asscher measurements

[dtufo]

I know another asscher question by me. does anyone know what the lenght width height measurements of a square emerald/asscher should be to give it the more asscher like look? does it all depend on the cut of the corners?
i''ve looked at a few asschers and i can find the right shape 5.8ish 5.8ish and 3.6ish but not the right depth and table. The last one was 76 table 63 depth and was flat so no crown.
i''ve asked for an upper 50''s to low 60''s table and a upper 60''s to low 70''s depth

i think i''m right on for the depth and table (unless anyone thinks otherwise and I know you do) now i just need to find the octagonal shape i want.

i''m looking at a G VS1 as well.

 

[Hest88]

You really can''t rely on the numbers because it''s important to have wide, cut corners--which won''t be reflected in the numbers. The odds are better if it''s more symmetrical, but you''ll really need someone to see it to confirm.

 

[strmrdr]

An asscher is one of the hardest diamonds to pick from without someone looking at it in my opinion.
Either a trusted vendor, appraiser or yourself needs to eyeball the diamond.

I look for a table in the high 50s very low 60s.
Depth between 65% and 75%
crown 10%-15% <--- very important to add fire.
LW ratio as close to 1 as possible.
clipped cornered square vs more octagonal is personal preference Iv seen some awesome ones both ways and like the clipped cornered square look better.
Then it comes down to all eyeballs.
Are the squares well defined and concentric?
Does it have the 10 mile deep look under indirect lighting?

Id say that better than 95% of them will fail the last 2 tests in my somewhat limited experence.

 

[strmrdr]

I also wanted to add that vg or better on polish and symetry is another thing I look for.
To me it shows that the cutter took better care in cutting it and there is a better chance of the rest being right.
That isnt always the case but its something to think about.