JamesAllen.com
 

Diamond Jewelry Forums   Picture Gallery   Video Gallery   Journal

   
 Search Posted Today Most Active Help   
 » Home »  » Diamond Prices and Grading »  » RockyTalky »  » Emerald: Crown Height/Table impact on Overall Depth %


  

 Emerald: Crown Height/Table impact on Overall Depth %

P:  3/17/2006 12:30:42 PM  
Defender
Defender

Cut Rock
Total Posts: 104
Last Post: 8/9/2006
Member Since: 7/22/2005
 
In my continued quest to find a nice emerald at a good price, I have been given info/suggestions by vendors of a few different emeralds with depths that seem quite deep to me. 

However, I have been told that that table, crown height and other cut parameters still can make a deep emerald a very attractive make.  I wonder how much of this is reasonably correct, and how much is hype. These stones are  in the 70-73 % depth range, but they  feature good table sizes in the 59-64% range, with crown height percentages in the 13-16% range. I know that these numbers are only part of the overall story, but I trying to determine whether this advice is on the right track.

Does this make sense, and are these Emeralds with good table and crown numbers still worthy of consideration, despite their high depth percentages.

Posted:  3/17/2006 12:30:42 PM

 There are 9 replies to this message.  There are 9 replies on this page.

P: 3/17/2006 12:33:04 PM
strmrdr
strmrdr

Ideal Rock
Total Posts: 23,296
Last Post: 10/9/2009
Member Since: 11/1/2003
 
no time but hit www.goodoldgold.com and look at the emeralds he has there.
There are some deep ones that are awesome that Id love to have.

edit: they are missing from the new website.
email them and ask for the link/data

........... Karl has joined the diamond trade and is now posting as Karl_K

Posted:  3/17/2006 12:33:04 PM
P: 3/17/2006 12:54:33 PM
Chrono
Chrono

Ideal Rock
Total Posts: 11,318
Last Post: 11/23/2009
Member Since: 4/22/2004
 
Date: 3/17/2006 12:30:42 PM
Author:Defender
In my continued quest to find a nice emerald at a good price, I have been given info/suggestions by vendors of a few different emeralds with depths that seem quite deep to me.

However, I have been told that that table, crown height and other cut parameters still can make a deep emerald a very attractive make. I wonder how much of this is reasonably correct, and how much is hype. These stones are in the 70-73 % depth range, but they feature good table sizes in the 59-64% range, with crown height percentages in the 13-16% range. I know that these numbers are only part of the overall story, but I trying to determine whether this advice is on the right track.

Does this make sense, and are these Emeralds with good table and crown numbers still worthy of consideration, despite their high depth percentages.
Defender,
It is true that a deeply cut EC can look beautiful provided that the table is small, the crown height is high (12% and upward) and the other cut parameters are in synch.  The downside is these deep stones face up a lot smaller for their carat weight.  I highly advise you to pick something with a depth of 60% to 65% so that all that weight will not be hidden in the pavilon where nobody can see it. 

Posted:  3/17/2006 12:54:33 PM
P: 3/17/2006 1:05:43 PM
f0rbidden
f0rbidden

Cut Rock
Total Posts: 318
Last Post: 11/9/2006
Member Since: 2/17/2006
 
the depth on my EC is 71.3% and i adore it

many many people here (and everywhere, for that matter) have said that with fancy cut diamonds - you have to see to believe.
it's hard to judge fancy cuts on numbers alone. so go have a peek and see what the eyes have to say

Posted:  3/17/2006 1:05:43 PM
P: 3/17/2006 2:43:28 PM
kittycatsmac
kittycatsmac

Cut Rock
Total Posts: 484
Last Post: 4/5/2006
Member Since: 2/7/2006
 
My new EC depth is 68 and table is 70.  I think really when it comes to a fancy cut that your eyes have to be the judge and not the numbers.  I have to agree with fOrbidden. 

"May your life and love always stay golden"

Posted:  3/17/2006 2:43:28 PM
P: 3/17/2006 2:51:25 PM
DiaGem
DiaGem

Ideal Rock
Total Posts: 3,927
Last Post: 11/21/2009
Member Since: 10/21/2004
 
Date: 3/17/2006 12:30:42 PM
Author:Defender
In my continued quest to find a nice emerald at a good price, I have been given info/suggestions by vendors of a few different emeralds with depths that seem quite deep to me.

However, I have been told that that table, crown height and other cut parameters still can make a deep emerald a very attractive make. I wonder how much of this is reasonably correct, and how much is hype. These stones are in the 70-73 % depth range, but they feature good table sizes in the 59-64% range, with crown height percentages in the 13-16% range. I know that these numbers are only part of the overall story, but I trying to determine whether this advice is on the right track.

Does this make sense, and are these Emeralds with good table and crown numbers still worthy of consideration, despite their high depth percentages.
Emerald cuts can be gorgeous with td% of 70+

But mostly it depends on your "personal" taste.


**********************
>Y<

Yoram F.

Antique Diamond Gem
http://www.diagem.net/

"When it doesn't exist, design it..." Sir Henry Royce

Posted:  3/17/2006 2:51:25 PM
P: 3/17/2006 3:02:18 PM
oldminer
oldminer

Ideal Rock
Total Posts: 4,964
Last Post: 11/20/2009
Member Since: 9/4/2000
 
You cannot buy what you cannot find.  There are few emerald cuts in the 60 to 65% depth range, and only some of them are truly great looking.  There are many more very fine looking stones with deeper depths, but the penalty you pay is decreasing apparent size as depth % increases.  Its a costly trade off.

The cut parameters I have recommended since 1986 hold emerald cuts to a difficult to obtain standard in the hope that increased demand for less depth stones would lead more cutters to make them available.  It is purely demand that makes the value of better cut stones encourage cutters to make them that way. As it presently stands, people cave in and buy the deeper stones that cutters can give more carat weight to.  It is sort of a false premise to pay for unseen extra weight, but if the consumer demands no better value, they won't get it.  This is a traditional based business and it is slow to accept change.

A 71 or 72% depth stone is not a terrible compromise if it is very pretty.  Those who advise to use your eyes, myself included,  are correct as the market generally offers more deep stones than more moderate depth ones.  Consumers readily understand more weight and have a difficult time with a multitude of parameters and measures of light performance.  The easy path is not always the best one, but most people just do take the easy path.......

One buys an emerald cut for its subtle look, not its flashiness.  It always is a matter of taste, but getting a good spread for the weight is smart thinking which I have encouraged for the past 20 years, in spite of many others who will tell you "forget parameters".  Most of them either don't know, don't care, or have a bias to sell you the stones they own which they'll say are the best ones in spite of depth percentage.  Well informed consumers are not so easily swayed, but the uninformed are the vast majority still.

David S. Atlas

GG(GIA), ASG, Sr. Mbr. NAJA

www.datlas.com





Posted:  3/17/2006 3:02:18 PM
P: 3/17/2006 3:49:36 PM
Defender
Defender

Cut Rock
Total Posts: 104
Last Post: 8/9/2006
Member Since: 7/22/2005
 
Thank you Oldminer.  I understand your point about the hidden weight.  As a laymen, I have already seen that a well cut 2.5 can be the same size as some deep 3 carat stones.

Getting back to the original question, can a expert such as yourself confirm "the general idea" that in most cases a good optimized crown height will help in balancing the looks of a deeper stone.

For example, won't a  72% deep stone with a 16% crown height look significantly better than a 72% deep stone with a 12% crown height?  I know that the table size figures into this too....

I am just trying to ascertain how info on the crown (and pavilion too) will help a laymen in consideration of a stone with a deeper depth.

Posted:  3/17/2006 3:49:36 PM
P: 3/17/2006 4:39:33 PM
Chrono
Chrono

Ideal Rock
Total Posts: 11,318
Last Post: 11/23/2009
Member Since: 4/22/2004
 
Defender,
Old Miner has a website where he lists the different cut grades for daimonds of all shapes.  Take a look here for emerald cuts.  It will probably come in handy to decide which stone you want to eliminate.  I will caution you that it is very difficult but not impossible to get a Class 1A EC.  Even a Class 1B or Class 2A ECs can be very beautiful.  With all that said, once the elimination by numbers is done, the final test is to view with your own two eyes and decide if that is the one you want.  Step cuts are such that it cannot to be chosen by numbers alone, it must be seen but the numbers sure do help.

Posted:  3/17/2006 4:39:33 PM
P: 5/7/2006 12:54:38 AM
windowshopper
windowshopper

Ideal Rock
Total Posts: 2,023
Last Post: 7/25/2006
Member Since: 7/11/2004
 
Date: 3/17/2006 3:49:36 PM
Author: Defender
Thank you Oldminer. I understand your point about the hidden weight. As a laymen, I have already seen that a well cut 2.5 can be the same size as some deep 3 carat stones.

Getting back to the original question, can a expert such as yourself confirm 'the general idea' that in most cases a good optimized crown height will help in balancing the looks of a deeper stone.

For example, won't a 72% deep stone with a 16% crown height look significantly better than a 72% deep stone with a 12% crown height? I know that the table size figures into this too....

I am just trying to ascertain how info on the crown (and pavilion too) will help a laymen in consideration of a stone with a deeper depth.
Hi all a few days past but i was doing some searching on this subject:

my EC stone has a depth of 61.9 and a table of 59.  The crown is nearly 17% . .............It is a gorgeous stone. I wanted a stone with a higher crown and wanted sommething over 12%.  I was willing to pay for the weight in the top for this one.

I am now looking to find a larger stone and I have found but one that i am even interested in looking at.  I simply am not willing to pay for extra weight in the bottom.  plus i believe that a depth larger than table is a must for a beautiful stone

Posted:  5/7/2006 12:54:38 AM

 Previous Page Next Page 
« Milgrain Added. Like it? «» Star Upper Ratio »
Next Topics
AGS cut charts Would you pay $300 more for an ideal cut stone? Looking for a jeweler in NYC... Chubb Insurance in NJ Local Boston Area Jewelers Jonathan, I LUV your new site! thinking about recutting my wife's earrings...worth doing? Need help washing my hands Is this a nailhead? So Excited...Two Stones...Which one??? HELP!!! Strong fluorescence weaker than faint?! Handicapping EGL Certed Stones... DiamCalc expired Pics of three-stone ring + wedding band together? Calling all pave eternity ring wearers (and everyone else, too!) Chicago Diamond Exchange Hearts and Arrows Question Has anyone gone from a RB to a fancy shape? Radiant experts please help! 145 Facets? question about looking at a loose diamond in store AGA-CERT - independant diamond quality grading cert Platinum-plated white gold for wedding band? HELP: suggestions for Three Stone ring to 60 yrs old mom Clarity Question Help! My bridal retailer ripped me off! I just can't decide! Pears or trillions for side stones?? help me decide! Appraisal - Loose Diamond and Setting? Lost: Good online diamond calculator Square Radiant - Please Help earrings or a pendant for $2500??

Jump to:



Contact Us  |  Back Home  |  Privacy Statement  |  Forum Agreement  |  Forum Policies

Ideal BB Version: 0.1.5.4.beta1 Message forum software powered by  the Ideal BB

IdealBB Badge


Pricescope - Knowledge - Diamond Prices - Tools - Resources - About

© 2000-2009 Pricescope. Terms of Use Privacy Policy Disclaimer
forum archives