Recut EC?

[chrono]

I have an uncerted 0.72 ct EC H colour, SI1 which I purchased 11 years ago before I knew anything about cut and PS.

I know that ECs do not have the same sparkle and brilliance compared to a RB but my EC only looks good in sunlight and low halogen light. It has large flashes of rainbow light when outdoors or at home but looks plain in my office flourescent light. My ideal cut RB on the other hand sparkles so much in my office that I can hardly see the H&A

which leads me to believe that my EC doesn't have a good cut (although another local jeweller assured me that the cut is quite good).

Since this is my engagement ring, I am loathe to "get rid" of it. Should I consider recutting it (to a better/ideal cut) to get better light return? Is it worth it? Is there a risk of damage since it is an SI1? And will I lose a lot of carat weight? Or should I just keep it as a sentimental piece and call it a lesson learned?

Thanks.

 

[valeria101]

Hm... maybe that's not a bad EC after all - those are not even suposed to match rounds. Ideal Scope anyone ?

 

[moremoremore]

You really can't compare a RB to an emerald...they are like apples and oranges....but both quite tasty!

The emerald has its own type of beauty....and so does the round!

 

[Hest88]

It's really hard to tell without an expert looking at it. There's no way even the finest EC is going to sparkle like a nice RB. That's sort of like wanting an ethereal redhead to have the same type of beauty as a voluptuous brunette. However, whether your EC is a dud or not as far as ECs go is not something we can tell you. Personally, I wouldn't bother re-cutting a stone of that size. If you don't want to wear it, maybe you can have it set into a modern, sleek pendant that will set off the stone?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 5/4/2004 7:05:08 PM Hest88 wrote:



wanting an ethereal redhead to have the same type of beauty as a voluptuous brunette...

----------------

He he!

So... would you help me find the perfect hair color next time ?

 

[Richard Sherwood]

From a monetary standpoint, the problem with recutting a 0.72 carat diamond is that it will most probably drop beneath the 0.70 carat benchmark, falling into a much lower price-per-carat category.

On top of that you have to pay the recutting costs, which adds to the monetary loss. You'd be paying money to devalue your emerald cut.

Monetarily speaking, you'd be better off trading up to a finer make or larger stone.

I know how emotions and sentimentality fly in the face of common sense though, with it being your engagement ring and all... Nothing wrong with that.

 

[innerkitten]

But you'll lose a lot of stone right?

 

[valeria101]

It may cost very little to know wether touching up the cut will likely make the stone look any bettr - all you need is as with stone in hand... I suppose.

The 'drop below 0.7cts and pay for it' logic is obviously sound, tried and true on the other side of the counter. All these opperations might not end up costing more than by selling the piece at the unavoidable loss.

As for the weight loss... who knows? It could be slight or half of the stone for what we know (clarity and weight

!?) about it for now.

The process could be fun - if PS worked it's way with you by now !

 

[chrono]

I take it from all the replies that this is something difficult to comment on without being able to see the stone. I don't think any jeweller around here even has an IScope! I live out in the boonies in PA.

I would love to see it's performance under the IScope myself! You all at PS have really spoiled me and make me want only the best.

PS is so bad for me in that I drool over every diamond that is posted; the latest being the Jubilee. I like ECs because they look clean, sleek and unusual (as opposed to the RBs that you see at every corner). The downside to the EC is that it doesn't "perform" quite like a RB; it is just different.

I gathered from all that I've read that I should keep the existing EC and hope that hubby will upgrade this one down the road. Is that right?

So when I am in the market for that elusive super cut EC, where should I look? What kind of stats should I aim for?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 5/5/2004 2:35:12 PM chrono wrote:



So when I am in the market for that elusive super cut EC, where should I look? What kind of stats should I aim for?

----------------

No stats better than AGA's I am aware of - so no prediction of brilliance.

And the Iscope is <$35, by mail, isn't it ?

If you like this technical stuff you could as well play with ray-trace software yourself (some shareware brother of the DiamCalc), based on OGI numbers I suppose. Well... of call in good ol' GOG (pun intended) to choose you one for brilliance.

Actually, you may have seen the Jubilee versus Round, BrilianceScope comparisons Jonathan did for the round. I would certainly like to see one for an EC (LINK), and at least two stones he has in stock top the EC-scale for brilliance

 

[valeria101]

Here's the abstract of the respective comparison: the different calibration seem to recognize that, indeed, the princess cut is supposed to deliver more brilliance than fire and that the best cut princesses would handle direct light as well as any round, producing lots of flash and somewhat less fire - no big surprise....

Of course, the B-Scope makers did well to create a different scale for each type of cut. However, this somehow makes me expect worse in terms of light return for those fancies, and there seems to be little reason for it.

Now, what would ECs look like? The square ones should bite rounds' heels, I suppose.

Besides, it would take a much larger round to get large facets and their flash to play with from a round, if one is so inclined.


(PS: ok. I did slice those charts quite badly, if inappropriate please accept my apologies and take the post off...)