Does cut consistency matter? A tale of two diamonds

[Lula]

Today I checked PS to see if stuinkc had posted any photos of his fiancee''s ring -- not yet -- but in looking at the tread again, I was reminded of something that came up in that thread that I think warrants a re-visit

in light of the many new threads on H&A, cut consistency, cut precision, etc.

There was a discussion in this thread about whether cut consistency matters:

previous thread

The argument was made that cut consistency is not important because "we don''t buy diamonds in bulk." True, but we do upgrade! And in the case of an upgrade, I think cut consistency does matter.

As evidence of my assertion that cut consistency does matter, I give you Exhibits 1 - 4, four photographs of my two Crafted by Infinity diamonds. Can you tell which is which?

 

[Lula]

photo 2

 

[Lula]

photo 3

 

[Lula]

photo 4

 

[Lula]

To be fair, I have seen photos on PS of other branded RB cuts, typically Whiteflash ACA's and Brian Gavin's stones -- and also GOG's new cushions -- and the photos of these stones are remarkably similar from ring to ring and stone to stone within the brand.

This is what I pay for in a brand -- a consistent look. Others may disagree, but I think this is important for newbies to understand as they decide what's important to them in a diamond.

A well-cut diamond that is not a branded cut can be beautiful, to be sure; however, I believe there is added value in cut consistency in that I'm buying a diamond with a particular "look" and a particular level of craftsmanship.

Diamond cutting is indeed an art and a science!

 

[DianaBanana]

Date: 8/27/2009 12:02:35 PM
Author: sarap333

A well-cut diamond that is not a branded cut can be beautiful, to be sure; however, I believe there is added value in cut consistency in that I''m buying a diamond with a particular ''look'' and a particular level of craftsmanship.

Diamond cutting is indeed an art and a science!

Interesting post Sara - I agree that there''s value in cut consistency and craftsmanship. I bought my Brian Gavin diamond knowing full well that I would upgrade, I''d hate to give up this beautiful stone if I wasn''t sure I would get an equally beautiful stone when I upgrade....I have no concerns with that as BGS diamonds all seem to share a particular look. I suppose this is going beyond customer loyalty and becoming brand loyalty!

 

[Lula]

A big fat ditto to your post, Diana!

The photos of Brian Gavin's stones on SMTR caught my eye -- they have a very consistent look that I believe goes beyond just his ability to photograph the stones under consistent lighting conditions.

So I did my own research using my photo archives, and even without the benefit of consistent lighting and better camera skills/equipment, the photos of my two Infinity stones are remarkably similar.

To me, this look is more than just "tricks of the camera" and speaks to the consistency of the cut and the brand.

I agree with you, it absolutely is brand loyalty. It is knowing that the stone I choose was cut with intentional precision for a specific look

ETA: Oh, I should add that my two Infinity stones are different sizes, different colors (by several color grades) and different clarities (by several clarity grades).

 

[Lula]

Okay, so it looks like no one was in the mood to play guessing games today...or maybe you all know my two Infinity stones too well from other posts for this to be much of a challenge!

But getting beyond the photo shoot games, the fact is, I've seen far too many posts lately from people who have purchased a stone who are questioning its performance under certain lighting, or are wondering why they perceive "darkness" under the table, etc. I've also seen many, many posts by people wondering how a certain stone will perform IRL, based on the stone's specs. Most of the time, the posters' fears are allayed and the poster moves on and enjoys his/her beautiful diamond.

But many times this is not the case, and the poster decides to return the stone.

It is those situations I wanted to address in my thread.

I, too, bought a stone that I was unhappy with. I returned it, even though other people assured me that it was a beautiful stone. But the truth was, I didn't feel like I had gotten what I paid for -- hearts and arrows -- and I didn't want to live with the thought that I could have done better. I wanted to know that the stone I chose was truly the best cut I could buy, so I started looking at branded cuts instead of taking my chances in the virtual listings.

For me, the only way I could get the assurance that I was getting the best cut possible was a to buy a branded cut.

Buying a branded stone took the guesswork out of the purchase. I don't have to wonder if my stone is well cut and will perform well across all lighting conditions -- I know it will.

And when I decided to go larger in carat size, I knew that my upgrade stone would have the same look and performance of my previous stone. There was no guesswork involved.

Sometimes I think we focus too much on getting the best price, the best "deal," at the expense of craftsmanship.

I don't think I realized how important the craft of diamond cutting is until I became a member of PS. And I hope we as a community don't lose that piece of the story when we advise consumers on their diamond purchases.

Oh, by the way, the first and fourth pictures are of my 1.00 M SI2 Infinity diamond -- yes, that's right, it's an M SI2. Good cut does make all the difference! The second and third pictures are of my .53 J VS2 diamond. I upgraded from the .53 to the 1.00 a month ago.

I admire the care and thought that went into cutting this diamond every single day. I got a "good deal" because I bought an M SI2, but there was no guesswork on how the stone would perform because of the brand's commitment to cut consistency.

 

[Rhino]

Great post Sarah and an absolute AMEN. It has been too long a time since I''ve written on the subject but we have in que a video program demonstrating this very fact, particularly within the diamonds we hand pick. We feature diamonds from different facilities including Tolkowsky, Isee2, etc. but not all of these earn our stamp for a clean bill of health or a two thumbs up on the optics. Consistency *is* important in a brand and without it the brand IMO loses loses its integrity as a brand. A brand, IMO must represent a clear, concise and consistent element to it that marks it as distinct and also as a stamp of both quality and value. Good post.

 

[Rhino]

btw ... I can see in your photography the wonkier optical symmetry of the non Infinity and the effects of longer lower half facets.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 8/27/2009 11:33:59 PM
Author: Rhino
btw ... I can see in your photography the wonkier optical symmetry of the non Infinity and the effects of longer lower half facets.

LOL!

John, which of her two Infinities are you calling the non Infinity???

Wink

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 8/27/2009 11:47:11 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 8/27/2009 11:33:59 PM

Author: Rhino

btw ... I can see in your photography the wonkier optical symmetry of the non Infinity and the effects of longer lower half facets.

LOL!


John, which of her two Infinities are you calling the non Infinity???


Wink

tee hee..Yes Jon, maybe some ''splainin to do

I agree with yours and Jon''s sentiments about branded cuts Sara, nice idea for a thread.

 

[Lula]

Date: 8/28/2009 6:23:48 AM
Author: arjunajane

Date: 8/27/2009 11:47:11 PM

Author: Wink

Date: 8/27/2009 11:33:59 PM


Author: Rhino


btw ... I can see in your photography the wonkier optical symmetry of the non Infinity and the effects of longer lower half facets.

LOL!



John, which of her two Infinities are you calling the non Infinity???



Wink

tee hee..Yes Jon, maybe some 'splainin to do

I agree with yours and Jon's sentiments about branded cuts Sara, nice idea for a thread.

Thanks, Arjunajane!

I'll just chalk up Jon's comments to "late-night-posting-syndrome" and also there may have been some confusion in the title of my thread. I mean, really, he made that post after I gave the answers to the quiz!!

It should be a tale of THREE stones -- the first stone was the stone I returned -- the link to Storm's and John Pollard's comments about that stone is in my first post on this thread. (I'm sure the IS in that post is the image Jon was referring to -- LOL).

I don't have any of photos of this first stone, just the IS.

 

[Lula]

Date: 8/27/2009 11:31:41 PM
Author: Rhino
Great post Sarah and an absolute AMEN. It has been too long a time since I''ve written on the subject but we have in que a video program demonstrating this very fact, particularly within the diamonds we hand pick. We feature diamonds from different facilities including Tolkowsky, Isee2, etc. but not all of these earn our stamp for a clean bill of health or a two thumbs up on the optics. Consistency *is* important in a brand and without it the brand IMO loses loses its integrity as a brand. A brand, IMO must represent a clear, concise and consistent element to it that marks it as distinct and also as a stamp of both quality and value. Good post.

Thank you so much for your comments, Rhino! This is really the sentiment I''m trying to convey in this post.

I''ve been a bit dismayed lately that there is so much focus by new posters on RT on "getting the best deal." Of course I don''t want anyone to pay too much for a diamond -- I mean, seriously, that''s exactly the reason I decided to buy online, to save $$ -- but I guess I feel I''ve been on PS long enough to know that choosing the best diamond goes beyond just the AGS0 or GIA excellent rating.

The discussion should be less about my specific Infinity stones and more about what qualities do we expect to see in a brand, and the reasons a consumer may want to buy a branded stone.

I do think this discussion would be highly beneficial to newbies.

When I look through the SMTR thread, I do notice that the branded stones have a consistent look to them -- Arjunajane''s cushion from GOG is a perfect example. Rhino has customers on waiting lists -- !!! -- to get a cushion. Why? Because consumers have seen the photos of the GOG cushions on SMTR and say, I love that look; I want that look!

When I look at photos of my Infinity stones, I see the same thing -- a consistent "look." The fourth picture I posted best shows what I see IRL when I view my stone. That''s the "look" I bought.

So I would say the first benefit of buying a brand is a consistent look, and while I am not a diamond cutter, I would venture to say that consistent look is a result of consistent cutting to specific parameters. There''s no guesswork involved!

 

[treelight237]

What a great, helpful post! Thank you Sara for thinking of us newbies, very very helpful! I can''t believe that is a M!!!!

 

[Lula]

Well, thank you, treelight! I''m glad you found it helpful. And, thank you for complimenting my M -- she''s a beauty. Amazing what good cut can do for a lowly "M"!

 

[Rhino]

Date: 8/28/2009 8:24:07 AM
Author: sarap333

Date: 8/28/2009 6:23:48 AM
Author: arjunajane

Date: 8/27/2009 11:47:11 PM

Author: Wink

Date: 8/27/2009 11:33:59 PM


Author: Rhino


btw ... I can see in your photography the wonkier optical symmetry of the non Infinity and the effects of longer lower half facets.

LOL!



John, which of her two Infinities are you calling the non Infinity???



Wink

tee hee..Yes Jon, maybe some ''splainin to do

I agree with yours and Jon''s sentiments about branded cuts Sara, nice idea for a thread.

Thanks, Arjunajane!

I''ll just chalk up Jon''s comments to ''late-night-posting-syndrome'' and also there may have been some confusion in the title of my thread. I mean, really, he made that post after I gave the answers to the quiz!!

It should be a tale of THREE stones -- the first stone was the stone I returned -- the link to Storm''s and John Pollard''s comments about that stone is in my first post on this thread. (I''m sure the IS in that post is the image Jon was referring to -- LOL).

I don''t have any of photos of this first stone, just the IS.

HAHA!

Actually it was the 2nd out of focus picture.

 

[elle_chris]

Sara- I understand what you''re saying about consistency, but in the real world, most people do not upgrade. Sure, they may get new stones for special occasions but I''ve never heard of upgrading until PS.

There are also folks like me

who have brand loyalty to a point. Meaning, i have H&A''s from some of the vendors here, yes, they''re gorgeous, yes, i would buy from them again, but, after learning as much as I could on PS, i ventured outside the "branded" cuts and still got a gorgeous stone That''s all that matters to me ,and i think that''s all that matters to most people. Just getting a beautiful diamond. That doesn''t always have to come with a brand name if they take the the time to learn what makes a stone beautiful.

Here''s a pic of my GIA EX. This isn''t an H&A stone, but when I compare it to my H&A''s, i don''t see a difference in cut or performance. What I do see though, is a difference in color betweem this G and my I''s (h&a''s from WF). So for new people just learning, unless they have no budget, they need to decide if the premium H&A''s carry is worth sacrificng size, color, or clarity for. If it is, great! If not, then they can still get an ideal and I bet even most of us on PS wouldn''t be able to tell the difference.

 

[Lula]

I agree wholeheartedly with you, elle_chris. And my "rant" about consistency is not about saying that only branded cuts are beautiful, because I know that's not true -- your stone is proof of that. It's gorgeous.

But the most important part of your post is your comment about when you knew enough, you ventured away from the branded cuts after you learned enough on PS.

This goes to the heart of what I'm trying to say: Yes, you can get a gorgeous non-branded stone; yes, you may need to learn more about cut to find one that performs well, and it may take more time to find, sifting through the virtual listings.

Leaving the PS culture of upgrading aside, I think the cut consistency offered by brands offers additional value to consumers who intend to buy only one stone. And this is what I think gets lost in our discussions when we advise newbies.

1) There is value in knowing that your stone was cut to exacting standards (if cut is indeed important to you -- I agree, some consumers would prefer a larger size, and a higher color/clarity, and are happy with what I'll call a generic well-cut stone).

There is so much marketing involved now that the terms "H&A" and "ideal cut" have become diluted and meaningless in the marketplace. There are plenty of threads in the PS archives to support my statement! So how do you ensure that you're getting what you pay for? Well, I think cut consistency is one way.

Branded cuts that are cut to specific parameters for specific types of performance offer consumers a product that performs in a measurable, reproduce-able manner, consistent from stone to stone. When I see a photo of an Infinity or an ACA or a BGD, or a GOG cushion, I know that if I order a stone from one of those brands, I will get a certain look and a certain type of performance. There's value in that, I think, even if you never upgrade.

As an example, the first stone I ordered was from a company that sells H&A's and ideal cut stones. It was marketed as H&A. It was not H&A; it was near H&A. Could my newbie eyes tell the difference between that and a true H&A if they were next to each other -- probably not. You are exactly right about that!

However, the transaction made me feel a bit ripped off -- I didn't get what I paid for. I was sold an H&A stone that was not a true H&A stone. That's happening all over in the diamond industry -- whether through online sales or B&M stores. How can I avoid this happening to me again? Two ways: Either buy a branded cut that is cut to specific cut parameters; or become an expert on reading H&A images. I don't have time to do that! So I pay a little more and get the real deal.

For those who have the time and energy and interest to become good at reading H&A images, that's great -- the tools are there for you to use. Some sites are better than others at providing clear images -- Whiteflash, GOG, HPD all provide images with their listings. Their stones cost a little more. But you don't have to hassle with requesting the images -- I'll pay a little more for that service, too.

2. That brings me to the "cost" issue. Since April, I've purchased 3 diamonds (yeah, I blame PS for that!). The first stone went back, not because it wasn't pretty -- it was, but because I felt I wasn't getting what I paid for in terms of cut quality. But it was a very reasonably priced stone, and if it had been labeled "near H&A," maybe I would have felt differently about it. But then there's the matter of service, pre-sale and post-sale service.

My two branded stones (both Infinity) came with extra services that non-branded stones don't offer. We don't talk about those much on PS, beyond the return policies and the upgrade policies, but there are many value-added qualities to branded stones that, I believe, make up for the additional cost. To name a few: Free insurance for a year (Infinity), personalized and customized service; videos of your stone (and comparison videos of stones); virtual listings contain IS, ASET, H&A images, full reports, and often additional information about the stone's performance; buyback policies, in case you lose your job, heaven forbid, and need to sell your diamond!

Often consumers don't realize how important these extras are until after the sale.

It's not my purpose to criticize those who are able to learn enough about cut to buy great stones from the generic well-cut stones on the virtual listings. All I have to do is look on RT every day and see the good work you, Storm, Ellen, Lorelei, Jet, Stone, and the others do on a daily basis to help consumers find the perfect stone for them that balances their cut, color, clarity, and size preferences.

My goal is to help consumers understand a) what a branded cut is; and b) the pros and cons of paying more for a branded cut vs. paying less for a non-branded cut.

Most important, I don't want the consumer to feel that he/she got ripped off because what he/she bought is not what the vendor said it was.

 

[elle_chris]

I can''t disagree with anything you wrote.. lol

 

[strmrdr]

Do not confuse brands with consistency of supply.
Many diamond brands have very little consistency and those that do it can change from time to time.
Isee2 is very consistent diamond to diamond but they have changed their formula and cutters at least 3 times.
Infinity consistent diamond to diamond but 4 or so years ago had slightly different numbers than those today. (Paul is gonna shoot me but I tracked that sort of thing for years and it is true)
ACA once was 1 line(classic) then 2 lines(classic, new line) then one line(classic) then a sorta combo(slight painting) which still pops up combined with classics.

But none of them offer consistency greater than a non-branded seller can achieve by selection or cutting contract.
So it is not as black and white as branded or not branded.

 

[Lula]

Date: 8/28/2009 7:53:39 PM
Author: strmrdr
Do not confuse brands with consistency of supply.

Many diamond brands have very little consistency and those that do it can change from time to time.

Isee2 is very consistent diamond to diamond but they have changed their formula and cutters at least 3 times.

Infinity consistent diamond to diamond but 4 or so years ago had slightly different numbers than those today. (Paul is gonna shoot me but I tracked that sort of thing for years and it is true)

ACA once was 1 line(classic) then 2 lines(classic, new line) then one line(classic) then a sorta combo(slight painting) which still pops up combined with classics.


But none of them offer consistency greater than a non-branded seller can achieve by selection or cutting contract.

So it is not as black and white as branded or not branded.

Good points, Storm. Especially your last comment about it not being simply branded vs. non-branded. The thread oldminer started about cut grade describes the problems with some brands not being very consistent at all link
I also need to clarify that I'm not necessarily excluding "private selection" or seller "signature cuts." I believe this is the model that GOG uses very successfully (Rhino will correct me if I'm wrong here). The end result is the same, imho, the consumer receives a stone that is intentionally cut/selected for certain qualities, and those qualities can be quantified visually and statistically -- e.g., stones slightly painted for edge-to-edge brilliance (Eightstar).

As a consumer, I'm also not terribly concerned if the brand changes/evolves over time. I think as long as there is a rationale that motivates the change (be it scientific advances in cutting/evaluation tools or be it a change in consumer preference) I can't get too upset when a company changes course to meet changes in the marketplace. But if the change results in a lesser product, that is something I'd take issue with. It sounds like there are many "brands" that have never distinguished themselves in terms of quality control, and that is unfortunate.

I see consumers being educated on PS about those types of brands all the time, though. The forum is quick to point out when a brand is not everything it says it is.

What I'm looking for in a brand is a) intentionality and purpose which, to me, translates into cut consistency, in order to achieve a certain look or level of performance; b) service, service, service. Yes, this costs more. But I am willing to pay for these things, because, personally, I prefer this model over the wild west, every-man-for-himself model that requires me to become an expert on diamond cutting so I don't get ripped off!

If Paul changes his cut parameters in a way that makes his stones less appealing to me, and, if god forbid, I want another upgrade

, then I would feel free to take my business elsewhere.

Will I get to the point that elle_chris is -- confident enough in my diamond knowledge to select my stone from the virtual listings? I don't know. There's still the matter of getting personalized service when buying a brand, so I'd probably contact another vendor who sells branded cuts or has a signature collection.

But that's just me, and my comfort level; each consumer has to decide on his/her own comfort level. And the best thing about PS is that all options can be discussed openly so consumers can choose what works best for them.

 

[Lula]

Date: 8/28/2009 6:46:13 PM
Author: elle_chris
I can''t disagree with anything you wrote.. lol

Thanks for the reply, elle!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 8/28/2009 7:53:39 PM
Author: strmrdr
Do not confuse brands with consistency of supply.
Many diamond brands have very little consistency and those that do it can change from time to time.
Isee2 is very consistent diamond to diamond but they have changed their formula and cutters at least 3 times.
Infinity consistent diamond to diamond but 4 or so years ago had slightly different numbers than those today. (Paul is gonna shoot me but I tracked that sort of thing for years and it is true)
ACA once was 1 line(classic) then 2 lines(classic, new line) then one line(classic) then a sorta combo(slight painting) which still pops up combined with classics.

But none of them offer consistency greater than a non-branded seller can achieve by selection or cutting contract.
So it is not as black and white as branded or not branded.

As the first and last word on the cut of Infinity, I want to strongly deny the above highlighted sentence. Our process and our goal in production of rounds has not changed since Infinity started in 2002. Of course, with experience growing, the refinement in the process in order to achieve our goal has improved.

It is incorrect to use such positive evolution as an argument against consistency.

Live long,

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/29/2009 8:52:40 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 8/28/2009 7:53:39 PM

Author: strmrdr

Do not confuse brands with consistency of supply.

Many diamond brands have very little consistency and those that do it can change from time to time.

Isee2 is very consistent diamond to diamond but they have changed their formula and cutters at least 3 times.

Infinity consistent diamond to diamond but 4 or so years ago had slightly different numbers than those today. (Paul is gonna shoot me but I tracked that sort of thing for years and it is true)

ACA once was 1 line(classic) then 2 lines(classic, new line) then one line(classic) then a sorta combo(slight painting) which still pops up combined with classics.


But none of them offer consistency greater than a non-branded seller can achieve by selection or cutting contract.

So it is not as black and white as branded or not branded.

As the first and last word on the cut of Infinity, I want to strongly deny the above highlighted sentence. Our process and our goal in production of rounds has not changed since Infinity started in 2002. Of course, with experience growing, the refinement in the process in order to achieve our goal has improved.


It is incorrect to use such positive evolution as an argument against consistency.


Live long,

Hey Paul not to get in an argument but when I joined PS it was almost always possible to tell your production by the 40.5-40.6 pavilions you have since moved to the 40.7 range.
It stood out because you were cutting to that edge and no one else was.
Not a large change and not a negative evolution at all.
That is where your famous line came from:
Cut to the edges and produce awesome diamonds.

My point was exactly as you stated, brands even the best(yours IS one of the best) evolve over time.

 

[strmrdr]

older Infinity diamonds:
http://www.diamondexpert.com/diamonds/dbs.cgi?sf=detd.setup.cgi&active=active&stock=RB30105051&submit_search=1

http://www.diamondexpert.com/diamonds/dbs.cgi?sf=detd.setup.cgi&active=active&stock=RB30105051&submit_search=1

This one is even older...
http://www.diamondexpert.com/diamonds/dbs.cgi?sf=detd.setup.cgi&active=active&stock=RB30006701&submit_search=1

Notice the same excellent quality as today in that respect they have not changed.

Trip down memory lane there.
Why that kind of thing sticks in my mind is that the range of diamonds posted was much smaller than and figuring out which cutter cut the diamond and which vendor was selling it was possible by the numbers.
With the much wider selection that is not possible today.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Storm, your interpretation is incorrect, but it is not worth arguing about. As the final word at Infinity, I suppose that I am entitled to know better.

Live long,

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Going back to the original topic of Sara, I think that Sara and others are only touching part of the positive aspects of consistency.

In order to understand this, you need to think with a different mindset. Most contributors here are used to thinking about the product and the product only, where I think that processes are most important. Some of these processes involve the choice of retailers selling a line, and the level of service that they provide (Sara touched this aspect also), but also the production-process which delivers the final product is extremely important.

Here on Pricescope and on other consumer-forums before that, I have learned important aspects of product. Some of these aspects are the choice of the lab-report, the need for photographs of the actual stone, the ideal-scope, the hearts-and-arrows, later on also of the ASET, and the disclosure of maximum information about the stone, available at all times.

What many do not realise, is that all these features of the product do not define the product. They describe certain aspects of the product, with great tools, but all these tools have their limitations. In our attempts to educate people, we have a lot of tools to cover, but we often forget to emphasize the limitations of each tool. As such, the mistaken idea arises that the combination of these tools accurately describe the diamond.

The reality is different however. If a stone passes the test of a tool, it indicates that the stone is better than a certain minimum-level. For example, if a stone has an Ideal cut-grade by AGS, this only means that the stone has passed the minimum-level chosen by AGS to describe the stone as Ideal. Within that grade, there are still a number of variations. Also, if a stone passes the minimum standards of H&A, this is not complete information, since the crispness of the H&A-pattern is an important differentiator between stones, but is not part of the minimum standards of H&A.

From my side, I have not only learned from these minimum-levels of information on PS, but I combine this with the experience and common sense of generations of the best diamond-cutters in the world. This is necessary, because science has not yet completely cracked the formula that makes a diamond work. As such, I do not have objective data to prove what works, but I guess that I do have the experience to make it work. In this regard, we are proud that we did not have to change our formula when AGS and GIA introduced new cut-grades, and the ongoing scintillation-studies by AGS will also have no effect on our formula. What I am trying to say in a complicated way, is that our formula for cutting our diamonds is ahead of its time, where the majority of cutters is only adapting (constantly) to newly arising needs.

Back to process. In our operation, we spend a lot of energy in the particulars of the cutting-process. This approach is totally different to one of product-quality-control. In the latter, one compares the final product (or at a sub-step in production) with a quality-level that needs to be achieved. The result is that everything that passes the minimally needed quality-level passes, since it is good enough. In our approach, I may have been influenced by my father, who used to be working at Ford Motor Company, where he was part of a quality-improvement-team. This team introduced the then new Japanese quality-improvement-methods into Ford''s manufacturing process, and, there, I learned that quality is not a matter of checking it afterwards only, it is much more a matter of adapting production-processes so that quality is an automatic result.

It is our attention to the process that creates our Infinity-brand with diamonds that dazzle consumers and that our retailers are proud to carry. I am often surprised how some consumers describe certain unique aspects of our stones. I know that these aspects are a result of our process and they can only be observed in real-life, as the currently available tools cannot show these.

Actually, that is why I think that consistency is important. Our consistent process guarantees a product that also delivers benefits beyond the abilities of the current cut-assessment-tools.

Live long,

 

[elle_chris]

Very good point, Storm. I think Paul disagrees with ya regarding Infinity though.

Sara- I got my e-ring stone through WF. While I did find a couple of stones I was interested in, but WF gave this one their thunbs up and then it went straight to my appraiser where I was able to view it with another set of eyes. I didn''t just pick the stone without having someone I trust give me their opinions

(i just didn''t want you to think that i picked a virtual stone and bought it just like that. Quite a few people evaluated it for me before i purchased it. including Ps''rs)

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/29/2009 12:17:40 PM
Author: elle_chris
Very good point, Storm. I think Paul disagrees with ya regarding Infinity though.


Sara- I got my e-ring stone through WF. While I did find a couple of stones I was interested in, but WF gave this one their thunbs up and then it went straight to my appraiser where I was able to view it with another set of eyes. I didn''t just pick the stone without having someone I trust give me their opinions

(i just didn''t want you to think that i picked a virtual stone and bought it just like that. Quite a few people evaluated it for me before i purchased it. including Ps''rs)

As Paul explains above we are simply looking at it in different ways and different directions.
I want to make it clear that I have a lot of respect for Paul and his products.
The same goes for many of the PS pros and their products be it diamonds or appraisals or tools.