This is a new thread to follow up an earlier post.
I finally figured out that there are three grades on an AGS report:
Cut
Color
Clarity
Each has its own scale of 0 to 10 with 0 being the best. Thus a TRUE "000" would be 0 Cut, 0 Color, and 0 Clarity.
The mythical "000" that people are always referring to is really a CUT 0 GRADE only.
Here is my question: AGS cut grade includes Polish, Symmetry and Proportions. Will AGS ONLY CERTIFY POLISH AND SYMMETRY AS IDEAL IF THE PROPORTIONS ARE ALSO IDEAL OR WILL AGS CERTIFY PROPORTION GRADES OF 1 AND 2 WITH IDEAL POLISH AND SYMMETRY?
Put another way, according to AGS, is a diamond only ideally symmetrical and polished if it ALSO HAS IDEAL (according to AGS) proportions?
That would seem ludricrous to me. Why couldn''t a poorly cut and non-symmetrical diamond have a perfect polish?
This is starting to seem like a marketing scheme designed to bring AGS more business, which has less to do with FACTUAL INFORMATION ABOUT DIAMONDS and more to do with MORE PROFIT FOR AGS.
It makes me question the ethics of the people in charge at AGS and give kudos to GIA for being more on target with the scientific method.
Am I wrong? Comments?
I finally figured out that there are three grades on an AGS report:
Cut
Color
Clarity
Each has its own scale of 0 to 10 with 0 being the best. Thus a TRUE "000" would be 0 Cut, 0 Color, and 0 Clarity.
The mythical "000" that people are always referring to is really a CUT 0 GRADE only.
Here is my question: AGS cut grade includes Polish, Symmetry and Proportions. Will AGS ONLY CERTIFY POLISH AND SYMMETRY AS IDEAL IF THE PROPORTIONS ARE ALSO IDEAL OR WILL AGS CERTIFY PROPORTION GRADES OF 1 AND 2 WITH IDEAL POLISH AND SYMMETRY?
Put another way, according to AGS, is a diamond only ideally symmetrical and polished if it ALSO HAS IDEAL (according to AGS) proportions?
That would seem ludricrous to me. Why couldn''t a poorly cut and non-symmetrical diamond have a perfect polish?
This is starting to seem like a marketing scheme designed to bring AGS more business, which has less to do with FACTUAL INFORMATION ABOUT DIAMONDS and more to do with MORE PROFIT FOR AGS.
It makes me question the ethics of the people in charge at AGS and give kudos to GIA for being more on target with the scientific method.
Am I wrong? Comments?