Old cuts, new cut: eye candy & a question

[LtlFirecracker]

Date: 9/2/2008 6:41:15 PM
Author: glitterata
More pictures; I hope I''m not boring anyone:

Are you kidding????? Keep them coming, this is a great thread. Education and eye candy, who could ask for more??

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/2/2008 11:16:05 PM
Author: LtlFirecracker

Date: 9/2/2008 6:41:15 PM

Author: glitterata

More pictures; I hope I''m not boring anyone:

Are you kidding????? Keep them coming, this is a great thread. Education and eye candy, who could ask for more??

ditto

 

[glitterata]

Thank you. And thanks for the attempt to figure out the crown & pavilion angles, Strm. I''ve posted all the decent pictures of those rings that I took today, but tomorrow I''ll try to get a better picture of the angle at the girdle. Maybe I can find a view where the setting doesn''t get in the way so much.

 

[arjunajane]

Fantastc thread Glitterata. I love all 3 of your rings, but the OEC is my fave aswell.
Thankyou for the comparisons and especially the eye candy!

 

[glitterata]

Meanwhile, just for kicks, here''s the black opal.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/3/2008 12:33:36 AM
Author: glitterata
Meanwhile, just for kicks, here's the black opal.

wowsers!!!!!
storm reaches through the monitor grabs it and runs!
hehehe

 

[jstarfireb]

I don''t have anything intelligent to add, but...WOW! I''m dying to get an old cut, and here you are with 2 family heirlooms...you lucky girl!

I love the facet pattern of the TC; if I look hard, I see what appear to be arrows, but big chunky ones compared to the smaller, more precise arrows of the Infinity. I also love how the 3 stones demonstrate the variations in color, from the more icy white F/G to the warmer tint of the K/L. Gorgeous stones!

 

[MMT]

Wow!! Beautiful rings and incredible photography. Thanks for sharing, my favorite is the OEC.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 9/2/2008 6:10:02 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/2/2008 6:08:23 PM
Author: glitterata

I must be misreading the report, then.

You still have the link to the infinity page for the diamond?

Here is the link to the stone

Live long,

 

[glitterata]

I tried to take some Idealscope pictures of my old cuts. I''m not sure whether I had the stone in the right spot--it might be too far in or too far out in some of these shots, so I''m going to post several, in case that helps experts figure out whether I was doing it right. This is the OEC.

 

[glitterata]

OEC again. This shot shows the pattern well, but I think it''s too red--maybe I had it too far inside the idealscope?

 

[glitterata]

This one might be tilted?

 

[glitterata]

OEC again. This one might be more realistic in terms of leakage?

 

[glitterata]

Now the transition cut. Am I holding it in the right place with respect to the Idealscope? I see lots of leakage in the middle, but also some nice arrows.

 

[glitterata]

TC again. I think the setting might be blocking it from showing some of the leakage around the edges.

 

[glitterata]

Last one. This seems more realistic to me in the leakage, but again, I''m not sure I''m holding the stone in the right place.

I hope people familiar with IS images of old cuts will comment on these. Thanks in advance!

 

[Green with Envy]

You capture great pics of the visual differences and personalities of the old and new stones. VERY helpful for comparison purposes. THANKS!

Hey experts...

It is my understanding that one can most commonly find OEC with a visible open culet... but also there are ones that have very small culet- TRUE? Especially if you get a new stone that is cut in old OEC style?

Old mine cuts typically have large culet and they get smaller as you move towards an OEC cut?

Or is it more common to find only Transitional stones with small culets?

 

[kcoursolle]

You have the most beautiful collection of heirloom stones I''ve seen, thanks so much for sharing!! I could look at your pics all day!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/3/2008 1:35:03 PM
Author: glitterata
OEC again. This one might be more realistic in terms of leakage?

too far out of the scope

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/3/2008 1:28:49 PM
Author: glitterata
I tried to take some Idealscope pictures of my old cuts. I''m not sure whether I had the stone in the right spot--it might be too far in or too far out in some of these shots, so I''m going to post several, in case that helps experts figure out whether I was doing it right. This is the OEC.

A little to far in the scope.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/3/2008 1:31:34 PM
Author: glitterata
This one might be tilted?

right position but tilted.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/3/2008 1:38:04 PM
Author: glitterata
Now the transition cut. Am I holding it in the right place with respect to the Idealscope? I see lots of leakage in the middle, but also some nice arrows.

Not enough black lighting on the TC shots the setting is blocking to much light.
also too far out of the scope which is common when trying to us it without enough back lighting.

 

[glitterata]

Thanks, Karl. I''ll try again tomorrow. Or maybe later tonight, with a lamp. Sure is difficult, holding hte ring, the camera, and the idealscope with only 2 hands!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/3/2008 5:38:26 PM
Author: glitterata
Thanks, Karl. I''ll try again tomorrow. Or maybe later tonight, with a lamp. Sure is difficult, holding hte ring, the camera, and the idealscope with only 2 hands!

yea it is, ASET is much easier on set stones.

 

[Love in Bloom]

I have no answers, but thank you so much for sharing the beauty and known history of these rings. You are LUCKY!!!

 

[glitterata]

Storm, are these IS images any better?

OEC A:

 

[glitterata]

OEC B:

 

[glitterata]

OEC C:

 

[glitterata]

Here come the TC IS images. The TC''s setting is actually much opener in the back than the OEC''s. Except around the edges.

TC A:

 

[glitterata]

TC B: