41 degree pavillion angle

[curiopotter]

Those images are pretty spot-on.. mine is 34.9-40.8

 

[kcoursolle]

Pyramid,
I recently purchased a stone that has the 34/41 combo and these characteristics:
depth: 61.3
table: 56
crown/pavillion: 34.0/41.0
girdle: thin-med

I''m getting it tomorrow and will take pictures of it so that you can see what it looks like. I can try to compare it to the stones in my wedding band that have other combos and are ACA classic lines and give you any descriptions that might be helpful.

However, the stone is only .43 carats and it''s going to be in a bezel pendant...so it might not be the best comparison.

 

[whatmeworry]

Pyramid,
Have you seen Leonid and Jim's survey video, asking random folks which diamond they prefer? The three diamonds
had angles of 40.5, 40.8 and 41.2(?)

http://diamondscope.pricescope.com/?src=Jim_Survey_01.wmv

 

[pyramid]

Thanks all for your replies. I will have to watch that video again Leonid did with James Allen, I didn''t remember about that.

I have posted another topic showing a video which GoodoldGold has made showing two diamonds with one of them having the 41 pavillion angle combinedd with a 34 crown angle.

 

[pyramid]

Date: 7/11/2007 2:16:04 PM
Author: kcoursolle
Pyramid,
I recently purchased a stone that has the 34/41 combo and these characteristics:
depth: 61.3
table: 56
crown/pavillion: 34.0/41.0
girdle: thin-med

I''m getting it tomorrow and will take pictures of it so that you can see what it looks like. I can try to compare it to the stones in my wedding band that have other combos and are ACA classic lines and give you any descriptions that might be helpful.

However, the stone is only .43 carats and it''s going to be in a bezel pendant...so it might not be the best comparison.

Thanks kcoursolle I would like to hear your description. I have seen a video now though showing a 41 pavillion, I have posted it in another topic so it may be helpful to others in the future too.

 

[96TL]

Date: 7/11/2007 11:28:38 AM
Author: strmrdr
35-41 slight table leakage
AGS says this is a 1, GIA says the leakage isnt eye visible so its a EX

This is exactly my combo. I just had it appraised this week, and it was rated as an AGS 0. I dont know much about diamonds, but it looks spectacular to me.

 

[pyramid]

Date: 7/11/2007 4:00:46 PM
Author: 96TL

Date: 7/11/2007 11:28:38 AM
Author: strmrdr
35-41 slight table leakage
AGS says this is a 1, GIA says the leakage isnt eye visible so its a EX

This is exactly my combo. I just had it appraised this week, and it was rated as an AGS 0. I dont know much about diamonds, but it looks spectacular to me.

96TL, if you look up to where strmrdr wrote the piece you quoted you will see below that Rhino from GoodoldGold had put in a correction to say that it is indeed an AGS0.

 

[96TL]

Date: 7/11/2007 4:08:06 PM
Author: Pyramid

Date: 7/11/2007 4:00:46 PM
Author: 96TL

Date: 7/11/2007 11:28:38 AM
Author: strmrdr
35-41 slight table leakage
AGS says this is a 1, GIA says the leakage isnt eye visible so its a EX

This is exactly my combo. I just had it appraised this week, and it was rated as an AGS 0. I dont know much about diamonds, but it looks spectacular to me.

96TL, if you look up to where strmrdr wrote the piece you quoted you will see below that Rhino from GoodoldGold had put in a correction to say that it is indeed an AGS0.

Whoops. Missed that.

Thanks Pyramid.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Rhino called me today and asked my opinion about 41/34 combos. I asked if it was a PS concern because I realized a post I put up yesterday (graphic in this thread) may have been related (?). If so please don't worry, Pyramid:The other diamond was 41/35 with depth > 62%.More importantly, the poster was reporting an effect seen in that particular diamond.

The whole “41” question reminds me of the 40.5-40.6 discussions a couple of years back. Yes, with 41+ pavilions, one should take leakage & color entrapment into account, just as head shadow should be taken into account with shallower pavilions.Don’t panic

, just consider everything together.

It’s not possible to make a blanket statement about "41" or any single number.Strm provided examples of how "41" can combine with other measurements for different light return effects…and those were at just one table size (maybe 57% Strm?). The final AGSL grade will also depend on table, minor facets, mm spread & overall configuration. The cutting guidelines state that 41/35 combos may receive anywhere from AGS1-3. As we know, the exact diamond may be be + or - a grade depending on how all facets work together in the AGSL ray-trace.

I appreciate Rhino taking the time to call me. We've always agreed on a general angle range many premier cutters prefer (Here is the thread (Strm posted the words for Rhino back then due to tech difficulty):

deep combos is the pavilion angle specifically. for those who are running or who have ran hca on certain diamonds you’ll note a sharp hit in the score as soon as the pavilion angles reach 41 degrees. Gary has done this for good reason because in many diamonds that are cut to get the AGS “0” score proportion rating, the factories who are trying to get the most yield from the rough try to preserve as much weight as possible and many times cut those pavilion angles steeper to help preserve this weight. What most of these factories don’t realize is that once you hit the transitional 41 degree mark, it adversely affects the brilliance of the diamond in a negative way, yet they attain that coveted AGS “0” score. Now … before I proceed, let me say that all diamonds with average pavilion angles of 41 degrees are NOT bad. Far from it. But what I am saying is that a lot of diamonds cut to ideal proportions can and do have sets of angles that contribute to a more dull stone and if those angles are at 41 degrees specifically (when coupled with crown angles approx. 34 degrees and higher, which many ideal cut stones have) if the majority of the pavilion main facets making up that 41 degrees are over 41 degrees then it will negatively impact the stone. If most are under 41 degrees then you’re ok. The only way to really know is with an optical exam of the diamond and critically examining the optical results. So the 41 degree pavilion angle presents a certain threshold within diamonds cut to ideal parameters...">>

What Rhino wrote above has long been the philosophy of many diamond cutters, including Brian Gavin.Beyond performance though, another consideration is entrapment of body color that occurs with steep pavilions (this is not a concern in high colors or smaller stones).Such color entrapment is not looked-for in AGSL or GIA cut grading, nor is it seen in color grading which is done table-down.This is one problem with current D-Z color grading (face-up can differ from face-down) and a key reason any diamond must be inspected in-person, especially at shallow & steep thresholds. Examination of diamonds with 41+ pavilions for visible leakage & color entrapment is no different than examining shallow combinations to see if shadow/obstruction is an issue.

Premium configurations - whether modern Tolk, shallower or steeper, 60/60 or other - can all be incredibly beautiful. Great cutters bring forth maximum beauty from a piece of rough. The numbers are simply a guideline and although it is correct to question certain of them it is also easy to develop “paralysis by analysis” about an aspect... Remember that the diamond must be considered as a whole.

At the end of the day good sellers put forth only the best for all their customers, especially those as discriminating as you are Pyramid. Your best bet is to ask the seller how that specific diamond looks & performs.No worries.

 

[pyramid]

Thanks John. No it was not anything to do with what you posted, it was more what posters had been posting in the past in threads.

 

[Cehrabehra]

My guess on the 41 is that it is a spread issue.... I''ve seen people here prefer 40.6 over 40.8 because they want the stone to be spreadier. I could be wrong.

 

[strmrdr]

(maybe 57% Strm?) 56 if I remember right might have been 57, I checked 55-58 and there wasn't any difference to amount to anything in the IS images with those angles.
Like I said earlier most of the 41 and over comments were from the hca which is based on old technology/thinking.
For the first couple years I was around here 41 degrees was viewed as evil.
that was wrong....

 

[pyramid]

Date: 7/11/2007 6:24:16 PM
Author: Cehrabehra
My guess on the 41 is that it is a spread issue.... I've seen people here prefer 40.6 over 40.8 because they want the stone to be spreadier. I could be wrong.

I think it is to do with the HCA where the 41 puts a stone into EX VG VG VG instead of the three EXs. I noticed too that the stone I am looking at is a -1% spread whereas many stones with the 34.8/40.8 were -3%. Although maybe it is the spread and it is hiding that 1% in the pavillion whereas the other stones are hiding it in the crown. Ofcourse both combinations have 0% spread and 1% spreads too. As well as the HCA ratings though what I had been worried about was that the stone would show leakage under the table.

 

[belle]

Date: 7/11/2007 7:46:27 PM
Author: Pyramid
....though what I had been worried about was that the stone would show leakage under the table.

that is one of the many reasons an idealscope image is so important. the numbers (ignoring the accuracy variable) and hca can only get you so far. the idealscope answers the questions that the hca cannot (lgf, symmetry, leakage etc)

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

Date: 7/11/2007 11:07:47 AM
Author: belle
what is the problem with a 38' waistine?

If you have a problem with me you should just say it directly.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 7/11/2007 10:37:32 PM
Author: WorkingHardforSmallRewards

Date: 7/11/2007 11:07:47 AM
Author: belle
what is the problem with a 38'' waistine?

If you have a problem with me you should just say it directly.

LOL!!!!

 

[belle]

Date: 7/11/2007 10:37:32 PM
Author: WorkingHardforSmallRewards

Date: 7/11/2007 11:07:47 AM
Author: belle
what is the problem with a 38'' waistine?

If you have a problem with me you should just say it directly.

do you think i''m really that shallow?




what''s your height?

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

a little under six feet thank you very much

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

I'll let you know I also have broad shoulders, or so my mom always said.


but I am also a bit fat. After I get my ring I'll find some picture to put up in the pictures with ring section, for the short period of time it is actually mine

.
(I don't think there will be any international treaties protecting a man's engagement ring if she breaks it off....so it will be my only chance, until I get my wedding band! Hooray!)

 

[AdamSklar]

Date: 7/11/2007 10:59:30 PM
Author: WorkingHardforSmallRewards




I''ll let you know I also have broad shoulders, or so my mom always said.



but I am also a bit fat. After I get my ring I''ll find some picture to put up in the pictures with ring section, for the short period of time it is actually mine

.

(I don''t think there will be any international treaties protecting a man''s engagement ring if she breaks it off....so it will be my only chance, until I get my wedding band! Hooray!)

Don''t know about international. But if you''re in California, you''re in luck. Well, lucky under the circumstances, I guess.

 

[belle]

Date: 7/11/2007 10:57:22 PM
Author: WorkingHardforSmallRewards
a little under six feet thank you very much

well, it was just an example

5'8" or 5'11"?

okay, i must stop, i can't hijack another one of pyramids threads!

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

I think 5 10, but I believe I have been growing recently so maybe 11 now. And yes, I am quite chunky

Actually I am in BIG trouble when I go back to Japan. I promised my gf I would lose weight before I proposed--Didn't happen. And in Japan...38 feet is QUITE humongous. I mean, inches. Anyway, feel free to post one more but I won't post anymore about me here, people will be reading this thread for years to come about 41degrees (heck I just refered Kiss to it today) and I really don't need everyone reading my waist size for the next 5 years

.

 

[pyramid]

Date: 7/11/2007 5:47:50 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Gary has done this for good reason because in many diamonds that are cut to get the AGS “0” score proportion rating, the factories who are trying to get the most yield from the rough try to preserve as much weight as possible and many times cut those pavilion angles steeper to help preserve this weight. What most of these factories don’t realize is that once you hit the transitional 41 degree mark, it adversely affects the brilliance of the diamond in a negative way, yet they attain that coveted AGS “0” score. Now … before I proceed, let me say that all diamonds with average pavilion angles of 41 degrees are NOT bad. Far from it. But what I am saying is that a lot of diamonds cut to ideal proportions can and do have sets of angles that contribute to a more dull stone and if those angles are at 41 degrees specifically (when coupled with crown angles approx. 34 degrees and higher, which many ideal cut stones have) if the majority of the pavilion main facets making up that 41 degrees are over 41 degrees then it will negatively impact the stone. If most are under 41 degrees then you’re ok. The only way to really know is with an optical exam of the diamond and critically examining the optical results. So the 41 degree pavilion angle presents a certain threshold within diamonds cut to ideal parameters...''>>

Just wondering about what you wrote here John about the majority of pavillion main facets making up that 41 degrees being over 41 degrees then it will negatively impact the stone.

Here is a link to another stone sold by a vendor here and you can see from the helium report that all 8 pavillion angles are over 41 degrees.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/2370/

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/12/2007 6:56:30 AM
Author: Pyramid


Just wondering about what you wrote here John about the majority of pavillion main facets making up that 41 degrees being over 41 degrees then it will negatively impact the stone.

Here is a link to another stone sold by a vendor here and you can see from the helium report that all 8 pavillion angles are over 41 degrees.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/2370/

The crown angle of 33.25 balances it out, which goes to show that the old thinking is wrong.
There is no ring of death,,,,,

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 7/12/2007 6:56:30 AM
Author: Pyramid

Date: 7/11/2007 5:47:50 PM
Author: JohnQuixote


Gary has done this for good reason because in many diamonds that are cut to get the AGS “0” score proportion rating, the factories who are trying to get the most yield from the rough try to preserve as much weight as possible and many times cut those pavilion angles steeper to help preserve this weight. What most of these factories don’t realize is that once you hit the transitional 41 degree mark, it adversely affects the brilliance of the diamond in a negative way, yet they attain that coveted AGS “0” score. Now … before I proceed, let me say that all diamonds with average pavilion angles of 41 degrees are NOT bad. Far from it. But what I am saying is that a lot of diamonds cut to ideal proportions can and do have sets of angles that contribute to a more dull stone and if those angles are at 41 degrees specifically (when coupled with crown angles approx. 34 degrees and higher, which many ideal cut stones have) if the majority of the pavilion main facets making up that 41 degrees are over 41 degrees then it will negatively impact the stone. If most are under 41 degrees then you’re ok. The only way to really know is with an optical exam of the diamond and critically examining the optical results. So the 41 degree pavilion angle presents a certain threshold within diamonds cut to ideal parameters...'>>

Just wondering about what you wrote here John about the majority of pavillion main facets making up that 41 degrees being over 41 degrees then it will negatively impact the stone.

Hey Pyramid, I didn’t write the highlighted part. Rhino wrote that in 2004 (I linked the thread above). I reposted it because he put it well.

He wrote me an email yesterday saying he’s changed his paradigms somewhat; he’s now comfortable with 41/34.x combos. No problem, but what he wrote then is in complete agreement with the “41+” philosophy of diamond cutters. This consideration is no different than the caution we take with shallower pavilions to be sure there is no head obstruction.

It doesn’t make any given diamond “bad.”On the contrary - every diamond must be considered individually. Any of the reputable PS sellers will treat you well Pyramid.We will not let you have a diamond with any kind of negative effect, so no worries.

 

[pyramid]

Date: 7/12/2007 10:25:41 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 7/12/2007 6:56:30 AM
Author: Pyramid


Just wondering about what you wrote here John about the majority of pavillion main facets making up that 41 degrees being over 41 degrees then it will negatively impact the stone.

Here is a link to another stone sold by a vendor here and you can see from the helium report that all 8 pavillion angles are over 41 degrees.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/2370/

The crown angle of 33.25 balances it out, which goes to show that the old thinking is wrong.
There is no ring of death,,,,,

I think there is a ring of death because I saw it on a stone I had out from a local jeweller about two years ago, under spot lighting the arrows showed up white but between the arrows all around the circle were grey and horrible looking. I posted a thread about it and I believe it was you Storm who did a diamcalc of the numbers I had from the IGI certificate. The diamcalc you did looked exactly like the diamond. So if there is no ring of death what would we call that, is that just leakage?

 

[pyramid]

Sorry John I missed reading that part first time where it said Rhino wrote it.

 

[Lorelei]

Pyramid, you are keeping us in suspenders

, have you decided yet??????

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 7/12/2007 1:19:37 PM
Author: Pyramid
Sorry John I missed reading that part first time where it said Rhino wrote it.

No problem Pyramid.I did want to address the statement “it will negatively impact the stone” from that post. Remember “negative” is a relative term.There are perfectly beautiful stones cut at the 41/xx angles discussed in this thread, just as perfectly beautiful stones are cut at shallower angles and in-between.

As you know, Tolkowsky’s 40.75 pavilion is a staple for diamond cutters.The reason premier diamantaires gravitate to this number is because much shallower or steeper may (may, not will) result in issues that have been discussed on this forum for years.Here’s a question:Would you worry about a 40.5 pavilion?41.0 is as north of 40.75 as 40.50 is south. No worries because again you must consider the whole stone:Combined with the right measurements, light performance for diamonds with either of those pavilion angles can be spectacular.

There is dichotomy in a technical sense because the GIA system departs from AGSL (and HCA) in their weighting.GIA has more EX combos possible at 41.0 than 40.5.AGSL predicts more at 40.50 than 41.0.Both systems reward combinations in-between.This is when people must remember to buy the diamond, not the paper:Using our situation as an example, Brian has certain tastes he established for ACA before current grading systems were even developed. He makes no secret of the angles he chooses to cut, but his personal tastes have never been the only possibility for beauty - and we certainly don’t judge combos outside his personal tolerances as “negative.”When considering borderline crown/pavilion combos for our clients it's a matter of inspecting for head obstruction (shallow) or leakage/color entrapment (deep), and taking each stone on its own merits. As is often said, diamonds can be different on paper but have equal appeal.

 

[pyramid]

Thanks John. Yes the 40.5 pavillion angle would bother me just as much, infact I told Rhino that about one he had with a 40.6. I don't know if it is mind clean with me, I think it is, or do I just want to follow the pack and go with what everyone consider ideal. When you say about considering the whole stone what makes a diamond with a 41 pavillion okay sometimes and sometimes not? Ha if I was Brian Gavin or Paul Slegers I would just stand at my diamond wheel and take a bit off the pavillion (just joking although maybe if I was really them I would be able to cut it to perfection, but then I would be complaining about the crown not fitting. I aslo read about Super Ideal and wonder if 41 pavillion is out of that category then and just into Ideal. I know that is being picky but..... and I also know that Super Ideal is not an industry term or so I read on the internet.