Why cut asschers with small corners and windmills?

[diagem]

Date: 2/23/2008 3:29:30 AM
Author: Serg
re:Serg..., did you take the fact of C1 step facet size difference between virual and actual Diamonds?

DiaGem,
I showed How big is this difference( at least 2 degree)
If you do better photos I will try measure difference with better accuracy

Hi Serg..., I am posting a better photo!
I scanned the Diamond with Sarin and Facetware..., and both are not accurate!
I measured manually every facet and would like to compare to your results!

 

[diagem]

Cool nightshot!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/24/2008 10:11:14 AM
Author: DiaGem
Cool nightshot!

yummy!
more pics!

 

[diagem]

Here ya go...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/24/2008 10:31:17 AM
Author: DiaGem
Here ya go...

sweet

My wifey2b sent me an email pleading for one of these some day.

 

[Serg]

Right side:

P1=50
P2=42
P3=31

C1=43.5

+-1

Left Side

P1=49.5
P2=41
P3=30

C1=46

DiaGem,
Could you try close aperture?

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 12:49:03 PM
Author: Serg

Right side:

P1=50
P2=42
P3=31

C1=43.5

+-1

Left Side

P1=49.5
P2=41
P3=30

C1=46

DiaGem,
Could you try close aperture?

Serg..., my actual manual measurements for all the step facets (except table and girdle)

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 1:26:15 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 2/24/2008 12:49:03 PM
Author: Serg

Right side:

P1=50
P2=42
P3=31

C1=43.5

+-1

Left Side

P1=49.5
P2=41
P3=30

C1=46

DiaGem,
Could you try close aperture?

Serg..., my actual manual measurements for all the step facets (except table and girdle)

Oops..., forgot the last line...

 

[Serg]

Diagem,
How did you do manual measurements?

 

[diagem]

The old fashioned way...

With a measuring apparatus against the light..., the only fashion I fully trust!
I may be off by 0.2-0.4 degree as the apparatus shows half degrees intervals...

But it''s the most trustworthy tool I have used in the past decade!

I have not used your Helium scanner yet..., but OGI, Sarin and FacetWare dont serve my needs at all!

 

[diagem]

This is the scan from FacetWare:

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 12:49:03 PM
Author: Serg

DiaGem,
Could you try close aperture?

Try this one..., I had this image saved in my computer...

 

[Serg]

Date: 2/24/2008 1:58:14 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 2/24/2008 12:49:03 PM
Author: Serg


DiaGem,
Could you try close aperture?

Try this one..., I had this image saved in my computer...

Thanks,
I see pavilion side facets now( Big tilt ot short focus lens). In such case I can not help

 

[strmrdr]

look familar?

 

[strmrdr]

c:
47
37
25

p:
51.9
42.3
32

For the above.

below side view.

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 3:42:21 PM
Author: strmrdr
c:
47
37
25

p:
51.9
42.3
32

For the above.

below side view.

Managed to fix your C1...

 

[strmrdr]

p1 is shorter and p2 longer on the real stone.
I tried doing a profile match but it came out goofy with a 32% table.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/24/2008 3:53:09 PM
Author: DiaGem
Managed to fix your C1...

You taught me a very very valuable lesson I was making the angles fit the table instead of the table fitting the angles.
Which is why your table came out smaller when you fixed my error in thinking.

 

[strmrdr]

and yes I am smacking my head and going duh!
lol

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 4:10:06 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/24/2008 3:53:09 PM
Author: DiaGem
Managed to fix your C1...

You taught me a very very valuable lesson I was making the angles fit the table instead of the table fitting the angles.
Which is why your table came out smaller when you fixed my error in thinking.

Storm..., I have been saying here on PS for years that there is a huge difference between virtual Diamond cutting and real live cutting on the material itself...
I am actually surprised at myself reaching this type of accuracy just by using a regular dop and my eyes and judgement....

I didnt scan/measured the rough or the stone once during the whole cutting process..., I worked soley based on the numbers you designed with me in the beginning! Only when it was fully cut I scanned the Diamond

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 4:00:45 PM
Author: strmrdr
p1 is shorter and p2 longer on the real stone.
I tried doing a profile match but it came out goofy with a 32% table.

On the real stone..., P1 and P2 are basically identical (maybe P1 in a fraction longer)..., P3 is approx. 60% of the length of P1 and P2...

In the picture it seems P1 is longer..., but in reality they are practically identical...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/24/2008 4:34:01 PM
Author: DiaGem
Storm..., I have been saying here on PS for years that there is a huge difference between virtual Diamond cutting and real live cutting on the material itself...
I am actually surprised at myself reaching this type of accuracy just by using a regular dop and my eyes and judgement....

I didnt scan/measured the rough or the stone once during the whole cutting process..., I worked soley based on the numbers you designed with me in the beginning! Only when it was fully cut I scanned the Diamond

You did an awesome job! I''m impressed.
It does prove that the basics of using DC to find angle combos is a good one.
But they have too be verified in stone :}
My new designs from here on will be a lot better taking what I learned from this one.
Personaly I feel it turned out very well and the end result rocks!
If you had set out too cut this stone without what we did here what angles would you have used?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/24/2008 4:50:07 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 2/24/2008 4:00:45 PM
Author: strmrdr
p1 is shorter and p2 longer on the real stone.
I tried doing a profile match but it came out goofy with a 32% table.

On the real stone..., P1 and P2 are basically identical (maybe P1 in a fraction longer)..., P3 is approx. 60% of the length of P1 and P2...

In the picture it seems P1 is longer..., but in reality they are practically identical...

kewl .. that makes it closer too my after cut model than the picture looks then.

 

[strmrdr]

I dont want too be a pest but would love more pictures in different kinds of lighting as you get time if you want too :}

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 4:51:52 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/24/2008 4:34:01 PM
Author: DiaGem
Storm..., I have been saying here on PS for years that there is a huge difference between virtual Diamond cutting and real live cutting on the material itself...
I am actually surprised at myself reaching this type of accuracy just by using a regular dop and my eyes and judgement....

I didnt scan/measured the rough or the stone once during the whole cutting process..., I worked soley based on the numbers you designed with me in the beginning! Only when it was fully cut I scanned the Diamond

You did an awesome job! I''m impressed.
It does prove that the basics of using DC to find angle combos is a good one.
But they have too be verified in stone :}
My new designs from here on will be a lot better taking what I learned from this one.
Personaly I feel it turned out very well and the end result rocks!
If you had set out too cut this stone without what we did here what angles would you have used?

Thanks for the compliment...

Yes..., I agree..., DC did prove useful on this design..., and I learned a lot too, thank you for that!
The problem is..., DC can only help on standard shaped Diamonds..., I understand you cant (yet) design your own designs on unknown shapes and cutting styles in which a lot of my work depends on..., (as you have seen some of my designs using different geometric step-cut shapes for precision designs...)

As for your question..., "...what we did here what angles would you have used?" I would probably use the old ''trial & error'' model to reach the best looking appearance I was looking for (while incorporating my past knowledge and experience in the field)..., I have and am using this model for years as I have no High-Tech solution yet!
Take for example the angle measurements..., all three scanners were off with the actual angle measurements! I needed to use a hand tool to get the right numbers which I couldnt rely on the scanners!

Its much more costlier and time consuming..., but I am happy with the end results every-time..., and the satisfaction when reaching beautiful results is a natural high after so many try-outs and hours of work!

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 4:56:54 PM
Author: strmrdr
I dont want too be a pest but would love more pictures in different kinds of lighting as you get time if you want too :}

Sure..., with pleasure...
I have studied it in a variety of lights..., and it blows my mind...
Especially in direct sunlight!!! I was surprised how bright it appeared..., you could actually see the undisputed D-E color of the material from 30 inches away easily..., and believe me it is a hard task for such a small Diamond...

It even looks super white and bright in yellow halogen lighting!

 

[strmrdr]

fyi while the cut designer in DC needs some work you can use gemcad too design any cut you want then use DC too fine tune it.
There have been several designs that are on the market designed that way.
I dont have the $$ right now to get gemcad.
http://www.gemcad.com/
You would feel right at home with gemcad I think.

My 2c is licence gemcad and integrate it as the cut designer for DC is what I would try doing if it was me.

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2008 10:56:13 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/24/2008 10:31:17 AM
Author: DiaGem
Here ya go...

sweet

My wifey2b sent me an email pleading for one of these some day.

Just name the day...., I''ll send you one or maybe even the prototype....

 

[strmrdr]

preliminary ranges for the pavilion:

p1 49.5 to 52.5 target 52
p2 42 to 47.3 (watch out for for 47.6 it gets bad) target 43
p3 28.75 too 32.5 Target 29.8 there is the most leeway either way there with other combos.

stacking all 3 too the lower # end is a very bad idea.
stacking them all too the upper # range is passable but 79.5% depth, 52.5/47.3/32.5

target 52-43-29.8

 

[strmrdr]

DC pic...
The target isnt the absolute best but it gives the widest range of angle error that still looks good.
How far do I want too go too achive that?