Regina''s Birthday Earrings, Hats of to Lesley Harris & the WhiteFlash Team

[belle]

josh, those are just perfection

!! thanks for sharing your story and the excellent info the differences on aca new & old, very well done!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 1/24/2005 11:13:21 AM
Author: Lord Summerisle


Thanks Sir John.

So, forgive me if I’m out here…for I am only 2 months into a journey from clueless noobie to dumbass with a little bit of knowledge… The new line came about from tweaking the minor facets within already tight tolerances you cut to, as those most dangerous of customers (those with a little bit of knowledge) gained an understanding of what IS images show, and the marketing spiel of other diamond cutters about ‘perfect’ 100% light return – hence the tweaking of the facets to alter the light return characteristics.

I'm LOL at the colorful editorial descriptors (or yourself and savvy consumers), but yes - this is correct.

As a consequence there is a loss of contrast, but gain in broader flashes of colour (scintillation?) – compared to an identical proportioned ACA classic cut, and a move toward more complete light return, which draws more favourable views from those with basic understanding of the IS image simply equating more red/black=good. White=leakage=bad

Ok...Since scintillation is dependent on movement & lighting variables relative to each particular diamond there's not a simple way to measure it in terms of "loss" or "gain" The differences (with proportions like these) is in the character of the beauty.

That said... In a well-cut stone we’ve observed greater contrast to give scintillation a “snappy” chromatic character. Less contrast results in a “fluid” colorful character. Both are beautiful.

Sorry for the simplistic reply and questions... but in diamond terms I’m still on 3-words-a-page books with a note on the back saying ‘this book is waterproof and chewable’

Hardly. You're doing well!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 1/24/2005 11:24:38 AM
Author: noobie

John,

I'd love to see photo essay of the of the new and old line ACAs. In fact I have Idealscope images of stones (non ACAs) I've purchased that look like old line and new line. I was wondering in the ones that look like new line if they are are more in the photography and color saturation versus the cutting. Maybe I could post and we could discuss? Perhaps we should start a new thread to discuss ACAs as to not detract from Josh's wonderful birthday gift and enviable fishing trips.

Noob... Time is so precious. If the chance presents itself I'd love to harvest such photos - but Micha is our photo potentate and I would want to enlist his services. He is a photo jedi. It's a matter of leveraging a few more hours into the day.

Brian has been following this thread and I am hoping he will make some observations - either in the glossary where Josh is posting or in a new thread as you suggest.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

These newsletter articles either side of this might help
http://www.ideal-scope.com/newsletters_issue003.asp

 

[pqcollectibles]

Very nice, Josh!!!

I was torn between New Line and Classic ACA''s. Both cuts are absolutely beautiful and you found a fabulous way to have the best of both worlds!!

Now you know you MUST provide ear shots!!

 

[Bagpuss]

Well Josh, you''ve convinced me!
Denise is looking at pair of ACA diamonds for a pair of earrings for me as we speak. You should ask John for commission!