HI:Date: 8/20/2006 9:13:17 PM
Author: ccuheartnurse
Most are never going to write a thesis on what makes a diamond tick.
what emeraldlover said.Date: 8/20/2006 11:03:47 PM
Author: emeraldlover
For me, researching diamonds is like any pursuit combining art and science, such as photography.
You learn as much technique as you can handle, you think about what you'd like to capture, then you try to forget the technique and go for the vision!
Of course, you keep up with new technology and see what it can do for you. You also review your parameters constantly, and sometimes you challenge those parameters to obtain a certain effect. But it's a balance.
I love that there are clever experts and specialists who keep the dialogue going, but my life is happier and saner if I keep a certain amount of distance!
If you lost a little you are feeling much more negative emotion than you are feeling positive emotion if you won a little .
Must be the drive for model building for understanding, rather than to seeking out "feelings" for direct measurement
You are so so right on this. I love my 60/60. Many here would have rejected this stone on numbers alone. Yet, it's beautiful and scored a 1.2 on the HCA. For many, myself included, we have immersed ourselves in diamond specs. And people come on PS asking for the best (expert) advice hoping to avoid making a poor buying decision. This is, in my opinion, where the wagon falls a little short. Recently, I even wound up criticising a diamond purchase because:Date: 8/20/2006 7:54:32 PM
Author: fire&ice
But - and a big butt - Who is the person deciding what is 'worth doing right'?What is right? With me, science be darned.
I'm seeing too much dismissing and less discussion about the negatives & the POSTIVES of a stone.
Nothing new here - I'm a rebel in that I LOVE blue fluor. Instead of dissing it, the Cap't said that someone told him that perfect 'ideal' diamonds couldn't come from fluor rough. Made sense. Still didn't care -To me - a perpective not a rule. What outways the other? Personal.
You know what they say about history....those who do not learn from it, are doomed to repeat it.
I understand what your saying but sometimes I think the newbs get overwhelmed by the "Ideal Crowd". I''ve seen lots of new people on here post a stone that they say they have seen in person, like and can get a great deal on and they are asking if it seems like a good buy. I''ve seen a lot of people start steamrolling on how it''s ok...and it could be a good stone...BUT if they go to these next 5 links they can a PERFECTLY cut stone. I understand a lot of people will respond to that with "Well i''m just letting them know what I think and what else is out there, they don''t HAVE to follow it." But I think they end up getting steamrolled into it sometimes. I mean think about it. Your new on here, you know nothing about diamonds really...and you have like 10 or so people giving a strong push in another direction. If your already wary and sort of scared about your purchase you may find yourself more confused than you started out. I don''t think a lot of new people understand eithier. I personally like this balance thats been brought up a few times. When anyone has asked my opinion for a stone I like checking out the numbers of it if only to merely be educated on it. There are certain stats that are going to be important to me. But I also know enough that if the stats are good, even if they aren''t THE BEST and the stone looks great and it''s a good deal. Well I know thats a good buy. I think some already confused and lost people could come on here and leave thinking that anything under an AGS000 isn''t worth buying, and thats kinda sad.Date: 8/21/2006 12:46:50 PM
Author: decodelighted
I think the ''Ideal Crowd'' has more traction & momentum for one simple reason:
If you DO have the guts or vision to go ''off the board'' of generally accepted stats ... ya may be hesitant to keep bringing attention to the so-called ''negative'' qualities of your beloved stone in order to give NEWBIES advice.
For example: how many times do I really want to ''pimp'' how awesome my non-Stmdr-approved Asscher is ... and recap the details of how it doesn''t meet his critera?
It''s kinda ''no win'' ... cause no one else can SEE what I''m SEEING, as clearly as I can ... and it leaves a kind of tainted perception of the very piece that''s so adored by me.
As much as I''d like to encourage NEWBIES to think outside the box ... look ''off the board'' ... don''t drink the Super Ideal/#s/Gizmos Kool-Aid ...& be an example of such ... it really depends on my mood at the moment -- how willing I am to open up that ''non-ideal'' can of whoop-a** all over my Precious.
Definietely a language barrier. Beauty, in general including people, art, cats, can not be measured scientifically as absolute. No two people will agree with what is optimum beauty. In the end numbers are irrelavent. Science can not predict what someone will think the most beautiful will be. The study I refered to (Ira - for you also) was regarding people. Symmetric looking people, more than not, were usually put in the beauty pile.
In my very humble opinion, the answer is yes and no.
Beauty cuts could be different for different people( Like different beauty cars). No problem. Beauty is not Ideal.Date: 8/21/2006 1:19:12 PM
Author: fire&ice
Definietely a language barrier. Beauty, in general including people, art, cats, can not be measured scientifically as absolute. No two people will agree with what is optimum beauty. In the end numbers are irrelavent. Science can not predict what someone will think the most beautiful will be. The study I refered to (Ira - for you also) was regarding people. Symmetric looking people, more than not, were usually put in the beauty pile.
But, many people may agree on what is NOT beautiful. I don''t think anyone here will embraced a stone that is poorly cut. Just not agree on what ultimate beauty may be.
Yeah, a balance is what I am trying to propose. The stone mentioned wasn''t really what prompted me to be the hellion Rich suggested I wasI suggested a stone within a persons budget, within the desired inventory of a particular vendor w/ stats like tolerant mm d 60.7 - t 56 thin to med girdle with (gosh forbid) only sym/pol as VG/G - And, was told I must have posted it in jest. Something''s got to give.
Ira......I didn''t think I was whining. My point was simple. My stone would not appeal to some on PS because the specs are not ideal. I didn''t know until long after I purchased my stone that it scored a 1.2 on the HCA. My rock was originally graded by GIA before the new grading reports. I didn''t get a sarin on my stone. I never saw an Ideal Scope. I just bought a stone, which to my eyes was fantastic in all sorts of light and was one I could afford. Once I received the updated GIA report after owning the stone for a few months, I was then able to plug the numbers in HCA, which confirmed the fact that my Very Good stone, was perhaps better than Very Good to begin with.Date: 8/21/2006 1:04:09 PM
Author: Regular Guy
Let''s not get Goofy (otherwise associated with conjecture about new planets).
You know what they say about history....those who do not learn from it, are doomed to repeat it.
This is all just words, right? F&I, though you''re exaggerating to make a point, don''t go too far...go back to talking about balance, which is necessary. Otherwise, no strategy is reasonable, except to, when shopping, look at one after another, after another. Why not start with an initial sort...which something like the ''search by cut'' db allows you to do.
Rod, you''re whining, but the diamond you bought scored 1.2. What''s the problem. You giveto others, and can do so with confidence, because there is a basis for it.
Actually, or so from what I read here, preferences may run toward symmetry, but...and I believe both AGS and GIA will say this... they are more reliably drawn towards good delivery of light, such that H&A are not scored, but grading is heavily dependent on proportions. And why not, study of optics can help predict when light delivery will be good. Now...consideration of things like head getting in the way...yes...this is pretty much beyond me. So...I will step out and say that good light performance and beauty run pretty well hand in hand. I don''t think our range of preferences varies wildly from this.
Anyway, regarding Buridan''s Ass, Leonid...although this site (see the last paragraph) discussed how the Chinese resolve this sometimes, note that it is context sensitive. In celebrating the new year, I will turn, too, to the I Ching, because a) you go through a process to contemplate the outcome (and you are trying to get an understanding of the environment of the new year you''re entering) and b) there is little specific info to draw upon, so it''s reasonable to project forward based on the creative template the I Ching provides. In contrast, I would rather sort through a Pricescope db, and make bad guesses with Idealscopes when diamond shopping...finally yielding to whatever set of choices I could make for myself at the end based on eye sight (and hopefully, getting myself in an environment where there could be a big set of choices from which to make a confirming pick, if possible). If the big set of choices is not possible, you can bet I''ll want to take advantage of whatever grace period to ultimately get this option (of comparing to others), if not before, then after the purchase decision, because shopping by eye, in the end, is all you have.
We have tools. Lets not disparage them too much. Balance, of course, too.
Regards,
Rod, I don''t think you''re being whiny.
I guess I don''t understand that. It''s fruitless why? Because you''re in the minority of opinions? Why is it fruitless because ten other people say the opposite?
300x240.png)
