New GIA paper on Oval, Marquise and Pear grading problems

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

GIA have published a non conclusive paper titled OBSERVATIONS OF OVAL-, PEAR-, AND MARQUISE-SHAPED DIAMONDS: IMPLICATIONS FOR FANCY CUT GRADING.
You can find the article in the link below.
I have only skimmed the article thus far.
The main focus seems to be "oh, this is really hard and that's why we still don't have a grading system".
Good news - the GIA recognize ASET now that they own the IP.
Bad News - they are still using the flawed DiamondDock for real person observations.
Bow Tie appears 28 times in the article, but not once is the cause explained.
Nor are the two types of bowties identified (Type 1 and Type 2 as described in my book and patent).

https://www.gia.edu/gems-gemology/fall-2024-fancy-shaped-diamonds

 

[Karl_K]

oh, this is really hard

Having designed a grading system for rounds its a fact that fancies are much much much harder than rounds.
Forget the turn everything into an RB stuff, that is a non starter.

I haven't read the whole thing yet but basing anything on "The authors assembled an initial reference set of fancy-shaped diamonds containing 21 ovals, 16 pear shapes, and 16 marquise shapes" is just kinda sad.
Further into the paper, observations were made with just 6 stones.


21 ovals and 16 pear stones would not even cover all of the facet variations they are cut into.
6 stones is a joke.

Having a grading system for fancies and having a good grading system for fancies are two different things.
I haven't seen a good one yet and there is a good chance there never will be a good one.
There are just to many variables once you get into it as I found out myself.
You can make huge assumptions to narrow the range or try and turn everything into a RB but both will fail.

 

[Rockdiamond]

A fools errand.
The beauty of fancy shaped diamonds is in the individual personality.
The very nature of the product defies standardization.
Unless we want all fancy shapes to mimic rounds. A non starter and extremely booooooring

 

[tyty333]

GIA have published a non conclusive paper titled OBSERVATIONS OF OVAL-, PEAR-, AND MARQUISE-SHAPED DIAMONDS: IMPLICATIONS FOR FANCY CUT GRADING.
You can find the article in the link below.
I have only skimmed the article thus far.
The main focus seems to be "oh, this is really hard and that's why we still don't have a grading system".
Good news - the GIA recognize ASET now that they own the IP.
Bad News - they are still using the flawed DiamondDock for real person observations.
Bow Tie appears 28 times in the article, but not once is the cause explained.
Nor are the two types of bowties identified (Type 1 and Type 2 as described in my book and patent).

https://www.gia.edu/gems-gemology/fall-2024-fancy-shaped-diamonds

Did a quick read...and have a few questions. I feel like the naming conventions between the public and trade are not consistent
(or I just dont know them).

8 mains - the typical configuration forms a "V" on each side of the center but there are also 8 mains where the main (arrow)
goes straight through the center. How does the trade distinguish between these two faceting patterns both with 8 mains?

bow-tie - Is there a consensus that bow-ties are black (mainly)? It seems the general public (usually) defines bow-ties as
the "V" area formed by the two mains on each side of the center (on an 8 main oval/marquise). Garry...I guess I need to
get your book because I dont know what Type 1 and Type 2 are!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

A fools errand.
The beauty of fancy shaped diamonds is in the individual personality.
The very nature of the product defies standardization.
Unless we want all fancy shapes to mimic rounds. A non starter and extremely booooooring

Well David, I know its not your style to actually read research papers, so here is the rub:
they did a mickey mouse survey that proves you right.
Lots of different people like or hate crushed ice and baowties!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

bow-tie - Is there a consensus that bow-ties are black (mainly)? It seems the general public (usually) defines bow-ties as the "V" area formed by the two mains on each side of the center (on an 8 main oval/marquise). Garry...I guess I need to get your book because I dont know what Type 1 and Type 2 are!

Here you go - definitions galore (of course they would never actually mention my patent in their study, just as they failed to do so (with apologies later) with their cut grading system):

US20240114982A1 - Diamond bow tie qualification system - Google Patents

A diamond bow tie grading system including a structured lighting environment, and an ability to view a diamond at different tilt angles, using the views to find a transition angle where a dark area on the diamond brightens and assigning a bow tie rating using the transition angle. The diamond...

patents.google.com

 

[Rockdiamond]

Well David, I know its not your style to actually read research papers, so here is the rub:

Apologies, you’re correct.
I did my best to skim it.
In the conclusion there was mention of how many people love crushed ice. If only we could have had this info 15 years ago during our “cut wars” lol.
But more seriously- lab diamonds have changed our business. We are now selling lots of “normal” round diamonds. Used to be our primary notoriety was for fancy color/ fancy shape.
Now I’ve gained a new appreciation for my ASET machine

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

quoting isn’t working for me for some reason but I just wanted to comment on “fancy shapes mimicking rounds” - I feel like it kind of goes against the entire point of a fancy. Why have other shapes then, right? The beauty of a pear to me is the contrast between the broad flashes in the bow-tie area and the crushed ice look at the tip. I like the elegant shape and how it’s elongating on the finger. I love the face up size boost. Pears that are cut to maximise light return often either have that H&A pattern that just feels out of place on a pear or are so deep and chubby that they look like they’re trying to be a round or face up much smaller. I’m glad they exist for the people that want them, but they’re not my jam, personally.

And personally I actually really like crushed ice not mushy and leaky stones ofc, but a good crushed ice stone (especially with cushions) is def my preference!