AGSL Light Performance Ray-Tracing vs Inclusions

[new4diamond]

...How much effect do inclusions have with the AGSL Light Performance Ray-Tracing?

I may not be asking this question correctly, but does the software plot the inclusions then generate the light performance results?

I emailed AGSL a number of days ago, asking the same questions, but have not received any answers....I am just curious as to how this actually works. May be far more complex than I will ever need to know.

 

[JulieN]

probably has some effect in some lower clarity stones. Unless you are keeping your diamond pristinely clean of dust, oils, and grime, that has an effect, too.

 

[Karl_K]

No, the software knows nothing of the inclusions so does not take it into account.

 

[JulieN]

Excuse me, brain fart! Karl is right, inclusions are not taken into account.

 

[yssie]

No, the software knows nothing of the inclusions so does not take it into account.

Would it consider things like extra facets, naturals - things that affect the external outline of the stone that a sensitive scanner might pick up?

 

[Karl_K]

No, the software knows nothing of the inclusions so does not take it into account.

Would it consider things like extra facets, naturals - things that affect the external outline of the stone that a sensitive scanner might pick up?

Yes, but they are running sarins so extra facet yea will likely see it, naturals not unless they were huge.

 

[John P]

Edited: I started this reply a while back. Others have already replied - but I'll press submit anyway.

AGSL uses an external 3D scan to computer performance values. The software does take internal factors into account. A diamond with dense clouds/pinpoints, graining, twinning or over-fluorescence isn't penalized, even if those factors do create a performance reduction. External factors such as notable naturals, etc., will be picked up.

FYI: All of the major labs use an external scan for cut-grade factors other than finish. Some are simply based on averaged 2D proportions. AGSL's is more sophisticated, but none of them "look inside" the diamond.

There are some signs I'd pay attention to, such as "Clarity grade based on (clouds, pinpoints, gaining) not shown," among others. It's not always a problem, but all data points must be considered.

 

[new4diamond]

interesting...I guess the next process to be developed may be scanning hardware/software that looks through the stone, plots inclusions then performs a light performance analysis. I suppose the more information the better, but I guess it still depends on what the human eyes see.

Maybe the more information that is put on a lab report, the easier to compare. I like the AGSL reports in that aspect.

 

[yssie]

interesting...I guess the next process to be developed may be scanning hardware/software that looks through the stone, plots inclusions then performs a light performance analysis. I suppose the more information the better, but I guess it still depends on what the human eyes see.

Maybe the more information that is put on a lab report, the easier to compare. I like the AGSL reports in that aspect.

What comes out is only as good as what comes in - don't do or die by the nuances on the reports, esp. w/ those ASET sims - Sarin scanners have limitations.
Well exhibit A is earlier in this thread w/ Karl's reply to me.

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

so in essence, what the ray tracing does is to evaluate light performance based solely on proportions.

Just like how GIA determines color distribution in colored diamonds, they don't take account of the inclusions in the stones. you can have 50% or more of the diamond covered by black inclusions and still achieve an even distribution of color grading.

 

[yssie]

so in essence, what the ray tracing does is to evaluate light performance based solely on proportions.

Just like how GIA determines color distribution in colored diamonds, they don't take account of the inclusions in the stones. you can have 50% or more of the diamond covered by black inclusions and still achieve an even distribution of color grading.

From this part of this post I understand that if 50% or more of the diamond doesn't show colour for any reason the colour would be graded "uneven": [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/pros-what-is-even-color-distribution.156686/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/pros-what-is-even-color-distribution.156686/[/URL]

The evenness of a color as defined by GIA is not about how similar the color is where it is visible (if that is what Mr. Kodner is meaning), rather it is a function of how much of the diamond shows color versus absence of color (i.e. extinction, brilliance, etc.) when viewed face up. If a diamond shows color over 50% or more of the crown then it would be graded as even, if less than 50% it would be graded as uneven. To continue with the pear shape example, if the bow tie (which would be defined as absent of color) were quite large and more than 50% of the crown when viewed face up, then it would have been graded as uneven. Similarly for the baguette, since the color is only at the heads and the majority of the diamond shows no color it was graded as uneven.
I hope this helps.

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/Radiant-cut/0.77-carat-GN-color-CO-clarity-sku-172443

removed... don't think it is suitable to discuss a totally different topic based on the thread.