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

[WinkHPD]

Date: 5/8/2008 4:43:37 AM
Author: strmrdr
Garry I agree 1 single cut by itself isnt that great but when you have a number of them the odds of seeing the fewer but larger brighter flashes goes way up.

Im a little biased too as I love the look of single cut melee.

Both Storm and Garry are making great points. I have to admit to loving both. The average full cut pales in comparison to a great cut single cut, but a well cut full cut has a special beauty of its own.

In an antique looking ring I greatly prefer the well cut singles for their authentic period look.

Sometimes I feel like the guy who wants to date two sisters and can''t quite make up his mind. Both make my eyes happy, but in the very smalls, 0.01''s and 0.005''s I definitely prefer the single cuts.

Wink

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/10/2008 9:21:35 AM
Author: Wink

Date: 5/8/2008 4:43:37 AM
Author: strmrdr
Garry I agree 1 single cut by itself isnt that great but when you have a number of them the odds of seeing the fewer but larger brighter flashes goes way up.

Im a little biased too as I love the look of single cut melee.

Both Storm and Garry are making great points. I have to admit to loving both. The average full cut pales in comparison to a great cut single cut, but a well cut full cut has a special beauty of its own.

In an antique looking ring I greatly prefer the well cut singles for their authentic period look.

Sometimes I feel like the guy who wants to date two sisters and can't quite make up his mind. Both make my eyes happy, but in the very smalls, 0.01's and 0.005's I definitely prefer the single cuts.

Wink

Wink try to find some sisters who had a big arguement and never talk with each other (or your wife)

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/10/2008 5:21:20 AM
Author: 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

Yes you did..., here you can find it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-light-yellow-fancy-or-cape.66898/page-2

We both know that a ''normal'' round 57-58 facet brilliant (vivid) will be much rarer and a few fold pricier than a modified round brilliant of the same (face-up) color appearance...

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/10/2008 1:37:20 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 5:21:20 AM
Author: 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

Yes you did..., here you can find it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-light-yellow-fancy-or-cape.66898/page-2

We both know that a ''normal'' round 57-58 facet brilliant (vivid) will be much rarer and a few fold pricier than a modified round brilliant of the same (face-up) color appearance...

Garry.., on a second thought..., you seem to think that they both should be valued the same as both have the same (color measured) face-up appearance!

True?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/10/2008 9:21:35 AM
Author: Wink

Date: 5/8/2008 4:43:37 AM
Author: strmrdr
Garry I agree 1 single cut by itself isnt that great but when you have a number of them the odds of seeing the fewer but larger brighter flashes goes way up.

Im a little biased too as I love the look of single cut melee.

Both Storm and Garry are making great points. I have to admit to loving both. The average full cut pales in comparison to a great cut single cut, but a well cut full cut has a special beauty of its own.

In an antique looking ring I greatly prefer the well cut singles for their authentic period look.

Sometimes I feel like the guy who wants to date two sisters and can't quite make up his mind. Both make my eyes happy, but in the very smalls, 0.01's and 0.005's I definitely prefer the single cuts.

Wink

I like them both too.
You raised a good point.
There are some ring designs and some center stones that work better with single cuts than others.
For example a crushed ice radiant or a 3 or 4 chevron princess would go much better with full cuts in my opinion.
A step cut or oec center in an antique style setting for me its single cuts!
With an RB center I could go either way.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/10/2008 3:16:18 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 5/10/2008 9:21:35 AM
Author: Wink

Date: 5/8/2008 4:43:37 AM
Author: strmrdr
Garry I agree 1 single cut by itself isnt that great but when you have a number of them the odds of seeing the fewer but larger brighter flashes goes way up.

Im a little biased too as I love the look of single cut melee.

Both Storm and Garry are making great points. I have to admit to loving both. The average full cut pales in comparison to a great cut single cut, but a well cut full cut has a special beauty of its own.

In an antique looking ring I greatly prefer the well cut singles for their authentic period look.

Sometimes I feel like the guy who wants to date two sisters and can''t quite make up his mind. Both make my eyes happy, but in the very smalls, 0.01''s and 0.005''s I definitely prefer the single cuts.

Wink

I like them both too.
You raised a good point.
There are some ring designs and some center stones that work better with single cuts than others.
For example a crushed ice radiant or a 3 or 4 chevron princess would go much better with full cuts in my opinion.
A step cut or oec center in an antique style setting for me its single cuts!
With an RB center I could go either way.

I have seen that occasionally - by chance - we made a cluster princess and the side stones had substantially the same virtual facet size as the center - it looked kewl.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/10/2008 1:53:53 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 1:37:20 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 5:21:20 AM
Author: 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

Yes you did..., here you can find it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-light-yellow-fancy-or-cape.66898/page-2

We both know that a ''normal'' round 57-58 facet brilliant (vivid) will be much rarer and a few fold pricier than a modified round brilliant of the same (face-up) color appearance...

Garry.., on a second thought..., you seem to think that they both should be valued the same as both have the same (color measured) face-up appearance!

True?

that would still be classed as a round brilliant DG - no extra facets I believe - just screwed proportions and symmetry - so would maybe get an AGS 6 etc. But it increases the ray path and makes the lighter coloured less intense material a deeper and more intense colour.

So if this was cut to our nice round HCA 1 proportions - it would be a Fancy Intense, and worth a lot less than it is as a Vivid

 

[tberube]

Date: 5/10/2008 3:16:18 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 5/10/2008 9:21:35 AM

Author: Wink

Date: 5/8/2008 4:43:37 AM

Author: strmrdr

Garry I agree 1 single cut by itself isnt that great but when you have a number of them the odds of seeing the fewer but larger brighter flashes goes way up.


Im a little biased too as I love the look of single cut melee.

Both Storm and Garry are making great points. I have to admit to loving both. The average full cut pales in comparison to a great cut single cut, but a well cut full cut has a special beauty of its own.


In an antique looking ring I greatly prefer the well cut singles for their authentic period look.


Sometimes I feel like the guy who wants to date two sisters and can't quite make up his mind. Both make my eyes happy, but in the very smalls, 0.01's and 0.005's I definitely prefer the single cuts.


Wink

I like them both too.

You raised a good point.

There are some ring designs and some center stones that work better with single cuts than others.

For example a crushed ice radiant or a 3 or 4 chevron princess would go much better with full cuts in my opinion.

A step cut or oec center in an antique style setting for me its single cuts!

With an RB center I could go either way.

OR....if your eye likes big contrasts, you might prefer a step cut (maybe oec, I can't say for sure, I've never seen one IRL) with full cut pave. Don't you think? Center diamond with big flashes + teeny pave diamonds with pinpoint flashes = big focus on center diamond?

And if so, perhaps the same could be said for the opposite combination (RB with single cuts)?

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/10/2008 4:58:39 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/10/2008 1:53:53 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 1:37:20 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 5:21:20 AM
Author: 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

Yes you did..., here you can find it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-light-yellow-fancy-or-cape.66898/page-2

We both know that a ''normal'' round 57-58 facet brilliant (vivid) will be much rarer and a few fold pricier than a modified round brilliant of the same (face-up) color appearance...

Garry.., on a second thought..., you seem to think that they both should be valued the same as both have the same (color measured) face-up appearance!

True?

that would still be classed as a round brilliant DG - no extra facets I believe - just screwed proportions and symmetry - so would maybe get an AGS 6 etc. But it increases the ray path and makes the lighter coloured less intense material a deeper and more intense colour.

So if this was cut to our nice round HCA 1 proportions - it would be a Fancy Intense, and worth a lot less than it is as a Vivid

Garry.., I''ll bet you that if you submit a "twisted crown vs. pavilion" round brilliant to GIA for grading you will receive (at least 7 out of 10 times, as GIA is not to consistent...

) a "round modified brilliant"...

Just my guess based on past experience!

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 5/10/2008 9:25:58 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/10/2008 9:21:35 AM

Author: Wink

Date: 5/8/2008 4:43:37 AM

Author: strmrdr

Garry I agree 1 single cut by itself isnt that great but when you have a number of them the odds of seeing the fewer but larger brighter flashes goes way up.


Im a little biased too as I love the look of single cut melee.

Both Storm and Garry are making great points. I have to admit to loving both. The average full cut pales in comparison to a great cut single cut, but a well cut full cut has a special beauty of its own.


In an antique looking ring I greatly prefer the well cut singles for their authentic period look.


Sometimes I feel like the guy who wants to date two sisters and can''t quite make up his mind. Both make my eyes happy, but in the very smalls, 0.01''s and 0.005''s I definitely prefer the single cuts.


Wink

Wink try to find some sisters who had a big arguement and never talk with each other (or your wife)

LOL! At this stage of my life, grandpa Wink does NOT any longer have to worry about sisters talking to each other, or even him very much.

My wife on the other hand understands me all too well, yet still loves me. Some things in life get MUCH better when you get older, especially the part about not having to decide which sister to date!

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 5/10/2008 3:16:18 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 5/10/2008 9:21:35 AM

Author: Wink

Date: 5/8/2008 4:43:37 AM

Author: strmrdr

Garry I agree 1 single cut by itself isnt that great but when you have a number of them the odds of seeing the fewer but larger brighter flashes goes way up.


Im a little biased too as I love the look of single cut melee.

Both Storm and Garry are making great points. I have to admit to loving both. The average full cut pales in comparison to a great cut single cut, but a well cut full cut has a special beauty of its own.


In an antique looking ring I greatly prefer the well cut singles for their authentic period look.


Sometimes I feel like the guy who wants to date two sisters and can''t quite make up his mind. Both make my eyes happy, but in the very smalls, 0.01''s and 0.005''s I definitely prefer the single cuts.


Wink

I like them both too.

You raised a good point.

There are some ring designs and some center stones that work better with single cuts than others.

For example a crushed ice radiant or a 3 or 4 chevron princess would go much better with full cuts in my opinion.

A step cut or oec center in an antique style setting for me its single cuts!

With an RB center I could go either way.

Agreed.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/11/2008 9:52:54 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 4:58:39 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/10/2008 1:53:53 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 1:37:20 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 5:21:20 AM
Author: 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

Yes you did..., here you can find it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-light-yellow-fancy-or-cape.66898/page-2

We both know that a ''normal'' round 57-58 facet brilliant (vivid) will be much rarer and a few fold pricier than a modified round brilliant of the same (face-up) color appearance...

Garry.., on a second thought..., you seem to think that they both should be valued the same as both have the same (color measured) face-up appearance!

True?

that would still be classed as a round brilliant DG - no extra facets I believe - just screwed proportions and symmetry - so would maybe get an AGS 6 etc. But it increases the ray path and makes the lighter coloured less intense material a deeper and more intense colour.

So if this was cut to our nice round HCA 1 proportions - it would be a Fancy Intense, and worth a lot less than it is as a Vivid

Garry.., I''ll bet you that if you submit a ''twisted crown vs. pavilion'' round brilliant to GIA for grading you will receive (at least 7 out of 10 times, as GIA is not to consistent...

) a ''round modified brilliant''...

Just my guess based on past experience!

Sorry DG - the amount of twist in such cases need only be a little mismatch which might drop a sym grade to Good, Fair or Poor. We are on different pages. My fault

 

[kcoursolle]

Cool pictures Garry!

I personally love the look of single cuts in pave work. I used to have a ring with single cuts and it was very pretty. It was a subtle, but noticeable difference. The flashes were more broad and the overall look was more antique and less modern. I agree with storn that single cuts would be perfect with asschers.

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/11/2008 8:55:45 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/11/2008 9:52:54 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 4:58:39 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/10/2008 1:53:53 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 1:37:20 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 5:21:20 AM
Author: 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

Yes you did..., here you can find it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-light-yellow-fancy-or-cape.66898/page-2

We both know that a ''normal'' round 57-58 facet brilliant (vivid) will be much rarer and a few fold pricier than a modified round brilliant of the same (face-up) color appearance...

Garry.., on a second thought..., you seem to think that they both should be valued the same as both have the same (color measured) face-up appearance!

True?

that would still be classed as a round brilliant DG - no extra facets I believe - just screwed proportions and symmetry - so would maybe get an AGS 6 etc. But it increases the ray path and makes the lighter coloured less intense material a deeper and more intense colour.

So if this was cut to our nice round HCA 1 proportions - it would be a Fancy Intense, and worth a lot less than it is as a Vivid

Garry.., I''ll bet you that if you submit a ''twisted crown vs. pavilion'' round brilliant to GIA for grading you will receive (at least 7 out of 10 times, as GIA is not to consistent...

) a ''round modified brilliant''...

Just my guess based on past experience!

Sorry DG - the amount of twist in such cases need only be a little mismatch which might drop a sym grade to Good, Fair or Poor. We are on different pages. My fault

OK..., I get you..., but a full twist will be better for color retention I would imagine...

And a full twist would earn the modifier

.... at the world''s foremost authority...

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/11/2008 10:46:50 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/11/2008 8:55:45 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/11/2008 9:52:54 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 4:58:39 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/10/2008 1:53:53 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 1:37:20 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 5:21:20 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)






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

Yes you did..., here you can find it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-light-yellow-fancy-or-cape.66898/page-2

We both know that a ''normal'' round 57-58 facet brilliant (vivid) will be much rarer and a few fold pricier than a modified round brilliant of the same (face-up) color appearance...

Garry.., on a second thought..., you seem to think that they both should be valued the same as both have the same (color measured) face-up appearance!

True?

that would still be classed as a round brilliant DG - no extra facets I believe - just screwed proportions and symmetry - so would maybe get an AGS 6 etc. But it increases the ray path and makes the lighter coloured less intense material a deeper and more intense colour.

So if this was cut to our nice round HCA 1 proportions - it would be a Fancy Intense, and worth a lot less than it is as a Vivid

Garry.., I''ll bet you that if you submit a ''twisted crown vs. pavilion'' round brilliant to GIA for grading you will receive (at least 7 out of 10 times, as GIA is not to consistent...

) a ''round modified brilliant''...

Just my guess based on past experience!

Sorry DG - the amount of twist in such cases need only be a little mismatch which might drop a sym grade to Good, Fair or Poor. We are on different pages. My fault

OK..., I get you..., but a full twist will be better for color retention I would imagine...

And a full twist would earn the modifier

.... at the world''s foremost authority...

DG you are a bad student.

The point about the full twist is that the light return is very similar, but at a slightly different less face up than normal well cut round.

If on the other hand you twist the top by say 3 degrees (not 22.5 which is a full twist) then you screw up the symmetry badly and get many more bouncing around ray paths = longer ray paths = deepening and possible intensifying of the colour.

A full twist is very bright - we all agreed on that - so no real benefit for colour (although there may be a little less contrast = less darkness which can be good for some colours like champagne)

Now what form of corpral punishment fits ?

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/12/2008 12:15:40 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/11/2008 10:46:50 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/11/2008 8:55:45 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/11/2008 9:52:54 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 4:58:39 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/10/2008 1:53:53 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 1:37:20 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/10/2008 5:21:20 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)






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

Yes you did..., here you can find it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fancy-light-yellow-fancy-or-cape.66898/page-2

We both know that a ''normal'' round 57-58 facet brilliant (vivid) will be much rarer and a few fold pricier than a modified round brilliant of the same (face-up) color appearance...

Garry.., on a second thought..., you seem to think that they both should be valued the same as both have the same (color measured) face-up appearance!

True?

that would still be classed as a round brilliant DG - no extra facets I believe - just screwed proportions and symmetry - so would maybe get an AGS 6 etc. But it increases the ray path and makes the lighter coloured less intense material a deeper and more intense colour.

So if this was cut to our nice round HCA 1 proportions - it would be a Fancy Intense, and worth a lot less than it is as a Vivid

Garry.., I''ll bet you that if you submit a ''twisted crown vs. pavilion'' round brilliant to GIA for grading you will receive (at least 7 out of 10 times, as GIA is not to consistent...

) a ''round modified brilliant''...

Just my guess based on past experience!

Sorry DG - the amount of twist in such cases need only be a little mismatch which might drop a sym grade to Good, Fair or Poor. We are on different pages. My fault

OK..., I get you..., but a full twist will be better for color retention I would imagine...

And a full twist would earn the modifier

.... at the world''s foremost authority...

DG you are a bad student.

You are not the first one..., nor the last one who said or will say that...

The point about the full twist is that the light return is very similar, but at a slightly different less face up than normal well cut round.

If on the other hand you twist the top by say 3 degrees (not 22.5 which is a full twist) then you screw up the symmetry badly and get many more bouncing around ray paths = longer ray paths = deepening and possible intensifying of the colour.

I agree..., more of a mish-mash in "bouncing around ray paths" will help color..., (for example..., the crushed ice effect!!!), but will loose its round brilliant appearance purpose..., no?

A full twist is very bright - we all agreed on that - so no real benefit for colour (although there may be a littleless contrast = less darkness which can be good for some colours like champagne)

Some of the deep fancy colored Diamonds require the brightening up of the depth..., cutting them to round brilliants is one of the manners!

Less contrast is one of the most important factors in (especially medium strength hue''s) fancy colored Diamonds..., not to mention if you combine it with some extra fine painting

Whats good for champagne..., will be good for pink champagne..., no?

Now what form of corpral punishment fits ?

I am ready for whatever you impose

on me!

I am a bad student..., but I keep learning everyday....

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/12/2008 2:40:38 AM
Author: DiaGem

I am a bad student..., but I keep learning everyday....

lol me two but it is too much fun to argue with the teacher! so I guess I will always be a bad student. hehehehehe

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

1 lost pint of blood from self flagalation will suffice. You too storm for being cheeky

Date: 5/12/2008 2:40:38 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/12/2008 12:15:40 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)




DG you are a bad student.

You are not the first one..., nor the last one who said or will say that...

The point about the full twist is that the light return is very similar, but at a slightly different less face up than normal well cut round.

If on the other hand you twist the top by say 3 degrees (not 22.5 which is a full twist) then you screw up the symmetry badly and get many more bouncing around ray paths = longer ray paths = deepening and possible intensifying of the colour.

I agree..., more of a mish-mash in ''bouncing around ray paths'' will help color..., (for example..., the crushed ice effect!!!), but will loose its round brilliant appearance purpose..., no?

A full twist is very bright - we all agreed on that - so no real benefit for colour (although there may be a littleless contrast = less darkness which can be good for some colours like champagne)

Some of the deep fancy colored Diamonds require the brightening up of the depth..., cutting them to round brilliants is one of the manners!

Less contrast is one of the most important factors in (especially medium strength hue''s) fancy colored Diamonds..., not to mention if you combine it with some extra fine painting

Whats good for champagne..., will be good for pink champagne..., no?

Now what form of corpral punishment fits ?

I am ready for whatever you impose

on me!

I am a bad student..., but I keep learning everyday....

Study here please DG http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/fancycolor-5.phtml and understand it shows how different strategies apply to different colours and sizes of stone.

In the case of valuable pinks they are the other side of red - they are not brownish they are purplish, so they will have spectrums that need to be handled more like the intense and fancy yellow - so generally we want crushed ice long ray paths for saturation (up on the chart) and very little contrast to make them light (to the right on the chart).

 

[diagem]

Date: 5/12/2008 3:51:59 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
1 lost pint of blood from self flagalation will suffice. You too storm for being cheeky

Date: 5/12/2008 2:40:38 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 5/12/2008 12:15:40 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)





DG you are a bad student.

You are not the first one..., nor the last one who said or will say that...

The point about the full twist is that the light return is very similar, but at a slightly different less face up than normal well cut round.

If on the other hand you twist the top by say 3 degrees (not 22.5 which is a full twist) then you screw up the symmetry badly and get many more bouncing around ray paths = longer ray paths = deepening and possible intensifying of the colour.

I agree..., more of a mish-mash in ''bouncing around ray paths'' will help color..., (for example..., the crushed ice effect!!!), but will loose its round brilliant appearance purpose..., no?

A full twist is very bright - we all agreed on that - so no real benefit for colour (although there may be a littleless contrast = less darkness which can be good for some colours like champagne)

Some of the deep fancy colored Diamonds require the brightening up of the depth..., cutting them to round brilliants is one of the manners!

Less contrast is one of the most important factors in (especially medium strength hue''s) fancy colored Diamonds..., not to mention if you combine it with some extra fine painting

Whats good for champagne..., will be good for pink champagne..., no?

Now what form of corpral punishment fits ?

I am ready for whatever you impose

on me!

I am a bad student..., but I keep learning everyday....

Study here please DG http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/fancycolor-5.phtml and understand it shows how different strategies apply to different colours and sizes of stone.

In the case of valuable pinks they are the other side of red - they are not brownish they are purplish, so they will have spectrums that need to be handled more like the intense and fancy yellow - so generally we want crushed ice long ray paths for saturation (up on the chart) and very little contrast to make them light (to the right on the chart).

Garry..., I understand where you are coming from..., and where you are going...
And I appreciate your pointing out where I can read and learn interesting information in general...

I read it..., and it is interesting, but..., obviously you would (most of the time) get a heavier, darker more saturated colored Diamond when cutting a brilliant to C=48 & P= 47.5 (or in that range) vs. C=36 & P=43.

As far as pinks..., I can assure you from experience and witnessing..., I have seen Diamond cutters transform brownish hue''s into pinks and unfortunately vice-versa! But!!! Pinks are also the "other side" of red!

Same with Blue''s and Grey''s (only more radical!!!)
See, my philosophy is: Fancy colored Diamonds have their own rules and behaviour (I even dare say they have a soul)..., a lot depends on the hand of the cutter as (1 of many examples) the heat endured during the cutting process can play a significant role on how the end result will appear..., not to mention other factors like rough skin, color zoning and planing positions etc..., etc...
You and I look at fancy colored Diamonds differently..., for me (my personal taste and market)..., true fancy colors do not need to be cut in a special manner to achieve that extra saturated face-up appearance..., and I (personally) wont touch a "crushed ice" appearance (either a fancy colored nor a colorless).

Thats why you say that (fancy) color-grading from the profile/side is irrelevant..., and I keep saying it is..., see, I think there is more to a diamonds beauty (especially in fancy colors) than "just" its face-up appearance! For example..., when I look at a yellow Asscher cut set in a ring..., I need to see the genuine citron color strongly from its side too (what I keep calling the "sculpture effect:!)..., thats when I can say its a fancy colored gem of a Diamond!

I am not saying that the technology DC offers is not a good one or a important one..., as the majority fancy colors are mainly marketed based on their face-up appearance..., but to me..., fancy colored Diamonds are a whole different meaning!

But you know already that I am a weird one!

 

[Isabelle]

BTW, Brian Gavin at Whiteflash told me he prefers full cut diamonds in his pave, and I saw his rings today. They are incredible and they sparkle like mad. --FWIW.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/12/2008 10:43:49 PM
Author: Isabelle
BTW, Brian Gavin at Whiteflash told me he prefers full cut diamonds in his pave, and I saw his rings today. They are incredible and they sparkle like mad. --FWIW.

Fire at a distance seems to be better from full cuts.
Single cuts like office department stores with high ceiling and fluoro for brightness

 

[Isabelle]

Date: 5/13/2008 1:17:53 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/12/2008 10:43:49 PM

Author: Isabelle

BTW, Brian Gavin at Whiteflash told me he prefers full cut diamonds in his pave, and I saw his rings today. They are incredible and they sparkle like mad. --FWIW.

Fire at a distance seems to be better from full cuts.

Single cuts like office department stores with high ceiling and fluoro for brightness

That''s interesting. I guess it depends on where you will be wearing your ring, but I think if I had to choose, I would go with the full cuts.--I say this only b/c that is what I have on my RHR and they really catch the light in a way that is very pleasing to me.