Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

August Vintage round to Distinctive Gems change in proportions and facet pattern

Rhino said:
Greetings my friends. <3

Just to address the points/questions.



There are videos comparing of which forum rules prevent me from sharing. :-/



As mentioned nope. GOG and myself have come to mutual agreements and I hold the patents and trademarks. I sincerely look forward to doing business with my family again.



I have begun calling these by differing names as each has its own personality. I'll expound below.



Yes and no my friend. :) The key to the AVR from its inception was *edge to edge* light performance in the OEC cutting style which, till these were cut were completely non existent. The patterning of OEC's over the course of its existence has not been of any particular kind of style. They vary all over the board. In fact a symposium was held in Vegas on defining exactly what an OEC is. There is but 1 facet set that sets them apart and that is the *short* lower half facets.

With regards to the two different patterns i've been focusing on the pattern on the left I've come to call the August Vintage Daisy and the other The August Vintage Lotus. These are the 2 flower patterns most closely associated with those diamonds. The reason for the Lotus was actually inspired by keeping to GIA standards of an OEC that the original AVR didn't. Ie. GIA's definition of an OEC embraces ...

  • Table < 53%
  • Crown angle => 40 degrees
  • Lower half length =< 60%
  • Culet slightly large or larger
And must meet 3 of these 4 criteria. The original AVR's didn't have crown angles this steep nor for the most part did they have culets. So... the newer Lotus design does incorporate each of these 4 elements into the design but I did alter other facet measurements not mentioned in GIA's definition (pavilion angles, upper halves, etc.) and keep the ASET perfectly solid like the original design. The new design *does not have a darker center* but illuminates equally as bright as the original. :cool2: I can cut either design on demand and some have requested a particular one or not but I have been toying with the idea of separate links/pages. One for the AV Daisy and one for the AV Lotus. What you guys think?

Warm regards,
Rhino
Click to expand...

Super helpful as always Rhino! Thanks for explaining! I own 3 beautiful AVR moissies. I am 100% on the market in the future for lab grown and natural. I know I would love 2 separate links for the Daisy and the Lotus. Both are delicious, just different flavors and I think making a distinction between the two would be awesome. Thanks for being transparent, that’s why we love you!
 
Rhino said:
Greetings my friends. <3

Just to address the points/questions.



There are videos comparing of which forum rules prevent me from sharing. :-/



As mentioned nope. GOG and myself have come to mutual agreements and I hold the patents and trademarks. I sincerely look forward to doing business with my family again.



I have begun calling these by differing names as each has its own personality. I'll expound below.



Yes and no my friend. :) The key to the AVR from its inception was *edge to edge* light performance in the OEC cutting style which, till these were cut were completely non existent. The patterning of OEC's over the course of its existence has not been of any particular kind of style. They vary all over the board. In fact a symposium was held in Vegas on defining exactly what an OEC is. There is but 1 facet set that sets them apart and that is the *short* lower half facets.

With regards to the two different patterns i've been focusing on the pattern on the left I've come to call the August Vintage Daisy and the other The August Vintage Lotus. These are the 2 flower patterns most closely associated with those diamonds. The reason for the Lotus was actually inspired by keeping to GIA standards of an OEC that the original AVR didn't. Ie. GIA's definition of an OEC embraces ...

  • Table < 53%
  • Crown angle => 40 degrees
  • Lower half length =< 60%
  • Culet slightly large or larger
And must meet 3 of these 4 criteria. The original AVR's didn't have crown angles this steep nor for the most part did they have culets. So... the newer Lotus design does incorporate each of these 4 elements into the design but I did alter other facet measurements not mentioned in GIA's definition (pavilion angles, upper halves, etc.) and keep the ASET perfectly solid like the original design. The new design *does not have a darker center* but illuminates equally as bright as the original. :cool2: I can cut either design on demand and some have requested a particular one or not but I have been toying with the idea of separate links/pages. One for the AV Daisy and one for the AV Lotus. What you guys think?

Warm regards,
Rhino
Click to expand...

Thank you for this awesome explanation!
 
Rhino said:
Greetings my friends. <3

Just to address the points/questions.



There are videos comparing of which forum rules prevent me from sharing. :-/



As mentioned nope. GOG and myself have come to mutual agreements and I hold the patents and trademarks. I sincerely look forward to doing business with my family again.



I have begun calling these by differing names as each has its own personality. I'll expound below.



Yes and no my friend. :) The key to the AVR from its inception was *edge to edge* light performance in the OEC cutting style which, till these were cut were completely non existent. The patterning of OEC's over the course of its existence has not been of any particular kind of style. They vary all over the board. In fact a symposium was held in Vegas on defining exactly what an OEC is. There is but 1 facet set that sets them apart and that is the *short* lower half facets.

With regards to the two different patterns i've been focusing on the pattern on the left I've come to call the August Vintage Daisy and the other The August Vintage Lotus. These are the 2 flower patterns most closely associated with those diamonds. The reason for the Lotus was actually inspired by keeping to GIA standards of an OEC that the original AVR didn't. Ie. GIA's definition of an OEC embraces ...

  • Table < 53%
  • Crown angle => 40 degrees
  • Lower half length =< 60%
  • Culet slightly large or larger
And must meet 3 of these 4 criteria. The original AVR's didn't have crown angles this steep nor for the most part did they have culets. So... the newer Lotus design does incorporate each of these 4 elements into the design but I did alter other facet measurements not mentioned in GIA's definition (pavilion angles, upper halves, etc.) and keep the ASET perfectly solid like the original design. The new design *does not have a darker center* but illuminates equally as bright as the original. :cool2: I can cut either design on demand and some have requested a particular one or not but I have been toying with the idea of separate links/pages. One for the AV Daisy and one for the AV Lotus. What you guys think?

Warm regards,
Rhino
Click to expand...

Having a video on your website doing a side by side comparison would be great as well - ideally with different lighting. I keep hearing that antique cuts were designed for candlelight but have yet to see a video of one under candle lighting.
 
Rhino said:
Greetings my friends. <3

Just to address the points/questions.



There are videos comparing of which forum rules prevent me from sharing. :-/



As mentioned nope. GOG and myself have come to mutual agreements and I hold the patents and trademarks. I sincerely look forward to doing business with my family again.



I have begun calling these by differing names as each has its own personality. I'll expound below.



Yes and no my friend. :) The key to the AVR from its inception was *edge to edge* light performance in the OEC cutting style which, till these were cut were completely non existent. The patterning of OEC's over the course of its existence has not been of any particular kind of style. They vary all over the board. In fact a symposium was held in Vegas on defining exactly what an OEC is. There is but 1 facet set that sets them apart and that is the *short* lower half facets.

With regards to the two different patterns i've been focusing on the pattern on the left I've come to call the August Vintage Daisy and the other The August Vintage Lotus. These are the 2 flower patterns most closely associated with those diamonds. The reason for the Lotus was actually inspired by keeping to GIA standards of an OEC that the original AVR didn't. Ie. GIA's definition of an OEC embraces ...

  • Table < 53%
  • Crown angle => 40 degrees
  • Lower half length =< 60%
  • Culet slightly large or larger
And must meet 3 of these 4 criteria. The original AVR's didn't have crown angles this steep nor for the most part did they have culets. So... the newer Lotus design does incorporate each of these 4 elements into the design but I did alter other facet measurements not mentioned in GIA's definition (pavilion angles, upper halves, etc.) and keep the ASET perfectly solid like the original design. The new design *does not have a darker center* but illuminates equally as bright as the original. :cool2: I can cut either design on demand and some have requested a particular one or not but I have been toying with the idea of separate links/pages. One for the AV Daisy and one for the AV Lotus. What you guys think?

Warm regards,
Rhino
Click to expand...

I personally like all the AV European Cuts/Vintage Rounds on the same page. Easier to compare them that way!
 
molecule said:
Having a video on your website doing a side by side comparison would be great as well - ideally with different lighting. I keep hearing that antique cuts were designed for candlelight but have yet to see a video of one under candle lighting.
Click to expand...

*Edit: Videos and ASET+Idealscope

@Rhino Looking at the general listing and the for sale Lotus cuts, I don't see any ASETS or idealscopes. Would you mind adding it to the general listing?
 
diamondseeker2006 said:
First of all, all natural diamond AVRs did not have the exact facet pattern of the picture on the left. There were variations.

My AVR was cut by Yoram within the parameters set by Jonathan. It has a tiny culet which was how Jon had many of them cut. I adore my stone and wouldn't trade it! But I think the new lab diamonds have a beautiful facet pattern, too!
IMG-5632 (1).jpg
Click to expand...

Just to confirm, is Yoram one of the cutters that produce Jon’s stones?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top