $14-17 billion. All their funds are invested in inventory. Even if every manufacturer in the world would stop cutting diamonds today, they could still supply polished for a full year.

And so – there is rough and there is polished. So what’s the problem?
The problem is that there are not enough buyers of polished. The problem is that there are too many manufacturers that purchase rough and manufacture polished even though they have no orders. All industries, worldwide, have moved to manufacturing by demand. All industries have learned that you mustn’t manufacture for stock. Stock is expensive. When you have a customer, you manufacture. No customer? Don’t manufacture. Only the diamond industry has failed to join this global trend.

 

[langchunWei]

Date: 2/18/2008 12:14:06 AM
Author: langchunWei

Why are we not in-depth discussion diamond-cutting - the unification of the standards?
RE: Sergey
Major Labs are not interesting in unification and objective grade.
If they will do it, they should close grading departments in USA and Europe( or they should find way to reduce cost of grading by automation whole grading process)

In the theoretical study, we can not achieve the same understanding?
Why we do not have to mathematical logic, through a continuous function to achieve this unity?
In the practice of pure theory, we have find to a continuous function! ! !
''It'' as a theoretical basis for a unified standard, whether it should be one key of the ''function''?
I think we should be tightly around the ''unification'' to do research, this will be the right move.

We created a new diamond-cutting scientific theory, and have a scientific formula for cutting through, we already have a scientific diamond-cutting database, We believe that it will lead to an extensive and profound reformation in the industry of diamond, and will establish a scientific system of rules and standard for the industry of diamond.

My Research Result
In the manufacture of diamond crude materials, the cut shape and data are key, which not only decide whether the nature for fire of diamond ring face is best or not, but also decide whether the carat value of diamond ring face is largest or not, i.e. whether the abrasion of crude materials cut is least, and whether the shape of crude materials cut is best. Since the industry of diamond manufacture is always in the course of groping for experiences in the recent century, there are all kinds of plentiful empirical ¡°cut data¡±, none of them were obtained by the application and calculation of mathematic equation, without any capacity to make an theoretic proof by applying mathematics functions, to prove ¡°what cut data ensure fire of ring face best? ¡±, ¡°what cut shape ensure the carat value of ring face largest?¡± Because of these various and plentiful cut data without scientific authority of mathematic equation, whoever are not convinced or overwhelmed, and there are so many systems of ¡°rating standard¡± and ¡°manufacture rules¡±, such as famous systems such as AGS, AGL, AGT, IGI, EGL, HRD, DGL, GIA, CGL, HCA and etc. The most famous ones are AGS and GIA from USA , HRD from Belgium , and HCA from Australia . The reality status in the industry should be called as ¡°experiential state¡± or ¡°semi-scientific state¡±.
¡¡¡¡We have created a theory and used it to research the shape of ¡°round cut¡± and obtained an equation. By calculation, a database is available, with infinite groups of cut data. Moreover, for each group of data, each of three items such as table spread, crown angle and pavilion angle is exclusive, without recurring for the second time in another group of data, in other words, each group of data is completely sole and unique. In the manufacture of common light (window) glass ring face, each group of cut data may make glass ring face with best fire and largest carat value. The application of mathematic equation may prove the following questions theoretically: why is the fire best? Why is the abrasion of crude materials least? Why is the carat value of ring face largest? The successful fact has proved that our theory is scientific.
¡¡¡¡In the application of this theory, we have researched the shape of round ball and accomplished the success. We name this kind of ring face with round ball shape as ¡°the ring face of Eight Diagrams Ball¡±. This new type of ring face makes ¡°diamond necklace¡± similar to ¡°pearl necklace¡± turn into the reality, which may compete with ¡°Pearl Necklace¡± on the market, and makes crude materials of diamond with various sizes increase a part of value. This successful fact proves our theory is scientific.


Langchun Wei
CEO
Haikou zuan cheng Technology Company Ltd.
Add: tower1, No.41 chengxi Road, Haikou , Hainan province, China
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.DLSTCHINA.COM

 

[langchunWei]

Comment on 92 Groups of Standard Data (Manufacture Rules System) for AGS and GIA

¡¡¡¡For the standard data in 92 groups of AGS ¡¢ GIA, I have a brief review. Among 92 groups of standard data, there are 42 groups of standard data with table spread of 52%:

1: (52% , 31.5 ©b , 41.8 ©b ), 2

52% , 32 ©b , 41.8 ©b£©£¬

3 : £¨ 52% , 32.5 ©b , 41.8 ©b£© , etc. totaling to 42 groups, among them, there are 7 groups for sole AGS, and 5 groups sharing with GIA , thus there are 12 groups of standard data with AGS, and 30 groups of standard data with GIA.

In 92 groups of standard data, there are 50 groups of standard data with table spread of 53%:

1: ( 53% , 31.5 ©b , 41.8 ©b ), 2

53% , 32 ©b , 41.8 ©b ),

3: ( 53% , 32.5 ©b , 41.8 ©b ), etc., totaling to 50 groups, among them, there are 5 groups for sole AGS, and 8 groups sharing with GIA , thus there are 13 groups of standard data with AGS, and 37 groups of standard data with GIA.

¡¡¡¡Two items totals to 92 groups. You choose willingly out 10 groups of standard data, and 10 ring faces are manufactured with common light (window) glass, whether can these 10 groups of standard data make these 10 ring faces fire? How is the fire? You may test 92 groups of standard data to observe how many groups of standard data can make glass ring face fire? Are all of them making fire? Or, are none of them making fire? How is the fire? It is worth asking additional three questions:

¡¡¡¡Question 1: why is the same table spread of 52% shared in 42 groups of standard data rather than 50 groups of standard data? Why is the same table spread of 53% shared in 50 groups of standard data rather than 42 groups of standard data? This question should be explained by pursuing theories, but AGS and GIA never make such explanations.

¡¡¡¡Question 2: in my database, for any group of data, these three data of table spread, crown angle and pavilion angle are unique and won''t be equal to the same data in another group, i.e. any data of any item occur for sole one time without a second time in my database. My each group can realize the secret of ¡°two extreme standard¡±, each datum for each item is unique and ¡°sole one time¡±. This characteristic is determined by my mathematic equation and may be proved with scientific theory. In database of AGS and GIA, there are recurring the same data of table spread, crown angle and pavilion angle in many groups of data, obviously, which is in departure, conflicts and contradiction with the nature characteristics of mathematic equation. Therefore, the theoretic illustration is necessary, but AGS and GIA never make such explanations.

¡¡¡¡Question 3: this responding ¡°blurry relationship¡± of ¡°one head and many tails¡± for ¡°one table spread and 42 groups of standard data¡±, ¡°one table spread and 50 groups of standard data¡± given by AGS and GIA, obviously, is in departure, contradiction and conflict with the nature characteristics of mathematic equation.

¡¡ There are brief reviews on the rating standard system of GIA. Since January 2006, GIA announced that GIA would begin ¡°to issue, free of charge, an appraisal report of cut rating system for round brilliant cut diamond.¡± How did such a completely rating system come into being? GIA made such explanation: ¡°GIA observed more than 2300 diamond ring faces for 70000 times, based on the scientific observation data, through the research for many years, and finally developed a completely new report system for cut technique rating. ¡± The explanation above may be made the following simple comments in one word: ¡°from the words and expressions such as 2300 rings, 70000 times, observation, etc., it is evident that this is a experimental groping process, and such process per se is completely empirical, thus, since the experimental establishing process for the rating standard system of GIA is not scientific or theoretic, how could we expect such rating standard system is scientific? ¡± To establish accurately a scientific process for standard system, first of all, ¡°extreme standard values¡± should be calculated theoretic, i.e., firstly we should determine ¡°how is the best fire like?¡± by calculation based on theory, rather than grope for and recognize ¡°how is the best fire like¡± in a lot of practicality, in other words, it would be scientific without a scientific theory for run-through all along in the scientific course of establishing standard system.

¡¡ In one word, the ¡°manufacture rules system¡± and ¡°rating standard system¡± are ¡°experiential¡±, or ¡°semi-scientific¡±. What People with scientific wisdom should do is only one, i.e. to accomplish immediately a leap from ¡°experiences¡± to ¡°science¡± and such large stride of scientific progre

Langchun Wei
CEO
Haikou zuan cheng Technology Company Ltd.
Add: tower1, No.41 chengxi Road, Haikou , Hainan province, China
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.DLSTCHINA.COM

 

[langchunWei]

¡°My theory, equation and database¡± have the following value:

Value 1: ¡¡
Everything has their ¡°extreme standard¡±. The scientific concept of ¡°largest¡±, ¡°longest¡±, ¡°brightest¡±, ¡°most colorful¡±, ¡°most beautiful¡±, ¡°best¡±, etc. in our words, is a certain ¡°extreme standard¡± of things. ¡°Extreme standard¡± of everything may be expressed by mathematic equations, and these ¡°extreme standard value¡± may be calculated, quested and obtained by mathematic equations. Whether the fire of diamond ring face is best or whether carat value is largest are two ¡°extreme standard¡±, which may be expressed by mathematic equations, and these ¡°extreme standard value¡± may be calculated, quested and obtained by mathematic equations.
¡¡¡¡ Although there are so many systems of ¡°manufacture rules¡± and ¡°rating standard¡±, whoever cannot be convinced by others. To consolidate them and establish ¡°uniform manufacture rules system¡± and ¡°uniform rating standard system¡± are one of my scientific theory necessary values.
Value 2:
There are thousands upon thousands of shapes for diamond crude materials, but Trotsky''s ¡°standard data¡± are only in one group, there are large differences between each other. Therefore, how to make crude materials least abrasion and make carat value of ring face largest, and at the same time, to make the nature of ring face fire best, become a big problem. Only one outlet is to find out real ¡°standard data'', and increase them to infinite groups, so people made a long-term research on ¡°cut shape¡± and ¡°cut data¡±. However, the achievements are few.
The application of my theory will make a research on various ¡°cut shape¡± and establish all kinds of mathematic equations, and calculate multifarious database. Another value of my theory is to provide the research of diamond cut with a strong theoretic tool for the theorization of exquisite diamond design and predication of manufacture result.
Value 3:
My diamond manufacture theory and equation and precious stone manufacture database, provide the possibility of intellectualization and automation as the premise of industry scale in the field of diamond cut, due to their symbolic logic characteristics of continuous function, which is another large value of my research result.
Three Key Words ¡¡
¡¡ It is necessary to make explanations for three parts: firstly, ¡°number combination and mathematic equation ¡±, secondly, ¡°two extreme standard¡±, thirdly, ¡°difference¡±.
1. ¡°Number combination and mathematic equation¡± Key word: ¡°equation¡±
¡¡ Tolksky''s famed group of ¡°standard data¡± is just a ¡°combination ¡±of several numbers. The ¡°combination¡± of these numbers is necessary to be supported by a mathematic equation, and it is not scientific but experiential in the absence of this support. What the mathematic equation obeys is the physics logic in the geometric optics and physic optics. The mathematic equation makes each number obey the same scientific logic when combining numbers, so as to ensure that the number combination is neither blindfold nor experiential. However, Trotsky never gave any mathematic equation, and the scientific question left by him is a theoretic problem. Therefore, Trotsky''s group of ¡°standard data¡± is only an experiential result, and the difficult problem relating to ¡°mathematic equation¡± left by him is a theoretic problem with deep essence and concluding issue with far-reaching significance.
All kinds of prevalent ¡°standard data¡± are without the support from mathematic equation, and are applied extensively in the systems of AGS, GIA etc. However, the essence and instinct of science are to pursue the ¡°highly quantitive ¡± analysis by adopting a mathematic equation. The subject without highly quantitive analysis for the moment is in a certain phase of the course of the scientific development, and may be called ¡°semi-science ¡±. The scientific development will make the quantitive degree of ¡°semi-science¡± higher and higher, which will become a highly quantitive science finally. ¡°Standard data¡±, as a group of scientific data, should be highly quantitive and supported by mathematic equation; if not, the called ¡°standard data¡± would be ¡°experiential data¡±. As a subject of science and technology, the quantitive degree of ¡°diamond cut data¡± should be highest, and supported by mathematic equation.
If the ¡°cut data¡± are not supported by mathematic equation, they are not scientific but experiential. In a word, it is a great stride in the advance of science with support from mathematic equation than without such support.
¡¡As for the shape of diamond round, my ¡°standard data¡± are expressed and calculated and obtained by the same mathematic equation, and each item of data in each group is unique without recurring in another group of data, moreover, such ¡°standard data¡± are infinite groups, which is the difference between my Database and others.
2. ¡°Two Extreme Standards¡±, Key word: ¡°Theory¡±
¡¡ Everything has their ¡°extreme standard¡±. ¡°Best¡±, ¡°largest¡±, ¡°most beautiful¡±, ¡°brightest¡± and so on, mean the ¡°extreme standard¡± of things. ¡°Extreme standard¡± of everything should be expressed, calculated, quested and obtained by mathematic equations, and theoretically speaking, it is without any exception.
¡¡¡°Is the fire for a ring face best? ¡± For a scientific procedure for judgment, we should consider all factors affecting the fire such as diamond materials, shape and data of ring face, light source environment etc. and calculate ¡°extreme standard value¡±, and then measure the rating value of ring face fire with instrument. When both values are equal, the fire is best. However, the fact is not so much highly scientific quantitive, but ¡°rating standard¡± in one place, or in another place, using their respective ¡°experiential standard value¡±.
¡¡¡°Is the carat value of diamond ring face largest¡±? The carat value may be largest, if the abrasion of crude materials is least. As a matter of fact, it is an issue ¡°how to determine the best cut shape for crude materials of diamond. For different cut shapes, crude materials have different abrasion, and ring face has different carat value. However, failing to determine the ¡°best cut shape¡± is a realistic problem that can be found everywhere.
¡¡How to cut the shape of crude materials and judge the nature of ring face are not satisfactory in fact. This depends on experiences to cut, and judgment is still made based on experiences. The recognition of ¡°both extreme standards¡± is blank. These problems such as how to apply scientifically ¡°two extreme standards¡±, how to judge whether the diamond fire is best or whether the carat value of diamond ring face is largest, are solved by applying my theory. The key word is our ¡°theory¡±.
3. Key Words-¡°Difference¡±
¡¡As to the information from GIA, SARIN, OGI, OctoNus, we have made some reading, in the recent several years, they achieved some technological results that change quickly, which encouraged us greatly. However, these results are different substantively to our research result, with difference between experiences and science.

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/19/2008 10:26:48 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Moti Ganz http://rough-polished.com/en/news/14565.html made a fabulous speech recently. He talks about the need to go to just in time diamond cutting and added value by becoming a luxury market.

Todd your story shows how De beers esablished diamonds as a ''need'' not a want.

Here is some of wehat Moti Ganz said:

However, before addressing the issue of distribution, I would like to contest a so-called truth – something everyone says: “There is no rough” – we are told, day in and day out. The headlines report gloomy forecasts about rough production, and we often read about the search for the next large mine. I want to refute this false claim. There is rough. There is no shortage of rough.

But even more than that – we also have plenty of polished. We have tremendous stockpiles of polished. The polished diamond manufacturers have accumulated stock in an unprecedented volume of some $14-17 billion. All their funds are invested in inventory. Even if every manufacturer in the world would stop cutting diamonds today, they could still supply polished for a full year.

Yes thats what he said (and was not taken too seriously by......, he just didnt say who valued these $14-$17 Bil. (what is the realistic value?) and what types of Diamond material they are....
Garry..., go open the vaults of all these Diamond manufacturers and see what is sitting (quietly) in there...., I promise you will be shocked!
If you dont already know...

Except some speculative "big guns" that stockpile limited large (5 carats +) high quality Diamonds for economic speculations..., I can tell you that there is a shortage of the high quality material in almost all sizes..., even the smalls (1/6-2.0 carats rough.)


And so – there is rough and there is polished. So what’s the problem?
The problem is that there are not enough buyers of polished (depending what polished...). The problem is that there are too many manufacturers that purchase rough and manufacture polished even though they have no orders. All industries, worldwide, have moved to manufacturing by demand. All industries have learned that you mustn’t manufacture for stock. Stock is expensive. When you have a customer, you manufacture. No customer? Don’t manufacture. Only the diamond industry has failed to join this global trend.

I personally know some great Companies that switched to the business model of supplying upon demand..., I certainly work this way most of the time..., and there are tons of orders that simply cant be supplied/delivered!!!

Sure..., if you need a ton of 1 carats to 1/2 carat rounds in J-Z, SI2-I3 any make..., you will find exactly what you need..., and more!!!
but try ordering 100- 1 carat to 1/2 carats rounds, PS, MQ, oval etc..., of good decent cut (does not have to be EX. cause you will not have a chance...) and J and better color and SI2 and better clarities...

Now try ordering the same in G+-VS+..., good luck!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/20/2008 12:37:27 AM
Author: langchunWei

Comment on 92 Groups of Standard Data (Manufacture Rules System) for AGS and GIA

¡¡¡¡For the standard data in 92 groups of AGS ¡¢ GIA, I have a brief review. Among 92 groups of standard data, there are 42 groups of standard data with table spread of 52%:

1: (52% , 31.5 ©b , 41.8 ©b ), 2

52% , 32 ©b , 41.8 ©b£©£¬

Howdy and welcome too pricescope.
Couple questions are the minor facets taken into account and is brilliance and scintillation take into account?
The AGS system is a 3D system and GIA in a very rough manner takes the lgf% into account.
A 3 criteria system would be a step backwards and cant be directly compared too the AGS system and too a lesser extent the GIA system.

I have been playing with the 52% , 31.5 , 41.8 combo in DiamCalc and find it a very interesting combo.
The brightness is excellent but the scintillation would be down compared to a modern tolk because of the lack of contrast.
This would rate it a penalty on the AGS system and the cutting guidlines grade is an AGS1/2 and I predict it would likely make an AGS2 in the AGS software.
75% lgf% with that combo would be a train wreck, 80% helps some...

 

[strmrdr]

Here is the GEM file hit play in the different light settings and it will show that this diamond dont dance very well.
There are mostly small scintillation events and a few med and almost no large.

 

[strmrdr]

Here is a modern tolk(default DC 57/34.5/40.75/80.5) too compare it too...

 

[strmrdr]

Modern tolk ASET

 

[Serg]

Hi Langchun ,


re:to the information from GIA, SARIN, OGI, OctoNus, we have made some reading, in the recent several years, they achieved some technological results that change quickly, which encouraged us greatly. However, these results are different substantively to our research result, with difference between experiences and science.

Welcome to IDCC2 (2nd International Diamond Cut Conference (IDCC-2) will take place in Switzerland in spring 2009. )

I will happy see your proof: why is your research better than OctoNus research.


Did you read our publications? where could I read your works( English version please

 

[langchunWei]

Hi Langchun ,

re:to the information from GIA, SARIN, OGI, OctoNus, we have made some reading, in the recent several years, they achieved some technological results that change quickly, which encouraged us greatly. However, these results are different substantively to our research result, with difference between experiences and science.

Welcome to IDCC2 (2nd International Diamond Cut Conference (IDCC-2) will take place in Switzerland in spring 2009. )
I will happy see your proof: why is your research better than OctoNus research.
Did you read our publications? where could I read your works( English version please
Sergey Sivovolenko
CEO OctoNus




RE:
DiaGem
Strmrdr (Veritas Vincit)
Sergey
How are you!
Ps I am concerned about a very long time,
Thank you for your greetings, I am very pleased to recognize you, DiaGem, strmrdr, Sergey,
Each one of you expert advice and perspectives, this is a unique perspective views, which often give us a valuable thinking,

We are particularly familiar with Russian science and engineering education and Sergey President, speaking with a Chinese proverb - Shenjiao has for a long time, very cordial "

About the scientific theory, continuous function, database theory, in the past, we write a lot of papers, they are Chinese, and we are of these papers will be translated into English, it may take some time, but they are very values, have an article entitled "Comments OctoNus''s high-tech", after the completion of translation, we will be here to Sergey and you,

Best regard

Langchun Wei
CEO
Haikou zuan cheng Technology Company Ltd.
Add: tower1, No.41 chengxi Road, Haikou , Hainan province, China
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.DLSTCHINA.COM

 

[niceice]

Date: 2/19/2008 10:26:48 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Todd your story shows how De beers esablished diamonds as a ''need'' not a want.

Absolutely. DeBeers created an expectation for a diamond engagement ring in the U.S. market, without a doubt. I suspect that people who elect not to incorporate a diamond into their engagement ring find themselves explaining it a lot... Well, you see I prefer sapphire, etc.

Interestingly enough I heard a radio advertisement this morning for XX Brand, "the ideal, ideal cut diamond". I''m so tempted to walk into the store and take their staff for a SPIN

but I won''t because it''s not their fault that somebody in their marketing department has a stutter... (oh yea, I know what their trying to say... our ideal cut diamond is "more ideal" than other ideal cut diamonds, blah, blah, blah) all I want to know is "why?" followed by "but why?" and "but why?" and a whole lot of chatter about crown and pavilion angles, consistency of facet structure, etc.

Great speech by Moti Ganz, thanks for the link Garry. I don''t think I''ve ever heard a supplier say that rough is in short supply, rather the rough they are looking for is too expensive or not within their reach at the moment. It''s no secret that the cartels make it a practice to hoard diamond rough, how else would they control the price of diamonds. Speaking of which, I forgot to mention in my post above with reference to DeBeers advertising, their early advertisements contained a grid in the lower corner which provided "examples of what a person might expect to pay for diamonds of various sizes" which was the workaround for not actually setting prices in the U.S. market which would be prohibited...

 

[langchunWei]

When Standards for Gem Cut Grades Unified?

On February, 16th,2008, Mr.Garry H. quoted an article Philosophic question about diamond advertising on the Internet, which caused a great response. The theme of this article was: When would be the standards for Gem Cut Grades unified?
Obviously, it is impossible to unify the grades standards by experience. Contrarily, depending on the pure scientific theoretical study achievement can realize the unification. Everyone is equal in front of experience and obedient to science. That is truth!
GIA promoted a free soft for grades standard on the market in 2004. It has made 70,000 observations on 2300 diamonds¡¯ cut facets, and this soft was a standard system established on the basis of plenty of those observational data. That could be considered as an actual effort on empiricism, hard and clumsy. Nevertheless, few people admitted GIA¡¯s achievements, for each had his own experience and nobody would like to be convinced. That is a worldwide truth, Everyone is equal in front of experience.
However, Human beings admit and obedient to science. Therefore, unifying the grades standard by science is the only proper method.
The essence of grades standard is gem cutting database ¨C processing rules system, for cutting data determines cutting quality. The essence of gem cutting database is cutting equations -- continuous function, for cutting equations determine the theoretical database. Thus, grades standard has close relationship with cutting equations, which means grades standard system and processing rules system cannot be separated.
To unify grades standard, we must apply cutting equations as the scientific theory which has the only qualification. It is the same with processing rules system. In a word, only cutting equations (continuous function) can be scientific theoretical support to realize the unification of processing rule system and grades standard system. it is a scientific logic, incontrovertible!
Fortunately, we have already obtained the cutting equations and a scientific theoretical database by calculation. It is a curve function, in which every parameter of every group of data is different from other groups of data. For instance, the group of data which table proportion is 53% is the only group. Among raw materials with infinite kinds of shapes, there is only one the most suitable for the only group of data. That is the differences between traditional database and ours. That is the differences between experience and science. That is also the scientific theoretical support for unifying processing rules system and grades standard system. We sincerely hope this theory can be validated and brings a modern era in diamond industry.
Science is charming and irresistible. The best way to protect the coming benefits is to adopt science instead of maintaining empiricism.

Your sincerely,


Langchun Wei
CEO DLSTCHINA


in Haikou 2008-2-18

 

[rainydaze]

Date: 2/17/2008 8:09:45 PM
Author: Kath1609

Date: 2/16/2008 12:27:07 AM
Author:Garry H (Cut Nut)
False use of absolute claims has diminished the confidence of retailers, salespersons and consumers.

I can''t speak about the confidences of retailers or salespeople, but as a consumer, I believe that false claims of ''ideal'' and ''perfection'' have reduced my confidence in the diamond industry.

I am not very knowledgeable about diamonds. Having lurked on here for a couple of months, I have increased my knowledge immensely. But I am still very much a novice.

The average consumer knows about the 4Cs. The poster is displayed in every jewellery store. Unfortunately ‘cut’ is defined as ‘shape’ and nothing more. Until I found PS, I too thought that ‘cut’ referred to ‘shape’. I now know better.

When a diamond company advertises that their diamonds have a superior or Ideal cut, as an ignorant consumer I believed them. I thought that companies couldn’t make such false claims without some sort of outcry – either from consumers or the diamond industry itself (appraisers, suppliers etc). I trusted them, because they are the experts. The ‘science’ of a good diamond was beyond my comprehension. Only gemmologists have this arcane knowledge. Yes, I was very naive. As are most consumers.

The aspect of ‘cut’, as anything other than ‘shape’, is just not discussed. There is no handy chart displayed in shops. The info isn’t on the little tag on the ring. Even the sales assistants think of ‘cut’ as ‘shape’. How many in-house grading reports have the table percentages and cut degrees on them?

Now that I know that ‘cut’ is so much more and so important, such advertising campaigns leave me disillusioned. They leave me sad and angry. Sad that everyday, hardworking people spend wads of their hard-earned money on inferior products; and angry because the diamond companies know they are selling inferior stones, and think that’s just fine. Rather than actually selling quality stones, they are just lying to naive consumers, because they can.

very well said, kath1609!! i completely agree!

 

[strmrdr]

I''m not sure that the science is even close too a point that unification is possible.
While static fire and brightness is fairly well understood, scintillation and human perception of it hasn''t been cracked yet.
I think that any break thru with the round shape is going too come from that direction.
Trying too do asschers and other fancies without understanding it is impossible too do well.
Is this something your group is working on langchunWei?

When I started working on designing asschers I found that it destroyed many of my perceptions built up from years of study of the science of the RB cut and showed how little was actualy nailed down.

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/20/2008 1:22:11 PM
Author: strmrdr
I''m not sure that the science is even close too a point that unification is possible.
While static fire and brightness is fairly well understood, scintillation and human perception of it hasn''t been cracked yet.
I think that any break thru with the round shape is going too come from that direction.
Trying too do asschers and other fancies without understanding it is impossible too do well.
Is this something your group is working on langchunWei?

When I started working on designing asschers I found that it destroyed many of my perceptions built up from years of study of the science of the RB cut and showed how little was actualy nailed down.

Sorry for the quick thread jack...

Storm..., I am trying to find the thread on the "super" high crown Asscher we were discussing..., can you give me the link?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/20/2008 2:04:35 PM
Author: DiaGem
Sorry for the quick thread jack...

Storm..., I am trying to find the thread on the ''super'' high crown Asscher we were discussing..., can you give me the link?

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/why-cut-asschers-with-small-corners-and-windmills.78433/
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/8-fold-symmetry-just-some-theory.78227/