Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Zone?

[Karl_K]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

Serg,
If you take a mirror the size of a 1ct diamond mount it and put it on someones finger it would have brilliance and scintillation and in some light conditions and angles fire.
A large mirror on the wall has light return but I would say it did not have brilliance or scintillation in the same way we would talk of a diamond having them unless it was viewed from a long distance on a huge wall.

A lot of how diamonds look to the eye is because of the relatively small size in relation to the environment and the large amount of contrast the environment provides. (Which is another huge flaw in the gia observation study. Unrealistic environmental contrast)
Contrast brilliance is not just inside the boundaries of the diamond but against the environment around it.

 

[Serg]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

Serg,
If you take a mirror the size of a 1ct diamond mount it and put it on someones finger it would have brilliance and scintillation and in some light conditions and angles fire.
A large mirror on the wall has light return but I would say it did not have brilliance or scintillation in the same way we would talk of a diamond having them unless it was viewed from a long distance on a huge wall.

A lot of how diamonds look to the eye is because of the relatively small size in relation to the environment and the large amount of contrast the environment provides. (Which is another huge flaw in the gia observation study. Unrealistic environmental contrast)
Contrast brilliance is not just inside the boundaries of the diamond but against the environment around it.

re:If you take a mirror the size of a 1ct diamond mount it and put it on someones finger it would have brilliance and scintillation and in some light conditions

Karl according my understanding that Brilliancy is , we can not see Brilliancy in one single mirror and usual light conditions .

what Brilliancy definition do you use?

 

[Serg]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy". Like you say, one mirror can only create a reflection. Even if that reflection is super intense, it is not "brilliant" in the sense we think about diamonds. That is, unless that one mirror is in rapid motion. And then the pattern would be uninteresting. So even if the amount of light returned was great, it would not be beautiful to look at .

Bryan,

re:In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy".

In Other words
in your understanding

Brilliancy = Life =Brilliancy +Scintillation + Fire
right?

it is quite misleading for communication .

If we deduct from Diamond Life( Diamond Beauty ) Scintillation and Fire then does diamond shows anything special ?
has diamond beauty anything special except Scintillation and Fire?

Is any reason to use word "Brilliancy" or it is just Fire + Scintillation ?

again this discussion shows weakness of diamond languages . we can not understand each other, a lot of misleading in communication coming.
Consumer can not receive confidence until industry uses one , clear language

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy". Like you say, one mirror can only create a reflection. Even if that reflection is super intense, it is not "brilliant" in the sense we think about diamonds. That is, unless that one mirror is in rapid motion. And then the pattern would be uninteresting. So even if the amount of light returned was great, it would not be beautiful to look at .

Bryan,

re:In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy".

In Other words
in your understanding

Brilliancy = Life =Brilliancy +Scintillation + Fire
right?

it is quite misleading for communication .

If we deduct from Diamond Life( Diamond Beauty ) Scintillation and Fire then does diamond shows anything special ?
has diamond beauty anything special except Scintillation and Fire?

Is any reason to use word "Brilliancy" or it is just Fire + Scintillation ?

again this discussion shows weakness of diamond languages . we can not understand each other, a lot of misleading in communication coming.
Consumer can not receive confidence until industry uses one , clear language

Serg,
"Brilliancy" is the term you seem to prefer and that is why I have put it in quotes when using it. You asked me for my understanding of the term and I tried to explain what it means to me.

I would say Brilliancy = Life = (Brightness + Scintillation + Fire)

I don't think that is terribly misleading. Not the whole story but definitely not misleading.

Yes, if we deduct Scintillation and Fire diamond becomes alot less special. But it's still a great abrasive!

Again, I am very interested in learning new ways to communicate diamond beauty. And if there is some sort of breakthrough in our grasp, let's try to figure it out. But apart from a somewhat to very technical discussion of the various aspects of diamond light performance (including human perception), I am not sure that it is possible to agree on a "standard" language for communicating diamond beauty.

If you put a group of poets together and show them the same sunset, will they use the same terms to describe it? If they did, would that be a good thing?

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy". Like you say, one mirror can only create a reflection. Even if that reflection is super intense, it is not "brilliant" in the sense we think about diamonds. That is, unless that one mirror is in rapid motion. And then the pattern would be uninteresting. So even if the amount of light returned was great, it would not be beautiful to look at .

Bryan,

re:In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy".

In Other words
in your understanding

Brilliancy = Life =Brilliancy +Scintillation + Fire
right?

it is quite misleading for communication .

If we deduct from Diamond Life( Diamond Beauty ) Scintillation and Fire then does diamond shows anything special ?
has diamond beauty anything special except Scintillation and Fire?

Is any reason to use word "Brilliancy" or it is just Fire + Scintillation ?

again this discussion shows weakness of diamond languages . we can not understand each other, a lot of misleading in communication coming.
Consumer can not receive confidence until industry uses one , clear language

Serg,
"Brilliancy" is the term you seem to prefer and that is why I have put it in quotes when using it. You asked me for my understanding of the term and I tried to explain what it means to me.

I would say Brilliancy = Life = (Brightness + Scintillation + Fire)

I don't think that is terribly misleading. Not the whole story but definitely not misleading.

Yes, if we deduct Scintillation and Fire diamond becomes alot less special. But it's still a great abrasive!

Again, I am very interested in learning new ways to communicate diamond beauty. And if there is some sort of breakthrough in our grasp, let's try to figure it out. But apart from a somewhat to very technical discussion of the various aspects of diamond light performance (including human perception), I am not sure that it is possible to agree on a "standard" language for communicating diamond beauty.

If you put a group of poets together and show them the same sunset, will they use the same terms to describe it? If they did, would that be a good thing?

 

[Karl_K]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

what Brilliancy definition do you use?

Websters?
Definition of BRILLIANCY
1
: brilliance
2
: an instance of brilliance

Synonyms
brightness, brilliance, candor, dazzle, effulgence, illumination, lambency, lightness, luminance, luminosity, luminousness, luster (or lustre), lustrousness, radiance, refulgence, splendor

Antonyms
blackness, dark, darkness, dullness (also dulness), duskiness

Related Words
blaze, flare, flash, flicker, light; fluorescence, incandescence, luminescence; burnish, gloss, polish, sheen, shine, shininess; fire, flame, glare, glow; flash, gleam, glimmer, glint, glisten, glitter, scintillation, shimmer, sparkle, twinkle

Near Antonyms
dimness, gloominess, somberness; cloudiness, haziness, murkiness, obscureness, obscurity; colorlessness, grayness, lackluster, paleness, shadiness, shadowiness

..................
Full Definition of BRILLIANT
1
: very bright : glittering <a brilliant light>

..........................
Full Definition of GLITTER
1
a : to shine by reflection with many small flashes of brilliant light : sparkle <sequins glittered in the spotlight>
.......................

Therefor a small mirror moving can have brilliancy but a large mirror on the wall does not at close range.
At long range the movement of the viewer can cause a large mirror to glitter.

When you start defining custom definitions to common words communication breaks down.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy". Like you say, one mirror can only create a reflection. Even if that reflection is super intense, it is not "brilliant" in the sense we think about diamonds. That is, unless that one mirror is in rapid motion. And then the pattern would be uninteresting. So even if the amount of light returned was great, it would not be beautiful to look at .

Bryan,

re:In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy".

In Other words
in your understanding

Brilliancy = Life =Brilliancy +Scintillation + Fire
right?

it is quite misleading for communication .

If we deduct from Diamond Life( Diamond Beauty ) Scintillation and Fire then does diamond shows anything special ?
has diamond beauty anything special except Scintillation and Fire?

Is any reason to use word "Brilliancy" or it is just Fire + Scintillation ?

again this discussion shows weakness of diamond languages . we can not understand each other, a lot of misleading in communication coming.
Consumer can not receive confidence until industry uses one , clear language

Serg,
"Brilliancy" is the term you seem to prefer and that is why I have put it in quotes when using it. You asked me for my understanding of the term and I tried to explain what it means to me.

I would say Brilliancy = Life = (Brightness + Scintillation + Fire)

I don't think that is terribly misleading. Not the whole story but definitely not misleading.

Yes, if we deduct Scintillation and Fire diamond becomes alot less special. But it's still a great abrasive!

Again, I am very interested in learning new ways to communicate diamond beauty. And if there is some sort of breakthrough in our grasp, let's try to figure it out. But apart from a somewhat to very technical discussion of the various aspects of diamond light performance (including human perception), I am not sure that it is possible to agree on a "standard" language for communicating diamond beauty.

If you put a group of poets together and show them the same sunset, will they use the same terms to describe it? If they did, would that be a good thing?

 

[Serg]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy". Like you say, one mirror can only create a reflection. Even if that reflection is super intense, it is not "brilliant" in the sense we think about diamonds. That is, unless that one mirror is in rapid motion. And then the pattern would be uninteresting. So even if the amount of light returned was great, it would not be beautiful to look at .

Bryan,

re:In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy".

In Other words
in your understanding

Brilliancy = Life =Brilliancy +Scintillation + Fire
right?

it is quite misleading for communication .

If we deduct from Diamond Life( Diamond Beauty ) Scintillation and Fire then does diamond shows anything special ?
has diamond beauty anything special except Scintillation and Fire?

Is any reason to use word "Brilliancy" or it is just Fire + Scintillation ?

again this discussion shows weakness of diamond languages . we can not understand each other, a lot of misleading in communication coming.
Consumer can not receive confidence until industry uses one , clear language

Serg,
"Brilliancy" is the term you seem to prefer and that is why I have put it in quotes when using it. You asked me for my understanding of the term and I tried to explain what it means to me.

I would say Brilliancy = Life = (Brightness + Scintillation + Fire)

I don't think that is terribly misleading. Not the whole story but definitely not misleading.

Yes, if we deduct Scintillation and Fire diamond becomes alot less special. But it's still a great abrasive!

Again, I am very interested in learning new ways to communicate diamond beauty. And if there is some sort of breakthrough in our grasp, let's try to figure it out. But apart from a somewhat to very technical discussion of the various aspects of diamond light performance (including human perception), I am not sure that it is possible to agree on a "standard" language for communicating diamond beauty.

If you put a group of poets together and show them the same sunset, will they use the same terms to describe it? If they did, would that be a good thing?

Bryan,
re:Yes, if we deduct Scintillation and Fire diamond becomes alot less special. But it's still a great abrasive!

if We deduct Scintillation and Fire diamond still shows special optical phenomenas. I like Fire in diamonds. But even without Fire diamond has something very special.
In same time Brightness is not something special .
it is reason why definition
Brilliancy = Life = (Brightness + Scintillation + Fire)
do not use( do not describe) all Diamond Light Performance uniqueness .

create Scintillation you may see in Disco Ball,... there are many options to see Color Flashes. But Brilliancy = Life-Fire-Scintillation you may see in few objects and may by polished diamond is one Luxury product from this list.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy". Like you say, one mirror can only create a reflection. Even if that reflection is super intense, it is not "brilliant" in the sense we think about diamonds. That is, unless that one mirror is in rapid motion. And then the pattern would be uninteresting. So even if the amount of light returned was great, it would not be beautiful to look at .

Bryan,

re:In my way of thinking about the term "brilliancy", scintillation is a fundamental part. That's the dynamic aspect- the on-off flashes of white and colored light in response to motion. It's the action and interaction of multiple mirrors that creates "brilliancy".

In Other words
in your understanding

Brilliancy = Life =Brilliancy +Scintillation + Fire
right?

it is quite misleading for communication .

If we deduct from Diamond Life( Diamond Beauty ) Scintillation and Fire then does diamond shows anything special ?
has diamond beauty anything special except Scintillation and Fire?

Is any reason to use word "Brilliancy" or it is just Fire + Scintillation ?

again this discussion shows weakness of diamond languages . we can not understand each other, a lot of misleading in communication coming.
Consumer can not receive confidence until industry uses one , clear language

Serg,
"Brilliancy" is the term you seem to prefer and that is why I have put it in quotes when using it. You asked me for my understanding of the term and I tried to explain what it means to me.

I would say Brilliancy = Life = (Brightness + Scintillation + Fire)

I don't think that is terribly misleading. Not the whole story but definitely not misleading.

Yes, if we deduct Scintillation and Fire diamond becomes alot less special. But it's still a great abrasive!

Again, I am very interested in learning new ways to communicate diamond beauty. And if there is some sort of breakthrough in our grasp, let's try to figure it out. But apart from a somewhat to very technical discussion of the various aspects of diamond light performance (including human perception), I am not sure that it is possible to agree on a "standard" language for communicating diamond beauty.

If you put a group of poets together and show them the same sunset, will they use the same terms to describe it? If they did, would that be a good thing?

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

First, I apologize for the duplicate posts. Something wacky was happening and I was getting error messages when I tried to post indicating the site was unavailable (try again later). So I tried again later, and later and...

Serg,
I am intrigued by your statement that if you take fire and scintillation out of the equation, diamond still has something special. Since you acknowledge that brightness alone is not all that special, what exactly is left that would make diamond special?

 

[Serg]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

First, I apologize for the duplicate posts. Something wacky was happening and I was getting error messages when I tried to post indicating the site was unavailable (try again later). So I tried again later, and later and...

Serg,
I am intrigued by your statement that if you take fire and scintillation out of the equation, diamond still has something special. Since you acknowledge that brightness alone is not all that special, what exactly is left that would make diamond special?

Bryan,

it is very difficult to explain before you see stereo test with B/W squares on grey background.
for such test you need special monitor and glasses but it worth to do if you want recognise and understand unique diamond optical phenomena

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

Serg,
I wish I understood this - it looks really interesting!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

If you are able to print the image Sergey posted with a seperation a little less than your eyes, and hold it on your nose and move it away like the stereo illusions in magazines, you may be able to see the effect without other assistance.
here is one like magazines often had http://4wtv.com/3d-illusions-wallpaper/

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

If you are able to print the image Sergey posted with a seperation a little less than your eyes, and hold it on your nose and move it away like the stereo illusions in magazines, you may be able to see the effect without other assistance.
here is one like magazines often had http://4wtv.com/3d-illusions-wallpaper/
if you wear spec's leave them on

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

double post

 

[Serg]

Re: Why are the ‘Best’ Cuts on the Edge of the Table-Bezel Z

If you are able to print the image Sergey posted with a seperation a little less than your eyes, and hold it on your nose and move it away like the stereo illusions in magazines, you may be able to see the effect without other assistance.
here is one like magazines often had http://4wtv.com/3d-illusions-wallpaper/

re:and hold it on your nose and move it away like the stereo illusions in magazines, you may be able to see the effect without other assistance.

it is very very difficult to see stereo with such glasses. Nobody from my friends did it in less than 10 min. Most of them fall to see stereo.

much better to use either 3D monitor with Nvidia glasses or 3D smart TV