confused about radiants

[confused about radiants]

I have been shopping for the "perfect" radiant cut for about 2 months. Last friday, I got a phone call from the jeweler I''ve been working with telling me that he had found the elusive 1A radiant I''d been looking for. I was sure that I''d finally found my diamond. But when I looked at it in the store next to the 2B radiant I''d seen before, the 1A didn''t look as nice. The 2B weighed the same and looked larger. To my unpracticed eyes, it also looked brighter. Is this possible?

The specs on the 1A are:

1.04 F VS2
6.30x5.03x3.12
62% depth
61% table
very good
very good
none
14.7% crown height

the specs on the 2B are:

1.03 F VS2
6.7x5.3x3.65
68.9% depth
67% table
good
good
none
10.1% crown height

The prices are about the same. I''m afraid to buy either one for fear of "messing up." Do any of the radiant experts out there have any advice?

 

[icelady]

Hi CAR,

Welcome to PriceScope and the world of Radiants!

I am a Radiant owner, and I love them! I am not an expert though.

I will take a guess at why the 2B may have looked better to you. The depth on the 2B Radiant may produce more fire than the 1A. I am surprised at the difference in length and width, except that the crown height may play a part in that. Maybe some of the experts can chime in. By the dimensions it is easy to see why the 2B looks larger too.

Now you know first hand why you need to actually see fancy cut diamonds, like Radiants, to know which one is for you!

Good luck with your search and please keep us posted!

 

[belle]

what are the girdle sizes? the 1a may have a thick+ girdle and the 1b may have thin. this can make a difference in size.

 

[valeria101]

Well, you saw the two diamonds, not anyone else.

The AGA standard does not pretend to select the most brilliant diamonds - the information that goes into those cut grades is not enough to pinpoint the looks of the stones. A good start, but not the whole story. I don't think you can possibly "mess up".

Not sure what the "perfect" radiant can be, but a very brilliant one with decent proportions makes a good start. The AGA grades say "nice proportions" this far. The brilliance part remains to be discovered. If what you see is not satisfactory enough because of limited choice (as usual, really), there are tools to analyze and rank diamonds... Not exactly 1000 options, but definitely quite a few - sure you must have found some info on these after looking around this forum. Some shops insist to use 'em all. Like THIS.

Of these tools, the Ideal Scope (see link) is the only available to shoppers directly - the others remain for jewelers to use. I bet that your impression of the diamonds would be confirmed by such a test. On top of that, it would become clear if there is any room for improvement left over the more brilliant stone of the two.

Just my 0.2, of course.

 

[moosewendy]

Trust your eyes, not the charts. It is quite possible for a "2A" to be a superior cut to a "1A." Radiants are extremely complicated, and a full evaluation of cut requires far more information than is contained in the AGA charts. For example, your 1A stone seems to spread quite small for its carat weight, even though the depth% is low. In all liklihood, this results from a substantial "bulge" on the pavilion of the diamond. Diamonds cut like that often lack life, because, in order to "swndle" out the low depth%, the facets that form the culet are actually cut too flat, in order to compensate for the diamond weight retained elsewhere in the pavilion. In this way, you end up with a small looking stone, which nevertheless has the leakage normally associated with a stone which is too flat.

Charts like the AGA are useful tools for narrowing choices prior to seeing the actual stones. Nevertheless, I''m not sure the AGA rankings even represent an industry concensus, and they certainly should not be a substitute for your own judgment. If the 2A stone looks bigger and brighter to you, then it is the better cut, period. My advice is buy the 2A and don''t look back!!

 

[confused about radiants]

Thanks for the replies. I think I''m going to trust my eyes and buy the 2B. Just one question - if the AGA rankings are not intended to evaluate brilliance, what do they mean? I didn''t really understand Moosewendy''s response, but if a lower depth percentage doesn''t mean the diamond will look bigger or be more brilliant what difference does it make?

 

[oldminer]

In the next few weeks we will begin to offer Light Performance grading with Imagem technology and combine it with a highly modified, and simplified AGA Cut Class parameters. These new parameters will only work along with a device that measures light. This means that we can greatly expand which diamonds may be the nicest looking along with being well cut for size appearance and durability. I believe it will be a lot like GIA and AGS systems later in 2005, and possibly even better.....One never knows, and we will let the truth decide once it is available. When experts compare the validity of the results, we will know.

Without light performance measurements and with consumers attempting to buy blindly on the Internet, the AGA Cut Class standards, as they exist today, have been helpful tools in screening diamonds for good potential. 700 plus NAJA members use these standards as diamond cut grading tools in evaluating diamonds. The Russians of Moscow State University and Helium technology have these built into their DiamCalc program. Maybe, because there is no other system, but maybe the system does have some benefit, too. At least, I never charged anyone to use it and never misprepresented what it was good for. The diamond business is full of tools that don't work right and cost thousands. Free is good, especially when it has been recognized as useful by quite a reasonably large number of experts. You have to think outisde of the GIA mindset if you want to be more than a gemology robot....GIA is where a lot of us began our learning, but the world is just full of other knowledge.

Anyway, it is quite possible that a radiant cut to 1A would look less good to you than a radiant cut to 2B. This could be because the 2B is a better light performer. It could be that you really don't know how to grade what your eyes see. This is a huge problem that cannot be explained easily. If a Radiant is graded in the 2A or 2B range, it may well be a very normal stone for its type, but it "could" have problems. They might not be apparent to a consumer.

The future grading of diamonds will be far more elegant.

 

[confused about radiants]

David, thanks for your reply, but now I''m confused again. Are you saying that there is likely to be a problem with the 2B that I don''t understand? The diamond looks great to me, but it''s alot of money and I''m nervous about making a mistake. I can''t buy the 1A since it just doesn''t look nice, maybe because of the stuff moosewendy said. Can a 2B be a well cut diamond, or does it have to have problems which I don''t understand? How can I tell? Unfortunately, I can''t wait for your new technology. I want to do this for Christmas, so I need to decide.

 

[belle]

go with what looks good to you!! that is really all that matters. you have to actually like looking at the ring. you sure don''t want to get a stone that you don''t like just because there are some #''s that say it should be good, you''ll never be happy. let your eyes and your heart guide you. best of luck.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/21/2004 60:12 PM
Author: confused about radiants

The diamond looks great to me, but it's alot of money and I'm nervous about making a mistake.

Can a 2B be a well cut diamond, or does it have to have problems which I don't understand ?

Now, what can the mistake be ? You mayeither (1) find a larger diamond for the money next day, or (2) see one that is seriously more brilliant, or... (3) this one may break on the way home... no ?

The high AGA grades (ok, 2B is not the bottom of the scale, right ?) promise that #3 doesn't happen, and that #1 gets very unlikely. Not much about #2 though - not yet. There are ways to deal with it though, and after a doze of Pricescope you may know what I am talking about

Hope this makes some sense. I am not saying anything different than the previous posts (at least it is not my intention to).

Comparing the two diamonds, the nicet one appears to be a bit larger as well. There doesn't seem to be any argument in favor of the other, really. If there is a third that's way nicer out there, there is no way to guess by the numbers. Do you want to know ?

 

[oldminer]

The business of high quality diamonds is a hair-splitting contest. There is little likely to be "wrong" with a 2B. It is more a matter that a small thing or two could be "better" that "might" be invisible to YOU. Can you see the difference from D to E or E to F color? Can you tell a diamond is IF or VVS2? Certainly not with the naked eye. The same holds true with cutting. Tiny things make large changes in cut grade, yet have little material effect on your pleasure.

A 2B might be a little deep, a little shallow, a bit thin girdled---some sort of little issue that the trade recognizes, but would prefer you not to know about. If a 2B pleases you, it probably will be very serviceable. Very few 1A to 2B radiants exist, most are 3 and 4 level cut yet they still get sold. So I'd suggest not to be too worried.

 

[confused about radiants]

Thanks again for everyone''s help. I''m going to take the 2B, its easily the nicest radiant I''ve seen. The jeweler thinks I''m nuts, since I drove him crazy demanding a 1A and I''m winding up buying a 2B. The 2B may have subtle defects that don''t effect it''s beauty, but the 1A has obvious problems obvious even to my untrained eye. I guess no system is perfect and you just do the best you can with the info you have.

You all have made me much more comfortable with my choice. I guess nothing beats trusting your own eyes.

 

[belle]

i''m so glad you are comfortable with your decision, that is what matters most!
.....you will post pics, right?

 

[HollyGo-Lightly]

Do post pictures of the stone!!! I would love to see this 2B radiant. My aunt got a radiant recently and it''s a 4A cut according to AGA... It has LOTS of fire, but supposedly is really bad according to the charts. Curious to see how a 2B looks!!!!

Congrats on your find and all the best to you!!!

 

[oldminer]

With most radiants that score very low on the AGA Cut Class charts it generally is a matter of shallow crown height, way to much depth and sometimes a very large table. There is a widening range of possibilities as the cut grade gets lower so it is hard to say what or how much is bad about a low graded diamond. It could have decent light return, but it would be a safe bet that it is probably looking much smaller for its weight than some others. It might be safe to bet it does not have good distribution of light return or even dispersion. These things may seem unapparent or unimportant to a casual or lay oberserver, but these things do not get past the eyes of trained diamond dealers. The value is negatively impacted by less proper cutting although the price asked for a diamond may not be at all different. It depends how astute the buyer is. Caveat Emptor.

In the end, how well you like a stone is all that is necessary. If you ever re-enter the market with it, it will be how well a diamond expert likes it and then a poorly cut example is seen immediately as such by the expert buyer. It pays to shop well and find a nicely cut example even if your eyes don''t have the training to see all the details.

 

[confused about radiants]

I''m not sure how, but I''ll try to figure out how to post a picture next week.

 

[belle]

it''s not just diamonds experts around here. there are picture posting experts as well!!!!

can''t wait to see it!!!

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Hey Confused- this is an area where many "experts" do not agree.
I respect the work being done by Garry Holliway as well as Dave Atlas, and many others. This work seems designed to fix a numerical quantity on the cut of a diamond.
As Dave points out- with folks buying blind on the internet, this would seem to be a very good idea.

Except, in my opnion, there will never be a way to properly judge a diamond''s beauty using a nemerical scale- or light return numbers.

I have had amazing Radiant cut diamonds which produced terrible results on the "Ideal Scope". So what should I do?
NOT buy a great looking Radiant because it does not look good thru a pink plastic viewer? I don''t think so.

In your case, folks have put diamonds into groupings which obviously mean little or nothing.
I feel that theses groupings do more harm than good- and your situation is the perfect example of why.
YOUR EYES ARE NOT LYING!!!!
If you love one stone better because it plays with the light in a more pleasing manner than the other, what difference does it make if someone says it''s 1A or 36C??

 

[belle]

If you love one stone better because it plays with the light in a more pleasing manner than the other, what difference does it make if someone says it''s 1A or 36C??

funny how a guy ends up with a # like 36C!!

 

[chris143007]

i was about to write "nothing wrong with 36c!"

 

[diamondsbylauren]

SEXISTS.... all of you