Pricescope Abbreviations and Lingo

[denverappraiser]

There are a few terms that are used rather differently here than in normal conversation. 'Leakage' and 'spread' come to mind.

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

There are a few terms that are used rather differently here than in normal conversation. 'Leakage' and 'spread' come to mind.

Indeed - perhaps we make that clear in a disclaimer of sorts. Thanks!

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

Mush: areas of the diamond that have many small areas that are inefficient at returning light looking mushy and dark compared to the surrounding areas.

It has nothing to do with sharpness at all, its poor light return.

What would you say about the mention of the virtual facets (or lack of) as part of the definition?

 

[Karl_K]

What would you say about the mention of the virtual facets (or lack of) as part of the definition?

makes it more complex and no more accurate in my opinion but either one works.....

Mush: areas of the diamond that have many smaller virtual facets that are inefficient at returning light looking mushy and dark compared to the surrounding areas.

vs
Mush: areas of the diamond that have many small areas that are inefficient at returning light looking mushy and dark compared to the surrounding areas.

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

makes it more complex and no more accurate in my opinion but either one works.....

Mush: areas of the diamond that have many smaller virtual facets that are inefficient at returning light looking mushy and dark compared to the surrounding areas.

vs
Mush: areas of the diamond that have many small areas that are inefficient at returning light looking mushy and dark compared to the surrounding areas.

Interesting take on this - I like it and I take your point.

I got caught up in a few other projects, but will re-post a modified list soon - thanks!

 

[Karl_K]

wholesaler - one who sells exclusively to the trade. Often used inappropriately by dealers selling to the public. If they sell to a consumer they are a retailer.

 

[drk14]

@Karl_K said:
makes it more complex and no more accurate in my opinion but either one works.....

Mush: areas of the diamond that have many smaller virtual facets that are inefficient at returning light looking mushy and dark compared to the surrounding areas.
vs
Mush: areas of the diamond that have many small areas that are inefficient at returning light looking mushy and dark compared to the surrounding areas.

Interesting take on this - I like it and I take your point.

I got caught up in a few other projects, but will re-post a modified list soon - thanks!

I have to respectfully disagree with @Karl_K 's suggested definition, which is a tautology (Mush = mushy areas), and is not sufficiently differentiated from the way one might describe leakage.

Furthermore, the description of mushy areas as "dark" is not always accurate, as shown in this example (from a recent thread), in which the mushy crushed-ice regions of the oval are lit up brighter than the belly region -- so much so that OP thought there was a bowtie problem:

As used by Pricescope members (which is what your glossary is intended to be), I find that the word "mush" almost always refers to areas of blur (lack of focus) in high-magnification images of fancy cut diamonds.

 

[Karl_K]

Furthermore, the description of mushy areas as "dark" is not always accurate, as shown in this example (from a recent thread), in which the mushy crushed-ice regions of the oval are lit up brighter than the belly region -- so much so that OP thought there was a bowtie problem:

Those areas are not mushy as they are clearly returning light.
There is a difference between crushed ice and mush.
crushed ice is effective at returning light
Mush is ineffective at returning light
Mush has nothing to do with photography.

 

[drk14]

@Karl_K ,
Your definition is prescriptive, mine is descriptive (of the actual usage by PS prosumers). You can do a search on "mush" or "mushy" to see how the term is used IRL on PS. Below are a few images that have been used to identify "mush". Reading the accompanying posts reveals that mush is typically identified in static images by looking for areas of blur that are often accompanied by color saturation and sometimes have a slightly darker appearance than the surrounding.

"Mush"=areas outlined in black (source)

"Mush"=areas outlined in orange (source)

"Mush"=areas outlined in yellow (source)

The problem is that what you call mush (ineffective VFs) is not easily distinguishable from out-of-focus crushed-ice VFs in static images with shallow depth of focus. Therefore, in practice, the term "mush" as it is used in PS lingo encompasses both of these scenarios.

 

[Karl_K]

@drk14
They can be told apart based on relative brightness.
I would call the first example as having some mushy areas.
The second one not.
The third one has some small areas but not the large areas circled.

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

I felt some of the abbreviations would spark some small debate - but I love this exchange. If the term "mush" is commonly used in reference to 'crushed ice' look - that would be unfortunate, in my opinion.

I like that Karl references relative brightness, but I also see how that makes the term subjective. But it IS a subjective term isn't it?

 

[Karl_K]

I felt some of the abbreviations would spark some small debate - but I love this exchange. If the term "mush" is commonly used in reference to 'crushed ice' look - that would be unfortunate, in my opinion.

I like that Karl references relative brightness, but I also see how that makes the term subjective. But it IS a subjective term isn't it?

It is subjective, there is no way to get around that.

 

[Tekate]

thank you!

 

[rockysalamander]

Anyone know how to request the PS Admin put
@Diamond_Hawk's table as a static link on the top of the forum? It won't be as helpful for newbies if it gets buried.