3 years, 4 months ago-
Posts
-
I would like some clarification on how to judge the size of the stone. Dan Lynch in his cutting review says to measure from the G4, G5 point to P11. Well P11 does not meat the girdle so is one supposed to guess on where one thinks P11 will hit the girdle. The L/W of the stone is 1.001 so it seems to me that a more accurate measuring point would be the 96, 48 point. Which is G1 /G9.
Good catch – I certainly made an error on the width instructions. Stay tuned, this is being checked with the head of the competition committee and we will post here and update the write up timely.
Great question. I was just wondering the same thing when I was reading the instructions. I hope we can get the info soon.
Thank you for keeping us up to date.
I have been studying the diagram and now understand that this design is really a misshapen-ed round by having a L/W of 1.001. The largest measuring points would be 24/72 which would be points or 96/48 with one flat and one point. Measuring from G5 would be another option but G5 does have an angle involved which would be harder to measure from accurately. It is important to get the size correct or face a large deduction. This design is going to be a challenge to cut, at least for me, with so many angle changes and is worthy of being a Grandmaster stone. I am not sure I will enter having taken a break from faceting for a number of years. Depends on how well by test cuts turn out.
To boil it all down, the width should be measured as marked on the diagram. Surely a Grand Master candidate can interpret a GemCad diagram.
Alan, in the review by Dan Lynch he stated it should be measured from G4, G5 and P11. He has since stated he was wrong. That is where the confusion lies. If the review had not stated what it did I would have measured by the diagram. Evidently you have not followed this thread. Why the sarcasm? Is it because I said I like an analog angle head and you disagreed with you previous post?
I should add Dan has stated it will reviewed by the competition committee which should settle the matter. Others wait on the answer as well because having the size correct without any question really matters.
” Surely a Grand Master candidate can interpret a GemCad diagram.”
I just want to say that someone who is an officer at the USFG to insult someone insinuating they cannot read a Gemcad diagram is insulting. I would expect more professionalism even if I was not able to read a diagram. Having competed at the International Australian contest I am obligated to compete at the grandmaster level.
Having competed at the 2014 International Faceting Challenge with 4 other Grandmasters which made up the team and placing above 2 other Grandmasters on our team I do not have to prove I can cut at the Grandmaster level. At least I could in 2014. I placed 11th against all the cutters in the world that entered that event.
Alan I look forward to hearing about your accomplishments in the Faceting world.
I do not think I want to participate on this forum any more if this is the an officer treats a member. At my age I do not need the hassle and drama that goes on at a forum when one just ask a simple question about the correct size of a competition stone.
Alan , you are spot on.
Master and Grand Master’s have the skills to read a simple design
and figure it out.I am perfectly able to design a stone using Gemcad but for the sake of us that are not as intelligent as Alan and Ron let them tell us the place to measure from to achieve 12mm and not be penalized. Dan has already stated that the competition committee is going to give clarification but appears your two already know how so tell us. As I see the diagram the largest measuring point would be either 24/72 or 96/48. Either should be the longest spot being that the L/W is 1.001. I honestly believe Alan’s post was just made being a jerk towards me, to insult me. Both of you tell us where to measure from where no one will be measuring from the wrong place or perhaps you both just want to keep the info for yourselves to have an advantage.
I got away for faceting having achieved my goal of being on the American team competing at the Olympics of gemcutting the Australian International Challenge and for the last 5 years or more I have been building audio amplifiers. I have built more than 40 with 15 or more being tube amplifiers built just from a schematic with the technique of point to point. Compared to an electronic schematic a facet diagram is no more than child’s play. It is insulting to me for members here to challenge my ability to read a Gemcad diagram any worse than they can. I am in good company with Dan Lynch waiting for clarification from the committee. Unless the two smarter guys can tell us where to measure from being that their talents are better than mine I will wait to hear from the committee.
Hi David, drawings…being a tech myself, I can agree on complexity and even the schematics you are building from, tube I take it, are small too, but complex on it’s own merit and knowledge. Reading a diagram is what it is all about. What I find funny is all the drawings I have seen used for faceting or any mechanical drawing is they are to scale. Take the calipers and measure the drawing and calculate. Am I thinking to simple here and all those numbers, simple math again, How else does one figure out if they have enough material, math…can someone explain the volume formula and how that is used?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.