1.01 K?

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 10/31/2006 8:31:26 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 10/31/2006 7:36:51 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
A well cut FIC has maybe 3-5% less brightness than a TIC - so there is not a huge amount of difference in the overall brightness.

The extra fire should be just percieved in spot lights where there is a lot of fire - but the scintillation / rapidity of sprkle is noticeable when side by side comp''s are done

OK Gary, I''m trying to understand this, as maybe I didn''t totally before? I get that it won''t be overall quite as bright as a TIC. As to scint, a TIC is a mix of white and color. I was under the impression that a FIC gives off almost all color, is that wrong? Does it give off white light too, but just MORE fire, or is it really mostly colored light?

I''m not garry but yes, FIC give off white light too! All diamonds reflect light, BIC diamonds bring it in and put it out almost trying not to refract it so they can maximize the whiteness that comes out.... they aren''t as good at refracting it... the more the stone is angled sharply to refract it, the less good it is to just reflect it straight out.... but that doesn''t mean that every single facet isn''t still returning white light - it just isn''t returning it STRAIGHT UP to one location - ie the eye face up from 10 inches or whatever. My stone returns light in every direction, white and color. everywhere a facet is facing light, it will return *some* white light.... the BIC diamonds IMO were a tightening of TIC into the craze of white light return... I daresay the pendulum is swinging the other way now...

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 10/31/2006 11:28:54 AM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 10/31/2006 8:31:26 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 10/31/2006 7:36:51 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
A well cut FIC has maybe 3-5% less brightness than a TIC - so there is not a huge amount of difference in the overall brightness.

The extra fire should be just percieved in spot lights where there is a lot of fire - but the scintillation / rapidity of sprkle is noticeable when side by side comp''s are done

OK Gary, I''m trying to understand this, as maybe I didn''t totally before? I get that it won''t be overall quite as bright as a TIC. As to scint, a TIC is a mix of white and color. I was under the impression that a FIC gives off almost all color, is that wrong? Does it give off white light too, but just MORE fire, or is it really mostly colored light?

I''m not garry but yes, FIC give off white light too! All diamonds reflect light, BIC diamonds bring it in and put it out almost trying not to refract it so they can maximize the whiteness that comes out.... they aren''t as good at refracting it... the more the stone is angled sharply to refract it, the less good it is to just reflect it straight out.... but that doesn''t mean that every single facet isn''t still returning white light - it just isn''t returning it STRAIGHT UP to one location - ie the eye face up from 10 inches or whatever. My stone returns light in every direction, white and color. everywhere a facet is facing light, it will return *some* white light.... the BIC diamonds IMO were a tightening of TIC into the craze of white light return... I daresay the pendulum is swinging the other way now...

Thanks C

There is a sloping relationship for ideal Crown and pavilion angles.
if the crown is lower the pavilion needs to be a bit deeper - then there is more light return but less fire

when the crown angle is bigger there is more fire and a little less light return

Tolkowsky is in the middle or slightly to the firey part of that line

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 10/31/2006 1:52:34 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Thanks C

There is a sloping relationship for ideal Crown and pavilion angles.
if the crown is lower the pavilion needs to be a bit deeper - then there is more light return but less fire

when the crown angle is bigger there is more fire and a little less light return

Tolkowsky is in the middle or slightly to the firey part of that line

my crown is 20% and I think the angle is over 40... I''m gonna have to shell out the $ for the research LOL

 

[Ellen]

Date: 10/31/2006 1:52:34 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Thanks C

There is a sloping relationship for ideal Crown and pavilion angles.
if the crown is lower the pavilion needs to be a bit deeper - then there is more light return but less fire

when the crown angle is bigger there is more fire and a little less light return

Tolkowsky is in the middle or slightly to the firey part of that line

Gary, I understand the balance of angles needed. I guess where I'm being dense is, I don't quite understand the hoopla over a FIC, if it gives off a mix like a TIC, but is slightly less brilliant overall. That's what I understood Cehra to say. Am I still missing something?

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 10/31/2006 3:21:13 PM
Author: Ellen
Gary, I understand the balance of angles needed. I guess where I''m being dense is, I don''t quite understand the hoopla over a FIC, if it gives off a mix like a TIC, but is slightly less brilliant overall. That''s what I understood Cehra to say. Am I still missing something?

again, not garry, but all 3 are going to give off white light and colored light return... the bic stones are cut in a way to maximize light return and they do a very good job of reflecting brilliant white light back to a tuned focal point.... the fic cuts have steeper angles that are not as good at returning it back to that same focal point - it is still returned but a little more all over, and with it comes more color refracted out of the steeper facets but again not straight up to the focal point, just all over. my stone "loses" light in every direction and if you want a white circle of light, that''s a *problem*! But personally, I love it, it means that I can look at my diamond from ANY angle and get a prism in a snap. I hardly think that''s a problem!!

Think of it kinda like a flashlight that you can widen or focus the beam on.... the more focused the beam, the more intense the white reflection and the less broad the coverage and on a BIC all facets are cut in such a way as to pour the light straight back out through the table to an awaiting eye looking down on it from a foot or two. on the oppsite extreme you have a stone like mine that throws fire in every direction and tons of it, but wouldn''t light your way in the dark LOL Most stones fall somewher ein the middle but generally toward the white realm since that has been what is popular the last 20 years or ???

 

[Ellen]

Cehra, thanks. I just want to totally understand TIC and FIC, so I could explain it to someone else. Your last post helped....


Maybe I''ll just direct them to it.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 10/31/2006 3:43:35 PM
Author: Ellen
Cehra, thanks. I just want to totally understand TIC and FIC, so I could explain it to someone else. Your last post helped....


Maybe I'll just direct them to it.

lol wait for garry to correct me first I really wanted the most fire and the biggest broadest fire I could find and 2nd was lots of scint so I ran with that.... and thought that I'd always want that in a diamond, but the truth is I don't! When looking at the earrings I found that I prefer the BIC for earrings and I imagine for a pendant I'd want a TIC. I don't need fire coming off my earrings.... I prefer them being white light returners.... and a pendant I'd want some of both... but for my ring I just wanted fire.... it's nice to have options!!!!

I think Garry's got a real niche here with defining types and if he deliniates them even more and backs it up with more fire research, I think he's gonna blow the lid open

 

[:)]

Date: 10/31/2006 4:08:45 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 10/31/2006 3:43:35 PM
Author: Ellen
Cehra, thanks. I just want to totally understand TIC and FIC, so I could explain it to someone else. Your last post helped....


Maybe I''ll just direct them to it.

lol wait for garry to correct me first I really wanted the most fire and the biggest broadest fire I could find and 2nd was lots of scint so I ran with that.... and thought that I''d always want that in a diamond, but the truth is I don''t! When looking at the earrings I found that I prefer the BIC for earrings and I imagine for a pendant I''d want a TIC. I don''t need fire coming off my earrings.... I prefer them being white light returners.... and a pendant I''d want some of both... but for my ring I just wanted fire.... it''s nice to have options!!!!

I think Garry''s got a real niche here with defining types and if he deliniates them even more and backs it up with more fire research, I think he''s gonna blow the lid open

You may not want a bic for earrings - I have Tiffany''s studs and I swear they are bics - I actually have no idea (they were gifts), but I get bored looking at the whiteness all the time (LOL, of course not that I am walking around staring at myself in the mirror constantly!!!)

 

[Jelly]

Ebree, is this an upgrade for your ering?

 

[:)]

El, I think Garry posted somewhere once that when people see side by side tic/fic they prefer the fic with their eyes - (he may even have been the one that mentioned it is perceived as more romantic). I think he said something like 5-10 flashes of color for the fic instead of 3-5 with the tic, with difficult to appreciate a visible decrease in white light return. Okay, that is not a direct quote, but that was the gist of what I took from it. Another caveat to a fic, is that they don''t face up quite as large due to the steeper crown angle decreasing the visible spread (more of the weight in the height of the stone), so if size is important the person may not end up selecting a fic. He made a nice little side view once - the fics look like someone made muffins but overfilled the pan and the muffin top (crown) spilled up and above the pan!

Okay, now Garry can come and correct me too!

I apologize ahead of time for any errors I made!

 

[Ellen]

Thanks . And yes, I''ve seen a comparison pic by Gary, along with some racey commentary.

I knew FIC''s were more firey, I just didn''t totally understand the how and why of it.

And Ebree, I hope you don''t feel we ruined your thread. I apologize if you do.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 10/31/2006 8:00:53 PM
Author:
El, I think Garry posted somewhere once that when people see side by side tic/fic they prefer the fic with their eyes - (he may even have been the one that mentioned it is perceived as more romantic). I think he said something like 5-10 flashes of color for the fic instead of 3-5 with the tic, with difficult to appreciate a visible decrease in white light return. Okay, that is not a direct quote, but that was the gist of what I took from it. Another caveat to a fic, is that they don''t face up quite as large due to the steeper crown angle decreasing the visible spread (more of the weight in the height of the stone), so if size is important the person may not end up selecting a fic. He made a nice little side view once - the fics look like someone made muffins but overfilled the pan and the muffin top (crown) spilled up and above the pan!

Okay, now Garry can come and correct me too!

I apologize ahead of time for any errors I made!

5-10 smaller more frequent flashes compared to 3-5 much bigger flashes. but maybe only 5% more fire in total.

I am making a graphic from http://www.gemology.ru/cut/english/podrobno_1.htm that shares the same scale that i hope will help explain it better
The differences are subtle - not super strong.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 10/31/2006 8:21:06 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
5-10 smaller more frequent flashes compared to 3-5 much bigger flashes. but maybe only 5% more fire in total.

I am making a graphic from http://www.gemology.ru/cut/english/podrobno_1.htm that shares the same scale that i hope will help explain it better
The differences are subtle - not super strong.

Ok, with this and everything else, I pretty much get it now. I tend to try and visualize things when I''m learning, and the "flashes" explanation finally drove the whole thing home. lol Thanks Gary.

 

[E B]

Date: 10/31/2006 8:10:34 PM
Author: Ellen

And Ebree, I hope you don't feel we ruined your thread. I apologize if you do.

Oh my gosh, no! I've learned quite a bit in this thread.

Jelly- I wasn't happy with the way my setting clashed with what seemed like EVERY wedding band I tried on, so I had to sell the entire thing (the setting was made for the diamond). It wasn't an easy decision at all, but I decided I would rather be happier with my wedding ring and the set in general than with just the e-ring setting, which I loved on its own. I want to wear my wedding band for life. So now, I'm searching for a brand new e-ring.

I didn't get a chance to ask WF about this stone today, but I will tomorrow. They're also bringing another stone in for me, a fabulous TIC 1.01 J, SI1. I'll keep everyone posted!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 10/31/2006 7:49:08 PM
Author:

You may not want a bic for earrings - I have Tiffany''s studs and I swear they are bics - I actually have no idea (they were gifts), but I get bored looking at the whiteness all the time (LOL, of course not that I am walking around staring at myself in the mirror constantly!!!)

too late! already have them!! lol my earrings face up like round white circles big time and I''ve always liked them like that... and when someone here was showing some stones that were more like my ring I didn''t like them as much for the ears...

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 10/31/2006 10:05:24 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 10/31/2006 8:10:34 PM
Author: Ellen

And Ebree, I hope you don''t feel we ruined your thread. I apologize if you do.

Oh my gosh, no! I''ve learned quite a bit in this thread.

Jelly- I wasn''t happy with the way my setting clashed with what seemed like EVERY wedding band I tried on, so I had to sell the entire thing (the setting was made for the diamond). It wasn''t an easy decision at all, but I decided I would rather be happier with my wedding ring and the set in general than with just the e-ring setting, which I loved on its own. I want to wear my wedding band for life. So now, I''m searching for a brand new e-ring.

I didn''t get a chance to ask WF about this stone today, but I will tomorrow. They''re also bringing another stone in for me, a fabulous TIC 1.01 J, SI1. I''ll keep everyone posted!

oh I''m bummin!! I went back and looked at your old setting and I totally remember it because I loved it!!! Oh well - you have to love it, right? LOL Good luck on your new search!!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 10/31/2006 8:27:32 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 10/31/2006 8:21:06 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
5-10 smaller more frequent flashes compared to 3-5 much bigger flashes. but maybe only 5% more fire in total.

I am making a graphic from http://www.gemology.ru/cut/english/podrobno_1.htm that shares the same scale that i hope will help explain it better
The differences are subtle - not super strong.

Ok, with this and everything else, I pretty much get it now. I tend to try and visualize things when I''m learning, and the ''flashes'' explanation finally drove the whole thing home. lol Thanks Gary.

This should help.
The small graphs below are for light return and fire (right side), and both have the same scale as the big one above.

The big one is a mixture of the 2 smaller ones.

The scale on the right and the contours show that the various properties - 1.0 = Tolkowsky - less, like .95 = 5% less light return, and the 1.05 contour = 5% more than Tolkowsky.

If you are not good at reading charts like this - get someone who is to explain it to you.

BIC is in the upper left and FIC in the lower right.

This is old 1999 MSU work and Sergey and Yuri would say they have different data today since they now include things like observers eye and lamp size and distance etc. But this is probably more accurate than any GIA attempts, and was produced well before GIA did their rather sad virtual studies.

 

[phoenixgirl]

I recently got K SI earrings and was very happy with what I got for my money.

I think this stone looks very promising. My stones were also GIA very good cuts that had scored 2.0 and below on the HCA. They both ended up having arrows and better symmetry than any of my other diamonds. I think the flourescence should be neat and is a lucky find to go with a K stone. If you like the way the stone looks, you are getting a one carat stone for a great price.

Let us know what you decide!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Bump - you all went quiet on me????

Does that mean you understand it all?

Or did the scientific charts chill ya out?

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 11/2/2006 5:08:27 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Bump - you all went quiet on me????

Does that mean you understand it all?

Or did the scientific charts chill ya out?

I understand that on the chart there are little hawaiian islands of higher performance along a basic ridge of activity... I unerstand that at one end of the lava chain are active firey eruptions and at the other are established big islands, er I mean a lot of brilliance. Somewhere in the middle of it all, the Gods of Designation have declared certain islands to be most ideal for tropical vacation, providing you want a safe generally appealing journey. But if what you really want is something really unique yet spectacular, you can venture into the more difficult to navigate islands outside the safety zone.

That''s all I got.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 11/2/2006 10:12:46 AM
Author: Cehrabehra
I understand that on the chart there are little hawaiian islands of higher performance along a basic ridge of activity... I unerstand that at one end of the lava chain are active firey eruptions and at the other are established big islands, er I mean a lot of brilliance. Somewhere in the middle of it all, the Gods of Designation have declared certain islands to be most ideal for tropical vacation, providing you want a safe generally appealing journey. But if what you really want is something really unique yet spectacular, you can venture into the more difficult to navigate islands outside the safety zone.

That''s all I got.

Sorry Gary, I appreciate the charts, just got busy and forgot to respond! I was busy buying more diamonds.

LOL!! Cehra, you''re so colorful.

That''s what I got too, just wouldn''t have worded it that way.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 11/2/2006 10:50:16 AM
Author: Ellen
Sorry Gary, I appreciate the charts, just got busy and forgot to respond! I was busy buying more diamonds.

LOL!! Cehra, you''re so colorful.

That''s what I got too, just wouldn''t have worded it that way.

hey, I live in oregn and guess what, it''s raining - all week... had to vacation in my head since I spent all of our vacation money for the next few years on a stinken sparkly pebble!!!!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Very good C - you have on one of those Hawaiian shirts!!!

Glad you got it.

the charts are an aoverall thing though - not that accurate as they have done better more complex work since then

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 11/2/2006 1:57:00 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Very good C - you have on one of those Hawaiian shirts!!!

Glad you got it.

the charts are an aoverall thing though - not that accurate as they have done better more complex work since then

Kilauea baybee!!

I''m curious to know more about how these charts were done in the first place - were they done with just the opinions of people or based on some sort of scientific somethingorother... also... where are the better charts of more complex work? And I''m still wanting to know more about something you''re cooking for next year about fire...

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 11/2/2006 7:39:38 PM
Author: Cehrabehra
Kilauea baybee!!

I''m curious to know more about how these charts were done in the first place - were they done with just the opinions of people or based on some sort of scientific somethingorother... also... where are the better charts of more complex work? And I''m still wanting to know more about something you''re cooking for next year about fire...

C you know that diamCalc and Gem Adviser give values for light return, contrast etc.

Well if you do them for thousands of different proportions you can build charts olike these - just like the weather maps et

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 11/2/2006 9:44:27 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 11/2/2006 7:39:38 PM
Author: Cehrabehra
Kilauea baybee!!

I''m curious to know more about how these charts were done in the first place - were they done with just the opinions of people or based on some sort of scientific somethingorother... also... where are the better charts of more complex work? And I''m still wanting to know more about something you''re cooking for next year about fire...

C you know that diamCalc and Gem Adviser give values for light return, contrast etc.

Well if you do them for thousands of different proportions you can build charts olike these - just like the weather maps et

I knowt hat diamcalc and gem advisor give values - but how accurate are they? I know it all boils down to physics, so I''m confident it could be accurate... but it seems like there are still issues - maybe more regarding the actual measuring devices?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 11/3/2006 10:06:24 AM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 11/2/2006 9:44:27 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)


C you know that diamCalc and Gem Adviser give values for light return, contrast etc.

Well if you do them for thousands of different proportions you can build charts olike these - just like the weather maps et

I knowt hat diamcalc and gem advisor give values - but how accurate are they? I know it all boils down to physics, so I''m confident it could be accurate... but it seems like there are still issues - maybe more regarding the actual measuring devices?

In the case of the maps above they are calculated from virtual diamonds, so there is no measuring. (But Sergeyalso invented Helium which is the most accurate scanner by a long way).

The accuracy of the factors Sergey now produces is beyond question in my mind.

There are factors that he has withdrawn and rethought. But the values in those maaps above are older and less accurate. Today Sergey has many more unpublished charts that include a huge variety of factors that he is either not happy enough to publish until after we have conducted the Master Stone study (MSS) which will involve showing many dianmonds to people in controlled lighting environs to check the vlaidity of those results.
We have a small number of the stones cut already and more on the way.
We should be able to star this MSS next year.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 11/3/2006 2:27:51 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

In the case of the maps above they are calculated from virtual diamonds, so there is no measuring. (But Sergeyalso invented Helium which is the most accurate scanner by a long way).

The accuracy of the factors Sergey now produces is beyond question in my mind.

There are factors that he has withdrawn and rethought. But the values in those maaps above are older and less accurate. Today Sergey has many more unpublished charts that include a huge variety of factors that he is either not happy enough to publish until after we have conducted the Master Stone study (MSS) which will involve showing many dianmonds to people in controlled lighting environs to check the vlaidity of those results.
We have a small number of the stones cut already and more on the way.
We should be able to star this MSS next year.

okay duh on the virtual diamonds - that makes sense.... making mental notes about helium scans.... now.... the mss is what I was thinking about - is it going to be in one locaion like NYC or are you going to have stations set up arond the world?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 11/3/2006 3:05:11 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 11/3/2006 2:27:51 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

In the case of the maps above they are calculated from virtual diamonds, so there is no measuring. (But Sergeyalso invented Helium which is the most accurate scanner by a long way).

The accuracy of the factors Sergey now produces is beyond question in my mind.

There are factors that he has withdrawn and rethought. But the values in those maaps above are older and less accurate. Today Sergey has many more unpublished charts that include a huge variety of factors that he is either not happy enough to publish until after we have conducted the Master Stone study (MSS) which will involve showing many dianmonds to people in controlled lighting environs to check the vlaidity of those results.
We have a small number of the stones cut already and more on the way.
We should be able to star this MSS next year.

okay duh on the virtual diamonds - that makes sense.... making mental notes about helium scans.... now.... the mss is what I was thinking about - is it going to be in one locaion like NYC or are you going to have stations set up arond the world?

the Master stone study will be conducted in many locations in many countries

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 11/3/2006 3:22:10 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

the Master stone study will be conducted in many locations in many countries

so is it next year as in january or next year as in next november??? LOL or as in ALL next year??