Facet Yaw

[JohnQuixote]

Re: Swindling...Brian has a section in the PriceScope tutorial which addresses that, linked here.

Date: 11/26/2004 9:44

7 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

It always needs to be stated - there is more skill in swindling like this, than in simply cutting H&A''s on an auto dialit or process line. i am constantly in awe of the skill these people exhibit. (and btw they are often teams of several people doing each part of a process).

Garry, this is a most important point.

Diamonds cut on these large process lines, as you put it, often result in the imprecisions illustrated in this whole discussion. This floods the market with phony, so-called hearts & arrows cuts and dilutes standards.

Most machines are used for blocking (too many problems cutting the whole stone mechanically, especially in larger sizes). It’s possible for a machine to complete a stone, especially with smaller stones, but in most facilities brillinteering is done by hand.

I, like you, am also in awe of the skill that precision cutting requires.

I believe the cutter who cleans up the diamond, removes inclusions, retains the weight AND delivers perfect patterning has the most skill of all. He is not making adjustments merely for the sake of retaining weight – he is delivering physical symmetry as it was intended in the initial design of the diamond. True symmetry and resultant patterning is not an accident. It is the goal when starting out.

Brian presented a discussion of grading for Hearts & Arrows diamonds at the IDCC, but it''s obvious that labs have their hands full and will not get into it anytime soon. Therefore, it''s up to those of us who interact, appreciate and have a passion for precision to communicate in forums such as this one.

I will post a series of what I term "Phony," "Near-True" and "True" hearts photographs to illustrate different levels of precision which are out there. This may help separate the “auto-dialit drones” from higher standard stones with acutely good craftsmanship.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/27/2004 3:56:28 AM
Author: valeria101
Great follow up !

The fact that optical symmetry is not the same with what lab reports call 'symmetry grade' has been tossed around for quite a while with no explanation.

As far as I undersatnd, this thread begins the story. Is there much more in store?

Yes, dear Ana. I am just getting started

For the casual reader curious about the differences in symmetry you mention, here is a link illustrating the differences.

How about this Q:

The description of facet yaw shows that the certified symmetry grade is not suficient to obtain optical symmetry. Clear enough. But is it one necessary to the other: can there be diamonds with great H&A and 'good' symmetry grades on lab reports ? A recent therad on crown and pavilion angle variation makes me guess this could be the case - hence the Q

There are so many variations that each case must be taken individually. Example: If the stone was penalized in symmetry for only 1 meet point being “out” (and if the crown is not twisted in relation to the pavilion) the H&A pattern could be unaffected. But if you have a stone where multiple meet points are “out” the patterning may not be good.

You need to see the image or work with a reputable dealer who guarantees good patterning.

As with all of this, it will be the consumer’s choice. To begin with, you need to be a fan of the H&A pattern. Then, if you find a pattern which meets your standards of acceptability with non-ideal symmetry you may be able to save some $.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/26/2004 9:17:28 PM
Author: strmrdr
Thanks for the answers John.

What are the effects of the less commonly yawed facets being yawed?

I'm not sure what you mean here, Strm. Can you be more specific?

Lets say the star facets are yawed how would this show up or even would it?

It would not have the impact that pavilion facet yaw has.

It takes a total of 5 different facets to work in harmony to create a Heart with an Arrow head above. The star facet is the final component. 1 Heart = (2 main pavilion facets, 2 Lower girdle facets and 1 Star facet from the crown).

In the crown the shape of the arrowhead may possibly be different.
In the pavilion here is the role the star facet plays:

Pic. 1: Without the Star facet in place and
Pic. 2: With the Star facet in place. Note the squared off heart shape.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Dear John,

Enjoy your H&A''s discussion.
H&A''s have little or nothing to do with indexing or yaw as we have been discussing.
8* have a consistent yaw; yet they show noce H&A''s patterns.
Cheated girdle diamonds like the one shown here have nice H&A''s patterns. http://www.goodoldgold.com/_60ct_i_si1_h&a.htm (Educational stone).

If you want to discuss / promote H&A''s then why not do it under a topic of H&A''s?

I also disagree that production lines can not produce H&A''s as a matter of course. i see it happening with people Janak Mistry works with. A good process engineer can remove discrepencies. A good factory owner can and does spend the effort to remove vibration and can afford to spend 100''s of K''s for german engineers to analyse surface flatness etc. The old grey haired craftsman is no match for modern technology.

Don''t get me wrong - I LIKE to see finely cut diamonds. but I LOVE to see a parcel of beautifully cut diamonds that has 1/3rd of them as really nice H&A''s and 50% that look great through an ideal-scope - because it means that even the stones I reject are still far superior to what i would have selected 10 or 15 years ago.

 

[strmrdr]

Garry,
Did you read the first line of his first post:
"It may be helpful to illustrate an effect that can influence the physical symmetry of any round brilliant, and acute precision in Hearts & Arrows cuts."
The entire intent was to show us how to spot the affects of facet yaw in diamonds.
With an emphasis on h&a diamonds.
No hidden agenda just strait up education.
I for one thank John for his hard work.
I for one do not want to pay a h&a premium for a near h&a diamond.

second:
Why are you happy with a 50% reject rate?
Sure its better than years ago but isnt it your lives work to make that reject rate 0?

Why the sour grapes over this thread?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

oK Storm, i will try to find a way to show you the effect of cheating a facet on a H&A''s pattern.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 11/28/2004 1:40:38 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Dear John,

Enjoy your H&A''s discussion.
H&A''s have little or nothing to do with indexing or yaw as we have been discussing.
8* have a consistent yaw; yet they show noce H&A''s patterns.
Cheated girdle diamonds like the one shown here have nice H&A''s patterns. http://www.goodoldgold.com/_60ct_i_si1_h&a.htm (Educational stone).

If you want to discuss / promote H&A''s then why not do it under a topic of H&A''s?

I also disagree that production lines can not produce H&A''s as a matter of course. i see it happening with people Janak Mistry works with. A good process engineer can remove discrepencies. A good factory owner can and does spend the effort to remove vibration and can afford to spend 100''s of K''s for german engineers to analyse surface flatness etc. The old grey haired craftsman is no match for modern technology.

Don''t get me wrong - I LIKE to see finely cut diamonds. but I LOVE to see a parcel of beautifully cut diamonds that has 1/3rd of them as really nice H&A''s and 50% that look great through an ideal-scope - because it means that even the stones I reject are still far superior to what i would have selected 10 or 15 years ago.

Hey Garry,

We all know that you are Australian. You do not have to prove that anymore. Just relax a bit, and do not take such a confrontational stand.

Both you and John have valid and interesting points. I think that we all can agree that what is called yaw here is an effect that might be harmful to the light performance of a diamond. It might be obvious in the hearts-pattern, but I think that I agree with you that this is not always the case.

Can we continue from there?

As for your side-discussion about the difference between big factory outfits compared to the "artisan"-way of working, I would like to stop this 19th-century-way of thinking. The size of your organisation only has a limited effect on what you produce. What is important is what you focus on as an organisation. In the 21st century, the goal defines the result.

Live long,

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thanks Paul

I have worked out an experiment - but need a little time to explore it

Time!!!!!

 

[mdx]

Date: 11/28/2004 12

3

7 AM
Author: JohnQuixote
Hi Johan (say, what a great name)

Nice to have ''another from down under'' in the thread.

Flat...Let''s have a rest of how this term is being used.

A yawed facet may be flat unto itself. But a yawed facet is NOT flat in relation to the line on which it SHOULD have been run (see diagrams at the beginning of the thread). From the starting point to the end point there will be a difference in the elevation of the facet. Relative to the axis of how it should have been cut, and relative to adjacent facets, it is NOT flat (there are micron differences in the flatness) it is yawing in one direction or another. This is always reflected in the patterning.


Thanks for the graining diagram. It might be a bit confusing for anyone who does not know what the arrows represent, however...

The arrows on that diagram show the direction the wheel must go when touching the facet, however the first contact point (for pavilion facets) will either be at the girdle or at the culet, and proper polishing will happen top to bottom or vice-versa.


Okay Johan, here''s a question which will be helpful to our collective discussion: On a 2-point stone can you explain - for the layman - how to get the table to run?

Although its now possibly a bit of a deviation from the way the tread is going.
When I get a spare minute I will see if I can do a bit of a sketch to demonstrate the main possibilities to run a 2 point. Not the best artist though.
Although its possible to have two opposite directions work, one is usually better (quieter) than the other

A typical 2 point is a stone that is sawn along one of the straight edges of an octahedral crystal (dodecahedral direction) so has only two corners.

Johan

 

[perry]

This has been an excellent tutorial that I have followed for several days on some issues that affect true symetry for H&A and other diamonds out there.

However, one thing puzzels me.

I can take the lessons learned in this tutorial and go to several sites that show H&A photos of their diamonds - and see the affects, where facets have been yawed, etc.

However, the H&A pictures at Whiteflash are so small that it is very difficult to see these details (just little things under the picture of the diamond - and clicking to enlarge does not open to a window with larger H&A photos).

I for one do not object to a vendor comming on the site to eductate us about some issue that they focus on - and that us consumers can then use to compare diamonds available. It does bother me that you cannot then apply the same lessons to that vendors diamonds?

I hope John at Whiteflash will start putting up full sized (or large enough sized) H&A pictures on their "A cut above" and other diamonds so that those of us who have taken the time to learn about this can see how the Whiteflash diamonds stack up.

Perry

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/28/2004 1:40:38 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Dear John,

Enjoy your H&A's discussion.

H&A's have little or nothing to do with indexing or yaw as we have been discussing.

8* have a consistent yaw; yet they show noce H&A's patterns.

Cheated girdle diamonds like the one shown here have nice H&A's patterns. http://www.goodoldgold.com/_60ct_i_si1_h&a.htm (Educational stone).

If you want to discuss / promote H&A's then why not do it under a topic of H&A's?

I also disagree that production lines can not produce H&A's as a matter of course. i see it happening with people Janak Mistry works with. A good process engineer can remove discrepencies. A good factory owner can and does spend the effort to remove vibration and can afford to spend 100's of K's for german engineers to analyse surface flatness etc. The old grey haired craftsman is no match for modern technology.

Don't get me wrong - I LIKE to see finely cut diamonds. but I LOVE to see a parcel of beautifully cut diamonds that has 1/3rd of them as really nice H&A's and 50% that look great through an ideal-scope - because it means that even the stones I reject are still far superior to what i would have selected 10 or 15 years ago.

Garry,

Why the hostility??

We can agree to disagree if you like. That is a valuable quality of professionalism. Castigation and accusation are not necessary.

About a week ago you asked me if I was "drinking" when posting a reasonable question about ASET and color coding (here). I am tempted to ask you the same question about your statement "H&A's have little or nothing to do with indexing or yaw as we have been discussing." It is obvious that H&A patterning, indexing and yaw are inter-related.

As for your opinion about production lines, I defer to Paul's wisdom (or will ask Brian Gavin to come in and address the realities there), but I stand by my original statements.

The point here is to express our point of view: To express what yaw of the facet does to the patterning (especially in the pavilion). It is not exclusively about H&A stones, yet, (as I said in the first line of the original post - thanks Strmrdr for pointing that out) it particularly concerns those who like that level of symmetry.

We want to demonstrate what yaw is. Yaw is not a change in what azimuth is (azimuth is indexing).

Yaw is the resultant effect of azimuth shift. Yaw is when the facet starts at a point on the face of a facet: You start at point 1 and end at point 2. When you start at point 1 that facet gets 10 minutes of polish, but the end point (point 2) gets only 1 minutes of polish. Therefore there is greater surface area polished away from point 1 than point 2, which means more material polished away from point 1 relative to point 2, HENCE yaw of the facet: The facet is not flat, resulting in skewed patterning (you can see my original diagrams for an illustration).

YAW is the resultant effect of azimuth shift. Period. This is not arguable.
I will continue to post our findings on this effect.

It will be disappointing if you really want to 'take your loupe and go home,'

as your OBJECTIVE input is valued.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

John I must have missed something?
And sorry if I can over terse.

Yaw is curved facets?

You wrote:
Yaw is when the facet starts at a point on the face of a facet: You start at point 1 and end at point 2. When you start at point 1 that facet gets 10 minutes of polish, but the end point (point 2) gets only 1 minutes of polish. Therefore there is greater surface area polished away from point 1 than point 2, which means more material polished away from point 1 relative to point 2, HENCE yaw of the facet: The facet is not flat, resulting in skewed patterning (you can see my original diagrams for an illustration).

I really did not understand the sketches - the second one is still flat - but has a different slope. that means it has a different orientation - but that does not mean anything unless it is not the angle it is meant to be - and that is what I take what you are saying to mean?
So if yaw simply means a facet that is crooked, then I do not understand the pictures in the 2nd and 3rd post on the first page?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/28/2004 9:24

5 PM
Author: mdx
Although its now possibly a bit of a deviation from the way the tread is going.

When I get a spare minute I will see if I can do a bit of a sketch to demonstrate the main possibilities to run a 2 point. Not the best artist though.

Although its possible to have two opposite directions work, one is usually better (quieter) than the other

A typical 2 point is a stone that is sawn along one of the straight edges of an octahedral crystal (dodecahedral direction) so has only two corners.

Johan

Johan - You''re right about the 2-pointer being noisy. After speaking to Brian. a better illustration might be a 3-pointer, on which the table will be tilted in order to get it to run.

You''re also correct about the deviation from the impetus of this thread.
Maybe we can start a new thread on the particulars of graining down the road?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

bTW - John that big H&A''s was a joke

Here is a diamCalc default tolkowsky proportions with a 57% table.
I have made one pavilion main facet on the right hand side 1 degree steeper at 41.75 degrees.

i would not have called that yaw - but i guess you would? Am I on the right path?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Examples of yaw/non-uniformity in the pavilion.
(additionally, many lower girdle facets are too long for visual balance, though this is not related to yaw)

 

[JohnQuixote]

Good patterning. Slight yaw. Some lower girdle % deviation.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

This time all the pavilion angles are 40.75 - but the same pavilion facet has been twisted (indexed or changed azimuth) by 3 degrees.

This is what we would see more of in terms of badly aligned H&A''s patterns? Yes?

 

[JohnQuixote]

These are true patterns. Great examples of physical symmetry.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

And this is with only the two lower girdle facets either side of the pavilion main (corrected) tilted (azimuth or index) by 3 degrees each toward the clockwise direction.

How are we going - confusing with john''s and mine all mixed up?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/28/2004 10:39:22 PM
Author: perry
This has been an excellent tutorial that I have followed for several days on some issues that affect true symetry for H&A and other diamonds out there.

However, one thing puzzels me.

I can take the lessons learned in this tutorial and go to several sites that show H&A photos of their diamonds - and see the affects, where facets have been yawed, etc.

However, the H&A pictures at Whiteflash are so small that it is very difficult to see these details (just little things under the picture of the diamond - and clicking to enlarge does not open to a window with larger H&A photos).

I for one do not object to a vendor comming on the site to eductate us about some issue that they focus on - and that us consumers can then use to compare diamonds available. It does bother me that you cannot then apply the same lessons to that vendors diamonds?

I hope John at Whiteflash will start putting up full sized (or large enough sized) H&A pictures on their 'A cut above' and other diamonds so that those of us who have taken the time to learn about this can see how the Whiteflash diamonds stack up.
Perry

Perry,

Thanks for your comments and request!

We do not self-promote on PriceScope, so I won't display a parade of ACA imagery here. If you would like me to email you a sampler platter of H&A photos to check their integrity you can PM me and I'll gladly do so.

I can tell you with confidence that the reason we are trying to bring this effect to light is because Brian Gavin has invested years of study in this effect (which is not well-known or understood). Though cutting of RB has been done since the early part of the 1900's, measuring and viewing optical symmetry to this degree is still in its relative infancy.

As per your request I can display one pavilion image which is at my fingertips...It is my personal ACA. I acquired it before I ever worked here (don't know if it will be big enough for you). If you want to see the crown pattern as well, or for anything else, please contact me privately.

Best,

 

[JohnQuixote]

Garry,

Thanks for reopening our dialogue. We will continue on this, but some of us must go to bed after this post.

Your illustrations are a step forward, but what you are doing is changing the indexing by azimuth. What I am talking about is more than this. It is hard to understand unless you have sat at the wheel and polished a diamond. The way current software is, you cannot reproduce yaw in DiamCalc. In an above example you have made one facet a degree steeper (therefore the culet is now off-center) but that does not actually address the situation of yaw relative to the intended axis. What you did was a culet to girdle (north to south) change in facet angle, but yaw in this instance will be east to west (sideways), which cannot be keyed into DaimCalc.

Imagine a wire-frame of a diamond. Now imagine one facet being polished from one side to the other... Point 1 is polished for 10 minutes, point 2 is only polished for 1 minute. Now, relative to the wire-frame (which was the intended result), point 1 has been ground down to a lower elevation relative to it''s intended axis. DiamCalc makes no provision for this. Arg.

If I can illustrate this better I will. I regret that my initial diagrams aren''t getting the job done.

Brian has some proprietary software from Sarin which arrived this weekend. We''re in the process of testing it, so please be patient. I believe we will be able to scan a stone with yaw, put it in DiamCamc and better illustrate this effect.

 

[Serg]

Date: 11/29/2004 2:46:15 AM
Author: JohnQuixote
Garry,

Thanks for reopening our dialogue. We will continue on this, but some of us must go to bed after this post.

Your illustrations are a step forward, but what you are doing is changing the indexing by azimuth. What I am talking about is more than this. It is hard to understand unless you have sat at the wheel and polished a diamond. The way current software is, you cannot reproduce yaw in DiamCalc. In an above example you have made one facet a degree steeper (therefore the culet is now off-center) but that does not actually address the situation of yaw relative to the intended axis. What you did was a culet to girdle (north to south) change in facet angle, but yaw in this instance will be east to west (sideways), which cannot be keyed into DaimCalc.

Imagine a wire-frame of a diamond. Now imagine one facet being polished from one side to the other... Point 1 is polished for 10 minutes, point 2 is only polished for 1 minute. Now, relative to the wire-frame (which was the intended result), point 1 has been ground down to a lower elevation relative to it''s intended axis. DiamCalc makes no provision for this. Arg.

If I can illustrate this better I will. I regret that my initial diagrams aren''t getting the job done.

Brian has some proprietary software from Sarin which arrived this weekend. We''re in the process of testing it, so please be patient. I believe we will be able to scan a stone with yaw, put it in DiamCamc and better illustrate this effect.

John,

You can reproduce any position for flat facet in current DC.

Garry did it in his examples.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

John Sergey is correct.
Many people do not know about the advanced button on the lower left side of DiamCalc.
I only knew how to use it with scannned 3D models (.srn fils).
But to resolve this issue with you I asked Sergey how to use a perfect parametric model.

Do this: open and make any DiamCalc stone - open Cut>export>AutoDesk to DXF file.
Then open the DXF file with Import in the same menu.

Then open the advanced tab as shown here and you can have full control.
Here I show you the stone with the ''yaw'' of 1 pavilion main of 3 degrees to the clockwise direction. This is 2nd of my 3 examples.

I am afraid John that using H&A''s still does not appeal to me as the best way to explain these features becuse there are many interactions that result in these patterns..
I remain unconvinced about the "flatness of facets" issue. An polishing sideways versus long ways? i have never polished a diamond - but have many times been in factories and I think I have a reasonable grasp of the processes.

Paul? Can you shine a light for me?

 

[Iiro]

Thanks for tip Garry.

 

[perry]

John:

I appreciate that you are willing to educate both us and diamond specialist on this topic as part of what you do. I do consider that part of promoting of you company - in a good way. To me the best promotion, and marketing, is by helping other people.

The key point of the point I tried to raise last night is while this is very interesting information - and it allows us consumers to sort out a good H&A from a bad H&A, that your company site does not provide the necessary pictures for people to apply this knowlede to the diamonds you have listed.

You state that I, and others by implications, can always e-mal you for the information. Fine. However, when browsing diamonds and looking for what interest me - I am not interested in sending lots of e-mails on lots of diamonds to get the pictures. This would be saying something similar to "e-mail us for the cert, ideal-scope image, ect." Otherwise, you are just saying
"trust us" because we are the ones who know and understand this issue.

My suggestion is that if you want to demonstrate that your H&A''s are really good ones - that you provide suitable pictures with the other information you provide on your specially selected and "a cut above" diamonds. Then people can browse, compare, and decide to buy their selection.

Otherwise, from a consumer point of view, how usefull is your basic information in this thread. OK, diamonds facets can be skewed to add weight to the stone, and that affects the H&A pattern (and probably other optical properties). There are good and bad H&A''s out there. Did''nt most of us know that up front without knowing how they skewed the facets. That still does not help us select a diamond unless suitable pictures are available.

Perry

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/29/2004 5:19:48 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
John Sergey is correct.
Many people do not know about the advanced button on the lower left side of DiamCalc.
I only knew how to use it with scannned 3D models (.srn fils).
But to resolve this issue with you I asked Sergey how to use a perfect parametric model.

Do this: open and make any DiamCalc stone - open Cut>export>AutoDesk to DXF file.
Then open the DXF file with Import in the same menu.

Then open the advanced tab as shown here and you can have full control.
Here I show you the stone with the 'yaw' of 1 pavilion main of 3 degrees to the clockwise direction. This is 2nd of my 3 examples.

Garry: He shoots, he scores!

When I looked at your examples last night I said "well it looks like a virtual of yaw," but was not familiar with the adv features. We have not put the latest version of DC on the system. I'm pretty sure we will do that now...Brian has been studying/photographing/analyzing this for years without aid of software.

I showed Brian your virtuals this morning and he said "well we're just old grey-haired cutters around here...we need to upgrade."

More: Brian's work with the new Sarin software this weekend implies that we'll be able to import much more info into DC (he was doing some of the same kind of experimentation this weekend). I'll produce images - both virtual and their actual counterparts - later.

Date: 11/29/2004 5:19:48 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

I am afraid John that using H&A's still does not appeal to me as the best way to explain these features becuse there are many interactions that result in these patterns..
I remain unconvinced about the 'flatness of facets' issue. An polishing sideways versus long ways? i have never polished a diamond - but have many times been in factories and I think I have a reasonable grasp of the processes.

Paul? Can you shine a light for me?

I appreciate your position. Don't get me wrong, you're someone who can help with the understanding of this!

Not everyone (especially consumers) is a scientist like Serg or Yuri or you, Garry.

Interpreting these things in a H&A viewer is our attempt at "Facet Yaw for Dummies." We're trying to help consumers and other interested parties who may not have a black belt at DiamCalc.

Thanks for your help in the thread!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/29/2004 4:19:44 AM
Author: Serg

John,

You can reproduce any position for flat facet in current DC.

Garry did it in his examples.

Serg - Thank you. Those features are exciting!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/29/2004 10:18:36 AM
Author: perry
John:

I appreciate that you are willing to educate both us and diamond specialist on this topic as part of what you do. I do consider that part of promoting of you company - in a good way. To me the best promotion, and marketing, is by helping other people.

The key point of the point I tried to raise last night is while this is very interesting information - and it allows us consumers to sort out a good H&A from a bad H&A, that your company site does not provide the necessary pictures for people to apply this knowlede to the diamonds you have listed.

You state that I, and others by implications, can always e-mal you for the information. Fine. However, when browsing diamonds and looking for what interest me - I am not interested in sending lots of e-mails on lots of diamonds to get the pictures. This would be saying something similar to ''e-mail us for the cert, ideal-scope image, ect.'' Otherwise, you are just saying
''trust us'' because we are the ones who know and understand this issue.

My suggestion is that if you want to demonstrate that your H&A''s are really good ones - that you provide suitable pictures with the other information you provide on your specially selected and ''a cut above'' diamonds. Then people can browse, compare, and decide to buy their selection.

Otherwise, from a consumer point of view, how usefull is your basic information in this thread. OK, diamonds facets can be skewed to add weight to the stone, and that affects the H&A pattern (and probably other optical properties). There are good and bad H&A''s out there. Did''nt most of us know that up front without knowing how they skewed the facets. That still does not help us select a diamond unless suitable pictures are available.

Perry

Perry – Good points all. Ahh, for more consumers like you.
You bring up a topic that remains on the table for us... I’m pretty sure Strm was smiling ear to ear when he read your post.

I didn’t mean to give a cloak-and-dagger impression when I invited you to email me: I was trying to avoid going off on a company tangent in this thread… However, as you have asked, it’s relevant to explain why we use stock H&A imagery for the ACA line...(at this time)*
We have a true patterning guarantee in place. Some will surely raise the burning torch and pitchfork of “show all images!” but consider that for a casual consumer there is security in the guarantee approach. If you’re not reading this thread you may not understand how to identify splits in the hearts, facet yaw, stray reflection, etc. Right now we make it safe even in the event that one does not have an expert knowledge base. One day I hope this stuff is as understood as IdealScope images (well, for those who are seeking great patterning – not everyone will want or need to). But, until such a time, we elect to protect with quality control as a safeguard and put manpower into aspects other than a parade of almost-identical imagery. We see the guarantee as added insurance.

Anyone wanting more particulars can check the bottom of this link for the checklist.

* By the way, some consumers do prefer to see all aspects, so if desired we provide the H&A imagery before we ship.

So Perry, for some this approach may not be good enough. However, for others it makes it "very comfortable." As consumer awareness in the market changes maybe there will need to be a policy shift, but for now it is what it is.

Also – man, if we had anything to hide there is NO WAY I would have broached this topic and provided illustrations of different levels in the patterning.

I''ll PM you with a more detailed explanation and further thoughts but I hope this covers the bases for anyone following.