antique step cuts?

[Lula]

Cost of rough is why they aren't being cut today.
I have looked into cutting some and the high cost of rough combined with the precision needed to do them right makes them pretty much unprofitable.
The same rough could be cut into a cushion that is much heavier.
Which is also the reason Octavia is in short supply.
Yoram, separates out rough for it out of all the parcels he gets and when he has a enough to make a production run he does so.
It can take months to get the rough for 3-6 stones.

I just saw this post from June -- Bah! I really wish more diamonds were cut for beauty instead of weight. It's such a waste of good carbon.
Anyway, any hope of recutting the cruddy emerald cuts on the market into stones that look like kelpie's?
I'm off to see if there are any more recent threads on kelpie's lovely diamond. Has it been set?

 

[diagem]

... I really wish more diamonds were cut for beauty instead of weight. It's such a waste of good carbon.
Anyway, any hope of recutting the cruddy emerald cuts on the market into stones that look like kelpie's?

Naturally the current market conditions forces cutters to cut more for beauty and less for weight. Consumers are significantly more educated (and getting more by the day... )

To your question..., the majority of EC's on the market are cut to problematic proportions as to calculating a recut option.
To recut a 8-11% crown height EC into a 17-25% crown height EC makes it uneconomical in any scenario.

Unfortunately so

 

[Karl_K]

In general a small table with a high crown will not be well balanced out by a shallowish pavilion.
That does not mean they cant be very pretty but put them next to a stone cut for light return and they can look a bit dull.

Hmm, interesting. I would guessed the opposite -- that a shallow EC with a small table and high crown would face up large for its carat weight and be bright and flashy.

Yes, EC's are complicated. That's an understatement But when I see a good one, it takes my breath away.
Thanks for your comments, Karl.

The placement of the facets is just as important as the angle to good light return in an EC.
Remember you have usually 3 sets in the crown and 3 sets in the pavilion that are can be put anywhere.
Lining up the pavilion facets with the crown can change the light return over 20%.
If you have wide facets on the crown ie: small table, you need wide facets on the pavilion to line them up under them. This giving you a deepish pavilion.
Then to get a bright stone you need to align your reflectors to get into the red zone in aset.
This changes your angles.
A high crown with a shallowish pavilion will be mostly in the green zone in ASET.
This can give a very nice looking diamond but it isn't overall as bright as if it was more into the red zone.
So you have placement under the crown facets in a certain way at an angle that gets you to the red zone in Aset as a design criteria.
It is not going to be shallow.

 

[Lula]

... I really wish more diamonds were cut for beauty instead of weight. It's such a waste of good carbon.
Anyway, any hope of recutting the cruddy emerald cuts on the market into stones that look like kelpie's?

Naturally the current market conditions forces cutters to cut more for beauty and less for weight. Consumers are significantly more educated (and getting more by the day... )

To your question..., the majority of EC's on the market are cut to problematic proportions as to calculating a recut option.
To recut a 8-11% crown height EC into a 17-25% crown height EC makes it uneconomical in any scenario.

Unfortunately so

Thank you for your insight and comments, DiaGem. I do agree with you, with respect to round brilliants anyway, that consumer education has forced cutters to cut for beauty instead of weight. But with respect to fancy cuts, there's so little to choose from. And it makes sense that a cutter can't create a high crown with beautiful steps from a stone that is essentially flat on top. So many EC's -- that I've seen on the secondary market anyway -- are virtually all table, with flat crowns and teeny-tiny steps.

 

[ariel144]

these pictures are terrible but 2 antique 2.5c asschers in one ring:

http://www.antiquejewelryforsale.com/viewProduct-611-PLATINUM_DECO_3_STONE_ASCHER_CUT_RING.html#

Here's another one with a very high crown...again ...bad pic

http://www.antiquejewelryforsale.com/viewProduct-46-Platinum_Antique_Asher_Cut_Diamond_Engagement_Ring.html

Too bad they can't spell asscher...LOL!

 

[Lula]

In general a small table with a high crown will not be well balanced out by a shallowish pavilion.
That does not mean they cant be very pretty but put them next to a stone cut for light return and they can look a bit dull.

Hmm, interesting. I would guessed the opposite -- that a shallow EC with a small table and high crown would face up large for its carat weight and be bright and flashy.

Yes, EC's are complicated. That's an understatement But when I see a good one, it takes my breath away.
Thanks for your comments, Karl.

The placement of the facets is just as important as the angle to good light return in an EC.
Remember you have usually 3 sets in the crown and 3 sets in the pavilion that are can be put anywhere.
Lining up the pavilion facets with the crown can change the light return over 20%.
If you have wide facets on the crown ie: small table, you need wide facets on the pavilion to line them up under them. This giving you a deepish pavilion.
Then to get a bright stone you need to align your reflectors to get into the red zone in aset.
This changes your angles.
A high crown with a shallowish pavilion will be mostly in the green zone in ASET.
This can give a very nice looking diamond but it isn't overall as bright as if it was more into the red zone.
So you have placement under the crown facets in a certain way at an angle that gets you to the red zone in Aset as a design criteria.
It is not going to be shallow.

Karl, thank you. This is very helpful information. I've never thought about the actual placement of the facets, and how the crown facets and pavilion facets balance out, e.g., wide crown facets need a deeper pavilion. Lightbulb moment here -- thanks!