 |  |
| Sign in or Register Home |
|
|
|
| Buy | Sell | Education | Forum | Directory | Blog | |||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| HOME : FORUM : EDUCATION : DIAMONDS : GIA objects to EightStar's claims |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Post#1 @
03-04-02
, 11:25 AM
GIA objects to EightStar's claims, that GIA considers the EightStar diamond to be the "perfect diamond." In it's own press release, GIA states that two of its studies on diamond brilliance make no such claim and the organization wasn't looking for the perfect diamond. In addition, GIA doesn't endorse products. GIA's press release reads as follows: A press release issued by EightStar Diamond Company Jan. 31, 2002 states the EightStar diamond, “…won a search by the prestigious Gemological Institute of America for a perfect diamond,” and another statement, “The renowned Gemological Institute of America looked at 67,000 diamonds in an attempt to find stones whose symmetry matched that of a perfect diamond it had created on the computer. Only one real-world diamond equaled GIA’s cyber-diamond for perfection of shape and faceting: the EightStar diamond.” The GIA studies on diamond “brilliance” (published in the Fall 1998 issue of Gems & Gemology) and “fire” (published in the Fall 2001 issue of Gems & Gemology) found there are multiple sets of proportions that produce favorable light return in diamonds. There was never an intent—stated or implied—in either of these studies to “attempt to find stones whose symmetry matched that of a perfect diamond...created in a computer,” as stated in the EightStar press release. Furthermore, GIA has never said it was searching for a perfect diamond. The EightStar diamond was used in the brilliance study solely to satisfy the need for a stone with high symmetry to illustrate the appearance of a diamond in fully diffused lighting, not to serve as a model of a “perfect” diamond. In fact, it was specifically stated in the acknowledgements for that article (p. 182, Gems & Gemology, Fall 1998)) that the EightStar diamond “approximated the symmetry of the (computer) model.” Likewise, there was no conclusion reached in either study indicating that the EightStar diamond “equaled GIA’s cyber-diamond for perfection of shape and faceting...” In fact, GIA has often stated publicly that there is no single best set of proportions for a diamond (a major conclusion in the published reports) and GIA has never defined or described a “perfect diamond” based on a given set of criteria. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post#2 @
03-04-02
, 11:38 AM
Clearly, they don't like Eightstar creating the impression of a GIA endorsement. But I think this milk is spilt. GIA saying GIA quote: ----------------------------------- the EightStar diamond “approximated the symmetry of the (computer) model.” ----------------------------------- shows that they were pretty much doing what Eighstar claims they were doing, minus the editorial hype of course. John |
|
|
Post#3 @
03-04-02
, 01:21 PM
Good point, and then they go on to hire Al Gilbertson from Eightstar. GIA is also fighting that no term such as "Ideal" be used at all. I think this has the two major labs squaring off.......ding, ding, round two to follow. |
|
|
Post#4 @
03-04-02
, 02:10 PM
Quote:
Which is, in fact, a ringing endorsement for Eightstar and quite a sting to other diamond brands that tout their exceedingly low tolerances for deviances in external proportions. The fact is, each Eightstar has different proportions because each stone is cut to maximize its own internal symmetry regardless of external tolerances or proportions. However other brands, such as Superbcert, use as their main marketing tool the fact that each diamond meets a very tight specified set of external proportions. The fact that GIA has stated that there is no single best set of proportions for a diamond then makes a stronger case for Eightstar and for Garry's research, which is based not on a set of proportions but how the diamond performs under a scope designed to show light return (such as the ideal scope or the Firescope). This same statement is a blow to AGS's grading system, which is based entirely on external proportions, as well as EGL's "Tolkowsky Ideal" and other brands that market their stones based on external proportions. Shelby |
||
|
Post#5 @
03-04-02
, 03:36 PM
Hi; Shelby, Good to see you're feeling better. Last time I looked, the LightScope images and the internal symmetrics for SuperbCert were/are stellar. BTW; no response to my private e-mail of about 2 weeks ago? Que Pasa? Barry http://www.superbcert.com "When Good Isn't Good Enough" [Edited by barry on 03-04-02 at 03:37 PM] |
|
|
*Hello to Marvin!!*
Post#6 @
03-04-02
, 04:13 PM
I have read and studied everyone's contributions to the above thread and can truthfully say I don't have a single comment to make about them. I do want to say, "Hi" to Marvin, though. Marvin, do you have a website in operation now? If so, please post the url. I miss you and would like to visit. AGBF |
|
|
web site
Post#7 @
03-04-02
, 05:48 PM
Hi good looking ,I just sell to the trade I do a lot of lurking ,smiling and laughing at many of the remarks on this network. There are a few that have an answer for everything.If people would believe most of the comments they could fill a hot air balloon. Many of the people in the loop have drifed away.Lifes to short to repeat, repeat, and repeat.Good selling stuff for the ones that need it. How's the east coast ,when you coming to the west where the sun really sets. Marvin |
|
|
|
|
Hi Marvin!
Post#8 @
03-04-02
, 08:51 PM
We miss you around here!!! |
|
|
Hi Barry, Sorry, I was sick and off the computer and then went into the hospital. Once I read your PM I couldn't find the thread again. Send me a link and I'd be happy to retract. I think that GIA (and Garry's) research is veering away from the external proportions definition of "ideal" and I also think that certain resellers (not you) are desperately grasping to the external proportions argument to try and sell diamonds that simply don't perform well (certain AGS000s, for example, or EGL's misnamed "Tolkowsky ideals"). For Superbcerts to perform well under the lightscope, display excellent symmetry, and have tight tolerances is certainly a win-win situation--the best of all worlds. Shelby 
|
|
| Read Messages in: | DIAMONDS | All forums | ||||
| Newer: |
|
|
||||
| Older: |
|
|
||||
|
| ||||||
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
| Contact Us - Guidelines - Privacy Policy - Refer a Friend - Top^ |
|
|
