Before ASETs, Idealscopes, etc...

[Roxie Bling]

For those of you who have been either in the diamond trade or had a passion for diamonds or other gems for quite some time, are the latest technological tools that are used by many PSers to evalate their stones always a positive? I am new to searching for an upgrade/replacement stone, and my previous stone was handed down from my grandmother, so I have never had to shop for a diamond before.

It may be too basic of a question, but how did people shop for well-cut diamonds before light return/performance could be measured with instuments other than the naked eye? Is it as simple as just shopping with our eyes? Do jewelers who have been in the business for a long time miss the "good old days" or do the majority embrace the advancements?

I guess my questions also extends to people who have bought diamonds before the technical advancements, and now utilize ASETs and the like to help choose their stones.

Personally, I like the option of having these additional images of diamonds I am considering, but it does make me wonder what I would have used as criteria if I were shopping for diamonds 15 years ago when I first got married. Is emphasis on cut quality a relatively new phenomenon (realizing that many people still don''t shop with this as their primary criteria).

Looking forward to gaining your insight.

 

[Hest88]

In the good old days, you hoped you had a jeweler who knew what he was doing.

 

[CharmyPoo]

The truth is .. at the end of day .. I still believe what our eyes see is what matters. Most people probably don''t carry around a loupe, ideal scope or aset scope in their purse

 

[denverappraiser]

That’s a good question. Not everyone sees the tools in the same way. I made a decent living in part by buying and selling diamonds through the 80s and 90s before the reflector and computer based tools became popular and we used a technique that’s fallen a bit out of favor. We looked at stones, lots of stones. You really can see the differences if you pay attention. The problem is that it takes a lot of practice and it really does take paying attention. How consumers did it was by choosing and relying on the expertise of the jewelers because they didn’t really have much other choice. Before the mid 80’s lab graded diamonds were decidedly unusual and reflector images, sarin scan, diamcalc models and the like were out of the question. The way you would buy a diamond is to go into a store, give them a budget and some basic parameters and buy what they offered. To a large extent that’s STILL how it’s done.

Are there jewelers who like it that way? Sure. Lots of ‘em. There’s customers who like it too because it’s easy, it’s fast and it mostly works. There are others who love the ‘new’ approach where consumers are empowered to make the decisions themselves. There are dealers now who wouldn’t have existed 30 years ago and it’s not just the Internet and reflectors that are different. I never would have imagined what I would be now doing for a living as a highly vocal part of an industry of ‘independent appraisers’ that barely existed as recently as 20 years ago. Blue Nile, Walmart, QVC, Rapaport, and Stuller (they’re a manufacturer) are the dominant players now and they didn’t even exist when I got into the business back in the 70’s. Back in the ‘good old days’, GIA was a college for gemologists instead of a lab that competes with them, DeBeers had the mining and rough distribution business in a stranglehold, cutting in India was a joke and Zales and Service Merchandise dominated the US retail landscape. My how things have changed.

Is it better now? For consumers I think it clearly is. The quality of stones is drastically improved, the cost as compared to other goods is down, the choices for sources has exploded and people are far better able to understand what they’re getting into. For some in the industry it’s better too. It’s certainly benefited the labs and the appraisers as well as the specialty niche of ‘super-ideal’ type jewelers along with their suppliers and the whole industry of branded jewelry designers. Who is way down is the chain stores, department stores, DeBeers, cutters in the US and Europe and the big entrenched distribution houses. Overall I would call that progress.

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

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 2/22/2010 10:59:59 PM
Author:Roxie Bling
It may be too basic of a question, but how did people shop for well-cut diamonds before light return/performance could be measured with instuments other than the naked eye? Is it as simple as just shopping with our eyes? Do jewelers who have been in the business for a long time miss the ''good old days'' or do the majority embrace the advancements?

some do,b/c nowadays a 100% mark up on a diamond are gone with the wind.

 

[Roxie Bling]

Thanks for the input and insight.

While I definitely am glad I am gaining the knowledge I have here, it definitely makes finding a mindclean stone more challenging.

 

[tallchickbarbara]

Date: 2/22/2010 10:59:59 PM
Author:Roxie Bling
Do jewelers who have been in the business for a long time miss the ''good old days'' or do the majority embrace the advancements?

This is a great thread, Roxie. Thanks for asking...

To answer the specific question above I think that a lot of "old school" jewelers do indeed miss the good old days, and often - too often - turn their noses up to any type of change in the industry that ultimately betters it. As an internet company, we''re often seen as the "bad guy" and not just because of price. Everything from ads in trade publications to banners at major jewelry trade shows showcase how some company or another can help you "beat the internet competitor" and in reality, it''s as simple as this: offer more in the way of information, service, and warranty.

Funny thing... I started in this industry 14 years ago and worked in the diamond district of a major city. I am still friends with several of the jewelers that I worked alongside back then, and they think what I do now is mind blowing. Some of them think we''re killing the business. Some think offering the information we offer is ridiculous because "the eye says it all", and I don''t dispute that, because in reality, the eye still is the bottom line, but the way I see it, what''s wrong with some of both? I''m happy to have learned what I have to this point and I''m eager to continue to learn more as I go, and as the labs learn more, and create more instruments, and stumble upon newer ways to determine light return or brilliance. And I''m happy to share what I''ve learned as long as I continue to do so without forgetting that there is also an emotional side to this too, for each customer.

 

[tallchickbarbara]

Heeeeyyyyy... I''m a Cut Rock now. Woo hoo!

 

[MichelleCarmen]

With my first purchase in ''94, the diamond was partly judged based on how sparkily it was. Also, I did based my decision on clarity and color. Luckily, even though I only thought clarity/color were what makes a diamond look fabulous, the diamond I bought for my eng. ring still is as impressive as my WF diamonds. It''s not H&A, but nearly there. Only downside is because I bought it locally, I paid a lot more than I would by buying online!

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 2/24/2010 12:55:29 PM
Author: BarbaraP

Date: 2/22/2010 10:59:59 PM
Author:Roxie Bling
Do jewelers who have been in the business for a long time miss the ''good old days'' or do the majority embrace the advancements?

Funny thing... I started in this industry 14 years ago and worked in the diamond district of a major city. I am still friends with several of the jewelers that I worked alongside back then, and they think what I do now is mind blowing. Some of them think we''re killing the business. Some think offering the information we offer is ridiculous because ''the eye says it all'', and I don''t dispute that, because in reality, the eye still is the bottom line, but the way I see it, what''s wrong with some of both? I''m happy to have learned what I have to this point and I''m eager to continue to learn more as I go, and as the labs learn more, and create more instruments, and stumble upon newer ways to determine light return or brilliance. And I''m happy to share what I''ve learned as long as I continue to do so without forgetting that there is also an emotional side to this too, for each customer.

nothing, i just can''t understand why some jeweler''s mind are still stuck in the 80''s by refusing to use today''s technology.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 2/22/2010 10:59:59 PM
Author:Roxie Bling
For those of you who have been either in the diamond trade or had a passion for diamonds or other gems for quite some time, are the latest technological tools that are used by many PSers to evalate their stones always a positive? I am new to searching for an upgrade/replacement stone, and my previous stone was handed down from my grandmother, so I have never had to shop for a diamond before.

It may be too basic of a question, but how did people shop for well-cut diamonds before light return/performance could be measured with instuments other than the naked eye? Is it as simple as just shopping with our eyes? Do jewelers who have been in the business for a long time miss the ''good old days'' or do the majority embrace the advancements?

I guess my questions also extends to people who have bought diamonds before the technical advancements, and now utilize ASETs and the like to help choose their stones.

Personally, I like the option of having these additional images of diamonds I am considering, but it does make me wonder what I would have used as criteria if I were shopping for diamonds 15 years ago when I first got married. Is emphasis on cut quality a relatively new phenomenon (realizing that many people still don''t shop with this as their primary criteria).

Looking forward to gaining your insight.

I first learned about diamond cutting in 1975 while a student at the GIA. Then we were taught mostly about total depth and table size with minimal input on angles, and there was a something scope that I had that had a line image of an ideal cut diamond on it that we could size up and down to fit on the diamond that we were inspecting to see if it fit into that outline. I even had one in the reticular lense of my microscope. I still have it somewhere, but no longer use it as the available technology and the science behind it is so much better now.

Occassionally we would get "Ideal" cut diamonds that just were not as beautiful as we thought they should be and did not know why, now they would never be graded Ideal, and we do know why.

Wink

 

[oldminer]

Sure, I miss the good old days. Just like an old cowboy misses the Friday''s night riots after payday on the range when he took his trip to town for an evening''s fun and games. The old diamond selling game was a free for all and often the loser was the consumer. However, the consumer rarely found out and all was well.

Would I trade today''s market for going back to the old ways, NEVER! While we all know a lot more today about what makes a fine diamond better than an average one, the real improvement has been in transparency and honesty. It just never sat well with me that so many white lies were told and so many jewelers simply got away with it. Sure, there are still many old fashioned, silver tongued retailers still doing it like the old West, but there are a growing number of jewelers who are giving the consumer a far better experience than ever before. It looks like it will continue to improve for consumers and that isn''t bad news. The screening tools such as ASET and I-S are still new to many retailers, but their use is growing and I doubt we''ll see any change of this positive growth in their use as time goes on.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Date: 2/24/2010 1:29:50 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 2/24/2010 12:55:29 PM
Author: BarbaraP

Date: 2/22/2010 10:59:59 PM
Author:Roxie Bling
Do jewelers who have been in the business for a long time miss the ''good old days'' or do the majority embrace the advancements?

Funny thing... I started in this industry 14 years ago and worked in the diamond district of a major city. I am still friends with several of the jewelers that I worked alongside back then, and they think what I do now is mind blowing. Some of them think we''re killing the business. Some think offering the information we offer is ridiculous because ''the eye says it all'', and I don''t dispute that, because in reality, the eye still is the bottom line, but the way I see it, what''s wrong with some of both? I''m happy to have learned what I have to this point and I''m eager to continue to learn more as I go, and as the labs learn more, and create more instruments, and stumble upon newer ways to determine light return or brilliance. And I''m happy to share what I''ve learned as long as I continue to do so without forgetting that there is also an emotional side to this too, for each customer.

nothing, i just can''t understand why some jeweler''s mind are still stuck in the 80''s by refusing to use today''s technology.

Many of the regular chain stores are even bringing in asset/H&A-type viewers. In my experience, the SAs only bring using up looking under those if I bring up well-cut diamonds first. Seems like until then, the standard less expensive, not-so-well-cut diamonds are just shown under the lighting.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 2/22/2010 10:59:59 PM
Author:Roxie Bling
For those of you who have been either in the diamond trade or had a passion for diamonds or other gems for quite some time, are the latest technological tools that are used by many PSers to evalate their stones always a positive? I am new to searching for an upgrade/replacement stone, and my previous stone was handed down from my grandmother, so I have never had to shop for a diamond before.

It may be too basic of a question, but how did people shop for well-cut diamonds before light return/performance could be measured with instuments other than the naked eye? Is it as simple as just shopping with our eyes? Do jewelers who have been in the business for a long time miss the ''good old days'' or do the majority embrace the advancements?

I guess my questions also extends to people who have bought diamonds before the technical advancements, and now utilize ASETs and the like to help choose their stones.

Personally, I like the option of having these additional images of diamonds I am considering, but it does make me wonder what I would have used as criteria if I were shopping for diamonds 15 years ago when I first got married. Is emphasis on cut quality a relatively new phenomenon (realizing that many people still don''t shop with this as their primary criteria).

Looking forward to gaining your insight.

Great Topic.

They used the certificate, their eyes, and realationships with cutting houses, maybe not in that order. I used to think that this method in the hands of a true expert one used to seeing several dozen cushions each week and thousands over their lifetime would still be capable of sourcing the best performing and most beatiful diamonds. Trust the experts, trust their eyes for fancies many have said here.

Well sadly that wasn''t true and even two of the most trusted "old school" vendors on Pricescope, who told me to trust their eyes really didn''t have the highest standards for light performance and what I would call beauty, which I wanted my wife''s diamond to have. At the end of the day they just sold the closest diamond they could find to my preferences which was a well cut diamond, they honestly did their best and made an honest judegement and search to the best of their abilities. That was simply not enough, my eyes could distinguish excellent from ideal and with the help of reflector technologies a better choice could have been made.

My wife is blissfully happy and will probably never appreciate that there are stones with better light performance and more beauty(in my opinion) out there but I will always know.

 

[Jim Summa]

Hi Roxie,

I graduated from GIA in 1980 when the school was still in Santa Monica.

This question really does cut to the quick about what some jewelers are embracing and others rejecting when it comes to seeing diamonds as a jeweler. My first ASET, an AGS lab model, was purchased with the intention of helping me see quickly how the cutter made the stone - and there is no better tool for matching.

I found out about ASET through attending lectures at AGS'' annual meeting called Conclave, which I will be attending in Boston this spring. I have talked over drinks (actually listened) with friends and colleges about what the early people involved in education and information would have thought of the new tools you are asking about. I think it would be about even, some people would love them and others would prefer what went before.

 

[WinkHPD]

Welcome Jim, nice to see you posting here.

FYI, Jim is a friend of mine and an all around nice guy, please make him feel welcome, he will be a great addition to the board. I see him in Vegas and at the Infinity Symposiums in Dallas. He is a forward looking retailer and I am happy to know him.

LOL, I don''t even remember where he is from, back east somewhere and I am in Idaho.

Wink''s small wolrd department

 

[Hughrock]

Had a online vendor today ask me if I had been on pricescope gaining knowledge about diamonds because of my request for certain specs & Aset testing.He seem not too happy to deal with informed shoppers.

 

[Jim Summa]

Hi Wink,
I live in St. Louis.......Thanks for the kind words.

 

[Rhino]

Good post Barbara and pleasure to make your acquaintance Jim.

My thoughts between the lines Roxie.

Date: 2/22/2010 10:59:59 PM
Author:Roxie Bling
For those of you who have been either in the diamond trade or had a passion for diamonds or other gems for quite some time, are the latest technological tools that are used by many PSers to evalate their stones always a positive?

Yes and no.

Yes in the sense that a person shopping online wants objective data by which to base his or her decision on. Were I a consumer today spending thousands on an item I can hold between my fingers and is primarily an optical product I want more than a "trust me" to base my decision on. This industry is filled with these types and everytime I hear a jeweler/vendor/supplier/manufacturer say "this diamond is beautiful" I want to see what their definition of that is and how they present it. These tools provide that objective data.

No in the sense that these tools are not end all be all solutions. Firstly, *not always* will a diamond that looks great in a reflector guarantee "ideal" light performance as defined by AGS nor guarantee GIA Ex results either. One of the primary weakness of reflectors is their inabillity to accurately assess head/body obstruction. But there are other things to consider as well. For example an Asscher cut can have a stupendous ASET/IS but if a person does not enjoy the nature of the reflections in an Asscher it will not appearl to them no matter how great it is. Same can be said for various kinds of cushions, rounds ... whatever shape you want to name. We feature a number of rounds that are cut (and purposely) for the rarest optics you''ll find with regards to visual observation as well as reflectors but a Star129, a Solasfera, a Hearts & Arrows or even an August Vintage is not going to appeal to every single person. It is true I limit my purchases to diamonds that can demonstrably display awesome optics but something has to be said for the way each of these reflect and refract light back to the eyes of the viewer. The lady who enjoys a fireworks display of pin flish sparkle may not be drawn to an August Vintage but a Star129 so alot depends on taste and what appeals to the eyes and personality of the woman buying.

It may be too basic of a question, but how did people shop for well-cut diamonds before light return/performance could be measured with instuments other than the naked eye? Is it as simple as just shopping with our eyes? Do jewelers who have been in the business for a long time miss the ''good old days'' or do the majority embrace the advancements?

I don''t miss the gold old days. I like and prefer the technologies. What is most important though if people are going to recommend off of these technologies it to learn 2 basic pieces of information before they comment positively or negatively with them. Those 2 pieces of information are ...

What appearance appeals most to your eyes?
What reflector images translate to that appearance?

Oftentimes people are encouraged into a particular diamond but who''se to know if that person (or their fiance'') may not prefer a different appearance altogether? I try to never assume one way or the other. The most important thing is listening to and learning what it is that pleases the ladies eyes most. You do that and you have a get out of jail free card for at least a year.

I guess my questions also extends to people who have bought diamonds before the technical advancements, and now utilize ASETs and the like to help choose their stones.

Personally, I like the option of having these additional images of diamonds I am considering, but it does make me wonder what I would have used as criteria if I were shopping for diamonds 15 years ago when I first got married. Is emphasis on cut quality a relatively new phenomenon (realizing that many people still don''t shop with this as their primary criteria).

Looking forward to gaining your insight.

Yes it is a new phenomena. In fact the grand majority of the industry is still old school and may take decades before they catch up especially in way of fancies. AGS is the only lab moving forward and on the cusp in these studies. Since working intimately with tools like Isee2, Bscope, FireScope, ASET, DiamXray, DiamCalc etc. my knowledge has expanded to a place where i was comfortable buying rough and having it cut to various geometry. Had I not worked with these tools and became familiar with how they translate to practical observation NEVER would I have spent the capital to cut.

Old school ... we simply called in diamonds on consignment as people needed. I love what I do and always look forawrd to advancements in technology and ways we can perhaps incorporate those technologies into new creations.

Hope that helps.