AGA Cut Chart for Emeralds & Radiants...L/W issue?

[Defender]

I have already posted about the variances and fashions in Emerald cut shapes, but I just noticed that the AGA cut chart for grading Emeralds and Radiants shows a recommended rectangular range of 1:5 to 1:75 for emeralds and radiants. This is shown as ''preference only" but it appears that these shapes would be the preference for Class 1A to 2A.... This would seem to exclude most available emeralds and radiants.

Can David Atlas or others explain this shape preference, and its validity in grading a stone.

 

[AChiOAlumna]

The L/W ratio is strictly personal preference. the smaller the ratio, the more "boxier" the EC, while the larger the ratio, the more elongated the EC. It''s honestly your preference. I found that I like ECs that are 1:4 - 1:5 ratio. My EC is a 1:4. I don''t like the 1:6-1:75 as they seem too skinny for me....

 

[Defender]

I understand the personal preference issue, but it seems a bit disconcerting to see the AGA chart recommend a L/W ratio which is much more rectangular than most current Emeralds seem to be.

Does this impact valuation or appraisal??

 

[oldminer]

Well, that''s exactly why I said "personal preference", not part of grading. Before square princess cuts became the fashion, people commonly liked longer, rectangular shapes more. I am waiting for wide ties to come back into style again, too. These charts have withstood the test of time and reflect some traditional appearances that you might not like yourself, today. In the long run, I believe we''ll see a resurgence of rectangular shapes once again.

If you prefer the more square shapes, like Asscher cuts, remember these were completely out of style for over 40 years before again coming back into fashion. The truths of fashion are elusive except that like history, they repeat eventually.