So, what kind of cut is done for Pave diamonds?

[strmrdr]

that does bring up a huge point,
I can tell you how, why, and when they look different but I can not tell you which look you would prefer.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/8/2008 5:20:49 PM
Author: Lynn B

Date: 5/7/2008 6:25:50 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
The same light return rules are very important.

Here is a little box with 45 full cuts on the top and the lower left, and single cuts above.

The full cuts are from our regular stock which are all selected (usually 80% rejection) with an ideal-scope. Note the overall brightness. (The single cuts we stock for repair replacements as a client service, so they are ''as they are'').

Note the lower photo - i took this during a discussion with Peter Yantzer who is interested in this topic also (lab Director at AGS). The stones were in the bottom of my wheely travel bag which was partly closed - with a single halogen about 10 feet 3M above. Note the single cuts show a lot more fire at about 1.2M to the camera.

Sir Garry,
As usual, you lost me with your Aussie-speak!!!

Exactly WHICH are WHICH again?!

Thanks!
Lynn

Yes - I did make a bo-bo

There are 2 photo''s - the top pic has S/C at the top and F/C at the bottom
The lower image inside the black bag has SC on the upper right side and FC on the lower left. You can see the FC''s in the bag are brighter and more firey - they would definitely work better for evening pave'' jewels.

Sergey and I discussed these stones last week, and he would like to cut a suite where all the stones are on the same production line to the same proportions to single cut stage, and then half are taken and made into full cuts (brillianteered).

Then there are no cut quality issues.

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 5/8/2008 7:20:38 PM
Author: strmrdr
that does bring up a huge point,
I can tell you how, why, and when they look different but I can not tell you which look you would prefer.

You can''t? You loser! What good are you then???!

Haha, totally teasing!

Thanks for the reply and the (always valuable!) input!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 5/8/2008 8:45:26 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Yes - I did make a bo-bo

There are 2 photo''s - the top pic has S/C at the top and F/C at the bottom
The lower image inside the black bag has SC on the upper right side and FC on the lower left. You can see the FC''s in the bag are brighter and more firey - they would definitely work better for evening pave'' jewels.

Thanks, Garry! I appreciate the clarification!

What size are those pretty little diamonds, anyway?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

about 1.2mm - less than .01ct

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I am in the midst of another of these tests.

As Paul''s business partner can attest (after helping Drena and i ideal-scope several thousand small diamonds for a pair of shoes), there are very many small diamonds where when they are finished cutting the crown (or the pavilion) and they turn the stone upside down into the alternative holder (dop) - it is difficult to align the main facets.

As the sizes get smaller cutters make more mistakes and place the minor facets directly over the top of the main''s. I call these Twist stones.

Along with my little box of full and single cuts, I now have 12 x 1.8mm (.025ct) in a little box. 6 are twists and 6 are normal. All were chosen with the ideals-cope and have excellent red ideal-scope look.

So far (as I suspected) no one can tell the difference - not until I coach then that the normal stones have a little more face up light return in some lighting, and the twists have more light return if you look from about 45 degrees.

I tried to photograph the difference - but it is sooo slight that I can not show it (honestly, without cheating).

There is an arguement that since very small stones are generally not viewed face up - they are on shoulders etc - that twist stones could be better.

 

[tberube]

Date: 5/9/2008 8:20:16 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
I am in the midst of another of these tests.

As Paul''s business partner can attest (after helping Drena and i ideal-scope several thousand small diamonds for a pair of shoes), there are very many small diamonds where when they are finished cutting the crown (or the pavilion) and they turn the stone upside down into the alternative holder (dop) - it is difficult to align the main facets.

As the sizes get smaller cutters make more mistakes and place the minor facets directly over the top of the main''s. I call these Twist stones.

Along with my little box of full and single cuts, I now have 12 x 1.8mm (.025ct) in a little box. 6 are twists and 6 are normal. All were chosen with the ideals-cope and have excellent red ideal-scope look.

So far (as I suspected) no one can tell the difference - not until I coach then that the normal stones have a little more face up light return in some lighting, and the twists have more light return if you look from about 45 degrees.

I tried to photograph the difference - but it is sooo slight that I can not show it (honestly, without cheating).

There is an arguement that since very small stones are generally not viewed face up - they are on shoulders etc - that twist stones could be better.

Huh? Not viewed face-up? Do you mean in jewelry or loose?

 

[strmrdr]

hmm it would be fairly easy for me to design a cut optimised for a certain viewing angle to be used for that.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

In jewellery they are pave set and you look at as many or more diamonds at an angle than face up.

When used as shoulder stones they always face a way a bit to a lot.

When used in clusters generally they face away 10 degrees or more from the center stone.

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 5/9/2008 9:29:24 PM
Author: tberube

Date: 5/9/2008 8:20:16 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
I am in the midst of another of these tests.

As Paul's business partner can attest (after helping Drena and i ideal-scope several thousand small diamonds for a pair of shoes), there are very many small diamonds where when they are finished cutting the crown (or the pavilion) and they turn the stone upside down into the alternative holder (dop) - it is difficult to align the main facets.

As the sizes get smaller cutters make more mistakes and place the minor facets directly over the top of the main's. I call these Twist stones.

Along with my little box of full and single cuts, I now have 12 x 1.8mm (.025ct) in a little box. 6 are twists and 6 are normal. All were chosen with the ideals-cope and have excellent red ideal-scope look.

So far (as I suspected) no one can tell the difference - not until I coach then that the normal stones have a little more face up light return in some lighting, and the twists have more light return if you look from about 45 degrees.

I tried to photograph the difference - but it is sooo slight that I can not show it (honestly, without cheating).

There is an arguement that since very small stones are generally not viewed face up - they are on shoulders etc - that twist stones could be better.

Huh? Not viewed face-up? Do you mean in jewelry or loose?

tberube,
I'm with you!

I was confused, too, but then, Garry's Aussie-speak posts OFTEN *confuzzle* me!!!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 5/9/2008 9:48:27 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
In jewellery they are pave set and you look at as many or more diamonds at an angle than face up.

When used as shoulder stones they always face a way a bit to a lot.

When used in clusters generally they face away 10 degrees or more from the center stone.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh, that makes sense! Thanks for the clarification, Garry!
When *I* think of pave, I think of my ring... a single line of pave, with each stone facing straight up. So your post is a good reminder that a LOT of pave (although not so much here on PS) is "cluster" pave... and I can see that that is a whole ''nother beast! Thanks again.

Interesting thread!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 5/9/2008 9:48:27 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
In jewellery they are pave set and you look at as many or more diamonds at an angle than face up.

When used as shoulder stones they always face a way a bit to a lot.

When used in clusters generally they face away 10 degrees or more from the center stone.

ALTHOOOOOUGH, what is a "shoulder" stone?
Thanks!

 

[strmrdr]

face up it sux

 

[strmrdr]

tilt it 10-15 degrees in a halo and it knocks your socks off from the top of the ring.
or around the shank of a ring.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

You could only ever see one or 2 diamonds face up in this collection
http://images.google.com.au/images?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLL,GGLL:2007-51,GGLL:en&q=pave+diamond+ring&ei=IAElSPmBHZGmpASCvfHXCw&gbv=2

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/9/2008 9:56:52 PM
Author: strmrdr
tilt it 10-15 degrees in a bezel and it knocks your socks off from the top of the ring.
or around the shank of a ring.

That is a single cut Storm?

I know the cut desinger in DC has a problem with twist in full cuts.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/9/2008 10:03:51 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/9/2008 9:56:52 PM
Author: strmrdr
tilt it 10-15 degrees in a bezel and it knocks your socks off from the top of the ring.
or around the shank of a ring.

That is a single cut Storm?

I know the cut desinger in DC has a problem with twist in full cuts.

its not a twist, its a modified single cut that is no longer single cut :}

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/9/2008 10:24:13 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 5/9/2008 10:03:51 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/9/2008 9:56:52 PM
Author: strmrdr
tilt it 10-15 degrees in a bezel and it knocks your socks off from the top of the ring.
or around the shank of a ring.

That is a single cut Storm?

I know the cut desinger in DC has a problem with twist in full cuts.

its not a twist, its a modified single cut that is no longer single cut :}

Cant get the step-cut out of ya!!!

I like..., now twist it as Garry said and you will notice a better result in the tilt position I would think...

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/9/2008 9:46:21 PM
Author: strmrdr
hmm it would be fairly easy for me to design a cut optimised for a certain viewing angle to be used for that.

The (near) future:

Customized Diamond cuts to adapt to the position and location in the jewelry design!
Something the high end watch industry has been doing for a long time (in fancy shapes)!

It will happen when (future) jewelers will be willing to pay for costume jobs! Some already do..., but so-far its a rare sight!

Strmrdr..., can you imagine two trapezoid step-cuts side-stones that are cut with opposed leaning culets for the tilt position...?
I would imagine the same could be done for rounds....

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/10/2008 1:51:18 AM
Author: DiaGem
Cant get the step-cut out of ya!!!

I like..., now twist it as Garry said and you will notice a better result in the tilt position I would think...

step cuts rule!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/10/2008 2:12:04 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/9/2008 9:46:21 PM
Author: strmrdr
hmm it would be fairly easy for me to design a cut optimised for a certain viewing angle to be used for that.

The (near) future:

Customized Diamond cuts to adapt to the position and location in the jewelry design!
Something the high end watch industry has been doing for a long time (in fancy shapes)!

It will happen when (future) jewelers will be willing to pay for costume jobs! Some already do..., but so-far its a rare sight!

Strmrdr..., can you imagine two trapezoid step-cuts side-stones that are cut with opposed leaning culets for the tilt position...?
I would imagine the same could be done for rounds....

not on a public board :}
lets just say the one posted was not a good example but shows the concept and if anyone wants to have the design they can :}

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/9/2008 8:20:16 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
I am in the midst of another of these tests.

As Paul''s business partner can attest (after helping Drena and i ideal-scope several thousand small diamonds for a pair of shoes), there are very many small diamonds where when they are finished cutting the crown (or the pavilion) and they turn the stone upside down into the alternative holder (dop) - it is difficult to align the main facets.

As the sizes get smaller cutters make more mistakes and place the minor facets directly over the top of the main''s. I call these Twist stones.

Along with my little box of full and single cuts, I now have 12 x 1.8mm (.025ct) in a little box. 6 are twists and 6 are normal. All were chosen with the ideals-cope and have excellent red ideal-scope look.

So far (as I suspected) no one can tell the difference - not until I coach then that the normal stones have a little more face up light return in some lighting, and the twists have more light return if you look from about 45 degrees.

I tried to photograph the difference - but it is sooo slight that I can not show it (honestly, without cheating).

There is an arguement that since very small stones are generally not viewed face up - they are on shoulders etc - that twist stones could be better.

Forgive me quoting me.
I took some photo''s - here the twist and the full cut single cut box are on about a 45 degree angle with a fluoro strip ceiling light directly above. It is very hard to pick the difference (a little easier by naked eye thean by camera).
Compared to the full and single cuts in the box on the right though - where you can see a huge difference.

On the left the 6 normal stones are on the bottom - the twists on the top. The box to the right ahs full cuts are on the left side - single cuts on the right.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Tthe image shows on the top an out of focus view with an ideal-scope at about 45 degrees to try to show the same as above.
You can easily see which are the normal stones in the seperate joined in photo below.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

And for the record - a very hard to take ASET with the $50 hand held version all hand held - so when people say they can not take ASET shots - tell them to get a life!!!!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

So now they are all there - what I did was take pics front on with light at an angle. This is about the same as taking photo''s at an angle with the light directly above (which was near impossible with reflections off the box etc).

You might just see the 6 twist stones in the ideal-scope - on the left side appear slightly more red = more light return in the out of focus image.
This is the best I can do to show that it may be that for small stones deliberatly misaligning top and bottom of stones could work.

But certainly we can see that improving on a 90 year old cut design is feasible.

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/10/2008 2:45:37 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
So now they are all there - what I did was take pics front on with light at an angle. This is about the same as taking photo''s at an angle with the light directly above (which was near impossible with reflections off the box etc).

You might just see the 6 twist stones in the ideal-scope - on the left side appear slightly more red = more light return in the out of focus image.
This is the best I can do to show that it may be that for small stones deliberatly misaligning top and bottom of stones could work.

But certainly we can see that improving on a 90 year old cut design is feasible.

Garry..., I personally know some fancy color cutters that purposely practise the "twist" on round brilliant fancy colored Diamonds for years now!!!

It works on color!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/10/2008 3:20:17 AM
Author: DiaGem
Garry..., I personally know some fancy color cutters that purposely practise the ''twist'' on round brilliant fancy colored Diamonds for years now!!!

It works on color!

a lot of twist designs were published in the 50s.
I think every shape has been twisted at one point or another.

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/10/2008 3:52:28 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 5/10/2008 3:20:17 AM
Author: DiaGem
Garry..., I personally know some fancy color cutters that purposely practise the ''twist'' on round brilliant fancy colored Diamonds for years now!!!

It works on color!

a lot of twist designs were published in the 50s.
I think every shape has been twisted at one point or another.

Strmrdr..., they were twisted prior to being symmetrized...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/10/2008 4:03:46 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 3:52:28 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 5/10/2008 3:20:17 AM
Author: DiaGem
Garry..., I personally know some fancy color cutters that purposely practise the ''twist'' on round brilliant fancy colored Diamonds for years now!!!

It works on color!

a lot of twist designs were published in the 50s.
I think every shape has been twisted at one point or another.

Strmrdr..., they were twisted prior to being symmetrized...

rofl!
but...

You almost made me drench my new old keyboard!
I woulda been really really really mad!
The pepsi coming outa my nose just barely missed it!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/10/2008 3:20:17 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 2:45:37 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
So now they are all there - what I did was take pics front on with light at an angle. This is about the same as taking photo''s at an angle with the light directly above (which was near impossible with reflections off the box etc).

You might just see the 6 twist stones in the ideal-scope - on the left side appear slightly more red = more light return in the out of focus image.
This is the best I can do to show that it may be that for small stones deliberatly misaligning top and bottom of stones could work.

But certainly we can see that improving on a 90 year old cut design is feasible.

Garry..., I personally know some fancy color cutters that purposely practise the ''twist'' on round brilliant fancy colored Diamonds for years now!!!

It works on color!

I am sure I showed you this before DG - from G&G article about fancy yellow