Solasfera -vs- SUPERBcert

[Superidealist]

Barry Gutwein, SUPERBcert''s owner, has argued both on this forum and others for the accuracy of the BrillianceScope and touted his SUPEBcert diamonds'' BrillianceScope results. So for those who believe in the BrillianceScope, here is a side-by-side comparison of David So''s new Solasfera diamonds to Barry Gutwein''s SUPERBcert diamonds.

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

Solasfera

SUPERBcert

 

[strmrdr]

and your point is???

 

[rfath]

Erm... quite the lengthy post...

I''m curious, though, to know how visible the differences between the middle very-high and extreme very-high values are for these stones to the lay observer.

Haven''t had a chance to see a solasfera stone in person yet. I *have* seen a superbcert and absolutely love the dear little thing.

 

[Superidealist]

Date: 1/14/2005
Author: strmrdr

and your point is???

To provide a side-by-side comparison of two diamond brands that rely on the BrillinceScope to make their case for being superior cuts.

 

[nicknomo]

Id be interested to see how this solasfera looked in person.. Arent they pretty expensive?

 

[JohnQuixote]

First, I am not a BScope proponent.

The BS rewards thin pavilion mains due to the concentrated nature of the light return. The Solasfera is a ten-cut (a modified version of a stone Rosy Blue patented I believe - DR may know). There are 2 additional mains and, obviously, they will be more thin than those on an eight-cut.

These results are predictable matching an 8-cut against a 10-cut on a machine preferential to a certain type of construction.

 

[Dancing Fire]

where''s rhino,he carries both type.maybe he can comment.

 

[ame]

Holycrap the Solasfera is cool.

 

[valeria101]

Well, I can understand why a big diamond gets better looking with a few more facets, but can''t understand 10 fold symmetry on a 1 carat round. The precission of the cut for all those tiny facets must be quite a feat though, beyond the looks.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 1/14/2005 7:46:23 PM
Author: valeria101
Well, I can understand why a big diamond gets better looking with a few more facets, but can''t understand 10 fold symmetry on a 1 carat round. The precission of the cut for all those tiny facets must be quite a feat though, beyond the looks.

Agreed, Ana (large diamond versus avg or small and this cut).

The extra faceting and meet points - especially on the Solasfera version of the 10-cut - is why you rarely see one of these stones receive the top symmetry grade.

 

[Mara]

I have to say that I never fail to be amazed at the beauty of the SuperbCert diamonds that we see in rings in pictures on this forum...for whatever reason they always hands down are some of the most beautiful H&A's that we see. The first few I attributed to great picture taking, but it's definitely a continued trend.

That said, how does side by side comparison of an 8cut to a 10cut really suffice as a true comparison? Isn't that like apples to oranges, both are fruit (H&A's) but they are different types? Am I missing something? What about comparing two 8 cuts on Bscope results? That would seem more aligned?

 

[icelady]

Date: 1/14/2005 10:10:21 AM
Author: Superidealist

Date: 1/14/2005
Author: strmrdr

and your point is???

To provide a side-by-side comparison of two diamond brands that rely on the BrillinceScope to make their case for being superior cuts.

I still have to ask what your point is? Are you attempting to market the Solasfera? If so, you have succeeded in proving that you could not discern this minute difference with the naked eye. The beauty is still in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Super idealist is an idealistic sort of dude.
He may be making some slightly sarcastic and pointed point scorings against the brilliancscope(tm) and superbCert''s barry Gutwein who has been a very strong supporter of the technology. OR He may be letting readers draw their own conclusions.

But before you jump to conclusions check out these 2 threads https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/proprietary-diamond-cuts.13712/ where you will see that he does perform excellent and balanced information presentation services for pricescope users. This takes an amazing amoutn of time and effort.

So read into the information what ever you like.

 

[Superidealist]

Date: 1/15/2005
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

He may be making some slightly sarcastic and pointed point scorings against the brilliancscope(tm) and superbCert''s barry Gutwein who has been a very strong supporter of the technology. OR He may be letting readers draw their own conclusions.

I leave this as an exercise for the diligent reader.

 

[RockDoc]

This reply got put in and? thread - so I pasted it here.





RockDoc

Rough Rock

Total Posts: 439
Last Post: 1/15/2005
Member Since: 8/16/2000
Subscribe to this author

While both round diamonds.... I don''t think the two should be compared except for appearance.

I have seen only one Solasfera, and while it pegged the B Scope rating, I thought a "regular" H&A looked better. But that is my taste and opinion, not that of the industry.

Between Barry''s stone and the Solasfera (as well as other H&A stones) they are different because of the number of facets.
While the solasfera is very brilliant and dispersive it lack the "crispness factor" that seems to be maximized by the standard ideal. This is why I say that they really can''t be compared.

I am a proponent of the Brilliance Scope, as it adds another dimension to analyzing a diamond. For me it has been a very interesting teaching tool and supplemental device which reports light return. But the return of light or how well a diamond performs to the eye is what for most people matters. The BScope is very good at comparing light return from most stones and my eyes generally agree with its resultant grading. But sometimes I don''t agree (seldom). While it is a very useful tool it still is not the trained and experienced eye, as it counts pixels in the three areas it does report.

Maybe I''m not giving Solasfera the credit it deserves... Both types of stones are certainly have a permium look to them, but I think that depending on preference needs to override the B Scope rating.

I have only seen one example of the Solasfera, and I was dissappointed with it. Maybe voiceing this opinion is not fair having only seen one stone, so I want to conditionalize my statement here.

Relevant to Superb Certs, I have seen lots of them.

It is the beginning for seeing the Solasfera and other new cuts so, as time goes on, and I see more, perhaps I''ll change my opinion... but I did want to express my feeling in answer to your post.

Regards

Rockdoc

consumersgemlab.com

 

[icelady]

Date: 1/15/2005 12

2:31 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Super idealist is an idealistic sort of dude.
He may be making some slightly sarcastic and pointed point scorings against the brilliancscope(tm) and superbCert''s barry Gutwein who has been a very strong supporter of the technology. OR He may be letting readers draw their own conclusions.

But before you jump to conclusions check out these 2 threads https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/proprietary-diamond-cuts.13712/ where you will see that he does perform excellent and balanced information presentation services for pricescope users. This takes an amazing amoutn of time and effort.

So read into the information what ever you like.

Garry,

Slightly sarcastic is an understatement.

I have read the threads you posted above, and while I truly appreciate Superidealist''s time and effort to gather the information posted in those threads, there is NOT the same "balanced information presentation" displayed in this thread as was the case in the others. As Mara and RocDoc point out, the comparison is not apples to apples giving the impression that this post was made for a different purpose.

 

[Superidealist]

I don''t see why the BrillianceScope reports of the two can''t be compared. After all, isn''t the BrillianceScope actually measuring brilliance, fire, and scintillation? Can''t BrillianceScope reports of two diamonds be compared to determine which of the two is more brilliant, firey, and scintillating? If not, why should we even care about what the BriilianceScope says?

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 1/15/2005 3

0:58 PM
Author: Superidealist
I don''t see why the BrillianceScope reports of the two can''t be compared. After all, isn''t the BrillianceScope actually measuring brilliance, fire, and scintillation? Can''t BrillianceScope reports of two diamonds be compared to determine which of the two is more brilliant, firey, and scintillating? If not, why should we even care about what the BriilianceScope says?

As far as return of light - yes you can compare them... However, it is a better comparison to compare solasfera against solasfera, and other H&A ''s etc, to each other.

The Visual display to the human is different than how the BScope gathers its data.Our eyes can''t count pixels when obvserving a diamond.

There is a particular look that is different between thses two stones, and while the BScope does report the amount of white light, color light and scintilation, the end result is that ( limited by my only having seen one of them) the consumer really needs to see both and make a choice showing his preference for which kind of cut they prefer. Then compare the same cut to the same cut. FOr the individual that feels both are attractive then the Bscope is useful.

Both are very finely performing stones, but slightly different....

Rockoc

 

[Superidealist]

So it would be fair to say that some people prefer the superior optics of the Solasfera while others prefer the less brilliant and scintillating look of a superior hearts and arrows diamond?

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 1/15/2005 4:16:23 PM
Author: Superidealist
So it would be fair to say that some people prefer the superior optics of the Solasfera while others prefer the less brilliant and scintillating look of a superior hearts and arrows diamond?

No it wouldn''t be fair to tag the H&A type cutting as less brilliant. In some of the images of the B Scope in this thread you can see that the Solasfera type stone, varies in its B Scope rating, some very close to the ratings other H&A get too. So it''s sort of unfair to tag the Superb Cert or other branded H&A as less brilliant than the Solasfera.

While the BScope does it thing in an unemotional stance, our eyes don''t. Most consumers as well as those testing MAY have a preference.... others may not. All of the equipment we use has its limitations. Our job is to report the facts and let the client make his own decision after pointing out the differences, so the data can be interpreted meaningfully.

Keep in mind that the techonology is constantly being improved, so things may change, plus I''ve attempted to claify that the B Scope isn''t a set of eyes - but it does have a very meaningful report of information...

Most diamonds give off one characteristic or another as dispersion can offset brilliance and scintillation. This is the most common reading of Eightstars... Some like them a lot more than the typical well cut H&A others don''t. My experience has been that many consumers see a difference, but when weighing their budget, prefer to spend less as to them the difference isn''t overwhelming in many cases.

I would like to see more Solasferas, as I''ve tried to make it clear I have only seen one.... perhaps I''ll change my position and opinion then.

Rockdoc

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/15/2005 4:16:23 PM
Author: Superidealist
So it would be fair to say that some people prefer the superior optics of the Solasfera while others prefer the less brilliant and scintillating look of a superior hearts and arrows diamond?

If the Bscope scale calls that brilliance and scintillation it doesn''t mean that''s what they are... I think. This tool deals differently with smaller and larger gems and with smaller or larger facets on them. Should I just believe that all small rounds have less scintillation (B''scope reads them this way) ? Bscope, Iscope or Xscope, I would still say these tools are much more useful once one understands their limitations... It can''t be that precisely this ''scope is perfect.

One can call opals "pinfire", "harlequin" and "flag" after the size of the patches of color on them. Anything like that for diamonds yet

At least among opals, the larger the flash, the bigger the price too...

 

[RockDoc]

Valeriia


Yes... the opal comparison is relevant in this....

As I''d explain it, the Solasfera has a lot of pinfore.

The H&A - type have broader colors generally

The Eightstar has the broadest flashes of color...

But that is only for dispersion ( color spectral light return )


Hope this helps

Rockdoc

 

[samhahn]

As an owner of both H&A and solasfera diamonds, I can say both of them look great with minor diffence in visual presentation. Very simplely put, H&A seems to have bigger flash but less sparkle and solarfera seems to have smaller flash but more sparkle. So depends on your personal preference, you can go either way but not matter which one you get, I am pretty sure you''ll be happy~ I prefer smaller more frequent sparkle over bigger but less frequest sparkle when the diamonds moves so I went with solasfera for my latest diamond purchase but I am sure there are people who prefer bigger flash over frequent sparkle~ Just out of curiosity, I wonder what would be the maximum number of arrows/hearts you can have in a modified rb cut diamond while maintaining/improving the light performance over super ideal cuts like H&A and solasfera~?