 |
|
Below is an outline of highlights from a few of the presentations from IDCC-1
with an editorial comment on changes, for better, or for worse since 2004.
Complete agenda of the conference can be found on
http://www.cutstudy.com/conference/program.htm
|
| |
|
Gabi Tolkowsky and Maarten de Witte (from Hearts on Fire) both
gave passionate presentations asking us to question the jargon used in
our industry. For example Gabi asked why major labs would not call a
newly designed and fashioned diamond by its owners preferred name,
for example the Zoe. This could replace the need for the costly legal
protection. Instead labs use vague generic names like "square modified
brilliant" to describe commonly known diamonds. Maarten also focused
on our 4C’s jargon which is not intuitive or commonsense for
consumers. As buyers consumers learn the jargon to level the playing
field, but they promptly forget it as the diamond takes on the new
owners "stories". Nothing has changed, although at www.octonus.com/oct/gallery/internal.php universal listings of new and existing cuts is well
under way. Please submit any cuts you find missing, or suggest names
for those already there but unnamed.
|
|
Gabi Tolkowsky,
Tolkowsky and Sons
|
|
| |
|
Bruce Harding reviewed the consensus of research noting a
relationship between crown and pavilion relationship slopes. Since then
AGS and GIA have both implemented round cut grade systems that
reflect this principle.
|
|
| Bruce Harding
|
|
| |
|
Peter Yantzer, Jim Caudill and Jose Sasian heralded their new
performance based grading systems based on the AGS ASET principle
and the concept that a diamond is a "window to light sources". Their
new grading methodology was a big step forward and has been effective
for rounds. However sadly few stones are being submitted for the
various other cuts they now also grade. The AGS system does not help
the introduction of new cuts.
|
|
Peter Yantzer,
American Gem Society
|
|
| |
| Nick Del Re gave a description of the various options for intellectual
property protection of new cut designs and pointed out weakness’ in the
Summary of the First International Diamond Cut Conference (IDCC-1)
current patent system. Patents themselves can be more unique than the
often similar stones they describe. Nick raised the idea of a role for lab’s
in describing optical performance as a differentiating factor.
|
|
Nick Del Re,
EGL USA
|
|
| |
|
Olga Okhrimenko’s discussion on brand development is still a very big
topic, and one that we invite presenters to cover in IDCC2.
|
|
Olga Okhrimenko,
CBIconsult
|
|
| |
|
Janak Mistry and Brian Gavin presented on separate but somewhat
related topics. In order to guide cutters Labs should provide clear and
open information on cut quality factors like proportion, polish, symmetry.
Since IDCC1 two labs released software at cutters expense to provide
such information. At the Cut Groups insistence some guidance
information has since been made available. There are still no clear rules
for Hearts and Arrows symmetry pattern standards. Some labs will laser
inscribe "H&A" or report such inscriptions on grading reports which often
misleads retailers and consumers as such diamonds are often
represented as being given a de facto blessing.
|
|
Janak Mistry,
Lexus SoftMac
|
|
| |
|
Sergey Sivovolenko and Yuri Shelementiev presented a cut grade
system based on 3-dimensional diamond models. Basic light
responses’ (BLR) of different diamonds can be analyzed and compared
by computer tools. This approach allows the grading of any diamond
cut regardless of shape, facet arrangement and symmetry features. One
grouping of basic light responses is ETAS - effective total angular size -
that describes the potential of a diamond cut to redirect light from a light
source to an observer's eye. The benefit of this new approach for the
diamond manufacturing industry is that the enhancement of existing
fancy cuts and the creation of better new designer cuts becomes
possible. The same grading standards are applied to all shapes, just as
other industries such as hotels, wine and cars are rated. |
|
Sergey Sivovolenko,
OctoNus
|
|
| |
| Michael Cowing showed the complexity of basic light response
grading by describing the visual difference in contrast in diamonds with
differing proportions. The Master Stone Study that the Cut Group
announced at IDCC-1 in conjunction with the research arm of HRD
(which failed to clear the lawyers hurdles) has progressed slowly. Current
developments and master stone information is available at
www.octonus.ru/oct/mss/index.phtml |
|
| Michael Cowing, AGA
|
|
 |
Marc Brauner,
IGI
|
|
 |
Garry Holloway,
Ideal-Scope
|
|
 |
Siddharth Mehta,
Shairu Gems
|
|
| |
 |
Paul Jacobs,
Venus Jewels
|
|
 |
Brian Gavin,
Whiteflash
|
|
 |
Ann Peeters,
HRD
|
|
 |
Sergey Sivovolenko, OctoNus
Yuri Shelementiev, MSU Gemological Center
|
|
 |
Maarten de Witte, Hearts on Fire
Mark Goossens, Inter Gem-Claes
|
|
| |
|
|
|
