Why I love 60/60 diamonds- compared to AGS0 IS/ASET and photos

[Rockdiamond]

IS of GIA .54ct

 

[Regular Guy]

Oww.

Somebody turn off that tune: "Luck be a Lady tonight..."

 

[Stephan]

Funny, the 0.54 wants to become a pear.

 

[stone-cold11]

The ASET/IS of the 60/60 look worse off to me, I am not convince that it will look better in real life so far. So are we going to have a video shoot off? Maybe sent it to Jon since he has done lots of video comparison of stones?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

David please take photo''s as per instructions with your ideal-scope as the scan of the GIA stone is clearly not accurate.

And secondly, will you please fully describe the way you examine loose diamonds and have someone take photo''s of your technique - a full idiot proof description so that we can all replicate your precise viewing and lighting so we should see what you see when we look at diamonds.

 

[princesss]

Date: 5/15/2009 4:55:15 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
The ASET/IS of the 60/60 look worse off to me, I am not convince that it will look better in real life so far. So are we going to have a video shoot off? Maybe sent it to Jon since he has done lots of video comparison of stones?

A video would be a great idea. I''d love to see how the two diamonds compare in various lighting conditions, because that ASET and IS image aren''t convincing me that the stone can compare to the AGS0. The ASET just looks messy. To be fair, though, I am a symmetry freak in other aspects of my life and not just with the cutting on stones, so that could influence my opinion a little.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 5/15/2009 4:51:00 PM
Author: QueenMum
Funny, the 0.54 wants to become a pear.

Ahem. *straight face back on*

 

[denverappraiser]

Do I correctly remember from the warmup posts to this that the IS and ASET images were taken by David Atlas?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/15/2009 5:00:51 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
David please take photo''s as per instructions with your ideal-scope as the scan of the GIA stone is clearly not accurate.

And secondly, will you please fully describe the way you examine loose diamonds and have someone take photo''s of your technique - a full idiot proof description so that we can all replicate your precise viewing and lighting so we should see what you see when we look at diamonds.

HI Garry!
I did not take photos to get these images- Dave Atlas ran a Sarin and used Diacalc to generate these images. He also used Imagem.
I noticed the abnormality in the GIA stone once I posted them and called Dave.
He said that there was likely a piece of dust on the stone affecting the scan- but that he did not feel it was substantive to the results.

In terms of how I look at diamonds when we are purchasing- or assessing quality of cut: I use the normal diamond tools. A 10 power loupe, a tweezer, and a standard fluorescent diamond light.
Our offices have a lot of natural light as well.
I always give myself time to look at the diamond in a few different lighting situations, with and without loupe.
Anyone who''s ever graded diamonds probably has had the strange experience of looking at the same diamond, a few hours later- and having a different feeling about the grade.
Without question it''s more difficult to grade color later in the day. Sometimes what looked like an SI1 in the morning looks like a VS2 later on in the day.
When I was grading for large companies, there was not the luxury of taking a lot of time to contemplate.
Today, given the opportunity, I always have the diamond in my possession for at least 24 hours before committing to buy it. So I can look at it over time.

If we are looking at this from a practical standpoint, there''s no real life "repeatable" lighting situation.
This is another great point for reflector technology. Used by a dealer, they''d have far more repeatable results.
When I ''ve bought diamonds overseas the lighting wreaks havoc with having any type of calibration of the eyes ( you''re not used to the light). Many buyers bring sample stones to try and level the playing field. Many times what looks like a "G" in Ramat Gan becomes an "I" back in NYC lighting....

For the consumer, ASET/IS also a huge benefit.
Walk into a jewelry store, and who knows how the lighting will affect the stone?

My point is not that reflector technology is bad, or that it is not tremendously useful to many diamond buyers. It''s a great thing, and a boon to many buyers.

To try and put this in a way that clarifies how I feel: The utility of using reflector technology comes with certain inherent drawbacks.
For many, the drawbacks of NOT using reflector technology are far greater.

If, for example, we started to use ASET IS to make purchasing decisions, we''d loose a lot of what I love most about diamonds.
Would it be better to have a diamond that looked better in person, or using ASET/IS?
Remember, we''re not really carrying a lot of round colorless diamonds. Part of what I love so much about fancy shapes and colors are the tremendous variety of looks.


In terms of Video, thankfully we are totally set up to videotape these two diamonds, and in fact, have already done so.
I have taken photos of the two stones as well.


One aspect of this conversation that might prove to be a large challenge: my photos.
Garry- I can totally understand why my methodology for taking photos will be important to this conversation- because we''ve discussed this in the past.
My photos are different than many others on the web. I don''t use light boxes. I simply hold the diamond and take photos using many different lighting sources.
Can we stipulate that my photos are not a "scientific" representation, rather a more "artistic" one? Also- my goal in the photos is to represent what my eye( and the buyer, once they open the box) will see.
Using that as a barometer, the photos have performed remarkably well.
I would suggest that the photos be looked at to try and see what I feel I''m seeing.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/15/2009 5:36:47 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Do I correctly remember from the warmup posts to this that the IS and ASET images were taken by David Atlas?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

These are DiamCalc virtual images from I presume a not very good scan or a dirty GIA stone

 

[denverappraiser]

Also, what’s the date on the AGS0 report?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/15/2009 5:39:45 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Also, what’s the date on the AGS0 report?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

July 17 2006.

 

[whatmeworry]

David,
I dont know if you''ve posted it here but
1) What is the HCA score of each stone?
2) What is the Imagem cut grade (including the subcategories, brilliance, sparkke, ...) of each stone ?

 

[denverappraiser]

Date: 5/15/2009 5:41:08 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 5/15/2009 5:39:45 PM

Author: denverappraiser

Also, what’s the date on the AGS0 report?


Neil Beaty

GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA

Professional Appraisals in Denver

July 17 2006.

Thanks David.

The reason I asked that question was to know which cut grading system the lab was using to come up with the '0' grade since it's obviously relevant to the discussion. As you know, AGS changed the rules in 2005 and didn't fully impliment the new system until April 2007. That's right in the time slot where it could be either. If you can post a scan of the report I can tell you which it was.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 5/15/2009 6:12:35 PM
Author: whatmeworry
David,
I dont know if you''ve posted it here but
1) What is the HCA score of each stone?
2) What is the Imagem cut grade (including the subcategories, brilliance, sparkke, ...) of each stone ?

The Brilliancy of the AGS stone was EX 170, Sparkle was EX 97 ad Intensity was EX 324
The Brilliancy of the GIA stone was VG 131, Sparkle was VG 62 and Intensity was EX 171

 

[purrfectpear]

I''m still confused David. What exactly is the point that you''re trying to make in this thread ?

It feels like you''re all over the place?

You agree that reflector tech is good. You agree it''s a boon to consumers. You say it has inherent drawbacks....

and then you say that you might miss out on what you love about diamonds and then you start talking about the fact that you sell colored diamonds? OK we get that. You''re not trying to bring those into the discussion are you? ''Cause no one here is suggesting that reflector tech has anything to do with the sale of colored diamonds. So if I''m correct that that ISN''T what you''re bring into the talk, then what is the point if you agree that IS/ASET is good for consumers?

It sounds like there isn''t any new point? I think everyone agrees that the tech has potential good for consumers and that the FINAL decision maker is the consumers own eyes, no?



Regarding the lighting differences, I''m guessing that it''s harder in the afternoon because the kelvin rating of the natural light is much, much warmer later in the day. As a former photographer you learn to compensate for that.

 

[risingsun]

Can you give us the CA, PA, LG%, and girdle of both diamonds. It is because we are on the internet that I am asking for this information. If you have Sarins, that will do nicely. Thanks.

 

[strmrdr]

David take pictures of the diamonds side by side sitting in the V between 2 fingers please if you haven''t already.
That is a decent representation of a mounted stone, where the diamond in open air is not.
There are other issues with lighting that will be discussed once you post your photos.

 

[Ellen]

Where are the pics and video?

 

[risingsun]

Bueller...Bueller

 

[Rockdiamond]

What''s beuller? If it''s like Ferris Bueller, well, yes, I took a day off!

I should have the photos up later today

 

[risingsun]

Date: 5/17/2009 11:02:50 AM
Author: Rockdiamond
What''s beuller? If it''s like Ferris Bueller, well, yes, I took a day off!

I should have the photos up later today

Yes, it was a Ferris Bueller inquiry

 

[Rockdiamond]

HI everyone!
About this thread- why it''s here, and my "point"
Garry - and others- have invited me to embrace this technology.
I was guilty , in the past, at scoffing at the idea.

My mistake.
I would like to thank Garry, Paul, and others for the invitation, and expressing an open mind on allowing a new page to be turned.
If I never made it clear, I have tremendous respect for someone that''s put as much into the study of diamonds as Garry or Paul has.

My natural inclination is to look at diamonds from a different perspective.
The term "performance" for example, is a bit of a flash-point.
Not every one agrees what constitutes performance in diamonds.

My intention was an actual discussion- I have not staged anything.
I picked two stones- one which had a 60% table, and a look I liked- and another with a smaller table- and a stronger performance using the reflector technology tools.

I''ve looked at what goes on here on PS, and therefore made the statement that "reflector technology is a boon to the consumer".
That was a bit overly broad. As we''re having the discussion, I can see that I should have added- "Reflector technology is a boon to the consumer who''s looking for a stone with superior, or optimal light return characteristics"


As I said up front- we can''t really "settle" this issue.
IN terms of the market overall, no matter what we discuss here, it seems that Blue Nile, and others like them, will continue to post the largest sales figures and never even post a photo- much less ASET IS.
If we do decide to carry near tolk stones as part of our normal stock and trade, we''d do what it takes to provide reflector images. Clearly, sites offering superior light performance, as a selling point, need to demonstrate it.
IS and ASET effectively do this.

In terms of the photos- I took some before I sent the diamonds to Dave- but not very many.
I did get a few comparison shots.
When the diamonds come back I can take more.
My photos are more similar to a consumers, as compared to many of the sites offering more "controlled" environments.
The value is that it''s what my eye sees- and we''ve had tremendous experience over the years with consumers buying based on the photos.


In terms of the video, I could put them on a blank page of their own with no advertising and link to them if it''s OK with admin.

This comparison shot was taken in daylight.
I''d like to get more like this, once the diamonds are back.
To me, it''s obvious which is which.

 

[strmrdr]

David,
This image is showing exactly what I would expect to see under those conditions based on the ASET iamges.
Can I get the sarin data please?

Can you explain what we are seeing?

Can you explain what about the diamonds and the environment the diamonds are in is causing the difference in appearance?

 

[Rockdiamond]

Thank you Storm!
I agree.
To simplify what I see- and be able to describe it- the stone on the right is focusing the light in a more....accurate manner. The facets are lined up in such a way that you can see the patterns on the bottom of the diamond.
The stone on the left has a more open personality. The facet reflecting up through the table appear to either be more narrow, or not exactly lined up. To my eye, it looks a little brighter.
It also appears to be, ever so slightly, larger. In reality it''s not.

 

[Rockdiamond]

On a plastic white stone matching tray
High intensity lighting macro lens,

 

[strmrdr]

David the answers to my above questions are critical to understanding what is going on here.

I'm not going to answer them yet but to demo comparing ASET to actual, I did not attempt to line them up just used arrows to point to like areas.

base on arrow color:
Yellow arrow is leakage, black in ASET and your finger color in regular pic.
Green arrow is light return, white on diamond, red on ASET, in this case from a pavilion main.
Brown arrow is obstruction, black on pic, blue on ASET
Orange arrow is light return also, but off axis lighting. White on diamond and green on ASET.

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/17/2009 6:14:19 PM
Author: strmrdr
David the answers to my above questions are critical to understanding what is going on here.

I''m not going to answer them yet but to demo comparing ASET to actual, I did not attempt to line them up just used arrows to point to like areas.

base on arrow color:
Yellow arrow is leakage, black in ASET and your finger color in regular pic.
Green arrow is light return, white on diamond, red on ASET, in this case from a pavilion main.
Brown arrow is obstruction, black on pic, blue on ASET
Orange arrow is light return also, but off axis lighting. White on diamond and green on ASET.

Dare I say the 60/60 look prettier to me in these images...

The uniform pattern does not compliment the prestige (AGS) cut grade in these images...

 

[risingsun]

This is my photo of an AGS 0 hearts and arrow diamond. I wonder why your pic looks so much different than mine

I never pick up those black bits. Sometimes, if I try, I can get some black arrows to show up, but never like those that appear in your photos.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/17/2009 11:41:22 PM
Author: risingsun
This is my photo of an AGS 0 hearts and arrow diamond. I wonder why your pic looks so much different than mine

I never pick up those black bits. Sometimes, if I try, I can get some black arrows to show up, but never like those that appear in your photos.

black lens to close to the diamond.
totally unrealistic amount of head shadow in his first image.
It would be like someone looking at the diamond from 2 inches.

His second has a more realistic amount of head shadow but the white background is unrealistic.
Getting realistic images that show a diamonds performance is hard.
Many of the pictures you see on vendors sites are tricked out to hide flaws.
This is why reflector images are critical.