A Bit Concerned - Depth and Table Size Reversed?

[AW177]

Hello all,

Recently my gf looked at this 1.29 ring and fell in love w/ it, however I''m a bit concerned since the depth and table percentages seem to be reversed. The table % is bigger than the depth %, but the jeweler said that does not mean its cut is bad. I used the Cut Advisor, it came out VG and EX for all. Can anyone tell me what their opinion is on this? Specs for the diamond are below:

1.29
Polish: VG
Sym: EX
Cut: EX
Color: F
Clarity: VVS2
Girdle: TH - M
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 7.14 - 7.15 * 4.18mm
Depth = 58.5%
Table = 61%
Pav angle = 41
Crown angle = 32.5
Cutlet = Very Small

Thanks for any help!!!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/3/2006 11:29:27 AM
Author:AW177
Hello all,

Recently my gf looked at this 1.29 ring and fell in love w/ it, however I''m a bit concerned since the depth and table percentages seem to be reversed. The table % is bigger than the depth %, but the jeweler said that does not mean its cut is bad. I used the Cut Advisor, it came out VG and EX for all. Can anyone tell me what their opinion is on this? Specs for the diamond are below:

1.29
Polish: VG
Sym: EX
Cut: EX
Color: F
Clarity: VVS2
Girdle: TH - M
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 7.14 - 7.15 * 4.18mm
Depth = 58.5%
Table = 61%
Pav angle = 41
Crown angle = 32.5
Cutlet = Very Small

Thanks for any help!!!

According to those mm dimensions, the depth is correct. The rest of the numbers work out as well. With a 32.5 crown angle the total crown height is going to be in the 12-13% range, which is more shallow than typically seen on the forum. That makes sense with the larger table.

 

[AW177]

Date: 10/3/2006 11:39:12 AM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 10/3/2006 11:29:27 AM

Author:AW177

Hello all,


Recently my gf looked at this 1.29 ring and fell in love w/ it, however I''m a bit concerned since the depth and table percentages seem to be reversed. The table % is bigger than the depth %, but the jeweler said that does not mean its cut is bad. I used the Cut Advisor, it came out VG and EX for all. Can anyone tell me what their opinion is on this? Specs for the diamond are below:


1.29

Polish: VG

Sym: EX

Cut: EX

Color: F

Clarity: VVS2

Girdle: TH - M

Fluorescence: None

Measurements: 7.14 - 7.15 * 4.18mm

Depth = 58.5%

Table = 61%

Pav angle = 41

Crown angle = 32.5

Cutlet = Very Small


Thanks for any help!!!

According to those mm dimensions, the depth is correct. The rest of the numbers work out as well. With a 32.5 crown angle the total crown height is going to be in the 12-13% range, which is more shallow than typically seen on the forum. That makes sense with the larger table.

Thanks for the response John, so you''re saying that this diamond is ok then? I read somewhere on the Internet that:

"Unfortunately, most diamonds on today''s market are cut with a spread table (the large, octagonal-shaped facet on the top of the stone). This results in a stone that displays more brilliant white light but less fire and scintillation. Also, such stones look bigger than their actual weight due to a shallow total depth, which may be hidden in the mounting. Diamonds with spread tables offer "more flash for less cash" because they look bigger, are more brilliant and cost less. Be aware that these stones actually weigh less than they look and are more susceptible to chipping and damage."

The price we were offered was good, but should I just tell my jeweler to forget it and get another? Thanks again all!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/3/2006 11:47:51 AM
Author: AW177


Thanks for the response John, so you're saying that this diamond is ok then? I read somewhere on the Internet that:

'Unfortunately, most diamonds on today's market are cut with a spread table (the large, octagonal-shaped facet on the top of the stone). This results in a stone that displays more brilliant white light but less fire and scintillation. Also, such stones look bigger than their actual weight due to a shallow total depth, which may be hidden in the mounting. Diamonds with spread tables offer 'more flash for less cash' because they look bigger, are more brilliant and cost less. Be aware that these stones actually weigh less than they look and are more susceptible to chipping and damage.'

The price we were offered was good, but should I just tell my jeweler to forget it and get another? Thanks again all!

In this case I would agree with the portions highlighted above. You'll likely have more bright white light return and less colored dispersion/fire seen in rounds with higher crowns. The depth is a little bit more shallow than commonly seen on the forum (a Tolkowsky with a 7.15 mm spread is around 1.34 cts at a 60.5% depth) but at 1.29 it's certainly not extreme. The girdle is Thin-Med which is not a concern if strictly graded. Which lab did the grading report?

Technically, by the numbers, this diamond could qualify for GIA's top cut grade but not for AGS'.

We often say 'buy the diamond, not the paper.' If it's beautiful to her that's more meaningful than digits on a report. Be sure you've seen it away from bright jewelry store lighting. If she loves the look in several different illumination scenarios that's the most important thing.

 

[AW177]

Date: 10/3/2006 12:38:53 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 10/3/2006 11:47:51 AM

Author: AW177



Thanks for the response John, so you''re saying that this diamond is ok then? I read somewhere on the Internet that:


''Unfortunately, most diamonds on today''s market are cut with a spread table (the large, octagonal-shaped facet on the top of the stone). This results in a stone that displays more brilliant white light but less fire and scintillation. Also, such stones look bigger than their actual weight due to a shallow total depth, which may be hidden in the mounting. Diamonds with spread tables offer ''more flash for less cash'' because they look bigger, are more brilliant and cost less. Be aware that these stones actually weigh less than they look and are more susceptible to chipping and damage.''


The price we were offered was good, but should I just tell my jeweler to forget it and get another? Thanks again all!

In this case I would agree with the portions highlighted above. You''ll likely have more bright white light return and less colored dispersion/fire seen in rounds with higher crowns. The depth is a little bit more shallow than commonly seen on the forum (a Tolkowsky with a 7.15 mm spread is around 1.34 cts at a 60.5% depth) but at 1.29 it''s certainly not extreme. The girdle is Thin-Med which is not a concern if strictly graded. Which lab did the grading report?


Technically, by the numbers, this diamond could qualify for GIA''s top cut grade but not for AGS''.


We often say ''buy the diamond, not the paper.'' If it''s beautiful to her that''s more meaningful than digits on a report. Be sure you''ve seen it away from bright jewelry store lighting. If she loves the look in several different illumination scenarios that''s the most important thing.

John, again thank you for your response/help, I appreciate it very much. The grading report that I got the specs from is GIA; what is GIA''s "top cut grade" that you specified above?

The diamond is beautiful to my gf, she fell in love w/ the shine/sparkle/etc. I am more of a technical person (since I am a technical/mechanical engineer) and when I saw the disproportions, I was a little concerned. I put the diamond underneath the counter in the store, away from the bright lights and it still seemed shiny to me. I guess the true worth (money amount) will come from an appraisal, true?

Again, thanks much!!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/3/2006 1:50:19 PM
Author: AW177

John, again thank you for your response/help, I appreciate it very much. The grading report that I got the specs from is GIA; what is GIA's 'top cut grade' that you specified above?

The diamond is beautiful to my gf, she fell in love w/ the shine/sparkle/etc. I am more of a technical person (since I am a technical/mechanical engineer) and when I saw the disproportions, I was a little concerned. I put the diamond underneath the counter in the store, away from the bright lights and it still seemed shiny to me. I guess the true worth (money amount) will come from an appraisal, true?

Again, thanks much!!

No problem. It sounds like you both like it a lot. An independent appraiser is always a good option if you're worried about the technical; he/she may also be prepared to discuss and demonstrate what the shallow crown implies in tangible terms 'live.'

GIA's top cut grade is Excellent. They only started giving a cut grade for rounds in 2006. If the grading report is prior to that and doesn't list a cut grade you can get the report number, go to GIA Report Check, enter the report # and carat weight and get the expanded information there.

 

[AW177]

No problem. It sounds like you both like it a lot. An independent appraiser is always a good option if you''re worried about the technical; he/she may also be prepared to discuss and demonstrate what the shallow crown implies in tangible terms ''live.''


GIA''s top cut grade is Excellent. They only started giving a cut grade for rounds in 2006. If the grading report is prior to that and doesn''t list a cut grade you can get the report number, go to GIA Report Check, enter the report # and carat weight and get the expanded information there.

The problem w/ the appraisal, is that it cost a lot (around $200) just to check to see if the diamond is good/no good. Also, this diamond that we looked at is from 7/2006 and gives the cut grade as "Excellent".

How common is shallow diamonds like this? I really can''t see anything wrong w/ it right now since even the Cut Advisor gives it ratings of VG and EX. Can you see anything wrong w/ this?

Thanks again!!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/3/2006 2:22:02 PM
Author: AW177

No problem. It sounds like you both like it a lot. An independent appraiser is always a good option if you''re worried about the technical; he/she may also be prepared to discuss and demonstrate what the shallow crown implies in tangible terms ''live.''


GIA''s top cut grade is Excellent. They only started giving a cut grade for rounds in 2006. If the grading report is prior to that and doesn''t list a cut grade you can get the report number, go to GIA Report Check, enter the report # and carat weight and get the expanded information there.

The problem w/ the appraisal, is that it cost a lot (around $200) just to check to see if the diamond is good/no good. Also, this diamond that we looked at is from 7/2006 and gives the cut grade as ''Excellent''.

How common is shallow diamonds like this? I really can''t see anything wrong w/ it right now since even the Cut Advisor gives it ratings of VG and EX. Can you see anything wrong w/ this?

Thanks again!!

If you choose to have an appraisal it''s also good for insurance purposes. Independent appraisal is a separate choice you can make depending on your wants & needs.

Diamonds with those proportions are not uncommon and can be quite attractive. I don''t see anything wrong with the numbers - but remember that we here can''t ''see'' anything.

Any advice you receive on the forum is secondary to your own eyes and especially the eyes of the wearer.

 

[AW177]

If you choose to have an appraisal it''s also good for insurance purposes. Independent appraisal is a separate choice you can make depending on your wants & needs.


Diamonds with those proportions are not uncommon and can be quite attractive. I don''t see anything wrong with the numbers - but remember that we here can''t ''see'' anything.

Any advice you receive on the forum is secondary to your own eyes and especially the eyes of the wearer.

I understand that John, you''re right, as long as my gf loves it, it really doesn''t matter. I am just being on the safe side, w/ such an expensive purchase, I want to make sure everything is good. Since you say there seems to be nothing wrong w/ this diamond, I will trust your judgement and see where we go w/ this. Again, thank you very much for your help!

 

[Rhino]

Sounds like an interesting combination of proportions. I''d love to see such a specimen.

If it gets the Ex cut grade then it should have excellent optical characteristics and the spread factor is only a plus. Godspeed on your engagement AW.

 

[AW177]

Date: 10/3/2006 4:13:04 PM
Author: Rhino
Sounds like an interesting combination of proportions. I''d love to see such a specimen.

If it gets the Ex cut grade then it should have excellent optical characteristics and the spread factor is only a plus. Godspeed on your engagement AW.

Hi Rhino!

Interesting you say? How come? I thought this type of combination was not uncommon...? Yes GIA certificate says it has an ''EX'' cut grade and it really is shiny! The depth is not too far away from the table size, so it''s not too shallow of a diamond, only a little. What is your opinion?

 

[Rhino]

Date: 10/3/2006 4:29:13 PM
Author: AW177

Date: 10/3/2006 4:13:04 PM
Author: Rhino
Sounds like an interesting combination of proportions. I'd love to see such a specimen.

If it gets the Ex cut grade then it should have excellent optical characteristics and the spread factor is only a plus. Godspeed on your engagement AW.

Hi Rhino!

Interesting you say? How come? I thought this type of combination was not uncommon...? Yes GIA certificate says it has an 'EX' cut grade and it really is shiny! The depth is not too far away from the table size, so it's not too shallow of a diamond, only a little. What is your opinion?

I'll tell ya ... I'm so accustomed to seeing Tolkowsky proportioned stones. Many of my studies have revolved around variations of it. Ie. altering minor facet measurements etc. and how it impacts optics. With the release of GIA's new system it's causing me to explore and compare many more "Ex" combos which is why the proportions of the stone you mentioned interest me AW as they fall right on the fringes of GIA's new Ex grade. GIA's FacetWare program also confirms your proportion combo as an Ex grade as well. If I knew what the star and lower girdle length measurements are of your stone I can produce a fairly accurate 3d rendition of your stone for ya.

My first instinct when seeing the proportions were too shallow. My experience with shallow angled combo's is that in direct light environments they exhibit GREAT optics. Fiery and lots of bright flashes. This environment is what's typically found in jewelry stores. Take em in standard diffuse daylight and they go darker than I care for. Generally due to too many reflections of things obstructing light like the observer before the stone. Then again this depends on you or your fiance's focal length. Ie. How close you hold the diamond to your face when observing the stone. The shallower the stone, the greater your chances of seeing more darkness (and less brightness) at a greater distance. This stone with 32.5/41/61 combo appears to be at the cusp of their Ex grade because if any of the measurements are altered just a slight bit it falls into the VG grade (ie. making the crown angles 32.0 or the pavilion angles 40.8 or making the table to 62%). It is these stones on the cusp of the grade that interest me most for study. I have a VG stone in my inventory that is similar which I am using in an upcoming video on "understanding the GIA cut system" with a 32 crown angle, a 40.8 pavilion angle and a 62% table.

Attached is a graphic I put together of your stone with 55% stars and 80% lower half length in an office light view alongside a stone with proportions more like a Tolkowsky for a comparison on the right. I left the pavilion angle at 41 but made the crown angle 34.5 with a 55 table. From this graphic (which does correllate to a certain extent with real observation) the stone on the right does appear to be brighter. This is of course SUBJECTIVE and only a graphic I've put together with models. What I would do if I were you is compare it and see if you have a preference for one over the other. Ask the jewelry store if they have a stone on hand to compare it to with 34.5/41 with a table in the mid 50's just for comparison sake. You may still prefer the stone you have but it would make a good comparison for your own education and confirm your choice or not. If your jeweler can get a 32.5/41/61 combo I'm sure he can get a 34.5/41/56 combo for you to compare it too. You'll also want to view the stone AWAY from the heavy spot lighting that exists in most jewelry stores. Try to see it in natural ambient or diffuse daylight as well as the jewelry store lighting.

Having said all that, I'm sure the stone is beautiful though and with a stone falling on the cusp of the Ex grade, personally I'd rather have one on the cusp of the shallow end (like yours) than on the steep end.

Keep us posted on your progress AW and thanks for posting. Also ... excellent input Sir JohnQ.

All the best,

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/3/2006 4:13:04 PM
Author: Rhino

Sounds like an interesting combination of proportions. I'd love to see such a specimen.

If it gets the Ex cut grade then it should have excellent optical characteristics and the spread factor is only a plus. Godspeed on your engagement AW.

I'm surprised you haven't seen that combo. I visit other retail stores regularly and see tons of 60ish tables at & around that depth. To "see a specimen" might be as easy as walking into a neighboring store - unless that combo is just uncommon to NY.

I did a PS search for 0.5 - 2.5 ct, broad color/clarity, w 58-59T and 60-62D: 2479 diamonds came up. We may not see them on PS a lot, but they are out there in abundance.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/3/2006 6:55:26 PM
Author: Rhino

I'll tell ya ... I'm so accustomed to seeing Tolkowsky proportioned stones. Many of my studies have revolved around variations of it. Ie. altering minor facet measurements etc. and how it impacts optics. With the release of GIA's new system it's causing me to explore and compare many more 'Ex' combos which is why the proportions of the stone you mentioned interest me AW as they fall right on the fringes of GIA's new Ex grade. GIA's FacetWare program also confirms your proportion combo as an Ex grade as well. If I knew what the star and lower girdle length measurements are of your stone I can produce a fairly accurate 3d rendition of your stone for ya.

Rhino, one thing I'd mention is that the optical symmetry of any models you or I would produce would likely not match his diamond. Those 60/60 (in thie case 58.5/61) 'specimens' I see out and about range in OS quite a bit more than the near-Tolks we're familiar with, so I'd venture that the computer graphic is making some assumptions. Also, the GIA report is a bit rounded, so AW's diamond could be a bit more shallow or deep than indicated.

Having said all that, I'm sure the stone is beautiful though and with a stone falling on the cusp of the Ex grade, personally I'd rather have one on the cusp of the shallow end (like yours) than on the steep end.

Keep us posted on your progress AW and thanks for posting. Also ... excellent input Sir JohnQ.

Agree 100% with the summary, and I still think AW is in the best position to know if he's got a winner.

Thanks for the comment Rhino.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 10/3/2006 7:38:13 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 10/3/2006 4:13:04 PM
Author: Rhino

Sounds like an interesting combination of proportions. I''d love to see such a specimen.

If it gets the Ex cut grade then it should have excellent optical characteristics and the spread factor is only a plus. Godspeed on your engagement AW.

I''m surprised you haven''t seen that combo. I visit other retail stores regularly and see tons of 60ish tables at & around that depth. To ''see a specimen'' might be as easy as walking into a neighboring store - unless that combo is just uncommon to NY.

I did a PS search for 0.5 - 2.5 ct, broad color/clarity, w 58-59T and 60-62D: 2479 diamonds came up. We may not see them on PS a lot, but they are out there in abundance.

I don''t doubt their availability John. I''m just not accustomed to looking for them or having suppliers send em in. While knowing the table/total depth is a good start its no guarantee that I''d get a stone that falls on the cusp. When search engines include crown/pavilion angles that''ll be a much easier task of course. Also in my neck of the woods my face and store is pretty well known so walking into a local competitors store and asking to know the crown/pavilion/table data on the stones in their inventory and requesting them to see them in the lighting I desire isn''t practical for me to do. Appreciate the suggestions. I''ll get my mits on one sooner or later though.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 10/3/2006 7:44:18 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 10/3/2006 6:55:26 PM
Author: Rhino

I''ll tell ya ... I''m so accustomed to seeing Tolkowsky proportioned stones. Many of my studies have revolved around variations of it. Ie. altering minor facet measurements etc. and how it impacts optics. With the release of GIA''s new system it''s causing me to explore and compare many more ''Ex'' combos which is why the proportions of the stone you mentioned interest me AW as they fall right on the fringes of GIA''s new Ex grade. GIA''s FacetWare program also confirms your proportion combo as an Ex grade as well. If I knew what the star and lower girdle length measurements are of your stone I can produce a fairly accurate 3d rendition of your stone for ya.

Rhino, one thing I''d mention is that the optical symmetry of any models you or I would produce would likely not match his diamond. Those 60/60 (in thie case 58.5/61) ''specimens'' I see out and about range in OS quite a bit more than the near-Tolks we''re familiar with, so I''d venture that the computer graphic is making some assumptions. Also, the GIA report is a bit rounded, so AW''s diamond could be a bit more shallow or deep than indicated.

Agreed and good points. That''s another reason why those graphics are subjective. Whenever I see proportion combos on the cusp of any cut grade (GIA or AGS) I think they make for good study which is why I thought it''d be an interesting comparison. Technically speaking, the stone AW has is the last proportion combo in that set to receive the Ex grade or GIA''s minimum appearance/cut off for their top grade. On the steep/deep side we''d be talking a 41.6/34.x combo which I''ve yet to get my hands on too. I have VG stones right on the outskirts of Ex but not within. That''s the comparison I''d like to see.

Date: 10/3/2006 7:44:18 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Having said all that, I''m sure the stone is beautiful though and with a stone falling on the cusp of the Ex grade, personally I''d rather have one on the cusp of the shallow end (like yours) than on the steep end.

Keep us posted on your progress AW and thanks for posting. Also ... excellent input Sir JohnQ.

Agree 100% with the summary, and I still think AW is in the best position to know if he''s got a winner.

Thanks for the comment Rhino.

Amen to that.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/3/2006 10:37:10 PM
Author: Rhino

I don't doubt their availability John. I'm just not accustomed to looking for them or having suppliers send em in. While knowing the table/total depth is a good start its no guarantee that I'd get a stone that falls on the cusp. When search engines include crown/pavilion angles that'll be a much easier task of course. Also in my neck of the woods my face and store is pretty well known so walking into a local competitors store and asking to know the crown/pavilion/table data on the stones in their inventory and requesting them to see them in the lighting I desire isn't practical for me to do. Appreciate the suggestions. I'll get my mits on one sooner or later though.

That makes sense. Ever think about groucho-glasses/nose?

I'm friends with several local B&M guys, but being exclusively on the 'net I imagine they don't see me as competition (though technically I am).

Another thought; if you cruise the malls with the missus you can find places with the 'credit-card certs' that have CH listed. Locate a near-60/60 with a 12-13% CH and Tn-M girdle and you're in the ballpark for AW's angles. Of course, you'll be subject to their lighting scheme.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 10/3/2006 10:52:21 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 10/3/2006 10:37:10 PM
Author: Rhino

I don''t doubt their availability John. I''m just not accustomed to looking for them or having suppliers send em in. While knowing the table/total depth is a good start its no guarantee that I''d get a stone that falls on the cusp. When search engines include crown/pavilion angles that''ll be a much easier task of course. Also in my neck of the woods my face and store is pretty well known so walking into a local competitors store and asking to know the crown/pavilion/table data on the stones in their inventory and requesting them to see them in the lighting I desire isn''t practical for me to do. Appreciate the suggestions. I''ll get my mits on one sooner or later though.

That makes sense. Ever think about groucho-glasses/nose?

I''m friends with several local B&M guys, but being exclusively on the ''net I imagine they don''t see me as competition (though technically I am).

Another thought; if you cruise the malls with the missus you can find places with the ''credit-card certs'' that have CH listed. Locate a near-60/60 with a 12-13% CH and Tn-M girdle and you''re in the ballpark for AW''s angles. Of course, you''ll be subject to their lighting scheme.

LOL... I actually used to have the groucho glasses/nose!

I hear ya bout the malls but as you say "the lighting" and they are generally far from the lighting I like to examine in.

If you run into a "cusp stone" in the system I''d appreciate it if you can give me a heads up. I''d like to examinine it next to the shallow VG I have here and see if I can note differences.

Peace,

 

[AW177]

Wow I did not realize that the stone I have is a "study specimen"! I''m reading through all your posts, and some of your talk is leaving me a bit confused, but what I gather from all this is that the diamond is good, is not uncommon, and that if my gf really likes it, then it''s all good, correct? My main concern is that I am not getting ripped off for a diamond like this. Thanks again for the help guys!

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/4/2006 12:46:13 AM
Author: AW177
Wow I did not realize that the stone I have is a 'study specimen'! I'm reading through all your posts, and some of your talk is leaving me a bit confused...

Sorry about that. Don't be. The measurements you’re considering are pretty common. Some dealers here (Rhino’s store and ours included) tend to stock rounds cut near a different center of proportions, so one like you're considering may not commonly be in our hands. We do this because there is a narrow range which sells with success on the internet thanks to a reputation for consistently high performance, even sight-unseen. There is info here and here in the tutorial section. Not to worry, I see many diamonds like your candidate when visiting retail stores.

...but what I gather from all this is that the diamond is good, is not uncommon, and that if my gf really likes it, then it's all good, correct? My main concern is that I am not getting ripped off for a diamond like this. Thanks again for the help guys!

Right, right and right. You have the advantage of seeing the one you’re considering. If you and she like its balance of optical qualities you’re in good shape.

My main concern is that I am not getting ripped off for a diamond like this. Thanks again for the help guys!

That's a good concern regardless of measurements, and there is a way to compare. Go to the Pricescope main page’s search feature, type in carat (go 0.10 on either side of your diamond), color and clarity, leave GIA and AGS checked and search about 58-59% depth and 60-62% table. A few diamonds should come up and you’ll see what PS vendors are offering them for. You can reasonably expect to pay a little bit more in the average B&M store.

 

[AW177]

John, Rhino, thank you so much for your help; you have helped put me at ease and your knowledge of diamonds have been very beneficial to me. Thanks again!!!!

 

[Rhino]

Cool. Keep us posted on your progress AW.

Kind regards,