Crushed Ice Cushions...BAD???

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

OK- I read it three times Garry.
I did not ask which stone you preferred Garry- I asked which you thought looked brighter.

I think the cushion is ever so slightly brighter. I confirmed this by looking at all 200 pairs of photo's.

A point of order - I asked that you also send your 60:60 for scanning so we can do the same comparison of fancy to round?

 

[Rockdiamond]

OK- I read it three times Garry.
I did not ask which stone you preferred Garry- I asked which you thought looked brighter.

I think the cushion is ever so slightly brighter. I confirmed this by looking at all 200 pairs of photo's.

A point of order - I asked that you also send your 60:60 for scanning so we can do the same comparison of fancy to round?

Thanks for the honest answer Garry.
Knowing how much work this thing assuredly took, I'm sure you'd probably feel that the impression we got from the video is true to life.
It struck me as being a very good representation-albeit a criticism leveled at me here on PS might apply- it makes the diamond look as good as diamond can possibly look.

Good point about the 60/60.
I need to find a stone to borrow from a cutter for this purpose.
I will make that happen, but it might take a few days.
Now that I know where to get scans, that part is easier.

 

[CharmyPoo]

David - Thanks for making the great effort in participating in this educational exercise.

 

[clgwli]

Okay I admit this is all very cool too me to see these scans!

I echo Charmy. Thank you David for doing these scans. They really are interesting to look at after seeing video and photos of the stone.

I have lots of thoughts about this, but I can't quite put it into words. This has been fun to look at and very cool to make the comparisons of the scans vs what the eye sees.

Now I just need to make a trip to NY to see the stones with my own eyes t make a final judgment of what I think is my preference and which I feel is brighter. Wonder if my husband would go for that under the pretense of educational purposes

 

[Rockdiamond]

You're totally welcome guys.
Charmy, thank you for keeping an open mind. Nice kitty.

I want the Lbox- as soon as it's available, I'm buying one.
I'll still take my photos and videos as we do now- but add the additional dimension of that box.
Garry- you're going to sell a lot of those boxes.

I'd also be willing to send the cushion diamond we used in this test to Garry so we can see how it performs in the box.

Not that this thread is about aset, but it has been....
I'd far sooner spend eight grand of our company's money on Garry's Lbox, as compared to a Sarin, which would give us the ability to produce these aset representations.

I know, it's science, but if anything, seeing the scans of these two stones, and the photos ( of course I have the advantage of being able to look at the stones IRL)- has proved to me that the aset is not providing anything meaningful.
Please forgive me, those that get tremendous value from it.
I agree- it's a scientifically designed device, that shows where the diamond is getting the light from.
There may be great value in that information- for some people.
However it's not essential information IMO. It's extraneous information IMO- that distracts most diamond searches rather than focuses.

When I play the "match up game" the areas of leakage I see in the real stones are not accurately represented in the aset representations. But they are accurately portrayed in the photos and video.
Maybe I can do a better job that the simulations when I get the new aset and light.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

When I get a chance I will upload to you tube two video's I am making with 200 images in the DC standard 5 by 3 degree rocking and modeled in my shop lighting with these shown settings.
This will enable you to open both youtubes and run the movies side by side. (I will also make a standard round)
Unfortunately they are only 10 second movies.
If anyone knows how to join movies together - I can email .mov or .avi to them.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Rd,

I knew you would raise the question of simulated versus photographed ASET images and its a good one. Well here is the same Star129 photographed*(left), photograph ASET (middle) and simulated(right).


There was significant scan error in the pavilion with this one(which is important), the scanning machines have had trouble with the tiny close together pavilion facets but even still the simulated images reproduced most of the nuances in the potential brightness. The major differences come in the Red/Blue Boundary where the two colors are only seperated by a degree or two.

I could do hundreds of examples, with a good scan and photographed image of a brilliant cut the two are usually very close.[img][/quote][/quote]

ccl- I'll give you this much- in this example, the aset imagery versus that photo look far more relational. Maybe it works far better on rounds?
I'd still way prefer more photos and video to get a better idea of how the stone handles light.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Garry email me- there's some solutions.
Not only can you join the movies, you can experiment with lower res so that you can do longer movies.
From what I can see, you really nailed the images in both the cushion and the radiant.
Those images DO remind me of what the stones look like. Kewl!

 

[CharmyPoo]

Vimeo is another option. Allows longer videos to be uploaded.

 

[Serg]

OK- I read it three times Garry.
I did not ask which stone you preferred Garry- I asked which you thought looked brighter.

On my browser, the link was dead- Garry, can you please re-post the link to the Lbox page?

Hi RD,

 

[arjunajane]

OK- I read it three times Garry.
I did not ask which stone you preferred Garry- I asked which you thought looked brighter.

I think the cushion is ever so slightly brighter. I confirmed this by looking at all 200 pairs of photo's.

A point of order - I asked that you also send your 60:60 for scanning so we can do the same comparison of fancy to round?

Thanks for the honest answer Garry.
Knowing how much work this thing assuredly took, I'm sure you'd probably feel that the impression we got from the video is true to life.
It struck me as being a very good representation-albeit a criticism leveled at me here on PS might apply- it makes the diamond look as good as diamond can possibly look.

Good point about the 60/60.
I need to find a stone to borrow from a cutter for this purpose.
I will make that happen, but it might take a few days.
Now that I know where to get scans, that part is easier.

RD - quote of yours from couple pages back (two days):

"by Rockdiamond » 31 Aug 2010 21:38
Hi Stone
I'm grateful for the correction- a new thread or this one
I was curious to the relevance and you answered that
Although we don't carry a lot of rounds I do have a gorgeous 60/60 (about) on the site which we can use for comparison purposes
Once Garry sobers up maybe be can remember someone in NYC who can run the scan so you guys can make the simulated aset"

But now you say you will need a few days to hunt down a 60/60 ?

 

[Jennifer W]

OK- I read it three times Garry.
I did not ask which stone you preferred Garry- I asked which you thought looked brighter.

I think the cushion is ever so slightly brighter. I confirmed this by looking at all 200 pairs of photo's.

A point of order - I asked that you also send your 60:60 for scanning so we can do the same comparison of fancy to round?

Thanks for the honest answer Garry.
Knowing how much work this thing assuredly took, I'm sure you'd probably feel that the impression we got from the video is true to life.
It struck me as being a very good representation-albeit a criticism leveled at me here on PS might apply- it makes the diamond look as good as diamond can possibly look.

Good point about the 60/60.
I need to find a stone to borrow from a cutter for this purpose.
I will make that happen, but it might take a few days.
Now that I know where to get scans, that part is easier.

RD - quote of yours from couple pages back (two days):

"by Rockdiamond » 31 Aug 2010 21:38
Hi Stone
I'm grateful for the correction- a new thread or this one
I was curious to the relevance and you answered that
Although we don't carry a lot of rounds I do have a gorgeous 60/60 (about) on the site which we can use for comparison purposes
Once Garry sobers up maybe be can remember someone in NYC who can run the scan so you guys can make the simulated aset"

But now you say you will need a few days to hunt down a 60/60 ?

Arjunajane, I believe that the stone David mentioned has now been set and is being worn by his wife as a maternity gift. On that basis, I'm sure you'll understand that it isn't appropriate to use to illustrate any discussion here. (David will correct me if I'm thinking of the wrong stone.) He will find another suitable candidate as soon as possible.

Jen

 

[arjunajane]

Hi Jennifer -
if that is the case than many sincere congratulations to David and his wife.

Of course I hope you understand my observation that (less than) 2 days ago David was saying this stone was available to buy online; combined with David's hesitation to follow through on educational promises in threads past, this prompted my question.

If you as David's representative are saying that in less than 2 days it has been removed from stock, mounted and is now being worn as a ring, I will take that on face value - but I will say he is certainly a fast mover

 

[Jennifer W]

Well, as I say, if I'm thinking of the wrong stone, David will let us know, but I'm pretty sure it's the same one.

You can have stones mounted pretty fast when it's your factory.

Jen

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

You're totally welcome guys.
When I play the "match up game" the areas of leakage I see in the real stones are not accurately represented in the aset representations. But they are accurately portrayed in the photos and video.

RD,

Take any screen capture or photograph of the Daussi cushion you like where the pavilion is blocked (ie not a tweezer shot) and stone's facecup shot is being shown (no tilt) and add arrows to where you see leakage. You have the stone in hand and you know your lighting so this should be easier for you.

You asked me to annotate a photograph from your video and I have posted it showing the areas of strong light return, I'd like to see your version pointing to the leakage areas.

 

[kikidoe]

You're totally welcome guys.
When I play the "match up game" the areas of leakage I see in the real stones are not accurately represented in the aset representations. But they are accurately portrayed in the photos and video.

RD,

Take any screen capture or photograph of the Daussi cushion you like where the pavilion is blocked (ie not a tweezer shot) and stone's facecup shot is being shown (no tilt) and add arrows to where you see leakage. You have the stone in hand and you know your lighting so this should be easier for you.

You asked me to annotate a photograph from your video and I have posted it showing the areas of strong light return, I'd like to see your version pointing to the leakage areas.

Does red in ASET picture mean leakage?

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi Jennifer -
if that is the case than many sincere congratulations to David and his wife.

Of course I hope you understand my observation that (less than) 2 days ago David was saying this stone was available to buy online; combined with David's hesitation to follow through on educational promises in threads past, this prompted my question.

If you as David's representative are saying that in less than 2 days it has been removed from stock, mounted and is now being worn as a ring, I will take that on face value - but I will say he is certainly a fast mover

Yes, I did give my wife a drop dead gorgeous 60/60 diamond. ( even though it only scored 2.7 on HCA- what am I crazy...hehehe)
She asked me to keep it on the site- so it is still there. Ultimately, in this company, and my life, she is the boss. I do what she wants, whenever I can ( she would undoubtedly say that there's plenty of times I don't , but that's another story)

It is currently in a plain solitaire setting at this point meaning I'd have to remove it.
If and when someone calls to buy the stone, we'll explain all this to them- and offer the current setting for free ( considering it's used)
Then my wife gets the money, and I will find something else to buy for her ( believe me, she deserves this for putting up with me)

Also, in light of the educational nature of PS- and this thread- I've decided it would be better to use a stone we do not own.
I have asked a few cutters to weed through all the smaller tabled stones which are far more common today, and bring over some stones that are 60/60 ( or close enough)- I'll look at the stones, and pick one I feel is well made, and representative of the qualities I love about 60/60. Then I'll have someone from our office bring the stone over to Sarin office NYC, spend another ten bucks for a scan, post the scan and allow anyone who wants to insult my taste in diamonds.
k?

This thread has been amazing for so many reasons.
I have nothing against anyone who posts here- for any reason.
Clearly others have something against me.
Thank you very much for the congratulations arjunajane.
What have I ever done to you to cause this animosity?

 

[Rockdiamond]

You're totally welcome guys.
When I play the "match up game" the areas of leakage I see in the real stones are not accurately represented in the aset representations. But they are accurately portrayed in the photos and video.

RD,

Take any screen capture or photograph of the Daussi cushion you like where the pavilion is blocked (ie not a tweezer shot) and stone's facecup shot is being shown (no tilt) and add arrows to where you see leakage. You have the stone in hand and you know your lighting so this should be easier for you.

You asked me to annotate a photograph from your video and I have posted it showing the areas of strong light return, I'd like to see your version pointing to the leakage areas.

Does red in ASET picture mean leakage?

ccl- just using your notated picture, and aset simulation, they don't match up.
In the screenshot on the left, you point to a triangle located at about 3:00- this does not correlate to the aset.
Same for the triangle at 12:00- also not shown on the aset simulation.

I'll notate a photo using the stone as a guide to point out areas of leakage I see.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

ccl- just using your notated picture, and aset simulation, they don't match up.
In the screenshot on the left, you point to a triangle located at about 3:00- this does not correlate to the aset.
Same for the triangle at 12:00- also not shown on the aset simulation.

Rockdiamond,

Once again, the ASET shows potential brightness. Red areas are ones that have the greatest potential to be bright. That doesn't mean that in your assymetric lighting the entire red area should be lit up.

Reread these links again if you truly have an "open mind" and want to understand properly how to interpret the images.
You have seen them posted in threads at least a half dozen times already.

tutorial and supporting research

Do you really want to learn to use this tool and interpret the results properly?
Just can't tell with you, you fumble around so much due to lack of reading, but keep saying you have an "open mind" and are trying to learn.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Does red in ASET picture mean leakage?

White is leakage in the image.
Tutorial on interpreting the colors here

 

[Doc_1]

Reread these links again if you truly have an "open mind" and want to understand properly how to interpret the images.
You have seen them posted in threads at least a half dozen times already.

Do you really want to learn to use this tool and interpret the results properly?
Just can't tell with you, you fumble around so much due to lack of reading, but keep saying you have an "open mind" and are trying to learn.

I am going to say it loud and clear:
You have more arrogance than what you assigned to RD in all your posts. I mean common, the guy bent backwards to satisfy whatever every one is asking him to do, If you have learned one thing or two on diamonds it does not mean to put down some one with so many years of hands on and experience. And i do not give a damn if am banned or the post is deleted but enough harassing RD.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Reread these links again if you truly have an "open mind" and want to understand properly how to interpret the images.
You have seen them posted in threads at least a half dozen times already.

Do you really want to learn to use this tool and interpret the results properly?
Just can't tell with you, you fumble around so much due to lack of reading, but keep saying you have an "open mind" and are trying to learn.

I am going to say it loud and clear:
You have more arrogance than what you assigned to RD in all your posts. I mean common, they guy bent backwards to satisfy whatever every one is asking him to do, If you have learned one thing or two on diamonds it does not mean to put down some one with so many years of hands on and experience. And i do not give a damn if am banned or the post is deleted but enough harassing RD.

Doc_1,

You are entitled to your opinion which is a fair.
If the answer to my bolded question is Yes and RD is here to help educate us, than he should read the tutorials by the American Gem Society before he argues their developed tool is inconclusive. He hasn't demonstrated that he has read them and understands their meaning.

My skepticism comes from the fact I've spent countless hours trying to explain things(in this thread alone) as have a dozen or so others going back a year and dozens of threads before.

Just curious how did you find the link to RD's video so quickly that you introduced in this thread?

 

[Doc_1]

Just curious how did you find the link to RD's video so quickly that you introduced in this thread?

If you are hinting to a possible connection between me an RD that confirms my opinion about your arrogance.
The answer to your question is NO.
I am a physician in MI and RD is in NY i guess.
So try a different tune!

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Just curious how did you find the link to RD's video so quickly that you introduced in this thread?

If you are hinting to a possible connection between me an RD that confirms my opinion about your arrogance.
The answer to your question is NO.
I am a physician in MI and RD is in NY i guess.
So try a different tune!

You've got the wrong idea, I've read your posts don't think that at all.

You are welcome.
Thank you for taking the time to shoot the vid, i see your point better:
http://www.youtube.com/user/diamondsbyl ... zcR4kIBkCw

Without the link I tried to find this video on youtube it wasn't easy I had to go through a lot of videos, wondered how you did it?
Was it posted and then edited out in this thread?

 

[Doc_1]

Just curious how did you find the link to RD's video so quickly that you introduced in this thread?

If you are hinting to a possible connection between me an RD that confirms my opinion about your arrogance.
The answer to your question is NO.
I am a physician in MI and RD is in NY i guess.
So try a different tune!

You've got the wrong idea, I've read your posts don't think that at all.

You are welcome.
Thank you for taking the time to shoot the vid, i see your point better:
http://www.youtube.com/user/diamondsbyl ... zcR4kIBkCw

Without the link I tried to find this video on youtube it wasn't easy I had to go through a lot of videos, wondered how you did it?
Was it posted and then edited out in this thread?

You are free to think whatever appeals to your ego. That is not my business. but i think it is enough talking down RD.

 

[clgwli]

Interesting observations I have made now that I finally got a chance to view this on a real computer.

I was surprised to see as much red as I did in the Daussi diamond. I looked at the photos and videos more than once and side by side I would personally say that the Radiant was a brighter stone. FTR I am not putting down the Daussi saying it looked leaky at all, just pleasantly surprised with the amount of red and other colors. That is an aboslute positive for me.

And to go back to Gary's video on my better computer the stones looked equally bright to me. While on my laptop the RB actually appeared brighter. Just out of curiosity do you have an ASET of either to compare?

I finally finished the article that CCL linked. It took a while since the diagrams were always listed way before they were discussed which made for a lot of scrolling. Understanding the science behind it is neat.

I do wonder if taking a photo of an ASET is any more accurate than taking a photo of a diamond in a light box much like Gary's (very controlled light source). Just a thought that I hope others can comment on. I still hope to get the ASET kit some day to learn how to use on my own just for the heck of it. I don't mind seeing ASETs but I think I really do prefer videos more than an ASET. I do understand why many want them though and I highly respect that. Different strokes for different folks though.

I know that it shows potential light 'performance' (yes I used quotes much like I use them for 'ideal cut' stones) but particularly in the Daussi it is not exactly what I would have thought. Very cool stone all the same!

And yes, we all know limitations of videos and photos, but it is all we can use in this forum. Just know I am using the best equipment I own to look at the stones to make them as accurate as possible. Once I decide on a full HD laptop to get I will feel better about using my own.

CCL, David has a youtube channel. If you find his channel it is super easy to find any videos that have been posted. I actually stumbled on it while looking at another video of his. They are listed in chronological order from most recent upload to first upload. I believe this comparison video was 2 or 3 down on the list.

ETA: One final generic thought. I really thought it was so cool how the scan showed all the virtual facets the way it did. I really appreciate science and engineering behind things so that was awesome. Just a question on that. Do these scans also have the ability to show the pavilion facets much like they showed the facets on the crown? Just curious since I have no idea what they can or cannot do.

 

[risingsun]

ccl~I understand your frustation, but I think we have gotten further on this thread than on any of the previous threads that have involved RD. I would like to see the spirit of cooperation continue and hopefully lead us to some mutually understandable conclusions. You have been very helpful to me in understanding the optics involved in diamond cutting. I always enjoy learning from you.

RD~I know that we have not always agreed in the past. I don't know if we will agree in this thread. I just wanted to say that I'm so glad that you are cooperating with the other posters and using the tools that have been recommended. It helps me understand the issues from both sides. This has been a wonderful opportunity for education on PS.

Now I'm back to lurking. I just wanted to support this thread and tell you all that it is important for us to work together without the usual back and forth

Doc~as for your input, you do not know the history behind some of the feelings that have been posted. If you did, you might have better insight into the reason for these comments. We are doing well here. Let it be, please.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Marian- thank you so very much.
For anyone reading, Doc was a very strong critic of my approach on the earlier pages of this thread. When she ( (he?) came to look at my position in a more positive light, it made me feel like real progress had been made. One brick at a time. Also important to point out that her avitar is a lovely AVC ( not a dbl stone- although that in itself should not call anyone's motivation into question)

I AM a hard headed guy, strong opinions, quick ( sometimes too sharp) tongue. That means I need to share responsibility for the heated exchanges.

I agree that moving the discussion forward is a lot more important than arguing.

This is surely a good subject to encapsulate into an article in the near future......

CCL- the fact is, there is dissension among some of the industry's top people regarding some of AGS's tools, and grading standards- particularly cut grading of fancy shapes.

Pricescope is likely the one of the best places to air some of the considerations- including those regarding aset.
Please allow for this in our discussion

 

[Imdanny]

Reread these links again if you truly have an "open mind" and want to understand properly how to interpret the images.
You have seen them posted in threads at least a half dozen times already.

Do you really want to learn to use this tool and interpret the results properly?
Just can't tell with you, you fumble around so much due to lack of reading, but keep saying you have an "open mind" and are trying to learn.

I am going to say it loud and clear:
You have more arrogance than what you assigned to RD in all your posts. I mean common, the guy bent backwards to satisfy whatever every one is asking him to do, If you have learned one thing or two on diamonds it does not mean to put down some one with so many years of hands on and experience. And i do not give a damn if am banned or the post is deleted but enough harassing RD.

Hear, hear!

And BTW I don't give a damn about the past histories and the internecine warfare. Just drop it already. None of the rest of us should have to be reading harassing posts. Period.

 

[FuturePsyD]

Risingsun: yes, we may not be privy to what has occurred between certain members in the past, but that does not mean that Doc can't express his/her opinion regarding certain posts in this particular thread.

I personally have nothing against any individuals that have posted and have learned a great deal. But I don't think its fair to ask Doc to not voice his opinion on a public forum thread that is currently in play simply because there may be a back story between certain posters.