On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 23:50:21 -0400, Mike Raiford  
<mraXXXiford.at.@g1023mail.com> wrote:

> On the left is a Table Cut. Nothing exciting, basically follows the
> natural shape of a diamond. On the right is an Old Single Cut with two
> different parameters. Neither of these are the well-known brilliant cut,
> though the Old Single cut may very well be the basis for the brilliant
> cut, since it already has all of the proper angles.

I did a brilliant round cut a few years ago, but was never satisfied with  
the results.  They just never had the level of sparkle that I see in real  
diamonds.  Looking at the light traces, I suspect that my parameters may  
be suboptimal.  (I got the parameters from a Web site that appears to have  
passed on.)

I also suspect a bug (feature?) in dispersion: renders seem to be darker  
than without dispersion.  It just occurred to me that the multiple  
reflections and refractions in a cut gem could possibly exacerbate the  
problem.

I know Chris B. will show up to buttonhole us any second now, so I'll just  
say that I've been shy about submitting this, because of my  
dissatisfaction of the sparkle, but also because I fear that, with just  
the one cut, the module lacks generality.


-- 
<Insert witty .sig here>

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'diamond0-lo.jpg' (5 KB) Download 'diamond0-hi.jpg' (6 KB) Download 'diamond-demo-c.png' (33 KB) Download 'diamond_b90.png' (63 KB) Download 'diamond_b75.png' (130 KB)

Preview of image 'diamond0-lo.jpg'

Preview of image 'diamond0-hi.jpg'

Preview of image 'diamond-demo-c.png'

Preview of image 'diamond_b90.png'

Preview of image 'diamond_b75.png'