Do marquise have fire and brilliance?

[therainbowradish]

Rockdiamond I would be curious about your thoughts on mine since it is only 53% depth. It is Y color and has a charming culet with little bowtie.

 

[drk14]

Drk- although I agree that well cut marquise are rare, I would not base a market opinion on stones one can see online.

I stand corrected, thanks for calling me out.
As you infer, the population on which my 10% estimate (availability of what I would consider well-cut marquise) is based are those diamonds for which pictures and video are published on the internet. This is still a relevant sample, because those are exactly the diamonds we would be looking at when making recommendations to an online shopper who asks for advice on PS. Conversely, in a well-appointed B&M with expertise in fancies, the percentage of well-cut marquise should be significantly higher.

In terms of the tips- there's no way I've seen to eliminate the small VF's one might associate with "crushed ice".
The shape and placement of the facets won't allow larger VF's at the tips.
You mentioned you'd seen mq stones with chunky facets at the tips- maybe we're thinking of different things?

The available terminology to describe what we see is woefully inadequate. But look at the video posted by Serg. As the diamond tilts, we see flashes turn on and off, which are reflections from real and virtual facets. The size of each these individual flashes is largest in the belly of the mq, but the virtual facets above and below the belly, all the way to the N/S points, are not that much smaller (maybe 20-50% the area) than the belly VFs. Thus, I would call this scintillation pattern "chunky" throughout the body of the marquise.

At the same time, in the same video, if we look in the background (behind/between the "chunky" flashes), we do see the star-light twinkle of pinpoint flashes, i.e., which is what I will consider a characteristic of "crushed ice" for the sake of argument. But because there is no region in which there are only pinpoint flashes and no "chunky" flashes, I would rate this a well-cut marquise (by my subjective preferences).

In any case, I don't disagree with your statement that it may be impossible to eliminate small VFs. It's just that in my preferred flavor of marquise, there will be a field of chunkier VFs whose flashes distract from the pinpoint fire coming from the background.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

http://cutwise.com/share/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire
http://cutwise.com/stone/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire

Serg,
These movies are amazing (and very clearly illustrate the performance of a well-cut marquise)!

Are they simulations based on scan data? Is this example a real diamond or a numerical experiment?

Hi DRK,
I was aware of Sergey's marquise at the start of this topic, but mentioned that these stones are not currently available. This stone is listed on CutWise a.d MSS - it is a new stone as it is not even listed on the MSS site http://www.octonus.com/oct/mss/table.phtml, and to my knowledge none are yet available - this stone is marked as such.
This stone is real - it does exist - the video is made in ViBox which is starting to become a market standard for high quality videos of diamonds gems and jewels.

Could you show us images of what you mean of the 10% or whatever of good Maquise - because until I saw this first MSS marquise I have never seen a good example of a marquise.

 

[thecat]

Serg, that's a very firey marquise

 

[drk14]

Could you show us images of what you mean of the 10% or whatever of good Maquise - because until I saw this first MSS marquise I have never seen a good example of a marquise.

I think the one I purchased for my fiancee is pretty good.
I would describe it as having three broad bands of "chunky" facets -- across the belly, as well as midway between each point and the belly region. In the side bands, the facets are splintery and somewhat disorganized (maybe that is something that you would also call "crushed ice", whereas I would reserve such a descriptor for areas of miniscule VFs that produce pinpoint flashes), but importantly: these facets definitely give off "chunky" on/off flashes and fire in real life. More images and ASETs of this diamond here.

I could post other examples from the JA inventory, but I don't know if that would be allowed by PS rules. You might check my post history for recommendations I've made in the past.

The Cutwise site appears to only have 13 mq, and Sergey's is clearly the best among those. It appears to be an unusual cut with extra facets, so I've referenced it here mainly as an example of the subjective impression that a non-crushed mq will give, not as a proof of existence of well-cut mq in the wild.

I could see if I can find good examples among the other elongated fancies (pear, oval) on the Cutwise site, if that will help clarify what I mean by a well-cut marquise? (assuming that doing so doesn't break any rules)

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Could you show us images of what you mean of the 10% or whatever of good Maquise - because until I saw this first MSS marquise I have never seen a good example of a marquise.

I think the one I purchased for my fiancee is pretty good.
I would describe it as having three broad bands of "chunky" facets -- across the belly, as well as midway between each point and the belly region. In the side bands, the facets are splintery and somewhat disorganized (maybe that is something that you would also call "crushed ice", whereas I would reserve such a descriptor for areas of miniscule VFs that produce pinpoint flashes), but importantly: these facets definitely give off "chunky" on/off flashes and fire in real life. More images and ASETs of this diamond here.

I could post other examples from the JA inventory, but I don't know if that would be allowed by PS rules. You might check my post history for recommendations I've made in the past.

The Cutwise site appears to only have 13 mq, and Sergey's is clearly the best among those. It appears to be an unusual cut with extra facets, so I've referenced it here mainly as an example of the subjective impression that a non-crushed mq will give, not as a proof of existence of well-cut mq in the wild.

I could see if I can find good examples among the other elongated fancies (pear, oval) on the Cutwise site, if that will help clarify what I mean by a well-cut marquise? (assuming that doing so doesn't break any rules)

Perfectly OK to post images without reference to the stone 4C's and vendor for these types of discussion DRK

 

[Serg]

http://cutwise.com/share/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire
http://cutwise.com/stone/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire

Serg,
These movies are amazing (and very clearly illustrate the performance of a well-cut marquise)!

Are they simulations based on scan data? Is this example a real diamond or a numerical experiment?

these movies are from real diamond.

it is our first attempt to design marquise with medium size VF's , uniform pattern , good table color( short ray path) and big Fire.
Tips( knot) area is not perfect yet. we will try improve it in next attempts.

 

[thecat]

http://cutwise.com/share/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire
http://cutwise.com/stone/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire

Serg,
These movies are amazing (and very clearly illustrate the performance of a well-cut marquise)!

Are they simulations based on scan data? Is this example a real diamond or a numerical experiment?

these movies are from real diamond.

it is our first attempt to design marquise with medium size VF's , uniform pattern , good table color( short ray path) and big Fire.
Tips( knot) area is not perfect yet. we will try improve it in next attempts.

Looking forward to your revised marquise. Btw, does cutwise sell diamonds? Why is there no price on the stones? Or is it just an educational website or blog?

 

[Niel]

http://cutwise.com/share/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire
http://cutwise.com/stone/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire

Serg,
These movies are amazing (and very clearly illustrate the performance of a well-cut marquise)!

Are they simulations based on scan data? Is this example a real diamond or a numerical experiment?

these movies are from real diamond.

it is our first attempt to design marquise with medium size VF's , uniform pattern , good table color( short ray path) and big Fire.
Tips( knot) area is not perfect yet. we will try improve it in next attempts.

Oh I'll be very interested in that

 

[Serg]

http://cutwise.com/share/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire
http://cutwise.com/stone/6_HPD Marquise Summer 2015?format=video8Fire

Serg,
These movies are amazing (and very clearly illustrate the performance of a well-cut marquise)!

Are they simulations based on scan data? Is this example a real diamond or a numerical experiment?

these movies are from real diamond.

it is our first attempt to design marquise with medium size VF's , uniform pattern , good table color( short ray path) and big Fire.
Tips( knot) area is not perfect yet. we will try improve it in next attempts.

Looking forward to your revised marquise. Btw, does cutwise sell diamonds? Why is there no price on the stones? Or is it just an educational website or blog?

Cutwise does not sell any diamonds.
1) Cutwise is mainly B2B system for delivery adding value information for particular diamonds. Most cutters do not like( not ready ) publish retail prices. many does not like publish even wholesale prices .
they use this service just to share movies, photos with potential clients during direct communication( for my opinion, it is very weak business model, but it is not easy to change/)
most of them have buyer before they publish diamond on cutwise. some buyers prefer see additional information before confirm deal.
2) Cutwise is in developing stage . many features are not public yet, others are not even ready. yes we use it now mainly as "blog" for our cut design research and "Laboratory" to find a new way to show diamond Beauty, adding value diamonds. It is in R&D stage yet.

 

[thecat]

Serg, thanks for your reply. The concept of cutwise is new to me (since most PS online stores publish their own images/videos) yet it seems from your post that it has been in use for quite while.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Could you show us images of what you mean of the 10% or whatever of good Maquise - because until I saw this first MSS marquise I have never seen a good example of a marquise.

I think the one I purchased for my fiancee is pretty good.
I would describe it as having three broad bands of "chunky" facets -- across the belly, as well as midway between each point and the belly region. In the side bands, the facets are splintery and somewhat disorganized (maybe that is something that you would also call "crushed ice", whereas I would reserve such a descriptor for areas of miniscule VFs that produce pinpoint flashes), but importantly: these facets definitely give off "chunky" on/off flashes and fire in real life. More images and ASETs of this diamond here.

I could post other examples from the JA inventory, but I don't know if that would be allowed by PS rules. You might check my post history for recommendations I've made in the past.

The Cutwise site appears to only have 13 mq, and Sergey's is clearly the best among those. It appears to be an unusual cut with extra facets, so I've referenced it here mainly as an example of the subjective impression that a non-crushed mq will give, not as a proof of existence of well-cut mq in the wild.

I could see if I can find good examples among the other elongated fancies (pear, oval) on the Cutwise site, if that will help clarify what I mean by a well-cut marquise? (assuming that doing so doesn't break any rules)

I think something that gets lost in the mix very frequently on this forum is that taste plays an important role in deciding what constitutes a well cut diamond. Of course there are factors beyond taste, but taste does play an important role
DRK- your stone is amazing! I love the way it's cut.
For me, fire in a marquee is not all that important. Overall shape brilliance and sparkle are far more important. There are those who might select the marquee from the cut-wise site. But in my opinion, people that love Marquise (I do) would not find the Cutwise stone to be nearly as attractive as DRK's stone. Please do not take this as a knock on that stone – I very much admire the research being done by Garry and Serg- and others- to find new ways to cut diamonds.

Garry – you must admit, if you do not like a particular cut, it would be quite easy to say you've never seen one that's well cut.

 

[MJ_Mac]

Could you show us images of what you mean of the 10% or whatever of good Maquise - because until I saw this first MSS marquise I have never seen a good example of a marquise.

I think the one I purchased for my fiancee is pretty good.
I would describe it as having three broad bands of "chunky" facets -- across the belly, as well as midway between each point and the belly region. In the side bands, the facets are splintery and somewhat disorganized (maybe that is something that you would also call "crushed ice", whereas I would reserve such a descriptor for areas of miniscule VFs that produce pinpoint flashes), but importantly: these facets definitely give off "chunky" on/off flashes and fire in real life. More images and ASETs of this diamond here.

I could post other examples from the JA inventory, but I don't know if that would be allowed by PS rules. You might check my post history for recommendations I've made in the past.

The Cutwise site appears to only have 13 mq, and Sergey's is clearly the best among those. It appears to be an unusual cut with extra facets, so I've referenced it here mainly as an example of the subjective impression that a non-crushed mq will give, not as a proof of existence of well-cut mq in the wild.

I could see if I can find good examples among the other elongated fancies (pear, oval) on the Cutwise site, if that will help clarify what I mean by a well-cut marquise? (assuming that doing so doesn't break any rules)

I think something that gets lost in the mix very frequently on this forum is that taste plays an important role in deciding what constitutes a well cut diamond. Of course there are factors beyond taste, but taste does play an important role
DRK- your stone is amazing! I love the way it's cut.
For me, fire in a marquee is not all that important. Overall shape brilliance and sparkle are far more important. There are those who might select the marquee from the cut-wise site. But in my opinion, people that love Marquise (I do) would not find the Cutwise stone to be nearly as attractive as DRK's stone. Please do not take this as a knock on that stone – I very much admire the research being done by Garry and Serg- and others- to find new ways to cut diamonds.

Garry – you must admit, if you do not like a particular cut, it would be quite easy to say you've never seen one that's well cut.

Rockdiamond - Thanks for standing up for us marquise lovers! Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. I personally love marquise diamonds and always will. I buy with my eyes and what speaks to me.

Garry - I agree with Rockdiamond, you obviously don't like marquise diamonds which is very obvious by the way this discussion has gone.

 

[derbygal]

Radish, your marquise just made my heart skip a beat watching your video. Just WOW!

 

[drk14]

Perfectly OK to post images without reference to the stone 4C's and vendor for these types of discussion DRK

Garry -- The difference between what I consider well-cut and not cannot be seen without video imagery of a moving diamond (at least I cannot evaluate a marquise without moving the diamond). Thus, I would have to link JA or Ritani videos, which I think will prevent trade members from participating in discussion.

Are the Cutwise videos ok to use instead? Would examples of pear or oval diamonds that meet my criteria (similar to how I rate mq) suffice, or do we need to restrict ourselve specifically to marquise?

I think something that gets lost in the mix very frequently on this forum is that taste plays an important role in deciding what constitutes a well cut diamond.

David -- I agree! I don't know if that comment was addressed at me (since you quoted my previous post), but I have attempted as much as possible to qualify my use of "well-cut" to clarify that I am restricting myself to the particular flavor of marquise cut that I personally like to recommend. For someone who doesn't share my taste, my comments and recommendations would be worthless. Nonetheless, it gets repetitive to constantly write "what I personally consider well cut" instead of just "well cut", so if my posts use the latter phrasing, it is simply due to laziness (not an attempt to impose a universal standard of beaty for marquise).

 

[drk14]

Could you show us images of what you mean of the 10% or whatever of good Maquise

Garry,
This is not the best example, but I thought it was an interesting case.

In the still photo, it does not look very good at all (according to my subjective criteria). However, in the video (which I don't think I'm allowed to link, although you may be able to find it if you look around ), this mq shows excellent liveliness (crisp on/off flashing from VF's that are of reasonably large size) throughout most of the body, except for the very tips. This is an example of a mq I might recommend to someone who cares about scintillation but is not concerned with the aesthetics of the faceting geometry (which I personally find not to my taste in this particular stone).

As I've alluded, this discussion is not so useful without the videos. On the website, it's price is listed as "N/A", not sure if that makes it OK to link. If you're getting anything from viewing the still image alone, let me know, and I can try to find better examples.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Perfectly OK to post images without reference to the stone 4C's and vendor for these types of discussion DRK

Garry -- The difference between what I consider well-cut and not cannot be seen without video imagery of a moving diamond (at least I cannot evaluate a marquise without moving the diamond). Thus, I would have to link JA or Ritani videos, which I think will prevent trade members from participating in discussion.

Are the Cutwise videos ok to use instead? Would examples of pear or oval diamonds that meet my criteria (similar to how I rate mq) suffice, or do we need to restrict ourselve specifically to marquise?

I think something that gets lost in the mix very frequently on this forum is that taste plays an important role in deciding what constitutes a well cut diamond.

David -- I agree! I don't know if that comment was addressed at me (since you quoted my previous post), but I have attempted as much as possible to qualify my use of "well-cut" to clarify that I am restricting myself to the particular flavor of marquise cut that I personally like to recommend. For someone who doesn't share my taste, my comments and recommendations would be worthless. Nonetheless, it gets repetitive to constantly write "what I personally consider well cut" instead of just "well cut", so if my posts use the latter phrasing, it is simply due to laziness (not an attempt to impose a universal standard of beaty for marquise).

Hi drk, my comment about taste was not addressed to you at all!
What happens frequently is that new readers who are not well versed in diamonds can easily get the impression that opinions of others are actually fact based, as opposed to taste based.
I have tremendous respect for Garry's knowledge but we will still disagree on some important aspects of cut.

Just one example of the misperceptions is the thought that ASET images are necessary to tell if a diamond is well cut.
After a lot of time and experimentation, I can get a pretty good idea of how a diamond performs looking at the ASET.
But as we are stressing here, a lot of analysis of performance is about one's taste.
For someone who has not compared a lot of ASETS to actual diamonds a picture or video is far more intuitive to read.

You mentioned videos and I do agree they can be helpful. But again, sometimes videos are unintentionally misleading.
One vendor who has videos uses equipment that has the diamond laying on the pavilion. Some stones are easy to "read" from that angle, others are not.
For example: imperfection in some VS or SI stones might look horrible in such videos, while in person, the imperfection might be quite benign. A well cut stone videoed in this manner might look like it has a lot of windows.

Garry mentioned the ViBox- which puts the diamond table perpendicular to the lens. That can be a big improvement.
But the bottom line is that ANY photographic method has drawbacks.
Marquise's are one of the more difficult shapes to photograph for cut. Still, looking at yours (drk) I came easily see it's a winner

 

[drk14]

Perfectly OK to post images without reference to the stone 4C's and vendor for these types of discussion DRK

This one has nicer faceting (IMO) than the previous example I posted, and has plenty of chunky (non-pinpointy) flashes throughout the body, even at the tips:


Again, can't tell much about the performance from the still image alone...
(so I won't bother posting more pictures unless I get a green light on posting video links to Cutwise and/or JA, or if Garry confirms that seeing these still images of what I consider non-crushed ice mq is informative in some way).

 

[drk14]

Hi drk, my comment about taste was not addressed to you at all!

OK. Your comment is entirely apropos for this thread, by the way, because the thread contains examples of marquise of several different "flavors" (some quite uncommon at that). It would be a shame if a reader took a statement that has been made about one particular variety of marquise as a generalization that is applicabe to all mq flavors...

Marquise's are one of the more difficult shapes to photograph for cut. Still, looking at yours (drk) I came easily see it's a winner

Thanks, David!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

DRK I did not see any substantive difference between those 2 stones and what we might all consider better than most marquise. They all show the big virtual facet difference between the tips and the belly.
http://www.cutwise.com/stone/15_567...8Office&stereo=sets&size=comb&view_state=view
What do you think of this one? (BTW David - it is one of three marquise that I bought last week).
Mine show that tip to belly difference also.

What I do like about Marquise is they have a great spread - this one is 1.02ct but spreads 1.23ct.
And they cost less than rounds, which is a big wasted opportunity for consumers. In this example the RapNet List price shows a 25% price difference. So if you compare this marquise to a round diamond of the same cost, then it would be a comparison of a 90 point round vs a 1.02 marquise that spreads 1.23ct.
If you took just the parts of the Marquise "that work" and compared it to the 90 point best cut round, then the Marquise probably has more sparkle per dollar!

 

[Rockdiamond]

You bring up fantastic points Garry.
I have long maintained that the cost of a diamond is as important as the other four c's
About the ASET : I'd be interested to have a real life look. The larger red patches in the center could easily be static dark areas. But even a slight tilt might light them up. Likely if you bought the stone the red changes as I describe with tilt.

Drk- my comments can be valid on so many threads here on PS.
I have had discussions with consumers who've read many threads here and told me unequivocally that they hated "crushed ice"
But when I showed them stones that exhibit this effect they were blown away, and loved them.

The tips of a marquise or pear have the type of sparkle I associate with crushed ice. As Garry mentioned the center may not. Part of what I find attractive is when the two areas blend together well. It creates light performance that intrigues the eye

 

[drk14]

DRK I did not see any substantive difference between those 2 stones and what we might all consider better than most marquise.

OK, not sure of your point? They were intended to be examples of "better than most".

They all show the big virtual facet difference between the tips and the belly.

Do you base that statement on the still images, or on the videos? There's certainly a gradient in VF size, but I wouldn't call it "big" in these exemplars. More relevant to your original statement, I would definitely not describe the appearance as "crushed ice" in the areas flanking the belly (if and only if one observes the video of the moving diamond, in which the larger VFs are activated as the diamond is tilted).

http://www.cutwise.com/stone/15_56720196/?filters.sort[field]=mediaRelevance&filters.sort[directional]=desc&filters.isFancyColor=false&filters.availableOnly=true&filters.b2b=15&show-filters=on&page=4&format=video8Office&stereo=sets&size=comb&view_state=view
What do you think of this one?

I personally wouldn't recommend this one, because in my opinion, the number and size of VFs in the areas flanking the belly is too small, so that too much of the poinpoint/crushed ice background comes through. A big caveat here is David's comment about taste: I'm panning this one only with the assumption that I'm trying to find a mq that maximizes chunky flashes and minimizes the crushed-ice look.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

You bring up fantastic points Garry.
I have long maintained that the cost of a diamond is as important as the other four c's
About the ASET : I'd be interested to have a real life look. The larger red patches in the center could easily be static dark areas. But even a slight tilt might light them up. Likely if you bought the stone the red changes as I describe with tilt.

David you did not watch the video? (And surely you would know I would not buy a diamond with an ugly dark zone).

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

DRK I did not see any substantive difference between those 2 stones and what we might all consider better than most marquise.

OK, not sure of your point? They were intended to be examples of "better than most".

They all show the big virtual facet difference between the tips and the belly.

Do you base that statement on the still images, or on the videos? There's certainly a gradient in VF size, but I wouldn't call it "big" in these exemplars. More relevant to your original statement, I would definitely not describe the appearance as "crushed ice" in the areas flanking the belly (if and only if one observes the video of the moving diamond, in which the larger VFs are activated as the diamond is tilted).
Post videos, but please not JA's rotating 360 as they are back lit and provide no real info about cut

http://www.cutwise.com/stone/15_56720196/?filters.sort[field]=mediaRelevance&filters.sort[directional]=desc&filters.isFancyColor=false&filters.availableOnly=true&filters.b2b=15&show-filters=on&page=4&format=video8Office&stereo=sets&size=comb&view_state=view
What do you think of this one?

I personally wouldn't recommend this one, because in my opinion, the number and size of VFs in the areas flanking the belly is too small, so that too much of the poinpoint/crushed ice background comes through. A big caveat here is David's comment about taste: I'm panning this one only with the assumption that I'm trying to find a mq that maximizes chunky flashes and minimizes the crushed-ice look.
Fair enough, and I see your point with the first image you posted, but take away the back light and your second image could have been my stone!

 

[drk14]

Garry,
I will post the video link for the non-JA video, but first I would like to address this statement that you made:

but please not JA's rotating 360 as they are back lit and provide no real info about cut

Can you clarify what you mean? I have trouble understanding this claim, because:

(1) The background in the JA videos is the neutral gray platform on which the diamonds rest. By "back lit", do you mean the diffuse reflections coming from this gray material? Or did you mean "side lit"? The JA set-up seems very similar to the "Vibox 360 pavilion" videos on Cutwise -- are these also "back lit"?

(2) In those cases where I have had access to both a JA video and and ASET, the type of chunky VF reflections that I look for in the videos (when evaluating mq scintillation) correspond to areas of red or green in the ASET. If my process of evaluating scintillation was confounded by back-lighting in the JA videos (which is what your comment implies, I think), shouldn't those false-positive flashes come from leakage zones (ASET black/white)?

Fair enough, and I see your point with the first image you posted, but take away the back light and your second image could have been my stone!

I don't have enough information to determine if I agree or disagree with this statement, although I'm really not sure how you are able to make such an assessment without seeing the video of the second mq (or seeing it in person).

Would you be able to upload a ViBox 360 Pavilion video of your marquise? That would help me see whether your mq is similar to my 2nd exemplar (as you believe) or not (as I believe, given the information currently available to me).

 

[drk14]

David you did not watch the video?

To be fair, the video URL in your post was corrupted (I think because the URL contains square brackets). I used a trick to fix your URL where I quoted it in my response.

Here is a better link to the video for Garry's marquise:
http://www.cutwise.com/share/15_56720196?format=video8Office

Here is Garry's marquise under spot lighting:
http://www.cutwise.com/share/15_56720196?format=video8Fire

And here is the video link to my first example of a better-than-most mq:
http://cutwise.com/share/34_K368?format=video360Pavilion

For completeness, here is the ASET for that mq (i.e., my 1st exemplar):

(David, I think you may feel vindicated that a mq that I'm calling "well-cut" shows a fair amount of "leakage" in the ASET!)

 

[Catmom]

I was surprised with how much fire mine actually has.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Thanks for fixing the links drk
I was not able to watch the video previously- It does happen to be a lovely stone Garry, I agree.
About the JA videos- here we disagree Garry, but only about the lighting.
I agree that it's not possible to accurately judge cut in those videos but lighting is not the reason. It's the angle at which the diamond rotates. That's simply not the way I'd assess a diamond. I would look straight into the table, tilt slightly. Then turn the stone around and check the pavilion. This would be through a loupe.
The most important test would then be an arms length exam.

Drk- I very much appreciate your comment about leakage- but I need no vindication whatsoever.
There's really no debate that leakage is an essential element in many fancy shaped diamonds. No expert will be able to dispute that aspect. What would make me feel better is if you ( and others) would actually integrate that fact into normal discussions here on PS.

Btw- this discussion highlights yet again the inadequacy in terminology.
A detrimental bow tie is " chunky facets"
Yuck chunk
Blow chunks
Ugh.
I need a nice cold drink filled with some cool, chilling crushed ice

Lovely ring Cat mom! But while the photos show a lovely brilliance and color, it's not what people here mean when they refer to "fire".
They are talking about a prism like effect when the light bounces between two facets forming that prism.

 

[drk14]

That's simply not the way I'd assess a diamond. I would look straight into the table, tilt slightly.

Actually, that's pretty close to what I do with the JA videos. If you pause the video at the right spot (by clicking on it and holding the mouse button down), you will have a view straight down, into the table -- if you then drag your mouse slightly back and forth (while continuing to hold the mouse button down), you can simulate the effect of slightly tilting the diamond. This lets you observe the on/off flashing of VFs, so that you can evaluate their size, number, and distribution. Maybe not as effectively as observing the stone in person, but it beats looking at a static image (or even an ASET, imo -- although the ASET contains other useful information).

Blow chunks
Ugh.
I need a nice cold drink filled with some cool, chilling crushed ice

omg, that gave me a good laugh!

If I'm ever in NYC, I'd love to come to your shop to see some top notch crushed ice!

 

[Sphene]

Sorry your better than most marquise looks to me to have the biggest white bow tie - definitely not a fan I find a middle star pattern works best