Question about square H&A''s

[brandonhead]

If I were looking for a square H&A what dimensions should I look for? I''ve read that color is more noticable in princess cut diamonds, does that go for the square H&A''s as well?

My girlfriend likes princess cuts, but after reading on pricescope I think a square H&A would be better. She''ll love whatever I get her. It''s what the diamond represents that the diamond itself.
Never thought picking out a diamond would be so confusing and frustrating. Thanks for any help.

 

[diamond_quester]

If you don't get a lot of responses, it's because not a lot of people here have square H&A's or have seen them in person. From your research you have probably figured out who those PS-ers are and can check out their rings. The only online vendor I know of who carries square H&A's is Good Old Gold. The folks there can answer your questions more specifically.

Supposedly "brilliant cuts", including sq H&A, hide color and clarity flaws better. I expect G-H to be safe while I-J may depend on your taste and color sensitivity.

It's not clear if square H&A's are "better" than the new AGS000 Princess cuts, again a matter of taste. GOG has those princesses, I think, and so do a few other vendors mentioned here, e.g. Ice Mine and Wink's.

I had considered square H&A's for my ring too but didn't look too hard into them as they cost ~10% more than the Flanders cuts I was looking at, plus it was not that easy for me to check them out myself to see if the premium was worth it. (It could well be!)

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

I would disagree with the notion that mainly brilliant-cuts are hiding colour face-up.

The reason why well-cut stones hide colour is because the viewer is being blinded by an overwhelming light-return. As such, this can be achieved in basically any cut, brilliant-cuts, princess-cut or others.

True, most traditional princess-cuts are classic examples of bad light performance, and as such, they show their true body colour much easier. But this is not necessarily true for all princess-cuts.

The square H&A as such is an attempt of trying to combine a squarish outline with the very popular contrast-pattern of H&A. Technically, it is cut like a round, and turned squarish afterwards.

A princess has a totally different facet-pattern, and the contrast-pattern can therefore never be H&A. However, one can achieve very nice contrast-patterns in princesses, which give fantastic light performance. And what is important, in that case, the stone is square, not squarish.

Live long,

 

[Capitol Bill]

Date: 4/18/2006 9:36:08 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp
I would disagree with the notion that mainly brilliant-cuts are hiding colour face-up.


The reason why well-cut stones hide colour is because the viewer is being blinded by an overwhelming light-return. As such, this can be achieved in basically any cut, brilliant-cuts, princess-cut or others.


True, most traditional princess-cuts are classic examples of bad light performance, and as such, they show their true body colour much easier. But this is not necessarily true for all princess-cuts.


The square H&A as such is an attempt of trying to combine a squarish outline with the very popular contrast-pattern of H&A. Technically, it is cut like a round, and turned squarish afterwards.


A princess has a totally different facet-pattern, and the contrast-pattern can therefore never be H&A. However, one can achieve very nice contrast-patterns in princesses, which give fantastic light performance. And what is important, in that case, the stone is square, not squarish.


Live long,

brandonhead,

If you have a chance to examine a square H&A, make sure to check the girdle thickness. You''ll see exactly what Paul is talking about (above in bold).

Best of luck!
Bill Scherlag

 

[SSam]

It is interesting to note that because of this, the arrows will be slightly stubby, ie. they will not form a perfect point because the ends will have been cut off when the diamond is cut squarish AFTER the stone has already been cut.