- Joined
- Jul 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,033
AGBF|1412790817|3764364 said:ericad|1412780295|3764280 said:AGBF|1412740797|3764077 said:maccers|1412729164|3763989 said:Could you please expand on the idea that the increasing popularity of antique cuts started within the diamond industry? This may be a poor analogy but a lot of fashion trends actually start 'on the street' as it were, could the same not be said of antique cuts?
I do not really have any idea where the trend towards vintage cuts began. It may have been with consumers; with vendors; or in some relationship between the two.
The issue that has irked me and which made me start this thread was not that consumers turned from preferring round brilliants to preferring vintage cuts. (Not that all consumers have, of course.) The issue that irked me was not even that a few diamond merchants went into a smoky room and conspired to push vintage cuts over round brilliants. (It may have crossed their minds that this could be an alternate strategy if sales ever fell, but sales are not falling. Sales in China and India are wonderful. So this isn't the only way that they could make money selling diamonds.)
The issue that has irked me is that many of the diamond vendors selling right here in the United States to us were touting their scopes and discussing light leakage and scaring every new young man who came in here looking for a diamond with which to get engaged lest a diamond he picked didn't turn the correct color on a machine. They were monopolizing the many diamond boards that used to exist on the Internet. And now they are silent as consumers say that vintage stones with unmeasured light return are gorgeous.
Why can vintage diamonds be gorgeous with no light return while round brilliants have to go through all kinds of machines? What has happened, I asked? And I postulated that diamond prices rose. Actually, I quoted some other Pricescopers like Karl, as saying that diamond prices rose. So the merchants decided to sell bigger, lower color stones.
And I can believe that they (vintage stones) are not all ugly. Why should they be?
The two bolded statements are where you're gonna lose a lot of people.
They are inflammatory exaggerations, and it's generally not productive to try to have a conversation with someone who has already made up her mind that people's love of old cuts is part of a trade-wide conspiracy, and that old cuts offer zero light return.
I understand that your point is with regards to RB's and the movement towards light return as a measure of beauty, and the potential ulterior motives of dealers in general, but perhaps a more approachable way to ask the question is:
Why does light return matter so much for RB's, to the point of being critical in the selection process, yet genuine old cuts (excludes modern precision cuts) seem to be immune to the same light return criteria? Should consumers demand light return analysis for old cuts too, or do we need to reevaluate our zeal with regards to light return analysis on RB's?
See what I did there?
And my response to that question would be that maximum light return is not the only measure of beauty, and by applying it as a selection criteria for old cuts would be a great disservice to consumers because the beauty of an old cut is not balanced upon light return, but a combination of structure, light return, shape, and many other factors. If max light return was a significant measure of beauty for old cuts, people would only buy AV's and other new precision repro stones. Yet there are many who have seen both and PREFER the antique stones, even with increased leakage and lower symmetry/precision. Their appeal is impossible to quantify. And that's ok.
I really do not think you understand what I am saying or why I am saying it. I do not mind "losing people" as I am not selling anything. I have been bothered by something and I wanted to bring it up. Now I have.
AGBF
What I meant was that those types of exaggerations will be off putting to people and they'll just refrain from participating
(especially old cut lovers). I actually think it's an interesting topic and am enjoying thinking about it. The point of a thread is participation - makes for a better discussion. But that's my opinion, and this is your thread, obviously.