shape
carat
color
clarity

What does 60/60 ring mean?

sparlie

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Sep 24, 2013
Messages
113
Hi,

I have come across some posts stating that a diamond is a 60/60 diamond. Could you please tell me what this means? Thank you to all you diamond mavens out there!
 

Sagefemme

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 8, 2015
Messages
290
On the drop down menu above, click on Knowledge, then Advanced Tutorial, then 60/60. Should get you started on knowing what this means.

Or any of the forum threads that are listed above my post.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,217
Simple.
Both depth and table are 60% of the diamond's diameter at the girdle.
 

Texas Leaguer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,760
Two of the fundamental aspects of diamond cut quality are proportions and faceting precision. In terms of proportion, there is a narrow range of complimentary proportion sets that can result in high quality light performance. Diamonds that feature both a table and depth percentage very close to 60 can represent one end of that spectrum if crafted well. In general 60/60 proportions tend to favor brightness over fire, two related but independent optical effects. Most cut purists prefer balance between them. Fire can be observed in certain lighting conditions, and is perhaps the most magical of optical effects.
 
Last edited:

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707

Please put this page into perspective.
It's a remnant of an old argument between Garry Holliway and me.
Many years ago I was a staunch ( and pretty much sole) defender of "60/60"
The images on that page are...... CGI distortions of stones cut to 60/60 that never truly existed in reality.
At this point in time, the battle is over with cutters rushing to emulate the smaller table "ideal" cut look.
IMO a loss for consumers and a win for cutters. Many of the stones that make "triple EX" today give up spread.
As Bryan points out, they are simply different flavors of super well-cut stones.
I would add that using "fire" as a parameter ignores certain physical limitations such as size.
The larger the facets, the greater the ability to produce perceivable fire events which means a poorly cut 3ct can produce far more fire than the best cut .50ct diamond
 

Texas Leaguer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,760
It is true that bigger virtual facets increase the likelihood of fire being observed (all other things equal). They produce larger spectral fans which are more likely to be 'clipped' by the pupil of the observer and seen as single colors. However, most buyers are not choosing between a 3ct and a .50ct!
Most are choosing between stones of similar size, and for this it is valuable to understand the variations in light performance that different proportion sets and levels of facet precision will deliver.
 

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
I agree shoppers are not cross shopping 3cts and 1/2 ct diamonds.
BUT- my perception is that the aspect of fire is commonly discussed here on PS without the consideration of size being introduced.
For example- a person buying a one carat may be influenced by comments regarding fire.
A one carat round is simply not going to produce a lot of fire events- no matter how well cut.
A 60/60's attribultes of spread and scintillation remain consistent regardless of size.
 

Texas Leaguer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,760
I agree shoppers are not cross shopping 3cts and 1/2 ct diamonds.
BUT- my perception is that the aspect of fire is commonly discussed here on PS without the consideration of size being introduced.
For example- a person buying a one carat may be influenced by comments regarding fire.
A one carat round is simply not going to produce a lot of fire events- no matter how well cut.
A 60/60's attribultes of spread and scintillation remain consistent regardless of size.
Strongly disagree. High precision one carat can produce substantial fire. The lighting conditions have to be conducive, but that is true of any diamond.
 

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
HI Bryan,
Exactly how much fire a one carat throws off that the human eye can perceive...well, we won't be able to measure or conclusively say. If a client is looking specifically for fire, I'd not suggest a one carat RBC. Maybe my perception is colored by how many diamonds we see that are substantially more able to produce fire based on size, as well as cut. Precision cut OMB's, for example, are far better than round diamonds are producing fire events.
But we can surely say that larger stones will have more ability to produce fire, all other things being equal.
My perception that fire is frequently discussed without qualifying how much difference size makes here on PS....have you seen that?
 

bmfang

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 2, 2017
Messages
1,851
Sounds to me (as a long time lurker but newish PS forum participant) that the arguments on both sides still are going on now. :)

rockdiamond, have learnt a lot from reading yours and Bryan's posts over the years.
 

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
Thanks bmfang- your post really does mean a lot to me.
You're 100% correct- I still have strong convictions that are not in agreement with some of what is discussed here.
All that we need to do to re-open the debate is to bring up aspects like....fire:)
 

Texas Leaguer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,760
The ability of diamond (or any other material) to disperse light into it's colored spectral components is well understood and can be measured. There is no debate that a given diamond's ability to produce fire is controlled by the cut.
Few buyers, if any, are concerned only with fire to the exclusion of other attributes. Nor do many want to completely sacrifice fire to get a diamond that has slightly larger outer dimensions (spread). Astute buyers want to the best possible combination of optical properties.
 

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
The ability of diamond (or any other material) to disperse light into it's colored spectral components is well understood and can be measured. There is no debate that a given diamond's ability to produce fire is controlled by the cut.
Few buyers, if any, are concerned only with fire to the exclusion of other attributes. Nor do many want to completely sacrifice fire to get a diamond that has slightly larger outer dimensions (spread). Astute buyers want to the best possible combination of optical properties.

We are in complete disagreement on a number of points you make Bryan.

In my experience dealing with consumers, there are indeed people who place fire at a high priority- people that choose a diamond based on that ability. Of course, that type of buyer gravitates to well cut stones by nature. Basically, buyers that are actually aware of what we are talking about when we refer to "Fire" is a tiny minority.
Most buyers have no idea what we mean by Fire in this discussion.

Spread is an undeniable attraction to exponentially MORE buyers than those seeking the dispersion we are talking about.
Give someone an extra mm of size in exchange for the prism action and most will choose size.
We will surely agree that the "most" I'm talking about are not aware of cut as we ( PriceScope members) know it.
But there's plenty of people interested in getting a well cut diamond ( including many PS members) that place a high priority on spread.
 

HappyNewLife

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
2,534
we have 2 1.7ct 60/60 diamonds and love them :)
 

Texas Leaguer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,760
We are in complete disagreement on a number of points you make Bryan.
In my experience dealing with consumers, there are indeed people who place fire at a high priority- people that choose a diamond based on that ability. Of course, that type of buyer gravitates to well cut stones by nature. Basically, buyers that are actually aware of what we are talking about when we refer to "Fire" is a tiny minority.
Most buyers have no idea what we mean by Fire in this discussion.
Spread is an undeniable attraction to exponentially MORE buyers than those seeking the dispersion we are talking about.
Give someone an extra mm of size in exchange for the prism action and most will choose size.
We will surely agree that the "most" I'm talking about are not aware of cut as we ( PriceScope members) know it.
But there's plenty of people interested in getting a well cut diamond ( including many PS members) that place a high priority on spread.
I think you vastly underestimate the consumers researching their diamond purchase and finding their way here. It is not a "tiny minority that know what we are talking about when we refer to fire".
And the logic that "exponentially" more buyers are attracted to spread somehow makes spread a much better attribute than fire is like saying because McDonalds sells exponentially more meals is evidence that quarter pounders are better than filet mignon.
As members of the trade we should provide people with solid guidance on what is possible today and let consumers make informed decisions about what is most important to them as individuals. What is available in the modern marketplace is different from the past, and consumers don't have to settle for what others before them have chosen from a set of more limited options.
 

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
HI Bryan,
When I use the term "most buyers" I mean the general population. The vast majority of which do NOT know about Pricescope- or fire.
My position here at Diamonds by Lauren involves speaking with almost every single client- many thousand over the course of a single year.
Every year since 1998.
That's what I'm basing my comments regarding consumer awareness on.
Bryan- if you had to guess- what percentage of folks considering a diamond purchase today know about Pricescope?
I agree that a fair number of PS readers DO understand what fire is- but not even all PS readers do.
If we're comparing two well cut diamonds, a 60/60 vs a "Super Ideal" and we're considering spread versus fire, your meat analogy is totally off base.
How about comparing Filet Mignon with a marbled Rib Eye.
A given 60/60 may have fewer fire events than a stone cut to "Ideal" proportions, but the best examples of BOTH are considered extremely well cut. If the 60/60 spreads 6.6mm and the "Ideal" spreads 6.3mm, it's going to be an obvious difference, even to an untrained eye. As opposed to the fire events, which will not be easily observable. Or even observable at all if the stone is not that large.
If we extend this discussion to include the fact that these specifics get totally buried in a discussion of "super ideal" cut stones, it's easy to understand the assumption that you'd have to really hate great cut to choose those extra .3mm. And issues of size and how it relates to fire are basically never discussed.
A lot of the "information" about diamonds and cut available on the internet is merely a sales presentation disguised as "clinical information"
Therefore, my position is as a SUPER advocate for great cut- and explaining to consumers the differences between Rib Eye and Filet Mignon- as opposed to simply insulting the cut someone else prefers. A more informed decision.
 

gretag

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
20
From reading this disjointed and somewhat adversarial thread(the argument I gather the two of you (Bryan and Rockdiamond) have had for years) I see two differing opinions with some overlap and consensus which neither of you seem to be acknowledging or paraphrasing.

Do you two even agree on what is a well cut 60/60? Is the AGSL 0 for light performance standard acceptable as a standard for well cut 60/60? If not what is yours?

If a well cut 60/60/80LGF is compared to a well cut 57/61.5/80LGF of the same carat weight is there really a significant difference in potential fire? Is the only significant different in the potential for fire in the thickness of the arrows?
 

Texas Leaguer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,760
Gretag,
An AGSL report is your best evidence that no critical aspect has been overly compromised, as the light performance system evaluates a 3D model of the actual diamond and measures brightness, fire, contrast, and leakage. It also factors in spread.
If that is not available, then looking at LP images will give indications if anything is problematic.
 

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
HI Gretag,
Thank you for attempting to continue and possibly illuminate the discussion.
From my perspective, AGS0 is too narrow if a buyer loves the look of a well cut 60/60.
GIA's EX, which is roundly criticized here for being too broad, was designed to encompass more of what people find beautiful in a Round Brilliant Cut diamond. I agree that at the fringes there are stones GIA grants EX cut grade to that I would not choose.
Maybe part of the disagreement centers upon which is worse- excluding stones that should be in the top grade, or including too many.
If a well cut 60/60/80LGF is compared to a well cut 57/61.5/80LGF of the same carat weight is there really a significant difference in potential fire? Is the only significant different in the potential for fire in the thickness of the arrows?
Your question about fire completely overlooks the other aspects which are crucial.
Between the hypothetical, equal carat weight 60/60/80LGF, versus 57/61.5/80LGF- what is the comparative spread of the two stones?
Second, what is the carat weight of the stones?
If we're looking at .75ct the discussion of fire is completely different than if we're comparing 3ct diamonds.

That, to me, is really putting consumers who read this stuff at a disadvantage.
1) they may prefer the stones which AGSL excludes, and GIA includes based on the visuals. But they're being told they are buying a lesser stone if they go outside AGSL0.
2) Making a big deal about "fire"- without qualifying exactly what it is, and how insignificant an aspect it can be, depending on carat weight.

I apologize if the discussion seems contentious. I have a lot of respect for Bryan. The debate goes back a long way- before Bryan was even here:)
 

Kbell

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
264
My stone is considered a 60/60... it's GIA triple ex... 1.5 carat... I absolutely LOVE it and so has everyone else who's seen it in person including my appraiser. All my friends said it is SO sparkly. I think it looks amazing in all lighting conditions. I'm not saying it's better/equal to PS "ideal" proportions, I'm saying we all love it anyway and I wouldn't trade it for another. I can see why anyone who views the diamonds in person might choose one especially if it's priced well below a "super ideal" and is a well cut 60/60.
 

gretag

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
20
Gretag,
An AGSL report is your best evidence that no critical aspect has been overly compromised, as the light performance system evaluates a 3D model of the actual diamond and measures brightness, fire, contrast, and leakage. It also factors in spread.
If that is not available, then looking at LP images will give indications if anything is problematic.

Bryan given that you have a lot of experience with the WF ACA and the typical 34.5/40.8/57 type of diamonds. Have you compared same or similar carat weight AGS0000 60/60 versus to a WF ACA?
 

gretag

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
20
HI Gretag,
Thank you for attempting to continue and possibly illuminate the discussion.
From my perspective, AGS0 is too narrow if a buyer loves the look of a well cut 60/60.

Can you explain and describe GIA Cut grade Excellent 60/60 stones or combinations that you would not choose?
Your question about fire completely overlooks the other aspects which are crucial.
Between the hypothetical, equal carat weight 60/60/80LGF, versus 57/61.5/80LGF- what is the comparative spread of the two stones?

Your thesis would be much stronger if you could prove or minimize the differences in potential fire between some 60/60s and 'Superideal' in the potential for fire. I believe a case can be made for that in theory although I have not had the opportunity to compare two candidates that fit the criteria.

Burying and misdirecting that particular point with overall beauty assessments where all aspects of beauty must be considered at the same time just waters down your argument.
 

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
My stone is considered a 60/60... it's GIA triple ex... 1.5 carat... I absolutely LOVE it and so has everyone else who's seen it in person including my appraiser. All my friends said it is SO sparkly. I think it looks amazing in all lighting conditions. I'm not saying it's better/equal to PS "ideal" proportions, I'm saying we all love it anyway and I wouldn't trade it for another. I can see why anyone who views the diamonds in person might choose one especially if it's priced well below a "super ideal" and is a well cut 60/60.
Kbell - your post highlights some of what I'm pointing out here.
1) Most diamond buyers ( and diamond professionals) do not read Pricescope.
2) Here on PS, I have found the discussion lacking in context.
3) If one reads PS a lot, without the benefit of proper context, it can make them feel like they got a "lesser" diamond based on the opinions prolific PS members.
And those opinions may be based on taking the word of sellers who are promoting "Ideal" cut diamonds.

SPREAD!!!
The elephant in the room.
Let's focus on FIRE ( even if you'll never really notice that aspect in most lighting environments, or at all if your stone is too small)
Forget about how large the diamond looks.

In my experience, far more people care about how large the stone looks than certain aspects of cut that are near impossible to see. And it's entirely possible to be a "Cut Nut" and care about spread.
 

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
Can you explain and describe GIA Cut grade Excellent 60/60 stones or combinations that you would not choose?


Your thesis would be much stronger if you could prove or minimize the differences in potential fire between some 60/60s and 'Superideal' in the potential for fire. I believe a case can be made for that in theory although I have not had the opportunity to compare two candidates that fit the criteria.

Burying and misdirecting that particular point with overall beauty assessments where all aspects of beauty must be considered at the same time just waters down your argument.

Fire, per se, is not on all that high my list of attributes that make me love a diamond- nor is it high on the vast majority of diamond buyers based on my experience. You are conveniently ignoring my point about actual facet size, and how it affects fire.
Any discussion of "fire" that omits actual facet size is truly misleading.

There are so many other aspects of cut that people WILL see and be drawn to....such as spread.
 

gretag

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
20
SPREAD!!!
The elephant in the room.
Let's focus on FIRE ( even if you'll never really notice that aspect in most lighting environments, or at all if your stone is too small)
Forget about how large the diamond looks.

In my experience, far more people care about how large the stone looks than certain aspects of cut that are near impossible to see. And it's entirely possible to be a "Cut Nut" and care about spread.

Spread is important, but comparing two AGS Ideal 0 diamonds 60/60 versus Tolk spread difference is likely the range of 3 - 5% better for a 60/60. So is that significant enough to warrant ignoring everythingelse?
 

gretag

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
20
Fire, per se, is not on all that high my list of attributes that make me love a diamond- nor is it high on the vast majority of diamond buyers based on my experience. You are conveniently ignoring my point about actual facet size, and how it affects fire.
Any discussion of "fire" that omits actual facet size is truly misleading.

There are so many other aspects of cut that people WILL see and be drawn to....such as spread.
I agree there are more important aspects than fire for my diamond buying dollar. I think a balance is better than weighting any aspect like spread or fire too much.

However I can't agree with you, there is no discernible difference in average flash size between a 1.00ct and 1.05ct (0.1 mm in diameter difference) diamond of the same cut especially not in potential for fire. I bet Bryan could confirm this he has ACAs of similar sizes.
 
Last edited:

Rockdiamond

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
9,707
How about between a 1.00 and a 3.00ct?
 

gretag

Rough_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
20
How about between a 1.00 and a 3.00ct?
Irrelevant to the discussion of whether the 5% extra spread gives you significantly more fire potential. That is a 300% difference which will dwarf any more subtle differences from cut.
 

Texas Leaguer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,760
The premise that fire is a non-factor is small diamonds is false. And one of the reasons is something referred to as 'bloom'. The fire event is perceived as much larger than the virtual facet that produced it.
This image captures both points.

bangle sparkles.JPG
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top