Why is this non-ideal diamond .pretty?

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 4/17/2004 3:56:11 AM Manks wrote:



However, it can make people with stones that might score 2-3 on the HCA feel like they have bought a complete dog, which is not correct. I suspect that if you took all retail jewellery diamonds and put them through HCA, 99% would get the thumbs down!.
----------------

Hey - that statement resembles me!

That said, I have diamonds with various scores. Personally, I prefer the big pretty one!

Next is my OEC (scores around 4 something)

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 4/16/2004 4:09:07 PM mhtv wrote:

'No worries. However, if say 99% of people prefer a certain type of diamond.....'

such a 'statistic' refers to popularity, NOT beauty.
sad how the difference is so often not understood in this forum, and in the pricescope site.----------------

OH really, your statement, like most, are slanted, uninformed & in this case just plain wrong. Geez, yep pick the ugly stone that performs well on paper over the pretty one. That's my mantra.

 

[pricescope]

Fire&Ice, Mhtv reminds me DavidT.

Mhtv, since you're are obviously a diamond expert, why not to open your real name?

 

[elmo]

Is davidt a real name?

 

[elmo]

----------------
On 4/16/2004 7:15:20 PM aljdewey wrote:


I'll continue to hold my opinion that it does have value......and until I see someone post a DOG stone on here that the HCA didn't eliminate, I'll continue to hold that view.
----------------

What about the flip side of this argument, F&I's OEC that stores 4 something. It is a nice stone that was essentially eliminated by the HCA.

Also, Garry's "cheated girdle" stones can be AGA 1A with low HCA scores and be uninspiring if not dogs. I have seen this myself but don't have something to post.

I certainly don't oppose the tool - it is good at what it claims to be, a screening tool.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 4/16/2004 7:15:20 PM aljdewey wrote:

I'll continue to hold my opinion that it does have value......and until I see someone post a DOG stone on here that the HCA didn't eliminate...

----------------

But there IS one, ALJ. Garry posted a real darn barker (all white Iscope... whatever else wrong) just for example. Remember that one? It was the model of a really odd stone with all angles and proportions in place but way unusual (short) minor facets. No way the HCA or AGS or any other standard based on crown and pavilion angles, depth and table proportions could catch that.

However, the resp DOG was mentioned as a rare oddity with the comment that H&A and HCA are not yet popular enough so that some cutter might try to cut odd shapes which just fall through the holes of the standard. The stone would have not been H&A, but get top HCA

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 4/17/2004 12:55:57 PM elmo wrote:

----------------
On 4/16/2004 7:15:20 PM aljdewey wrote:


I'll continue to hold my opinion that it does have value......and until I see someone post a DOG stone on here that the HCA didn't eliminate, I'll continue to hold that view.
----------------

What about the flip side of this argument, F&I's OEC that stores 4 something. It is a nice stone that was essentially eliminated by the HCA.

Also, Garry's 'cheated girdle' stones can be AGA 1A with low HCA scores and be uninspiring if not dogs. I have seen this myself but don't have something to post.

I certainly don't oppose the tool - it is good at what it claims to be, a screening tool.
----------------

Actually 4 something is *good* for an OEC. The HCA admitted doesn't work for OEC. Or so I think Garry stated such. Also, OEC's aren't prized by everyone & has a different look than RB's - so it would make sense that HCA couldn't really fairly judge them.

And yes, it's beautiful....but different. I keep making this analogy & I believe it's a good. A sizzling Mod RB is like a good looking 20 something year old. An OEC is more like an older attractive deeper thinking women. Both will make heads turn; but, who you will continue to stare at is personal preference.

Since Dave Atlas is an affincino of OEC's, he has derived a chart based on his AGA specifically to grade OEC's. Probably more reliable judge than HCA.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to what one prefers. On another thread, I was in the minority w/ a stone that had a 62.4 (?) depth. I tend to like a tad deeper stones - I certainly can't explain why. That one jumped out at me. Everyone else liked the more sizzle larger mm (less depth) stone. All the stones looked nice. But, two were the stars. I would love to see these stones side by side. My pick was more expensive - because the dealer was offering more services with it - or because the stone just plain "had it".

 

[Mara]

Yes it doesn't really make sense to put something like an OEC through the HCA..the numbers will be off. OEC's are beautiful though, because they are different. Just like my shallow stone was beautiful. But my new stone IS more beautiful. It's all about preference. This forums IS filled with cut nuts and diamond freaks and also knowledge hounds, which is why I find it very beautiful.

Actually, Val...I think it was MDX that posted that stone? Or someone other than Garry? Had great numbers and AGS0 I think...but horrible IS and I don't recall the HCA score or if it was run.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 4/17/2004 1:31:34 PM Mara wrote:

Actually, Val...I think it was MDX that posted that stone? Or someone other than Garry?

----------------

Wow! Great memory !

Here it is (LINK). AGS0, HCA=0.7 ( Ex-Ex-Ex-VG, TIC) barking out loud !


At the time, I thought the example was great to show exaclt what HCA does compared to the H&A and AGS0 standards and how the HCA and Iscope should work together to allow buyers make use of online access to databse listings rather than loads of various types of cuts to compare and pick from (which, really, is never avialble, B&M, online or what not)...

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Hi everyone- I never meant to open a can of worms.


If we're having a conversation about diamonds, it could be understood that there are folks who use the HCA and those who don't. I would hope that does not disqualify me from a conversation.


It's obviously not a "thrown together tool" rather, there has been a lot of effort put into the HCA- There's been plenty written on the pros and cons, no need to go there.


Can't we all agree - I don't use it - and others do- no disrespect to anyone.




Peace

 

[mhtv]

"Fire&Ice, Mhtv reminds me DavidT.
Mhtv, since you're are obviously a diamond expert, why not to open your real name? leonid pricescope"


a foul tactic of you to try and use your position as owner of the site to intimidate a forum contributor!

foul, AND typical of you to attack the person, and not stick to the actual points made. and typical of you to attack someone who effectively defeats your biased agenda.

so, just because i've made effective points that you don't like, and that you can't counter with ON-POINT remarks, you resort to implying i have something to hide, and that i should use a name other than my forum user name.

do you go on every thread in the forum and openly challenge everyone to use what you "suspect" is their "real" name? i doubt it. so clearly you reserve such tactics for those whose opinions you oppose, especially when you are unable to oppose their opions with on-point thoughts and logic.

can't take the heat, resort to personal accusations! good job, Leonid.

clear proof of site owner bias and abuse of the site owner's power.

new twist on old saying: those who can't do, teach. those who can't teach, open a website.

 

[mhtv]

" Geez, yep pick the ugly stone that performs well on paper over the pretty one. That's my mantra."



???????????????????????????

 

[mhtv]

forum rule:
"Any posting of other members’ personal details without permission will be banned."

so Leonid, doesn't your posting of what you suspect is my "real name" violate YOUR rule??? LOL, a forum owner who violates the rules of the forum!!!

 

[fire&ice]

If I could figure out how to post all your last 3 posts, I could rest my case.

My mother always said you could never argue with someone whose crazed. It just bring you down to their level. Oh, not that this is the case....just something my mom always taught me. Best.

 

[pricescope]

Mhtv:

----------
a foul tactic of you to try and use your position as owner of the site to intimidate a forum contributor!

foul, AND typical of you to attack the person, and not stick to the actual points made. and typical of you to attack someone who effectively defeats your biased agenda.
----------

Personal attack? Intimidate?

I'm sorry, Mhtv, DavidT (David Thomas) used to post here and other forums. I just thought you are the same person. No personal attack was meant.

I'm sorry you take it all so personally

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 4/17/2004 12:55:57 PM elmo wrote:

----------------

What about the flip side of this argument, F&I's OEC that stores 4 something. It is a nice stone that was essentially eliminated by the HCA.----------------

See, that's where your wrong. The *HCA* doesn't eliminate any stone....the buyer does.

The HCA says "A score below 2 (Excellent) means you have eliminated known poor performers (more than 95% of all diamonds). "

It does NOT say that you *have* to select a stone that scores below 2.0. You as the buyer may choose your parameters any way you want. If you choose stones that fall between 2 and 4, perhaps you've only eliminated 60 or 70% of known poor performers, and if that's okay with you, then fine.

These tools help you hone in on diamonds that you may find pleasing and help to determine the appropriate fair price for them. NONE of these tools can tell you what you *should* pick.

 

[caratgirl]

Hi Khinton,

I am glad that your stone performs so nicely. I would always be curious to know if EGL made a mistake on your depth %. Why don't you take the ring to an appraiser to get is measured for your own peace of mind? They wouldn't need to remove your diamond from the setting for this. Should be a matter of a few minutes to resolve the mystery measurements. If you do, please post the results...I would be very interested, as I am sure others would be.

 

[pricescope]

Garry's update from the front line in Basel

------
They (GIA) did not announce the parameters of the new grading system

But they did give out a few sample proportions and announced that the early July issue of Gems & Gemology will have a detailed article that will explain a lot more.
--------

I know Garry has more to share but I'll wait for him to write it himself

 

[mhtv]

" No personal attack was meant."

but Leonid, that was EXACTLY what you did. i have no reason to doubt that it was what you intended to do. i made a comment about diamond beauty, and you responded with an accusation about my PERSONAL identity. this is a both a violation of the forum rule about posting personal information, and as i said, nothing but a foul tactic.

how is it NOT personal? it certainly is NOT on point to my comment. it is about ME, and it is NOT about the point i made! that IS personal..it is NOTHING else.

you cannot deal with the facts of my comment, yet still feel compeled to respond because i've effectively deflated one of your beloved biases. so, you are left with nothing but a personal comment....a conjecture about my personal identity. again, how is that ON POINT to my comment about diamond beauty...answer: it is not!

you violate a rule of your own forum. you violate basic etiquette of discussion by responding OFF TOPIC and PERSONAL.

a quip that i can't help repeating: those who can't do, teach. those who can't teach, open a website.

 

[Rank Amateur]

boy o boy

it's not just the diamonds that scream "look at me!"