Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

My First article:

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
I like the article. Prolly cuz I agree.
3.gif
It''s cool to be able to see the arrows on my diamond w/out the need for an IdealScope (which is good cuz we gave it to my fiance''s mom). Seeing the arrows under indirect lighting is yet another thing that gives my fiance enjoyment. It''s also another conversation piece for her ring other than "look, isn''t it sparkly?"
 
"This pattern is pleasing to look at to many people."
"Diamonds with strong a arrow pattern appeal to this sense of beauty and sense of order."
"I disagree I can see the arrow pattern under a variety of lighting and have read testimonials from several others who can also." (me too, I''m looking at them right now and love it.)

HERE HERE! Good job Storm! Keep it up.
 
Congratulations for breaking the ice strmdr !
35.gif
 
I see the arrows in my diamond more and more as time goes on......it seems like I "know" it better and know where to look! They stand out more to me now.
Good job on the article!!!!
36.gif
(But why is "no picture available?")
emquestion.gif
 
Date: 1/20/2005 8:59
6.gif
9 PM
Author: Maxine
(But why is ''no picture available?'')
emquestion.gif
Click to expand...
Everytime I look into a cemera it breaks so dont have any pictures.
Besides I dont want to give any little kids that might walk by while the page is up nightmares. :}
 
strm, you make it look so easy!! what''s up next?
 
Date: 1/21/2005 12:31:37 AM
Author: belle
strm, you make it look so easy!! what''s up next?
Click to expand...
I have 3 or 4 others im working on.
That one was just an opinion piece so it was fairly easy.
Some of the ones Im working on are taking a lot more research.
I enjoy writing.

A huge thank you to everyone for the kind words :}
 
Strm,

You make an excellent point about light return. You write very well!

One thing I would comment on is that if you state something like...

"Some may prefer the chaotic look of low optical symmetry but people''s perception of beauty tends to lean towards symmetrical objects being better looking according to several studies."

you may want to back that statement up by including references to the studies you have noted.

Great job! Can''t wait for more!!
 
Date: 1/21/2005 7:56:40 AM
Author: strmrdr

I have 3 or 4 others im working on.
Click to expand...
Sounds great
1.gif
What will they be about ?
 
Hail the budding scribe!
35.gif
You got that right - it ain''t all about light return!
 
Date: 1/21/2005 8:37:42 AM
Author: icelady
Strm,


You make an excellent point about light return. You write very well!


One thing I would comment on is that if you state something like...


''Some may prefer the chaotic look of low optical symmetry but people''s perception of beauty tends to lean towards symmetrical objects being better looking according to several studies.''


you may want to back that statement up by including references to the studies you have noted.


Great job! Can''t wait for more!!
Click to expand...
Thank you for the sugestion :}

Here is a few references:

http://www.art.net/~coffin/WRITINGS/BEAUTY/beauty.html

http://www.unm.edu/~quantum/quantum_spring_2000/mirror.html

http://amyscott.com/symmetry_in_music,carpets,_and_faces.htm

I thought about adding them in but figured since it was an op ed it didnt need it.
But I could have figured wrong.
 
Date: 1/21/2005 3:42:20 PM
Author: valeria101
Date: 1/21/2005 7:56:40 AM

Author: strmrdr


I have 3 or 4 others im working on.
Click to expand...

Sounds great
1.gif
What will they be about ?
Click to expand...

One I would really like to do and have worked on is "Honesty and trust in the diamond industry as seen from the consumers side of the counter."

However I cant get a good balance on it.
It either turns out too glowing or too dark when compared to the way I actualy see it.
 
Storm you did such a great job on this article! and of course I agree wholeheartedly since I am now the proud owner of an
H & A!

I didn''t realize they would let consumers post articles...I think that is awesome! Very good Job!
 
Date: 1/21/2005 7:48
6.gif
6 PM
Author: TL1
I didn''t realize they would let consumers post articles...I think that is awesome! Very good Job!
Click to expand...
Thank you for the kind words.

It was started as a place for the experts to submit articles so they wouldnt get lost in the forums.
I think its one of those things that grew beyond the original idea and will be a great resource.
Leonid has been very supportive in allowing me to place my article there.
I encourage others to submit articles.
The more we help one another the better it makes P.S as a place to hang out and talk about Gems/Life/.../.../.../ :}
 
Well done Storm, but now you are the one who si exposed to attack
36.gif
36.gif
36.gif
.

That would make you the attackee?

Just a coupe of points.
Many diamonds with good ideal-scope images and great stars in a H&A''s viewer, but have poor hearts. To see the arrows the stone need not be a HEARTS and arrows diamond.

H&A''s (in my opinion) is a guarantee of good optical symmetry, but not a gaurantee of great light return (and vice a versa).

If you agree, then H&A''s is irrelevant to the ability to see a "strong a arrow pattern appeals to this sense of beauty and sense of order."

The main role that I see in symmetry is that if a pavilion angle average of 41 varies from 40.5 to 41.5, then the stone will have "blobby appearance" because of 2 large leakage zones. But a stone of say 40 to 41 degree pavilion angle may still exhibit stars and appear nice (as long as the top of the stone is aligned over the bottom correctly).
 
Date: 1/21/2005 9:580 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

H&A's (in my opinion) is a guarantee of good optical symmetry, but not a gaurantee of great light return (and vice a versa).
Click to expand...
I wouldn't dare for the life of me to defend/ofend the psichological attraction of symmetry...

But there seems to be something there: at some point I did check a few dozen threads reading Ideal Scope images just to see what gets more notice: the symmetry of whatever image of light return. Well, the black arrows win. No good news for those fancies if balancing random spots of red, white & black is that much less intuitive. Storm's official statement (and refferences) brings further evidence that hunting symmetry is rather instinctive.

If this is so, than why not forget light return and produce perfectly symmetric diamonds
23.gif


It's rather easy to imagine an all white & black Iscope signature of a step cut. Is it feasible for a (weird) RBC ? Looking at some old european cuts, that must be feasible with some approximation
2.gif



I've always been seriously impressed with the idea behing the H&A - to translate a debatable quantitative factor (light return) into an instantly recognizable feature (symmetric model). Pretty elegant rhetoric if anything... almost philosophical - citing the Eight Star adds
12.gif
 
Date: 1/21/2005 9:58
6.gif
0 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Many diamonds with good ideal-scope images and great stars in a H&A's viewer, but have poor hearts. To see the arrows the stone need not be a HEARTS and arrows diamond.

H&A's (in my opinion) is a guarantee of good optical symmetry, but not a gaurantee of great light return (and vice a versa).

If you agree, then H&A's is irrelevant to the ability to see a 'strong a arrow pattern appeals to this sense of beauty and sense of order.'

The main role that I see in symmetry is that if a pavilion angle average of 41 varies from 40.5 to 41.5, then the stone will have 'blobby appearance' because of 2 large leakage zones. But a stone of say 40 to 41 degree pavilion angle may still exhibit stars and appear nice (as long as the top of the stone is aligned over the bottom correctly).
Click to expand...

Take "heart" Garry
1.gif


Pavilion patterning is relevant to Strm's article:

Diamonds with sub-par hearts may still have visible arrows, but good pavilion patterning sharpens the effect Strm wrote about. The entire effect is a result of the contrast quality of a diamond's brilliance. In diffuse light it is the diamond's reaction to obscuration in its panorama of illumination (most often the viewer him/herself). When the hearts patterning is true every pavilion facet is locked in alignment with its opposite. Logically, the resulting arrows will appear with great crispness. Moreso than in a stone where the pavilion patterning is 'out.'

View well-patterned H&A diamonds in the "Show Me The Ring" folder and you will abundant evidence of this. Though not often photographed, precisely aligned pavilion facets and good contrast make the arrows effect more apparent in low light.

Contrast brilliance also influences the "snappy" quality in a diamond's scintillation. As mentioned in other recent conversations (like this thread) some cutters' experimentation with minor facet construction within proven sets of major proportions has resulted in notable differences in the character of diamond beauty - including this aspect of contrast.
 
Garry, interesting points.

Lets take the easy one first:
"H&A''s (in my opinion) is a guarantee of good optical symmetry, but not a guarantee of great light return (and vice a versa)."

agree

"a non-H&A diamond can be just as bright under direct lighting as some H&A diamonds." from my article.

This one is a little harder:
"Many diamonds with good ideal-scope images and great stars in a H&A''s viewer, but have poor hearts. To see the arrows the stone need not be a HEARTS and arrows diamond."

Keep in mind that I said right near the beginning:
"H&A diamonds bring another aspect to the game:"

Again I have to agree but you are much more likely to find a strong arrow pattern in a H&A diamond.
My goal was to point out something that a h&a diamond brings with it that not all diamonds have.
There are other patterns out there a friends wife has a diamond that under indirect light looks like a wagon wheel with 8 narrow spokes, a hub and a rim.
Then we get into the ultimate diamond for those with a strong attraction to symmetrical shapes a well cut asscher :}
That other cuts may display nice patterns is really irrelevant to my article.
 
Dear Sir John,

I am afraid I am heartless and uncouth.

A photograph is taken with a dark perfect circular camera lens and so produces a perfect clycloptic effect.
Heads are not obsucuring a perfect circle or light, and our eyes are not magnifying the way a camera is.

I think your arguement is piffle Sir John. (cute word - been wanting to
18.gif
use it for ages)
 
I can agree that a star pattern can be attractive - but it probably takes a little training and knowledge for 90% of uninitiated consumers to agree. The pattern searching desire is strong in humans - but I have experianced people nticing it and thinking there was something wrong with the stone.

But Storm, while I am being disagreeable, I disagre with the idea that onyl what is accepted as a nice H&A''s proportion shows the strongets star.
Not true.

In fact the best star''s can be seen in diamonds with shallower crown / pavilion combinations than those most commonly touted as the Ideall''EST of all.

When the crown pavilion is at say c30 p41 the stars are much more evident than at 34c 41p. (Although at 30/41 the stone can still show a perfect H&A''s pattern - which further indicates that H&A''s does not mean to most people what they think it does because no one seems to attempt to produce H&A''s in unusual proportions. - it might be time for people to start to think outside the box?)
 
Date: 1/22/2005 12:20:18 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Dear Sir John,

I am afraid I am heartless and uncouth.

A photograph is taken with a dark perfect circular camera lens and so produces a perfect clycloptic effect.

Heads are not obsucuring a perfect circle or light, and our eyes are not magnifying the way a camera is.

I think your arguement is piffle Sir John. (cute word - been wanting to
18.gif
use it for ages)
Click to expand...

Garry, I know you’re an eye-convergence zealot, but we’re not fish.

I can read the fine print on a dime from 24 inches all the way in to the “hated” (but AGS-sanctioned) 10 inches. I can thread a needle with aplomb. Yes, I can gauge crispness of these effects, and I watch experts and consumers make such distinctions with rarified diamonds. I know what I see. If I couldn’t focus enough to gauge crispness of arrows I certainly couldn’t thread a needle.

Piffle is indeed a clever word, but “piff not” those in this thread who’ve already confirmed that they see differences
1.gif


As much as you believe Rhino or I “overstates” the virtues of H&A patterning, I believe you “overstate” your censuring of it.

Perhaps try the dime analysis for yourself (your lyrebird may not have print as fine…don’t have one on me…maybe the word “dollar” on 2 dollar Oz?).
 
Date: 1/22/2005 12:42:28 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
I can agree that a star pattern can be attractive - but it probably takes a little training and knowledge for 90% of uninitiated consumers to agree. The pattern searching desire is strong in humans - but I have experianced people nticing it and thinking there was something wrong with the stone.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it was a stone with poor light return? In diamonds with robust performance I have never heard someone complain about a symmetrical star pattern. Now there has been a well-cut stone or 2 with good performance where I personally thought the stars were too dark (not crisp...dark) but these were not "H&A" anyway.

But Storm, while I am being disagreeable, I disagre with the idea that onyl what is accepted as a nice H&A's proportion shows the strongets star.

Not true.

In fact the best star's can be seen in diamonds with shallower crown / pavilion combinations than those most commonly touted as the Ideall'EST of all.
Click to expand...

Yes, but did they have the all-around high performance of stones at proven proportions?

Garry - I know you've sworn to throw rocks against H&A, but I think you're splitting hairs here (like I did in your GIA review thread).

When the crown pavilion is at say c30 p41 the stars are much more evident than at 34c 41p. (Although at 30/41 the stone can still show a perfect H&A's pattern - which further indicates that H&A's does not mean to most people what they think it does because no one seems to attempt to produce H&A's in unusual proportions. - it might be time for people to start to think outside the box?)
Click to expand...

You know, I agree with your very interesting statement - and would love to get into it further. However, right now Strm (and those of us in the true-patterned H&A club) are making observations about tightly proven proportions and discovering how adjustments of the seldom-discussed minor facets influence the character of an already-beautiful stone - Which is what Strm's article was about...the contrast quality of brilliance and distinct arrows.
 
John when we do finally meet for the first time and break some bread (to soak up copius amounts of alcohol) I will give you lesson 101 in global politness.
#101 never assume that International travelers take any heed of non paper money. I niether know or care to know which of your little bits of shrapnel is a dime since they buy nothing of any value. Thier only purpose is to give airline waitresses something to collect from sleeping patrons.

But if I do imagine you can read the writting on most small coins from 60cm, then that would be perhaps 1/2 a mm. The distinction in pattern between a nice arrows stone, that has lousy hearts, might be 0.1mm or less in a 6.5mm stone. We have a saying in Oz "fair suck of the sav mate"
 
Re the H&A''s fan club - I have the greatest respect for the skill of individual cutters who can make H&A''s happen.

I have even greater respect for people who can build factories and process lines controlled by engineers, go out and employ illiterate hard working semi skilled labourers and through the tightness of their control processes, produce a fair % of H&A''s grade diamonds in huge quantities.

And I am very happy that there is this niche market that will pay a premium for this wonderful achievement in manufacturing excellence for a novel idea that is able to be demonstrated to consumers and hence further the demand for this level of perfection.

The main reason that I am happy about it though is that it produces, as a by product, better levels of symmetry that iron out some types of poor quality. This means there is now a lot more good looking diamonds that did not make the H&A''s grade.

It will be even better when AGS and GIA tighten their ability to reject leaking H&A''s that are near the current C35.8 P41.2 AGS 0 threshold. Not to mention H&A''s stones with dug out cheated girdles.
 
Garry,
You have raised an interesting point.

Do those that have no idea what an h&a diamond is and have never seen one ever get the feeling their diamond is missing something because it doesnt have the pattern?

Probably not.

But those that know about it and look for it can and do get enjoyment from it.

I think the cyclops arguement is tommyrot.
The simple fact of the matter is that I can see them without using tools and so can a lot of others.
 
Date: 1/22/2005 5:47:43 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
John when we do finally meet for the first time and break some bread (to soak up copius amounts of alcohol) I will give you lesson 101 in global politness.

#101 never assume that International travelers take any heed of non paper money. I niether know or care to know which of your little bits of shrapnel is a dime since they buy nothing of any value. Thier only purpose is to give airline waitresses something to collect from sleeping patrons.
Click to expand...

I did not intend to condescend, my aussie friend. I was suggesting an honest exercise in convergence and finding the near point of accommodation, which shifts with age. Between ages 16 and 50 it typically changes from 3 inches (7cm) to 20 inches (50cm).

You know me… In for a dime, in for a dollar
2.gif


But if I do imagine you can read the writting on most small coins from 60cm, then that would be perhaps 1/2 a mm. The distinction in pattern between a nice arrows stone, that has lousy hearts, might be 0.1mm or less in a 6.5mm stone. We have a saying in Oz 'fair suck of the sav mate'
Click to expand...

LOL. Well that’s hooly dooly, but fair crack of the whip! Your point about .1mm is well-taken. I’m not alleging Herculean distinctions, just the ability to distinguish more or less crisp patterns over the spread of such a crown.

Actually, it’s odd to be tilting on this side of the issue. I’m more often contrasting binocular vision (and the unique nature of human assessment that occurs when the ciliary muscle is relaxed) to attempted mechanical interpretations of same, which I feel are futile. In that sense we see “eye to eye.”

I’m fair dinkum. When we crack a tinnie I think it's my shout.
 
Make the next ones longer! I read that in all of 30 seconds!
9.gif


I do like the sentiment--the arrows are important to me to see in lighting situations and I always crave that quick moment when I see the arrows in a random lighting situation. Doesn''t mean all my stones have to have arrows, aka fancies, but in a round, I want those arrows.
 
Great, practical discussion...and now I know why I love those arrows!
30.gif
1.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top