ChicagoDave
has rocks in the head
Member since June 2016
Posts: 720
|
Post by ChicagoDave on Sept 22, 2018 5:19:30 GMT -5
Wow. These are all beautiful. Great job and thanks for posting!
|
|
Thesilversmith
off to a rocking start
Member since August 2015
Posts: 12 
|
Post by Thesilversmith on Sept 23, 2018 15:42:30 GMT -5
Are you stopping short of your meet points to avoid over cutting?it affects the performance of the stone when meet points are not met.
Just curious.
Dave
|
|
micellular
has rocks in the head
Rock fever is curable with more rocks.
Member since September 2015
Posts: 640
|
Post by micellular on Sept 24, 2018 13:11:04 GMT -5
Are you stopping short of your meet points to avoid over cutting?it affects the performance of the stone when meet points are not met. Just curious. Dave The effect on performance is marginal; ambient lighting has far more of an effect than whether my meets are a <tenth of a mm short. These are my own designs anyways, and I try to make them robust enough to tolerate small deviations from exactness. Let's see you do better before throwing stones, Dave. |
|
|
|
Post by Drummond Island Rocks on Sept 24, 2018 13:27:15 GMT -5
Really nice eye candy there. I enjoyed viewing them. Thanks for continuing to post your faceting work.
Chuck
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2018 14:19:44 GMT -5
The effect on performance is marginal; ambient lighting has far more of an effect than whether my meets are a <tenth of a mm short. These are my own designs anyways, and I try to make them robust enough to tolerate small deviations from exactness. I agree. Angles that maximize (or come close to maximizing) the brightness also have a bigger effect. Photos magnify every tiny detail, even beyond what is noticeable by eye, is of no concern to most - NO gem has perfect meetpoints if magnified enough. In an age of robots and automated cutting machines, I don't know that I'm even attracted to cookie-cutter "perfection" any longer. I far prefer stones with interesting inclusions to the idea of "flawlessness" (that can by imitated and synthesized much cheaper than natural gems) and similarly I've grown/matured to appreciate unique and uncommon cuts that someone thought out and hand produced that deviate from the mass-market designs that anyone can get anywhere. |
|
gemfeller
Cave Dweller 
Member since June 2011
Posts: 4,069
|
Post by gemfeller on Sept 24, 2018 15:20:46 GMT -5
@rocks2dust , I agree with most of your post but have reservations about your views on "flawlessness." The problem is that consumers don't agree with it even though the professional GIA standard for judging clarity in colored stones is very different from that of diamonds. I've had gems returned quite often because they had a very tiny inclusion invisible to the naked eye. The public and even the Trade to some extent have accepted diamond clarity standards for colored gems.
The GIA several years ago adopted an entirely different standard for transparent colored stone clarity from its method for diamonds. It's in 3 parts: Type I (gems that are very clean in nature as with aquamarine; Type II (gems that grow with some minor inclusions in nature with some eye-visible like ruby; and Type III (gems that typically grow with many eye-visible inclusions like emerald.)
The problem is that no one uses it, reverting instead to the old GIA diamond clarity standard of Flawless, VVS1, VVS2, etc. The public has simply been conditioned to demand diamond clarity in colored stones.
I had to chuckle when I showed a woman my emerald selection recently. All the stones are natural except one, a Russian hydrothermal synthetic. She immediately singled it out as her favorite despite the fact that other natural stones in the tray are worth many times more. I have no idea how to overcome that consumer preference other than continued education. I for one have no use for synthetic gems. They can be produced in any quantity, each nearly perfect, which calls into question the traditional concept of gem values based in part on rarity.
|
|
slomoshun
starting to shine!
Experienced bad influence
Member since April 2018
Posts: 38
|
Post by slomoshun on Sept 24, 2018 18:05:16 GMT -5
....All the stones are natural except one, a Russian hydrothermal synthetic. She immediately singled it out as her favorite despite the fact that other natural stones in the tray are worth many times more.
Worth more now, but as those who appreciate natural stones age out of the scene and are replaced by a generation who has different values and doesn't care, the price of natural gems will likely tank. I foresee the gem industry following the path of mechanical watches and film photography. CNC automation that can produce faceted perfection in volume will hasten the devaluation of both natural and synthetic gems. Digital is quickly changing everything as we've known it.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2018 18:06:27 GMT -5
I have no idea how to overcome that consumer preference other than continued education. I for one have no use for synthetic gems. They can be produced in any quantity, each nearly perfect, which calls into question the traditional concept of gem values based in part on rarity. I agree, education is the only thing that will get folks to appreciate a real gem over a synthetic (or colored glass, for that matter). I can sympathize with the emerald anecdote - the inclusions are a big part of why we value the natural stones (assuming they aren't opaque and you can barely make out the inclusions). They want 'em big and they want 'em completely flawless and they want 'em dirt cheap = a mark ripe for some Asian factory selling CZ misrepresented as something else. |
|
gemfeller
Cave Dweller
Member since June 2011
Posts: 4,069
|
Post by gemfeller on Sept 24, 2018 21:45:37 GMT -5
....All the stones are natural except one, a Russian hydrothermal synthetic. She immediately singled it out as her favorite despite the fact that other natural stones in the tray are worth many times more.
Worth more now, but as those who appreciate natural stones age out of the scene and are replaced by a generation who has different values and doesn't care, the price of natural gems will likely tank. I foresee the gem industry following the path of mechanical watches and film photography. CNC automation that can produce faceted perfection in volume will hasten the devaluation of both natural and synthetic gems. Digital is quickly changing everything as we've known it. Possibly. I'd make a bet with you that there will always be a high-end market for natural precious gems. But being part of that "older generation" that must die off before your scenario plays out, I wouldn't be able to collect if I won anyhow.  Flame fusion Rubies and sapphires were first synthesized in the 1890s, yet the market for fine natural rubies today has priced them far above most people's pocketbooks. Ditto fine natural sapphires, though not to the same degree as rubies. Rubies are now only for the rich and very rich. That's why natural red spinel, once ridiculed, has now become the red transparent gem of choice. Its prices have skyrocketed since 2000 and I only wish I'd bought more of it when prices were reasonable. |
|
Thesilversmith
off to a rocking start
Member since August 2015
Posts: 12
|
Post by Thesilversmith on Sept 24, 2018 22:11:39 GMT -5
You can view my work on Instagram Timberwolfartisansguild
|
|
mossyrockhound
fully equipped rock polisher
Member since January 2011
Posts: 1,315
|
Post by mossyrockhound on Oct 4, 2018 0:02:15 GMT -5
At first I thought you were showing faceted amethysts. After reading through the comments I see they really are garnets - way nicer than the almandine garnets I have found. Great job on some beautiful stones. My favorite in this set is the second one - that little design in the center is very eye-catching. I know garnets come in many different colors. My absolute favorite stone is tsavorite garnet.
|
|
... to the New Guys from The ChatBox V.2 Crew