AGS Begins Grading Oval Cut Diamonds.

[diagem]

http://www.idexonline.com/portal_FullNews.asp?SID=&id=30096



Is it realistic? What about the range of shape possibilities? Different Brilliant faceting arrangements (8 or 4 fold pavilions)? Different bulges?

Or is it going to be a Step-Cut flop?

Opinions.....?

 

[strmrdr]

It is likely going too be a very small segment of the possible great combinations/looks.
If they didn't pay attention too cut-ability and eliminating the bow-tie its going too be another bust.
Also if they went for all out light return it will likely flop too.

 

[WinkHPD]

I have not had a chance to study it yet, but I know that they have been working on it for well over a year and I am betting that it is going to be a very useful tool, I will get back when I have had a chance to talk with Peter Yantzer or Jim Caudill.

Wink

 

[oldminer]

To maximize light return one will have to stick to fairly narrow approaches to shape - outline. There are many potential outlines which are bound to be doomed by grading which has a rather narrow focus. A bow-tie is inherent in longish shapes and part of what one gets used to. I have no problem with a proper bow tie being in what I''d call a beautiful or ideally cut oval stone.

I have no idea of what AGS has proposed and I don''t want to be a critic without knowledge of their game plan. While I am not a lover of what they designed for Princess cut, it is a lovely diamond, but limits cutter''s choices. The same with oval may prove another hard sell to the trade and limit what passes into the consumer''s world of stones really being offered for purchase. The parametric guide for Ovals which I produced for AGA and NAJA years ago is quite broad and does not dictate outline. Cutters who create 1A to 2A ovals in my old system are doing a fine job for the consumer and I hate to see them limited. It will cost more to waste rough to produce a particular design with narrow parameters of shape.

I''ll hope for the best. I am sure the 0 cut ovals will be very attractive.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/16/2008 4:13:56 PM
Author: oldminer
To maximize light return one will have to stick to fairly narrow approaches to shape - outline. There are many potential outlines which are bound to be doomed by grading which has a rather narrow focus. A bow-tie is inherent in longish shapes and part of what one gets used to. I have no problem with a proper bow tie being in what I''d call a beautiful or ideally cut oval stone.

I have no idea of what AGS has proposed and I don''t want to be a critic without knowledge of their game plan. While I am not a lover of what they designed for Princess cut, it is a lovely diamond, but limits cutter''s choices. The same with oval may prove another hard sell to the trade and limit what passes into the consumer''s world of stones really being offered for purchase. The parametric guide for Ovals which I produced for AGA and NAJA years ago is quite broad and does not dictate outline. Cutters who create 1A to 2A ovals in my old system are doing a fine job for the consumer and I hate to see them limited. It will cost more to waste rough to produce a particular design with narrow parameters of shape.

I''ll hope for the best. I am sure the 0 cut ovals will be very attractive.

Anything that advances cut quality is good. I have no doubt many cutters learned better ways to cut princess from AGS''s work.
But anything that reduces cutters experimentation in finding new and better ways to cut diamonds is bad.

this could be really good, and slightly bad

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/16/2008 4:13:56 PM
Author: oldminer
To maximize light return one will have to stick to fairly narrow approaches to shape - outline. There are many potential outlines which are bound to be doomed by grading which has a rather narrow focus. A bow-tie is inherent in longish shapes and part of what one gets used to. I have no problem with a proper bow tie being in what I''d call a beautiful or ideally cut oval stone.

I have no idea of what AGS has proposed and I don''t want to be a critic without knowledge of their game plan. While I am not a lover of what they designed for Princess cut, it is a lovely diamond, but limits cutter''s choices. The same with oval may prove another hard sell to the trade and limit what passes into the consumer''s world of stones really being offered for purchase. The parametric guide for Ovals which I produced for AGA and NAJA years ago is quite broad and does not dictate outline. Cutters who create 1A to 2A ovals in my old system are doing a fine job for the consumer and I hate to see them limited. It will cost more to waste rough to produce a particular design with narrow parameters of shape.

I''ll hope for the best. I am sure the 0 cut ovals will be very attractive.

I fully agree with you that if it will limit the scope/possibilities of cutters to create beautiful Ovals as it limits the Princess Cut and Emerald/Asscher Cuts it will definitely beat the purpose..., unless they are trying to brand the AGS Oval!

 

[WinkHPD]

Okay, here are some of the specifics. I think it is going to be a VERY useful system, it addresses much of the concerns posted earlier in this thread.

Length to Width Ratios allowable. 1.25 to 1 for the short length/width ratio all the way to 1.8 to 1 for the long Length/width ratio.

Pavilion - 4 pavilion mains
6 pavilion mains
8 pavilion mains, two variations
standard variation
twisted variation

(Diagem, Peter said you would know what that means, I am not yet familiar with what it means, looks like it is back to the books for me.)

Bow tie - They have devised a bow tie mask to measure the percentage of bow tie. The allowable percentage of mask varies with the length/width ratio of the diamond. The goal is to minimize, but not to eliminate the bow tie.

The girdle must be faceted. This is because some very shallow marquise are incredibly gorgeous and a bruted girdle will show a nasty fish eye, while the faceted girdle will allow the diamond to really sing.

The shape must be symmetrical, and the shoulders must not be too big, which would tend to make the diamond look more cushion shaped than oval.

Sounds to me like they have done a LOT of work and put a LOT of thought into the creation of this cutting grade. I am looking forward to seeing some of the AGS 0 and 1 cut grade ovals.

Wink

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

thanks Wink

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/16/2008 5:24:06 PM
Author: Wink
Okay, here are some of the specifics. I think it is going to be a VERY useful system, it addresses much of the concerns posted earlier in this thread.

Length to Width Ratios allowable. 1.25 to 1 for the short length/width ratio all the way to 1.8 to 1 for the long Length/width ratio.

Pavilion - 4 pavilion mains
6 pavilion mains
8 pavilion mains, two variations
standard variation
twisted variation I assume it means like some cutters cut the cushions with the 8 crown mains at 12, 1:30, 3, 4:30, 6, 7:30, 9, 10:30 watch hour position and the 8 pavilion mains at 11, 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10 watch hour position...., when the crown mains and pavilion mains are twisted in their alignments!

(Diagem, Peter said you would know what that means, I am not yet familiar with what it means, looks like it is back to the books for me.)

Bow tie - They have devised a bow tie mask to measure the percentage of bow tie. The allowable percentage of mask varies with the length/width ratio of the diamond. The goal is to minimize, but not to eliminate the bow tie.

The girdle must be faceted. This is because some very shallow marquise are incredibly gorgeous and a bruted girdle will show a nasty fish eye, while the faceted girdle will allow the diamond to really sing.

The shape must be symmetrical, and the shoulders must not be too big, which would tend to make the diamond look more cushion shaped than oval.

Sounds to me like they have done a LOT of work and put a LOT of thought into the creation of this cutting grade. I am looking forward to seeing some of the AGS 0 and 1 cut grade ovals.

Wink

I see it is pretty wide in range...., any info. on the angles and proportion %''s?
Will the AGS take into consideration crown height vs. a wide range of pavilion angles?

It does seem as they are putting an emphasis on grading the cut based on the performance or maximum light return with a wider range of possibilities as its a must for these type of fancy shapes...

Thanks Wink...

 

[strmrdr]

that sounds encouraging maybe they learned something from the EC/SE mess.
The cuttability question will make or break the system.
After the huge let down with the EC/SE system I remain sceptical.

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/16/2008 6:03:23 PM
Author: strmrdr
that sounds encouraging maybe they learned something from the EC/SE mess.
The cuttability question will make or break the system.
After the huge let down with the EC/SE system I remain sceptical.

Only the EC/SE? Do you really think the Princess-Cut grading system is Ideal?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/16/2008 6:10:58 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/16/2008 6:03:23 PM
Author: strmrdr
that sounds encouraging maybe they learned something from the EC/SE mess.
The cuttability question will make or break the system.
After the huge let down with the EC/SE system I remain sceptical.

Only the EC/SE? Do you really think the Princess-Cut grading system is Ideal?

I don''t like princess cuts so wasn''t looking forward too it.
There are more well cut princess cuts on the market because of it so it isn''t all bad.
I think it does kill the incentive for someone too design an even better one and that is bad.
So its kinda take the good and the bad so I''m neutral on it.

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/16/2008 6:26:47 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/16/2008 6:10:58 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/16/2008 6:03:23 PM
Author: strmrdr
that sounds encouraging maybe they learned something from the EC/SE mess.
The cuttability question will make or break the system.
After the huge let down with the EC/SE system I remain sceptical.

Only the EC/SE? Do you really think the Princess-Cut grading system is Ideal?

I don''t like princess cuts so wasn''t looking forward too it.
There are more well cut princess cuts on the market because of it so it isn''t all bad.
I think it does kill the incentive for someone too design an even better one and that is bad.
So its kinda take the good and the bad so I''m neutral on it.

You are starting to sound like Garry

.

I do think that there are PLENTY of great Princess Cuts that are WAY out of the AGS 0 cut grading range!
Although they are definitely not mine nor my clients cup of tea...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/16/2008 6:35:21 PM
Author: DiaGem
You are starting to sound like Garry

.

I do think that there are PLENTY of great Princess Cuts that are WAY out of the AGS 0 cut grading range!
Although they are definitely not mine nor my clients cup of tea...

lol yea I agree with him on it.

 

[WinkHPD]

I have to say that I absolutely love the AGS 0 princess cuts. They are so heads and shoulders above the princess cuts that i was used to seeing before it was made available to us.

I used to send back 90% or more of the princess cuts that I called in without even showing them as they were so dead centered and unworthy of being even shown. I have never had to send one single AGS 0 cut princess cut back for being any thing less than spectacular.

As long as people are going to buy paper rather than look at the diamonds, then I am very happy to be able to offer diamonds that will look as good as the paper when they are delivered. I Think that for me AGS has proven to be a trustworthy part of the team that I use to deliver diamonds to my clients. I really LIKE having them in my corner and I think a lot of other vendors do too!

Wink

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/16/2008 7:06:24 PM
Author: Wink
I have to say that I absolutely love the AGS 0 princess cuts. They are so heads and shoulders above the princess cuts that i was used to seeing before it was made available to us.

I used to send back 90% or more of the princess cuts that I called in without even showing them as they were so dead centered and unworthy of being even shown. I have never had to send one single AGS 0 cut princess cut back for being any thing less than spectacular.

As long as people are going to buy paper rather than look at the diamonds, then I am very happy to be able to offer diamonds that will look as good as the paper when they are delivered. I Think that for me AGS has proven to be a trustworthy part of the team that I use to deliver diamonds to my clients. I really LIKE having them in my corner and I think a lot of other vendors do too!

Wink

The highlighted text says it all..., but you are right on that which you can count on the AGS Princess Cut grade to make sure you get a consistent supply in a pretty and limited type appearance..., but..., there is a MUCH wider scope/range of beautiful Princesses out there than the limited AGS "ideal" ones...

 

[oldminer]

Thank you Wink for the information. It pleases me to see AGSL is giving good information to the trade and really advancing the field. They are doing a number on GIA which has really dropped the ball.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 4/16/2008 7:13:09 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/16/2008 7:06:24 PM
Author: Wink
I have to say that I absolutely love the AGS 0 princess cuts. They are so heads and shoulders above the princess cuts that i was used to seeing before it was made available to us.

I used to send back 90% or more of the princess cuts that I called in without even showing them as they were so dead centered and unworthy of being even shown. I have never had to send one single AGS 0 cut princess cut back for being any thing less than spectacular.

As long as people are going to buy paper rather than look at the diamonds, then I am very happy to be able to offer diamonds that will look as good as the paper when they are delivered. I Think that for me AGS has proven to be a trustworthy part of the team that I use to deliver diamonds to my clients. I really LIKE having them in my corner and I think a lot of other vendors do too!

Wink

The highlighted text says it all..., but you are right on that which you can count on the AGS Princess Cut grade to make sure you get a consistent supply in a pretty and limited type appearance..., but..., there is a MUCH wider scope/range of beautiful Princesses out there than the limited AGS ''ideal'' ones...

Agreed, BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your "wider scope/range of beautiful princesses" is NOT what the consumer is used to seeing. I would hate for them to read it here then expect to go forth into the wild (mall) and think that they are going to find these treasures here and there and every where. What they will find is the usual lineup of dead and lifeless never going to be kissed princesses. These will be sleeping dogs, not sleeping beauties, and they should not be disturbed.

For you, being in the trade, saying that AGS is not your only option is quite true. But, how do we arm the average consumer so that when they are swimming with the sharks it is not THEY who are to be the main course? Me personally? I prefer to arm my clients with industrial strength shark repellant. Here Sir, try this little squirt of Eau de AGS, it will keep the sharks completely away from you and give you life long protection from flimflammery by those pesky ramora that are swimming with the sharks.

Let''s say this. You have the opportunity to pick up ten princess cuts, all identicle weight, color and clarity, all with AGS 0 cut grades or for the same price you could pick up ten princess cuts that sound similar, but with GIA papers that contain no cut info other than polish and symmetry. Which would you buy sight unseen? (Assuming of course that cut is important to you.)

If you put yourself into such a situation perhaps you would have a better feel for what the AGS is trying to accomplish, establish some benchmarks that allow a consumer or a vendor to make better decisions about which diamonds they want to spend their postage money on when trying to buy from the paper. So far they seem to be the only people making any attempt to do it for the fancies, and I fanciy that they are doing a pretty good job of it so far!

Wink

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/16/2008 8:03:58 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 4/16/2008 7:13:09 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 4/16/2008 7:06:24 PM
Author: Wink
I have to say that I absolutely love the AGS 0 princess cuts. They are so heads and shoulders above the princess cuts that i was used to seeing before it was made available to us.

I used to send back 90% or more of the princess cuts that I called in without even showing them as they were so dead centered and unworthy of being even shown. I have never had to send one single AGS 0 cut princess cut back for being any thing less than spectacular.

As long as people are going to buy paper rather than look at the diamonds, then I am very happy to be able to offer diamonds that will look as good as the paper when they are delivered. I Think that for me AGS has proven to be a trustworthy part of the team that I use to deliver diamonds to my clients. I really LIKE having them in my corner and I think a lot of other vendors do too!

Wink

The highlighted text says it all..., but you are right on that which you can count on the AGS Princess Cut grade to make sure you get a consistent supply in a pretty and limited type appearance..., but..., there is a MUCH wider scope/range of beautiful Princesses out there than the limited AGS ''ideal'' ones...

Agreed, BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your ''wider scope/range of beautiful princesses'' is NOT what the consumer is used to seeing. I would hate for them to read it here then expect to go forth into the wild (mall) and think that they are going to find these treasures here and there and every where. What they will find is the usual lineup of dead and lifeless never going to be kissed princesses. These will be sleeping dogs, not sleeping beauties, and they should not be disturbed.

Wink..., because of the nature of the cut and its pavilion faceting structure..., most (non AGS) Princess Cuts I have seen are lively stones (still not my cup-of-tea)! And in today''s volatile market..., manufacturers/cutters are not willing to take the chance of cutting "dogs" (as you and some other PS''ers like to call them

), Its getting non-economical, harder and tougher to market off-makes!

The problem I keep having with the AGS 0 Princess cuts is their welcoming of a very deep stone and a very large table where most of the depth is located/hiding in the pavilion, resulting in a rather small spread with almost no account to crown height..., unlike other fancy shapes that could be cut to deep proportions while exposing a substantial part of the depth to the crown to add beauty to the Diamond and for the observer to enjoy and feel!

For you, being in the trade, saying that AGS is not your only option is quite true. But, how do we arm the average consumer so that when they are swimming with the sharks it is not THEY who are to be the main course? Me personally? I prefer to arm my clients with industrial strength shark repellant. Here Sir, try this little squirt of Eau de AGS, it will keep the sharks completely away from you and give you life long protection from flimflammery by those pesky ramora that are swimming with the sharks.

Its fair and fine (I have no problem with your business model)..., and it sounds like a great marketing slogan..., AGS should adopt it!

Let''s say this. You have the opportunity to pick up ten princess cuts, all identicle weight, color and clarity, all with AGS 0 cut grades or for the same price you could pick up ten princess cuts that sound similar, but with GIA papers that contain no cut info other than polish and symmetry. Which would you buy sight unseen? (Assuming of course that cut is important to you.)

Like I said above..., firstly I am against buying any Diamonds sight-unseen (but thats the reason for the return policies..., correct?)
If you are willing to "limit" yourself to the range of AGS 0''s..., then be my guest! But, for some reason I had the impression that consumers pay a premium for AGS 0''s (I might be wrong...).

If you put yourself into such a situation perhaps you would have a better feel for what the AGS is trying to accomplish, establish some benchmarks that allow a consumer or a vendor to make better decisions about which diamonds they want to spend their postage money on when trying to buy from the paper. So far they seem to be the only people making any attempt to do it for the fancies, and I fanciy that they are doing a pretty good job of it so far!

I will agree with Garry, Storm that "advancing cut quality" is a good move..., but only time will tell which would have been a better move: Advancing cut quality by limiting ranges or not!

Wink

Everybody must find their niche in today''s volatile market conditions..., so does AGS, you and me etc..., etc...!
The only point that does not make ''complete'' sense to me is; why are the great majority of the cutters/manufacturers of fancy shapes like Princess, Emerald/Asscher cuts not utilizing the AGS cutting grades "even" for their Top-Makes?

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 4/17/2008 4:00:21 AM
Author: DiaGem
Everybody must find their niche in today''s volatile market conditions..., so does AGS, you and me etc..., etc...!
The only point that does not make ''complete'' sense to me is; why are the great majority of the cutters/manufacturers of fancy shapes like Princess, Emerald/Asscher cuts not utilizing the AGS cutting grades ''even'' for their Top-Makes?

First reason is less important for them: because their Top-Makes do not make the grade AND because they cannot compete in a consumer''s side-by-side comparison.

Major reason, because the trade in general is not ready to adopt the system. So, you either work hard to make sure that you get a decent market of AGS-graded princess-cuts, or you stick to GIA, which is accepted by even the biggest dinosaur in the business.

Live long,

 

[diagem]

Date: 4/17/2008 10:09:55 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 4/17/2008 4:00:21 AM
Author: DiaGem
Everybody must find their niche in today''s volatile market conditions..., so does AGS, you and me etc..., etc...!
The only point that does not make ''complete'' sense to me is; why are the great majority of the cutters/manufacturers of fancy shapes like Princess, Emerald/Asscher cuts not utilizing the AGS cutting grades ''even'' for their Top-Makes?

First reason is less important for them: because their Top-Makes do not make the grade AND because they cannot compete in a consumer''s side-by-side comparison.

Major reason, because the trade in general is not ready to adopt the system. So, you either work hard to make sure that you get a decent market of AGS-graded princess-cuts, or you stick to GIA, which is accepted by even the biggest dinosaur in the business.

Live long,

Name of the game in surviving these volatile conditions is: specialize and become professional in a certain niche..., and I am happy to see Companies like yours succeeding at it!!! Bravo!