Idealscope question - what is perfect?

[mikemaz]

From what I have read, an ideal cut diamond will have small v-shaped white leakage at the girdle. However, would an idealscope image like this one be preferred? What is the difference really? Less like leakage, less scintillation?

I''m very very curious... and also looking to buy this stone.

On the surface, this would seem more ideal as there is less leakage... but am I missing something?

Thanks!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 10/26/2005 6:52:08 PM
Author:mikemaz
From what I have read, an ideal cut diamond will have small v-shaped white leakage at the girdle. However, would an idealscope image like this one be preferred? What is the difference really? Less like leakage, less scintillation?

I''m very very curious... and also looking to buy this stone.

On the surface, this would seem more ideal as there is less leakage... but am I missing something?

Thanks!

Diamonds like this one have some tweaking to reduce the girdle leakage, but this also reduces the contrast.
It is a personal choice - no one is better.

This link will help you understand the issue
http://www.ideal-scope.com/newsletters_issue003.asp

 

[mikemaz]

Thanks Garry!

So just to make sure I understand... does that mean more light return but less fire or scintillation?

Anything that will be noticeable at all or not really?

Thanks for your input!


Mike

 

[WinkHPD]

That will be a VERY beautiful stone.

Wink

 

[Shay37]

I have one with a tweaked girdle (ACA). I have more than enough fire and scintillation for a lifetime.

Contrast, (amateur explanation), is the darks and lights in a stone in certain lighting. It''s when the arrows go dark but are not shooting back fire because the lighting environment is not conducive to fire. The overall appearance of the stone will be white, the better contrast will have the dark parts easily visible. When you lose contrast, less dark is visible. Stone appears just white or some variation thereof.

BTW, my ACA has plenty of contrast to please my eye. That looks like an awesome stone you''ve picked.

Hope my amateur description helped. Garry, if I misstated anything, please feel free to "cybersmack" me.

shay

 

[mikemaz]

Thanks everyone! Glad to hear you have a similar stone Shay and glad to hear there is a lot of fire. I figured there must be plenty of fire but I wasn''t sure!

From my understanding though... given the above, will the contrast of the arrows actually be affected or just the contrasts on the outer edges of the diamond? Shay, what are the contrasts like on you ACA tweaked diamond? Any other opinions?

From what I have been able to figure out, with the tweaked girdle as per above to reduce leakage, the results are:

Negatives:
- Less firey flashes as most are a result from the leakage on the outer part of the diamond


Positives:
- More brilliance since there is more light return and better performance/light return in dimmer light settings
- The diamond will actually look bigger since there is less leakage on the outer surface

Am I on the right track?

Glad to hear some of you like the idealscope image... I''m starting to get excited!!!!!

 

[Shay37]

Mike, I didn''t lose fire. Contrast and fire are different. Contrast has to do with lights and darks in certain lighting situations. I have more fire in this stone than in my old stone without the tweaked girdle.

shay

 

[Shay37]

Mike, check out the second page of this thread for an answer to your fire question. link

shay

 

[JohnQuixote]

Hi Mike. Your image is one of the New Line styles of ACA cutting.

Here is a thread with input from several about the two styles - one with minimal leakage (like your photo), and Classic ACA, cut with elements of contrast leakage.

 

[mikemaz]

Thanks everyone... that all really helped... especially the link with that detailed explanation. I never realized I was talking about the difference between new and old line ACA

From all that I have read, but not seeing the two in person yet, I would certainly lean more toward the "New Line" ACA!


Thanks... now to pick out a setting... I've got it narrowed down to two!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Glad you got yourt answers Mike
I got a bit snowed under yesterday.

John, a question for Brian the Cutter:

Does he still prefer the traditional?
He did last time we discussed it.

And what about you?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/27/2005 9:29:10 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Glad you got yourt answers Mike
I got a bit snowed under yesterday.

John, a question for Brian the Cutter:

Does he still prefer the traditional?
He did last time we discussed it.

And what about you?

Aw Garry, you know that's like asking Brian to name which one of his children is his favorite, don't you?

Actually we refrain from implying our preferences to clients, so as never to interfere in matters of taste. Your 'inside information' is correct though. If we were made to select one, Brian tends to favor the Classic ACA. I'm split. For a day in the park I'd prefer a Classic on her hand, but for a night on the town I'd give her a New Line (I suppose 'her' will just have to have one of each).

In a puritanical sense we both feel they are on equal levels of performance & beauty - and we work to communicate that. We don't want anyone getting the impression that either would be a 'wrong' choice. Making distinctions between a handful of ACAs lined up on Brian's desk is like assessing differences between closely matched wines (and almost as fun).

Appreciate you asking.

 

[DND168]

Hi all, I have a few novice questions regarding the usage of an Idealscope:

1) An all red and black image stone is ideal? In other words, if i''m looking for an ideal cut stone, I should not see any white.
2) Should the stone be placed on a black setting or white setting for it to be effective?
3) When viewing stone with tweezers under regular office lighting, I should still be seeing red and black color only for an ideal cut stone correct. (stone is held up in air when viewing)

I''ve read the link, but there''s no mention on my questions. Any comments, inputs would be appreciated.

Thanks.

 

[DND168]

BUMP!

anyone? inputs please?

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/28/2005 12:48:28 PM
Author: DND168
Hi all, I have a few novice questions regarding the usage of an Idealscope:

1) An all red and black image stone is ideal? In other words, if i'm looking for an ideal cut stone, I should not see any white.
2) Should the stone be placed on a black setting or white setting for it to be effective?
3) When viewing stone with tweezers under regular office lighting, I should still be seeing red and black color only for an ideal cut stone correct. (stone is held up in air when viewing)

I've read the link, but there's no mention on my questions. Any comments, inputs would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Hi DND.

Here are examples of two well-cut diamonds. The one on the left exhibits treatment to minimize any leakage. The one on the right exhibits perfectly acceptable 'contrast leakage' at the girdle and meet points between the table and girdle.

In the ideal-scope, black areas indicate light returned at very high angles. These areas are dark in the photo because light from directly above is blocked by the camera. Red areas indicate light returning to the eye at optimum angles. If present, pink indicates less optimum light return (not present in either of these examples). White indicates non-reflecting facets where light is escaping, or ‘leaking’ out of the diamond’s pavilion. Generally, the finest cut diamonds have an abundance of red, and a pattern of symmetrical black arrows radiating from the center if optically symmetrical. Average cut diamonds have areas of pink, gray and white leakage. Poorly cut diamonds have large areas of leakage and chaotic optical symmetry.

As mentioned above, finely cut diamonds may have small, triangular patterns of white along the edges, and outside of the center of the diamond. They enhance elements of contrast and provide a slighty sharper, on-off quality to the scintillation - as opposed to the robust, broadfire flashes seen in a diamond without contrast leakage.

 

[Rhino]

Hi DND,

Here''s my take on reflector images.

Date: 10/28/2005 12:48:28 PM
Author: DND168
Hi all, I have a few novice questions regarding the usage of an Idealscope:

1) An all red and black image stone is ideal? In other words, if i''m looking for an ideal cut stone, I should not see any white.

No. Just because an IS image is all red and black doesn''t mean its a good stone for a number of reasons. Two of hte most prominent are ...

1. Stones with shallow combinations appear to be great in IS images but in fact suffer in certain lighting environments. One, which is of importance to many folks is that of office lighting conditions when compared to an ideal that is not cut to shallow combinations.
2. The distribution of reds and blacks is not accounted for on HCA (which was designed using the FireScope reflector). You can have a solid red/black IS image and the distribution of contrast can be wacked, again depending on the cut.

2) Should the stone be placed on a black setting or white setting for it to be effective?

Most who photograph through reflectors generally prefer a white backlit background. AGS has introduced the concept of examining against black for leakage but I don''t personally prefer this. IMO it makes it harder to distinguish leakage vs return.

3) When viewing stone with tweezers under regular office lighting, I should still be seeing red and black color only for an ideal cut stone correct. (stone is held up in air when viewing)

Generally yes. The little bits of leakage you see in most ideal cuts around the perimeter of the stone (the upper girdle region) is not discernable to the eye for the most part. As Garry and others have pointed out, classic girdles contribute to a slightly brighter stone enhancing contrast.

Hope that helps.

 

[JohnQuixote]

On the internet we get a bit 'spoiled' by ideal-scope images of great diamonds. As a point of reference here are ideal-scope images of average and poorly cut diamonds. After spending time looking around here you may be surprised to learn that diamonds you see on the fingers of most casual pedestrians may resemble these.

With the abundance of high quality goods discussed here we really do get "IS" goggles

ETA: I would add that when using a hand-held IS the overall colors I observe appear lighter than they do in most controlled-environment photographs I see, depending on ambient light surrounding the observer and backlighting used.

 

[Whitefoot]

John @ Whiteflash.. That second, "Ideal" Cut Ideal Scope, looks like my diamond that you guys are getting me. Thanks for making me feel even better!!!!!!

Matt

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/28/2005 6:45:29 PM
Author: Whitefoot

John @ Whiteflash.. That second, ''Ideal'' Cut Ideal Scope, looks like my diamond that you guys are getting me. Thanks for making me feel even better!!!!!!

Matt

Matt - you''re right, it''s yours.

Beautiful diamond, and a good example for this thread.

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 10/28/2005 4:21:28 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

...I would add that when using a hand-held IS the overall colors I observe appear lighter than they do in most controlled-environment photographs I see, depending on ambient light surrounding the observer and backlighting used.

John,
As always, thank you for your valuable information and input.

Thanks for answering a question that I have wondered, and that is -- why does my diamond appear a lighter red ("pinker") color under my home IS than in the (vendor) photos I received? I would have to think that's a common question, and likely others have wondered too. So... THANKS!