Value of Gem-Ex Compare to 8* Diamond

[perry]

As I consider what I saw today in a jewelery store, one of the questions that came up was how good is the Gem-Ex as a tool. Yes it produces nice reports, and yes it seems to show something.

However, it got me wondering.

The 8* is supposed to be the best cut diamond out there in the normal 57/58 facet design. Several people whom I have a lot of respect for on this forum have stated that they are AWSOME, but expensive (you get what you pay for...).

Has anyone seen, or can anyone point me to, a Gem-Ex report on a 8* diamond.

I think the comparison might be very interesting. Does and 8* rate as 3 "Very High''s" or not?

Perry

 

[strmrdr]

no they usualy dont which is why 8* dealers/owners hate the b-scope.
Be prepared for some whining and screaming :}

also in my opinion you dont get what you pay for they are way overpriced.

 

[Brian Knox]

Date: 11/26/2004 10

8:39 PM
Author: strmrdr
no they usualy dont which is why 8* dealers/owners hate the b-scope.
...

Hi Storm,

I think that this would make a very lively and interesting debate.

And besides the rubbernecking at a trainwreck motivations

, a healthy debate could only add to the consumers information base.

 

[perry]

I also now see that Good Old Gold (GOG) is dealing with another extra faceted diamond with 91 facets - that "consistently ranks "3 Very High''s" on the Brilliance Scope.

Yet if you look at the GOG "normal cut" selection of 1+ carat diamonds - almost all of them rate 3 Very High''s" as well.

Kinda makes me wonder. It is obvious that a 57 facet diamond can be cut that rates "3 very high''s" on the Brillance Scope. My question is what are the additional facets giving you.

Is the reason the 81, 91, 129 facet stones rank "3 very high''s" just because the companies cutting them are controlling the cut better than the typical 57 facet diamond - or is there actually something intrinsic about the addtional facets that guarantees a "3 very High''s" rating?

Since GOG list dozen''s a large number of 57 facet diamonds that rate "3 very high''s" - why is it that the 8* does not rate up there? (based on Storms report above).

Perry

 

[Rhino]

Hi Perry,

The 8*/Bscope debate has been hashed out before and was (during 2001) an intensive study I had undertaken to better understand optical properties within diamond, particularly that of scintillation or the sparkle factor and why a diamond with a seeminglly perfect FireScope image didn't peg the meters on the B'scope. I have ran and tested many 8*'s not only on B'scope but also Isee2 among other devices as well as many other varieties of super ideals. Your post raises many questions which, for the most part I have researched and discovered the answers to. Answers that would possibly require a short book were I to answer them in detail. You'll find the answers actually throughout our tutorial on cut which covers subjects as how to interpret the red reflectors, the minor facets and their impact on brilliance, fire & scintillation, among others.
Regarding the 8* brand let me go on record as saying (although I do not currently feature this brand) that they are very beautiful diamonds. Their QA is among the finest and I can count on one hand factories whose QA is on par with them. I know the president personally (and his family) as well as some of their distributors (Wink Jones, Steve Livingston, etc.) and I have nothing but the nicest things to say about them.

To answer your questions about the Solasfera ...

There are a number of unique features regarding this cut that differentiate it from 57 facet H&A (even those that do score 3 VH's on the B'scope).

1. 10 pavilion mains/10 crown bezels (as opposed to 8 on standards).
2. In order to appreciate what this means, an understanding of how these facets function in super ideal cuts is in order. In short a. some of the strongest bursts of fire emanate off of these facets in direct light and in diffuse light act as points of contrast contributing to the *beauty* factor within super ideals among the light conditions of direct and diffuse.
3. Coupled with those extra light giving facets, a primary signature of the Solasfera is that of "no blatant leakage". Hence no whites in a FireScope/LightScope (or any red reflector technologhy). This is a feature that 8* and Solasfera have in common.
4. Optical symmetry on par with super ideals. An H&A diamond but different in the sense that this company has altered the optical design of the diamond to give it a different appearance ... one which when people compare to an H&A diamond feel is better. However since beauty is in the eye of the beholder I will always refer to the taste of the individual who is doing the looking. If there is a certain appearance they are after I may suggest one type of stone over another.
5. Maxed out B'scope results (or triple flush). The B'scope isn't just about light return/leakage. It is also about the quality or intensity of light being returned to the eyes of the viewer. A cursory examination of 2 diamionds with varying results proves each and every time the veracity of the technology and it's correlation with human eye observation. We do this with instore clients on a daily basis. Yes there are some results that are harder to differentiate than others between 2 stones but if there are any notable differences in the results you will also see this in real life.

Compared to most H&A's the Solasfera has a distinct advantage.

Compared to H&A that score 3 VH's....

Obviously this is NOT a comparison of a beautiful diamond next to a pooper. Both are gorgeous and once again ... I would defer to the taste of the individual. When giving Pepsi challenges of a Solasfera next to one of our top performing H&A many are siding with the Solasfera but we still have alot of people who prefer the appearance of our H&A (btw we do this with people in our store who aren't necessarily purchasing a diamond either). We'll always feature both unless demand for one far outweighs the other to the point where noone wants one or the other.

One thing I would like to make clear ... two diamonds of the 57 facet H&A caliber that DO score 3 VH's on the B'scope would be impossible to differentiate.

However ... change the optical design and the facet structure and then compare 2 diamonds of triple VH caliber (or almost even) and you will see a marked difference in appearance. Whether you're comparing a triple flush Solasfera next to an H&A or even an Eighternity next to an H&A. Each of these rounds can and do get the highest results however each of these rounds have a notably different appearance. Each has awesome performance but their display of light is different.

My suggestion: When viewing diamonds ... the more you can compare the better. One way, short of seeing them live is to open up virtual models of each cut, put em side by side in the same lighting conditions then *play* them all at the same time for a *virtual* look. If you'd like to see models of each let me know and I'll accommodate.

Peace,

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 11/26/2004 10

8:39 PM
Author: strmrdr
no they usualy dont which is why 8* dealers/owners hate the b-scope.
Be prepared for some whining and screaming :}

also in my opinion you dont get what you pay for they are way overpriced.

Strmdr.. You should be saying that about HoF and not EightStars (PS: I''ve done some consulting for EightStar)

Could it be that there are factors regarding the BS scope which effect why you say that 8* dealers "hate" the BS scope, like the truth, besides what 8* dealers are you quoting, and why do you think they NEED the BS scope?

1) The BS scope tests diamonds "for light return" in a lighting environment the diamond will never see again, and doesn''t see in nature, so what is it telling the consumer..

2) Knowing the way the BS scope lighting works, you can probably design a "cut" to maximize its returned "performance" metric.

Not having played with one extensively, but having seen it, I''m not impressed. I''ve also had some discussions with Randy Wagner about the BS scope, and told him my feelings regarding it. Maybe they have improved it since the last time I took a look at JCK.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/27/2004 3:52:38 PM
Author: adamasgem

Could it be that there are factors regarding the BS scope which effect why you say that 8* dealers ''hate'' the BS scope, like the truth, besides what 8* dealers are you quoting, and why do you think they NEED the BS scope?


1) The BS scope tests diamonds ''for light return'' in a lighting environment the diamond will never see again, and doesn''t see in nature, so what is it telling the consumer..


2) Knowing the way the BS scope lighting works, you can probably design a ''cut'' to maximize its returned ''performance'' metric.

Marty,

Couldn''t one say the exact same thing about an Eightstar and a Firescope?

Deborah

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/27/2004 3:52:38 PM
Author: adamasgem

Could it be that there are factors regarding the BS scope which effect why you say that 8* dealers 'hate' the BS scope, like the truth, besides what 8* dealers are you quoting, and why do you think they NEED the BS scope?

1) The BS scope tests diamonds 'for light return' in a lighting environment the diamond will never see again, and doesn't see in nature, so what is it telling the consumer..

This is a constant subject of debate:  Is Brilliance Scope a measuring device or a sales tool?

Pundits say it "agrees with their eyes," but critics think it's a box rife with chicaneries.  After serious consideration I have to admit great skepticism.  To further Marty's point:  BS attempts to measure in divided, mechanical terms what humans see together in nature.  It uses an anclosed chamber and lighting conditions under which diamonds are never viewed to calculate pixels and returns separate numbers for qualities of beauty that are never viewed separately.

Michael Cowing has done extensive work on aspects of diamond beauty and I agree with his insight:  “To be meaningful, measurements of diamond beauty should be made in the typical illumination circumstances in which human judgment of that beauty is made.  Measurements of beauty in atypical lighting can give high scores to cuts that have lower scores in typical illumination.” (from his aticle “Describing Diamond Beauty”).

Simply put, brilliance and fire work in tandem to create the “life” of a diamond’s beauty.  It is erroneous to separate them.  Moreover, Brilliance Scope does not account for the contrast quality of brilliance in any of its measurements and cannot possibly account for the vast range of variables in a diamond's panorama of illumination, so it has no chance of evaluating scintillation in relevant or accurate terms.  Let's don't even get started on the whole BS "scintillation" measurement circus, lest this thread go "to infinity - and beyond!"

Date: 11/27/2004 3:52:38 PM
Author: adamasgem

2) Knowing the way the BS scope lighting works, you can probably design a 'cut' to maximize its returned 'performance' metric.

...The "whock!" you all just heard was the nail being been hit on the head.

For the original poster:  Brilliance is a return of white light.  Dispersion is the breaking-up of white light into spectral colors.  Fire is the suite of colored flashes (chromatic flares) one sees within the diamond.  The finest diamonds achieve a harmony of both brilliance and fire with no light leakage.  All diamonds have the same dispersion value of .044, which is one of the highest for any natural, transparent gemstone.  Therefore, the amount of fire observed in a diamond is dependent on facet construction as much or more than lighting conditions.  The cut will determine how much brilliance you see, how much fire you see and the visual balance of those elements within the diamond.

Diamonds can be purposely cut to return more brilliance than fire.  Stores typically use bright lighting to sell diamonds, so this should not be a surprise.  Our cut team has determined that DCLR (fire) is sacrificed in favor of brilliance when the lower girdle facets construction is >80% - which makes the pavilion main facets thinner, resulting in sharper, "needles" of light at the expense of dispersion.  The intensity of returning white light is greater, but in softer lighting conditions the ability of that diamond to display colored flashes from within is reduced.  Unfortunately, the BS rewards brilliance over fire.  This is why some of the best cut and well-balanced diamonds do not always get the high readings of those with over-long lower girdle facets on BS:  It favors the “needles” of thin white light.

The Solasfera 10-cut is going to get great readings from BS because the pavilion facets are far thinner by the nature of the cut:  16 facets on the pavilion of a standard 8-cut.  40 on the Solasfera's pavilion alone.  Obviously facet construction on the pavilion will be thinner.

Pundits and critics toss this around and jello-wrestle pretty much on a daily basis - and we all will until there is some type of peer-review. People have been demanding this kind of review for years. I would have expected the makers to do this long before now.  If they would submit it to the NIST or another respected body perhaps credibility issues could be worked out...  Or maybe not.  And that's the point. 

 

[JohnQuixote]

8 Cut Facet Construction
10 Cut Facet Construction

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I have to agree - for newbies and those who never got it 1st time around:

This is one of Sergey''s ETAs reverse ray traces. The spots are where light would appear on an imaginary hemisphere if it was shone from above into the whole top of the stone from 90 degree above.
Note how there are rings of spots - then no spots then more rings etc.

If you take a cut that has rings of those spots that line up perfectly with the 5 positions the Bscope circular light is placed when it does its readings - then that stone will score better than another stone that has the rings lined up perfectly in between the light / collector spacing.

So in that way - if you scan diamonds and they score well - them the bscope is a sales tool. But are these diamonds better than stones that would work for a slightly different Bscope setting? Of course not.

Now about perfectly symmetrical stones - some stones will give out oval or different patterns that may not all light up with all the light positions. But the light return is still there - naturally they will score less that stones that are just right.

I am pretty sure those who use it as a selling system can look at crown pavilion angle and table size data and know which stones have a high probability of selling well with it.

Another concern - Bscope and ISee2 use similar technolgy but there seems to be a weak correlation in results for specific stones?

 

[strmrdr]

Marty,
I agree with you on the lighting.
That without knowing the lighting model it makes it a lot less useful add to that that the generation 3 b-scopes have had large changes to the camera's and light system.
Just looking at the light views shows large changes.

My personal opinion is that its interesting information to have but I question how meaningful it is. Like a lot of other things if its available its just another piece of the jigsaw puzzle that is diamond buying.

Great question AGBF :} care to answer Marty?

hof is way overpriced 2 btw.

Now as to the question of which one is going to whine about it well if past history is any indicator then it will be 3 or 4 of them and a gem lab owner who worked for them :}

 

[perry]

Great Information folks (and thanks to all), but a few comments and more questions.

Johnathan (Rhino): I will take you up on the virtual models - look for my PM.

I now understand that the newer high facet cuts have an intrinsic advantage in BrillianceScope ratings due; but that each of the cuts looks different.

I understand that the BrillianceScope is primarily measureing brilliance (which is why they are calling it the BrillianceScope).

So... Assuming that we are only discussing 57 facet diamonds (to keep the playing field even).

1) Is it safe to say that there are a population of "great" cut diamonds (and most diamonds are cut for brilliance), and the ones that test with 3 very highs on a brilliance scope are within that population (i.e. that the BScope will identify some of the "great" diamonds, even though it will miss on some to many of them).

2) Assuming the answer to question 1 is "yes", would the paring of a "3 Very High's" Brilliiant Scope and a "Very Good" Ideal-Scope image assure you of a "WoW" visual quality diamond - or do I really need to see the diamonds in person and compare them to other diamonds.

3) Since most diamonds are cut for brilliance, how do I learn what a diamond with the "proper" ballance of fire and brilliance looks like. I don't even have a clue where to see one (or buy one), much less under proper lighting (normal office and daylight) instead of the jewelry store tricked lighting (in real life I have seen I believe 3 dimonds on people's fingers in normal lighting that have any "life" to them).

4) What is the best way (if it is possible at all) to purchase diamonds that have the proper ballance of fire and brilliance? - or do I have to order them cut specially for me - and trust the cutter to deliver what I want? Yes I know about the Ideal-Scope, and own the professional model, and about the HCA (to get you down to a handfull to compare). But there is more to it than that, isn't there... That is why there is "Expert Selection" of diamonds at some of the vendors, isn't there.

Perry

 

[strmrdr]

perry,
A diamond with hca score less than 2, great looking h&a images, great looking ideal-scope images, and hand selected by someone who knows what to look for, it will knock your socks off.

If it scores triple vh on the b-scope i consider that a bonus but the others are more important.
I havent seen a case where it scores badly on the above tests that got a great b-scope score.
So there is some correlation but how much is open to debate.

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 11/27/2004 4:59:45 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 11/27/2004 3:52:38 PM
Author: adamasgem

Could it be that there are factors regarding the BS scope which effect why you say that 8* dealers ''hate'' the BS scope, like the truth, besides what 8* dealers are you quoting, and why do you think they NEED the BS scope?


1) The BS scope tests diamonds ''for light return'' in a lighting environment the diamond will never see again, and doesn''t see in nature, so what is it telling the consumer..


2) Knowing the way the BS scope lighting works, you can probably design a ''cut'' to maximize its returned ''performance'' metric.

Marty,

Couldn''t one say the exact same thing about an Eightstar and a Firescope?

Deborah

Yes Deborah, I agree. But the Firescope, besides being a symmetry tool, tells you important information regarding where the light return is coming from, namely from above, +/- 75 degrees from the table, where the majority of light comes from. A stone cut using the Firescope information, doesn''t REQUIRE low angle lighting to get light return from the perifary of the stone...

All the metrics proposed by GIA and others fool you, because they are heavily weighted towards low angle lighting...
The Hemispherical models proposed have equal INTENSITY lighting over all the hemisphere, including the low angles, contrary to the real world intensity variations, where in an outdoor cloud covered sky (sun obscured by clouds) there is a three to one intensity variation between overhead (zenith) and the horizon. Think about it, your bright light in almost any environment is overhead, NOT from the side..

 

[adamasgem]

Date: 11/28/2004 5:41:48 AM
Author: strmrdr
Marty,
I agree with you on the lighting.
That without knowing the lighting model it makes it a lot less useful add to that that the generation 3 b-scopes have had large changes to the camera''s and light system.
Just looking at the light views shows large changes.

My personal opinion is that its interesting information to have but I question how meaningful it is. Like a lot of other things if its available its just another piece of the jigsaw puzzle that is diamond buying.

Great question AGBF :} care to answer Marty?

hof is way overpriced 2 btw.

Now as to the question of which one is going to whine about it well if past history is any indicator then it will be 3 or 4 of them and a gem lab owner who worked for them :}

Regarding HoF marketing premium, they are well overpriced for just being a AGS 0 cut..

I answered AGBF''s question..

I''m not whining about anything, just stating facts.. AND my past consulting for EightStar to develop the Fire Performance Technology is well known..