OK I have to vent a little here!!!

[icelady]

Am I the only one a bit offended that one vendor in particular (in his advertising here) is SLAMMING square cuts that are not H&A. "Compromise optical beauty"???? I don''t think so buster!! I LOVE my Radiant just the way it is.

 

[sevens one]

Date: 1/6/2005 7:21:26 PM
Author:icelady
Am I the only one a bit offended that one vendor in particular (in his advertising here) is SLAMMING square cuts that are not H&A. ''Compromise optical beauty''???? I don''t think so buster!! I LOVE my Radiant just the way it is.

YOU GO GIRL!!!!!

 

[icelady]

The NERVE!!!

 

[Mara]

well it IS a promotion of the square shape and the round otpics. the majority of square cuts do *compromise* optics but ''beauty'' is kind of a nebulous term, obviously people buy their diamond because it''s beautiful to them. i doubt he meant to offend people with non H&A squares.

but since we''re talking about it, i noticed in that ad that it seems to be using something like a Regent picture, that is NOT a true square shape from what I can tell? so then wouldn''t it be ''she likes a cushion shape?'' rather than ''she likes the square shape?''

confusion abounds.

 

[strmrdr]

Well...
Doesnt everyone know that asschers/s.e. rule and all the the other squares drool???

 

[icelady]

Date: 1/6/2005 8:12:36 PM
Author: Mara
well it IS a promotion of the square shape and the round otpics. the majority of square cuts do *compromise* optics but ''beauty'' is kind of a nebulous term, obviously people buy their diamond because it''s beautiful to them. i doubt he meant to offend people with non H&A squares.

but since we''re talking about it, i noticed in that ad that it seems to be using something like a Regent picture, that is NOT a true square shape from what I can tell? so then wouldn''t it be ''she likes a cushion shape?'' rather than ''she likes the square shape?''

confusion abounds.

IF I had wanted round optics I would have gotten a RB. The "optics" are definitely different BUT to me I did NOT compromise on beauty. Yes, beauty is a somewhat nebulous term, but frankly I think one could advertise a square cut with H&A ''optics'' without calling everything else a "compromise"!

As for using a Regent pic and your statement "wouldn''t it be ''she likes a cushion shape?'' rather than ''she likes the square shape?''" I think you may well have hit the nail on the head. More a slam to those who like Cushions???

 

[chantal990]

Date: 1/6/2005 8:20:46 PM
Author: strmrdr
Well...
Doesnt everyone know that asschers/s.e. rule and all the the other squares drool???

hehehehehhehehe I like that one

 

[Rhino]

Hi folks,

My apologies if the ad offended anyone. That truly was not my intent. The content of the ad however is accurate. The Square H&A''s are the only square shaped diamonds on the market that have optics comparable to the most brilliant rounds (the H&A''s). It is true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and we would always encourage a person to view all their options and pick what it is that pleases their eye most but when it comes to light analysis and the variables of brilliance, fire, scintillation, contrast, optical symmetry and overall light return the square H&A''s are engineered to bring out the most in those aspects. Every person who has seen them for themselves agrees.

The (true) H&A round, cut to certain sets of proportions is deemed by many industry professionals (including many who participate on this forum) as the pinnacle of overall diamond beauty in optics. The ad is meant to convey that but if you feel I should use different wording to convey this message I am open to your suggestions and will change it asap as long as it is honest & truthful. I appreciate the input.

Hi Mara! The images used in the banner are of the Jubilee and Square H&A cushion (which appears more square after being set in 4 prongs).

Kind regards,

 

[ame]

Date: 1/6/2005 7:21:26 PM
Author:icelady
Am I the only one a bit offended that one vendor in particular (in his advertising here) is SLAMMING square cuts that are not H&A. ''Compromise optical beauty''???? I don''t think so buster!! I LOVE my Radiant just the way it is.

This better be a joke that you are offended.

Sorry but it''s an ad for a product. If you are that easily offended there''s a bigger problem tthan the ad.

 

[moremoremore]

LOL....Ice- nothing is better than a H&A. Don''t you KNOW THAT ALREADY???

. And don''t you know that my cushion has funky pavillion angles or something wrong with it. Same with your radiant. Defective. Defective. Defective.

I mean, can''t you see how my stone lacks optical beauty!!! (shameless posting)

I agree that the term *compromise optical beauty" is very silly. Optics are one thing. Beauty is another.
I''m more than happy with my funky cut non H&A (almost) square And your radiant is beautiful!

Ame- Ice is just venting. It''s gets rough for fancy lovers around here sometimes.

p.s. And since we have J''s attention...J- why do you guys picture a ''modern brilliant cushion'' at the top of your cushion page but then leave out its facet pattern (e/t you say the tutorial is dedicated to tradidional cuts?) looks too much like the square H&A facet pattern? HEHEHEHE Kidding with ya.

 

[Rhino]

I know you playin mmm.

Please ... by no means am I saying that traditional cushions or radiants or any other shape for that matter is ugly. Not by a long shot. I do sell and help people locate awesome radiants, princess'', cushions, etc. for those who prefer those cut styles. However if someone is looking for the superior optics of an H&A round, unfortunately there are only 3 shapes I know of that accomplish this. They are the Jubilee, Square Cush H&A and the Regent. I do not state this to belittle the other shapes but just stating it as matter of fact. There happen to be quite a few people who do not like or do not prefer the brilliance of an H&A round and that is ok. The Sq H&A''s would not be for them. The ad is meant to appeal to those who have seen them, prefer their brilliance but prefer a square shape instead of round. That''s all.

Peace,

 

[icelady]

Date: 1/7/2005 12:58:52 PM
Author: ame

Date: 1/6/2005 7:21:26 PM
Author:icelady
Am I the only one a bit offended that one vendor in particular (in his advertising here) is SLAMMING square cuts that are not H&A. ''Compromise optical beauty''???? I don''t think so buster!! I LOVE my Radiant just the way it is.

This better be a joke that you are offended.

Sorry but it''s an ad for a product. If you are that easily offended there''s a bigger problem tthan the ad.

AME,

I made it clear in my title for this thread that I was VENTING. I believe I have the right to voice an opinion without someone suggesting that "there''s a bigger problem than the ad". How did you formulate that mental health opinion from my three sentence post? If you dissagree with the point I was making, please try making your point without taking personal jabs.

 

[ame]

Date: 1/7/2005 3:54:10 PM
Author: icelady

Date: 1/7/2005 12:58:52 PM

Author: ame

Date: 1/6/2005 7:21:26 PM

Author:icelady

Am I the only one a bit offended that one vendor in particular (in his advertising here) is SLAMMING square cuts that are not H&A. 'Compromise optical beauty'???? I don't think so buster!! I LOVE my Radiant just the way it is.

This better be a joke that you are offended.


Sorry but it's an ad for a product. If you are that easily offended there's a bigger problem tthan the ad.

AME,


I made it clear in my title for this thread that I was VENTING. I believe I have the right to voice an opinion without someone suggesting that 'there's a bigger problem than the ad'. How did you formulate that mental health opinion from my three sentence post? If you dissagree with the point I was making, please try making your point without taking personal jabs.

You are well within your rights to vent but my "jab" was meant to inquire what was offensive about the ad and in my own way, vent that you were offended over an ad.

Don't freak out, just a little frustrated myself over how easily offended people, not you specifically, are these days.

It's not like the ad is saying "your rock sucks you shoulda bought from us, hope you realize you wasted your money", not to mention the fact that it isn't SLAMMING anything.

 

[icelady]

style="WIDTH: 99.76%; HEIGHT: 177px">Date: 1/7/2005 4

1:10 PM
Author: ame


You are well within your rights to vent but my ''jab'' was meant to inquire what was offensive about the ad and in my own way, vent that you were offended over an ad.

Don''t freak out, just a little frustrated myself over how easily offended people, not you specifically, are these days.

It''s not like the ad is saying ''your rock sucks you shoulda bought from us, hope you realize you wasted your money'', not to mention the fact that it isn''t SLAMMING anything.

AME,

Who is freaking out?

I think I made it clear why I was "a bit offended" (that was how I said it) in my original post. How this went from "a bit offended" to your opinion that there is a "bigger problem than the ad" I am not sure.

Also, who is easily offended these days? Darn, I must have missed some good posts.

 

[ame]

Date: 1/7/2005 4:15:49 PM
Author: icelady

style="WIDTH: 99.76%; HEIGHT: 177px">Date: 1/7/2005 4

1:10 PM

Author: ame



You are well within your rights to vent but my ''jab'' was meant to inquire what was offensive about the ad and in my own way, vent that you were offended over an ad.


Don''t freak out, just a little frustrated myself over how easily offended people, not you specifically, are these days.


It''s not like the ad is saying ''your rock sucks you shoulda bought from us, hope you realize you wasted your money'', not to mention the fact that it isn''t SLAMMING anything.

AME,


Who is freaking out?


I think I made it clear why I was ''a bit offended'' (that was how I said it) in my original post. How this went from ''a bit offended'' to your opinion that there is a ''bigger problem than the ad'' I am not sure.


Also, who is easily offended these days? Darn, I must have missed some good posts.

Not referring to posts. Referring to Americans and people in general. Can''t do or say or advertise anything anymore without someone getting offended and feeling the need to sue someone for "pain and suffering" because they are just so offended. What happened to freedom. Jeez. Don''t like it, don''t look at it, watch it, read it A good case in point would be the numbnuts suing NBC because he didn''t like what he saw on Fear Factor. I hope he gets laughed out ofcourt.

Luckily you were only a bit offended.

Didn''t mean to get you all worked up or upset. Just voicing my obviously too blunt opinion. I tend to say what Im thinking whether or not it''s warreted or friendly.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Wow can you believe the GALL of that Rhinocerous - talk about stubborn and unrepentive!!!

 

[icelady]

Date: 1/7/2005 5:25:17 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Wow can you believe the GALL of that Rhinocerous - talk about stubborn and unrepentive!!!

OK, Now I am a ''bit offended'' by you Mr. Cut Nut!

(In light of the last few posts I feel compelled to say I am joking or I will be accused of having another mental issue!)

Geeze, I hope we can all keep this in perspective!!!!!

After all, there are people that think there is life beyond H&A!!!

 

[moremoremore]

There is life after a H&A??
I can CERTAINLY appreciate the science and skill and optics behind the H&A.
However, there''s NO way I believe all the hype. Sorry folks.
I DO admit that I like to see some arrow in there...but a perfect h&a or size- sorry, I go size.
Ice- a lot of these vendors here make their living primarily off of the H&A (hehehehehe)

I have said it before and I''ll say it again. My girlfriend has a non H&A but ideal cut 2.0 E round. I can see *some* awesome arrows uniformly...are they perfect? Who the hell knows. The thing is amazing and blows away most of the H&A you put next to it. It just has this perfect balance of dark and light and scintillation and fire.

Also, for example, I hope J doesn''t think I have it in for the H&A cushion...but there is a 1.98 stone on the site and it''s nbot even close to 7 mm in diameter. My reg ol cushion is almost 8mm. Does it have H&A? No. But there is just *something* so perfect about it. Perfect contrast. Perfect amount of dark and light that my rock rocks my world!

 

[icelady]

MMM,

I agree completely with not believing ALL the HYPE!! I don''t either! We are however, shoveling the proverbial $hit against the tide. Considering the trend here that is!

(HEHEHEHEHE!)

 

[PhillipSchmidt]

What an entirely thought provoking post

I''ve leart the there are other cuts with H&A which I will surely be pursuing[$$)] and watched you all get wound up in the process!!

Actually my personal bent is far away from that. Me, I like the big fat facets of an emerald cut. I could even go for a cut with out the facets. I like to look inside a diamond. The area inside looks as big as a footbal field.

But I sell WoW factor...

 

[icelady]

PS,

I have a real fondness for Emerald cuts as well. They are simply elegant and stunning.

Rhino,

Frankly, the cuts you mention above (at least the Regents and Jubilees, I haven't seen any of your H&A Cushions in settings posted) have a very 'round' look to them when they are set. I am not alone in wanting something completely different than a RB. The different and interesting square shape of the Radiant is pure 'beauty' to me. So in order for me to get your H&A in a square stone, I have to give up the straight edge and clipped corners of my Radiant.

Since you asked, (and I am not alone here as you can see from some other posts) the problem seems to be in the phrase 'compromise optical beauty'. Beauty is a subjective and nebulous term. I don't know how you can tell anyone that they 'compromised' on beauty (optical or otherwise) just because they did not want hearts and arrows. If you want to stick to promoting your scientific theory behind H&A, then the word 'beauty' should be taken out. Obviously, I doubt you will change your ad based only on what I have said and since H&A is your bread and butter, but you cannot fault me for venting a bit either.

MMM was right, it does get tough for those of us that dare to like something other than a RB diamond around here. To me, reducing everything down to only numbers and scientific data takes the romance away from obtaining a wonderful and unique occurance of nature, thousands of years in the making. Since I am a very visual person, most of the fun of the diamond hunt was seeing and comparing stones to find THE one for me.

 

[Lurchie]

This thread is a good reminder that the next time I feel like venting (which is every 20 minutes or so) I''ll just talk to my computer screen. It''s a very good listener.

I think GOG''s ad is brilliant - pun intended. And I land squarely in the asscher/emerald camp.

 

[Superidealist]

Date: 1/6/2005
Author:icelady

''Compromise optical beauty''???? I don''t think so buster!! I LOVE my Radiant just the way it is.

That''s okay. As Jon has said before, some people just prefer diamonds that are not as brilliant, firey, or scintillating as those he sells. It''s okay to like diamonds that have demonstrably inferior optics.

 

[moremoremore]

Hmmm. Superidealist- I can''t tell from your post if you''re trying to be jerky or trying to b e funny!

Maybe specify next time for me? I''m not too bright..remember, I would buy a stone without H&A so my IQ must be a little off LOLOLOL

I actually think the ad itself is *very* cool. I really noticed it and I don''t tend to notice these things. But now that ice mentions it, I think the term *optical beautiy* is not really accurate. Superior optics? yes. Superior beauty? Who says? And I agree the regent looks totally round to me.

I''m all about getting the more beautiful stone! It could be the H&A, it might not be! In fact, if the right jubilee had come along before I found out about cushions, I''d be wearing a jubilee! But I pick my cushion over all of them !

 

[cflutist]

Icelady and mmm, how do you think I feel? There will never be an H&A pear shape ... LOL.

Sometimes I feel like an "odd duck" posting on PS because I have a pear e-ring, and a marquise RHR. At least my tennis bracelet from Wink has 32 G-H VS2/SI1 .33ct "machine cut H&A stones from Isreal".

 

[PhillipSchmidt]

You guys have no chance here,

I just noticed this entry on the first page introduction to diamonds on this site...

Quote "We also have a free tool to help evaluate the beauty of the round brilliant stones - Holloway Cut Adviser".

Note evaluate the ''beauty''.

Still, to me it is just semantics. Your fancy cuts are obviously beautifull, just look at them. I think your all taking it to heart a little too much. These words/adds mean nothing compared to the physical examples. You buy and wear the physical examples, so that''s that...

I have spoken

Phillip

 

[Jennifer5973]

Well, don't get me started... lol. I absolutely adore people's H&As around here--those arrows are outrageous! But I believe that they are but one type of beautiful diamond. In the lsat year, I think that Pricescope has evolved rather nicely to be much more inclusive of many styles of diamond--look at how many fancy owners (non H&A round) we have here...

I soooo want a MQ or pear rhr for my 10th anniversary.

Woman does not live by H&A/RBs alone.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 1/8/2005 8

9:38 PM
Author: cflutist
Icelady and mmm, how do you think I feel? There will never be an H&A pear shape ... LOL.

Sometimes I feel like an ''odd duck'' posting on PS because I have a pear e-ring, and a marquise RHR. At least my tennis bracelet from Wink has 32 G-H VS2/SI1 .33ct ''machine cut H&A stones from Isreal''.

No no no, Cflutist... Stop it now

You should not ever feel like a second-class citizen b/c of your most amazing pear. You have a unique and first-class stone. I believe that your personality, taste and focus on quality is of the highest order.

I have refrained from entering threads like this because of the perception of H&A "elitism." I don''t perceive the stones themselves as so different as I do the consumers who seek them (and yes, I count myself among their number).

Honestly, I don''t think anyone is trying to say a H&A superideal is "superior" to a beautiful round brilliant. I do think that there is a definite market for these stones - just as asschers and cushions and princess cuts have their own particular market. In short, some people prefer the level of order and precision offered in a H&A superideal. I think these people are of a kind - they do not necessarily speak for everyone, but they are out there nevertheless.

To this end, I am tempted to view the true H&A round brilliant almost as a separate cut... It is a niche market (like pears, heart shapes, asschers, etc.). It is also a definite market.

Beauty is always in the eye of the beholder. Just search PS and you will find plenty of people who love their non H&A round diamonds, plenty who love their pears, plenty who love their asschers, plenty who love their princess cuts and, yes, plenty who love their H&A. There is no reason for people to criticize. Cflutist loves her pears. Strm loves his asschers. Many love their non H&A rounds, and many love their H&A rounds. To each his/her own...

Stop the posturing - it is not necessary. In short, there is room enough in the world for all of us.

Sorry for the rant, but (as our friend Garry might say) diamond beauty is like human beauty... It comes in all shapes and sizes.

I hope no-one is offended. I am just trying to give perspective.

 

[icelady]

John,

As always, your post is very eloquent and there is no hint of ranting!

I really appreciate this comment from your post;

"Stop the posturing - it is not necessary. In short, there is room enough in the world for all of us."

I certainly agree from a consumer''s standpoint, and I am glad to see someone in the ''business'' express this as well.

Thank you for your respectful and insightful post!

 

[cflutist]

John,

I have to thank you also. You are so eloquent with your words of wisdom.

I knew I liked you from the day you asked me whether the Chaminade Concertino Op. 107
or the Prokofieff Sonata Op. 94 was more difficult to play. Did I tell you that I have
performed the Chaminade at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco where it was recorded then
broadcast on KKHI?