We need to do the Pepsi challenge. "top ideal cut" shootout on video.

[Rockdiamond]

Hi Valeria101,
I am thrilled to see you back posting !!
I remember you from the "old days"

I was confused about your post. Did you mean that the differences should be easy to see in a picture?
Do I understand you took photographs for a university? Cool!

 

[Dancing Fire]

David
You should post a well cut 60/60 on You Tube so we can compare it a MRB H&A

 

[Rockdiamond]

I'll be thrilled to do so this week DF
It's not going to "solve" anything but hopefully it will be informative.
Im very glad you started this thread and also that the discussion is again alive.
It's a fun subject for me.
Thanks

 

[Niel]

Agreed Sarah. The great news is that you got a band you love. But whatever your experience with the band, it's simply not relevant to this discussion because we don't have any info on the stones you did not like.

Seems very relevant as she had personal experience seeing 60/60 stones in person. She doesn't have to tell you exactly what the documentation did for her experience to be credible. Don't be rude.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi Neil
If Sarah 60/60's were that bad, and anyone was interested in learning why we'd need the details of LGF/CA/PA to know what type of stones we are taking about.
DF started the thread out of interest about them- and probably other people are interested as well.
I'm not suggesting that people go out and buy 60/60's. Only that we look at why people trash them here on PS. Is it justified?

 

[Niel]

Hi Neil
If Sarah 60/60's were that bad, and anyone was interested in learning why we'd need the details of LGF/CA/PA to know what type of stones we are taking about.
DF started the thread out of interest about them- and probably other people are interested as well.
I'm not suggesting that people go out and buy 60/60's. Only that we look at why people trash them here on PS. Is it justified?

If she says they were well cut 60/60 then I believe her. Your point was to disprove her statement. It was not for "learning" it was to prove your point David.

 

[sarahb]

Thank you Neil, appreciate your input.

The point to my posts, was the 60/60's far under performed the AGS Ideals. The 60/60 version was a 35k ring, every stone was certed. David took the position that my eyes deceived me. For everyone else, they did not.

Both eternities had half carat stones, big enough to render a reliable judgement.

DBL's long time default position is ones 'eyes' should be the final performance arbiter-- which was exactly what happened. My eyes led me to reject the 60/60's for the AGS Ideal ACA's. That's the only point I was trying to make. I had it home for the weekend, out of the bright jewelry store lights, in a real world situation. The difference between the 60/60 vs AGS Ideals (ACA's) was remarkable & distinct.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I do not think your eyes deceived you. If you're convinced the reason you did not like them was the table/depth, then by all means stay away from 60/60 Sarah. If we wanted to understand what it was you were looking at we'd need a bit more info. That much is clear. There's great 60/60's and lesser ones.
Just one example would be mm size. It's extremely likely that the 60/60 .50ct stone is larger than an ideal cut. That would be one aspect we'd look at in a comparison of GIA/AGS reports.
Of course even if the stones have better spread, if they don't look good who cares?
That's a big part of the discussion. 60/60s with longer LGF definitely look different than typical super Ideals.
But what some people think look great, others try to avoid. H&A patterning is one of those things.
Can you remember what it was about them that you didn't like Sarah?
Yes, I do feel that the eyes are the final and most important arbiter for each individual.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I doubt there would be any difference that humans could detect in person or by video if each of those vendors agreed.
Serg's ViBox fire counting and other software analysis of the videos may detect subtle differences. But i think most of the vendors would be worried. Also what they may decide to send may be better than their generic offering.
Even 2 stones per vendor is probably not going to be enough to gain a real performance difference.
But until the vendors agree (which I doubt) we can only make the rules.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Your points are all spot on Garry.
Theoretically- all the "Super Ideals" are aiming for a very similar goal. Of course they're going to look alike.
I agree that human eyes will not be able to tell the best super ideal brands from each other.
I also agree that vendors only have something to loose, and nothing to gain in such a "shootout"

I'm super glad that this once contentious discussion between us is no longer contentious (I'll admit I now have a man-crush on Garry, even though we may not agree on all points.
I'm also glad the discussion is still interesting.
Time has certainly changed both of us- as well as the market.
I don't have any 60/60's on hand- but more than likely I can find one.
I do have a few super ideal on hand.
The type of make I have in mind will be easily distinguishable from a super ideal.
If I do a comparison video, it's not going to "solve" anything- but it might forward the discussion.
I do believe there's definite value in making the rules by the way.
For one thing, dollars and cents.
If we did a blind test and two stones of the same mm size and color clarity have a substantial difference in price, I believe that's relevant.
What do you guys think?

 

[valeria101]

Hi Valeria101,
I am thrilled to see you back posting !!
I remember you from the "old days"

Thank you !

I was confused about your post. Did you mean that the differences should be easy to see in a picture?

Not among Ideals. I was thinking about the margins of the Ideal range & beyond.

About said margins: I sort of remember - from back in the days of playing with ray tracing, that stepping outside the Ideal range by a marginal amount had catastrophic consequences in some parts of the domain, but not everywhere. I had not done anything with the problem then - still curious if the observation is even right.

About beyond: imagining that once you'd change parameters enough, the result would eventually be different enough, if not necessarily worse - perhaps simply very good in some respects at the expense of others, hence suitable for contrarians like yours truly. Tame example: extending the HCA types ...

Digressing: my unusual tastes are bargains only until I hear of them in the news - often enough.

Do I understand you took photographs for a university? Cool!

Long story... A handful of good people let me put smashed natural pearls through electron microspcopes. Now, what to do with the dam' pictures ! [half joking]

 

[ccuheartnurse]

I would love to see this happen. But I can see the logistical nightmare of doing so. But sure would be a fun experiment.