Calling the pricescope experts RE: HCA, recutting.

[Rockdiamond]

Hey Rickdiamond, I'm aware that HCA is a rejection tool and their are many proportions that score 2 to 4 that I'd prefer to others that score less than 2. For example id much rather. 35/41, 35.5/40.8 even a 35.5/41 over a 33/40.5. But then HCA is not just for erings and I see it purely as a means to calculate theoretical light return which as you have many times discussed is only one attribute and does not dictate beauty. I understand all that.

I apologise if I was vague in my comments, I was commenting on two particular stones where one was 5.3 and the other 1.3, not a generalisation. Also I was expressing my particular opinion on a stone with 41.6 pav which I have seen before and not liked.

I have seen lots of stones although not a drop of a vendors experience. I have a strong preference for lower HCA stones, particularly when viewed outside the store lights. Your examples of people preferring 5 and 3 are quite arbitrary without any proportions, other vendors stated they have blind tested their customers with strong preference to super ideal proportions in general in the majority. Unfortunately I know of no controlled double blind study so further chat is just individual experience of both vendors and consumers alike. As to hinting vendors of financial incentives, it works both ways and I think it's useful to have variation of opinion and the ability to be able to express as such without such comments; although I feel you hinted in a similar fashion towards superideal vendors. I apologise if I misinterpreted

To put things in context- yes I did not introduce any other factors beside the HCA score in my comment about people potentially preferring a 5 over a 1. However the vast majority of users and people posting about it don't take any other factors into account.
I have not interjected any comments into threads where an online shopper is using HCA for years.
That's because the tool works for acceptance. Stones scoring below 2 are always extremely well cut, in my experience.
The rejection side is the issue- and even then only on threads like this.
Someone owns a diamond, learns of the HCA and it unseats their confidence.
I am extremely lucky in that I am located in the middle of one of the last active wholesale trading areas in the diamond business. I have gotten to look at countless stones and parcels over the years.
I will use HCA on pretty much any RBC we're considering.
There's a lot of stones with scores below 3 that are amazing in person.
If I was buying a 1.00 G/VS2 I'd likely skip any HCA scores above 2 because there's a gajillion of them on he market. And that type of buyer would be more likely to reject a stone based on HCA.
What if it's a 3.75 M/I1 - totally eye clean scoring 4 on HCA yet being amazing in real life?
So I look at both high scoring and low scoring stones and have a feel for the fact that there's plenty of great stones below 3.
About vendor motivation. Wink probably didn't mean to use insulting language. I know him. He probably didn't consider the language as closely as I did.
Kenny is seemingly on attack mode no matter what I do. Truly unfair as I don't know him.
But in general- since super ideal cuts sell for a premium, it seems clear that there's financial motivation for convincing people they are hands down better.
Since we sell both I don't have a horse in he race on either side in particular. If a client wants super ideal, that's what we show them. If they ask about the difference we get a super well cut non super ideal which are generally 10%+- less and let them make up their own minds. We don't have fancy jewelry store lighting.

 

[gm89uk]

Thanks for the response; enlightening to know how you work!

 

[Gussie]

If they ask about the difference we get a super well cut non super ideal which are generally 10%+- less and let them make up their own minds. We don't have fancy jewelry store lighting.

Can you estimate the percentage of clients that choose the super ideal over the well cut non super ideal?

 

[Rockdiamond]

Great question ceg and it's at the heart of the matter.
We built our business by illustrating graphically stones that were previously scorned. Like M color I1's.
This gets us buyers that are demographically different than the majority of Super Ideal buyers.
For this reason Wink, who's main focus is super ideal may find 90% preferring the super ideal, while we might be at 30%. That's a reasonable estimate for us.
Also important context that we likely get a higher volume of internet clients because we're easy to find on many popular google searches not related to Super Ideals.
Also factors in that Wink - and many other sellers of super ideal - may suggest that all buyers consider super ideal. I will not automatically suggest super ideal to all buyers.
I'd never discourage someone and I'd generally let uninformed folks know that there are such things as super ideals. Not a lot of those will go for it.
But if I ever recommend a poorly cut diamond to a buyer, I'm crystal clear about it.
Pretty much the only time I would suggest a poorly cut stone is in the case of super rare fancy colors

 

[Gussie]

Thanks!

 

[OoohShiny]

Different business models from different vendors, but it's good to know that both @Wink and @Rockdiamond let customers' eyes make the decisions by showing customers different options side by side

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Dont have my DiamCalc dongle handy, but those calc's seem about right

 

[whitewave]

OP, here is the deal as I have seen it (novice).

For instance, my cousin likes diamonds and is your average diamond purchaser who goes to the local B&M store and picks based on color and clarity and GIA ex ex ex. She hadn't heard about super ideals... her diamonds are beautiful.

I learned about cut here and eventually bought a pair of studs that are ideally cut within HCA specs.

She and I finally got together last weekend and having completely forgotten about my earrings I was wearing, she suddenly exclaimed that she had never seen such gorgeous sparkly earrings before, that she couldn't stop staring at them and was distracted in our conversation, and said they were the best studs she had ever seen on anyone.

These comments weren't platitudes either-- she said them with such heartfelt emotion and excitement. She had to see them closer, have me move my head around (we were sitting with our backs to large picture windows on a sunny day in her home).

She and her friends are no stranger to diamonds, so she has seen a ton of high end B&M stones before.

I kinda feel that is how you diamond may be-- beautiful in person with no comparison next to it, but if you put it next to a more ideally cut diamond, you would notice the difference.

If I were you, I would try and exchange the stone before it is set. I don't think that would be too much trouble for the jeweler.

 

[Rockdiamond]

The problem with using a single anecdote is that we simply don't know any of the details. Maybe the cousin's stones were dirty, poorly set, etc... It's kind of like saying, Horses are all bigger in Texas because my cousin has a horse in Idaho and it's way smaller than my Texas horse.
We can certainly take whitewaves account seriously- in other words, I'm not doubting that her stone looks better than her cousins.
Just that making broad decisions based on this single instance leads to incorrect results.
I have seen people select non ideals many times when comparing side by side. Which does not mean non ideals are better- just that some people prefer them. It's a lot smarter for a consumer to look for themselves before going through a lot of trouble, and or expense to exchange IMO.

There's plenty of PS posts where someone did recut to Super Ideal and wasn't blown away by the results.

 

[whitewave]

Oh, I agree. Personal sample sets don't translate to real world results.

And, yes, I compulsively keep my diamonds clean. It's a job. Maybe my cousin has never seen perfectionist-clean diamonds lately.

My first diamond was uncertified/old school/jeweler bought because it was pretty. I don't even know the measurements and I have no idea what HCA score it gets.

But did I die???

I always received plenty of compliments on it and bought a new one because that one was .75 and an asscher is my dream stone. i had it set into a pendant and get just as many compliments now as I always have.

I bought my asscher blind and with a depth of 69.7. I'm in love and obsessed with this stone.

I still think if you put his next to an ideal, a difference would be noted. Now, would it be dramatic? Who knows, and I suppose the question is does he want to find out...and maybe he would prefer the first stone... and maybe the price was right and ten other reasons why his first choice is the one he should stick with.

I think some people like precision and ideal and some people like stones with quirks and personality. Some people don't care about what they don't know and some people get what they can get for their budget.

Thank goodness there are enough vendors to go around to make everyone happy!

 

[Gussie]

I found ps a few days after I bought a stone from blue nile. It is a xxx but falls within the ags ideal line on the hca graph. I didn't even know what hca was when I purchased it. Reading PS threads really stressed me out when I was waiting for it to arrive but several respected psers told me that it was well cut. I happen to live 10 minutes from whiteflash so I decided to go compare my stone to a super ideal. I really went there with the mindset that I would end up seeing an incredible difference, almost with complete intent on returning mine and buying the ideal even with the significant price difference and added sales tax. I honestly could not see a hint of difference in several kinds of lighting and my mother couldn't either. I was relieved to save the money but boy I like their trade up policy better than blue nile. I am a newbie and probably not a discerning as most but this is my story.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Great story ceg.
In my experience, many people will have a similar reaction.
Of course, there might have been others that did see a difference. Of those, some will prefer the super ideal- others will choose differently.
Vive La Difference......

Thanks for sharing your story whitewave.
Important to point out that if we use the same measuring stick for a super well cut Asscher, it will still "lose" to the round.
The moral is, the measuring stick is not relevant in many cases.

 

[gm89uk]

Dont have my DiamCalc dongle handy, but those calc's seem about right

You don't need a dongle just an excel sheet! I'd be happy to share it but I can't upload to the forum.

 

[Dancing Fire]

13 yrs ago I had a flat top 60/60 stone recut (Wink/CBI) into ideal specs and now it sparkles.
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...t-after-the-recut-by-infinity-diamonds.24501/

 

[AdaBeta27]

When you get the diamond, run it by a Hearts On Fire dealer and that will tell you how well it compares with H&A superideals.

 

[Rockdiamond]

13 yrs ago I had a flat top 60/60 stone recut (Wink/CBI) into ideal specs and now it sparkles.
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...t-after-the-recut-by-infinity-diamonds.24501/

Oh how I'd love to see the numbers ( CA/PA/LGF) on the stone that hurt you so bad DF....I mean this one diamond made you hate ALL 60/60's .....it must have been sooo very bad. I feel for you man

 

[Dancing Fire]

Oh how I'd love to see the numbers ( CA/PA/LGF) on the stone that hurt you so bad DF....I mean this one diamond made you hate ALL 60/60's .....it must have been sooo very bad. I feel for you man

David
IDK the specs before the recut, but I can tell there was no crown height (flat as a pancake).... IMO, there is nothing wrong with a 60/60 stone with good crown height.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Wait, we agree????
HOLY MACKEREL!!
Yes, we certainly need good crown height for the best 60/60- and LGF 80% too.... ( if I had anything to say about it, which I don't)

Truth is, my type of 60/60 stones are a lot harder to find nowadays.
Seems like pretty much everyone aims for smaller table, which incidentally lead to higher depth ratios. Cutters love that.
DF- if we're not looking at round diamonds, have you ever seen a flat stone you liked?

 

[Dancing Fire]

DF- if we're not looking at round diamonds, have you ever seen a flat stone you liked?

I don't make an effort to look at flat stones.

 

[LightBright]

You don't need a dongle just an excel sheet! I'd be happy to share it but I can't upload to the forum.

Please share and explain what DiamCalc is to us novices...

Thanks to everyone for contributing to this very informative discussion.

 

[LightBright]

Wait, we agree????
HOLY MACKEREL!!
Yes, we certainly need good crown height for the best 60/60- and LGF 80% too.... ( if I had anything to say about it, which I don't)

Truth is, my type of 60/60 stones are a lot harder to find nowadays.
Seems like pretty much everyone aims for smaller table, which incidentally lead to higher depth ratios. Cutters love that.
DF- if we're not looking at round diamonds, have you ever seen a flat stone you liked?

Rockdiamond, I'm curious about specs for your favorite type of 60/60 since there seems to be a scarcity of information and photos about 60/60s on this site. (For example, I've seen a great many posts on what people prefer in a H&A type stone: optimal table and depth percentage ranges, optimal crown and pav angle or percentage ranges, etc....but none on the ideal or preferred parameters for a 60/60). What would you consider good crown height on a 60/60? What about depth percentage? Etc.

Does anyone have a link to anywhere on PS that discusses the selection of 60/60s? The new search engine doesn't get me anywhere, unfortunately...

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi LightBright!
I have a somewhat unique perspective here.
My training on diamond grading was based wholly on "seat of the pants" assessment. It's actually not all that difficult to be able to see small, but important differences with a loupe, and arm's length methodology.
I mean, if you need a tool to show one diamond is better than another, that means you can't see the differences with your eyes, which makes the differences meaningless.
The internet takes that entire methodology and throws it out the window.
Minuscule differences become VERY important if you're buying blind.
At first, I scoffed at the tools- leading to some contentious and "interesting" discussions. Leading to a total bashing of 60/60. Like this page. I've never actually seen real life examples of the "bad" proportion sets used for illustration on the page.
So in my buying, I've never had to study CA/PA, instead I use my eyes.
Of course, I realize that won't help internet consumers.
But if you can look at stones in person, and can find a place that has 60/60's ( that's very tough nowadays) you can see the look yourself.
What I look for
* High degree of scintillation, less contrast than H&A look. The 80% LGF helps with that.
* superior spread. Remember, most "Ideal" cuts are deeper than 60%-consequentlyy average spread decreases. It's always seemed to me that "Ideal Cut Nuts" never mention that aspect.
So what you get is a larger looking, more evenly bright diamond. The "Ideal" trades spread for brighter individual flashes. Which some people prefer. But by no means all - or even necessarily a majority.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I don't make an effort to look at flat stones.

I can understand your hesitation DF. Especially looking at discussions here over the years.
Did you know that Yoram cuts some AMAZING flat stones. Flat as a pancake, in some cases. Imagine sitting with Yoram, looking stones he's cut and prohibiting him from showing you any stones with nonclassical proportions. You'd miss out on some of his most remarkable work.

 

[LightBright]

I can understand your hesitation DF. Especially looking at discussions here over the years.
Did you know that Yoram cuts some AMAZING flat stones. Flat as a pancake, in some cases. Imagine sitting with Yoram, looking stones he's cut and prohibiting him from showing you any stones with nonclassical proportions. You'd miss out on some of his most remarkable work.

I agree. I recently saw some very flat modern cushions (these were not Yoram's) that were beautiful. I'll have to check out Yoram's site more often. I wish we could see more of his cuts.

 

[LightBright]

Hi LightBright!
I have a somewhat unique perspective here.
My training on diamond grading was based wholly on "seat of the pants" assessment. It's actually not all that difficult to be able to see small, but important differences with a loupe, and arm's length methodology.
I mean, if you need a tool to show one diamond is better than another, that means you can't see the differences with your eyes, which makes the differences meaningless.
The internet takes that entire methodology and throws it out the window.
Minuscule differences become VERY important if you're buying blind.
At first, I scoffed at the tools- leading to some contentious and "interesting" discussions. Leading to a total bashing of 60/60. Like this page. I've never actually seen real life examples of the "bad" proportion sets used for illustration on the page.
So in my buying, I've never had to study CA/PA, instead I use my eyes.
Of course, I realize that won't help internet consumers.
But if you can look at stones in person, and can find a place that has 60/60's ( that's very tough nowadays) you can see the look yourself.
What I look for
* High degree of scintillation, less contrast than H&A look. The 80% LGF helps with that.
* superior spread. Remember, most "Ideal" cuts are deeper than 60%-consequentlyy average spread decreases. It's always seemed to me that "Ideal Cut Nuts" never mention that aspect.
So what you get is a larger looking, more evenly bright diamond. The "Ideal" trades spread for brighter individual flashes. Which some people prefer. But by no means all - or even necessarily a majority.

Very interesting perspective, Rockdiamond. I know what you mean about not going solely by the proportions on stones to determine attractiveness. In my case, I'm an old cut lover, which also have to be seen in person. (I could give you a range of proportions, but why? Old stones are what they are... you've got to see them.) Similar to you championing the 60/60 diamond, I try to tell people that non-standard faceting or proportions on an old cut stone can also be beautiful. (In other words, not all stones have flowery or snowflake patterning under the table, or edge to edge crispness, etc. Falling for the standard PS definitions of perfection will get you a lifetime of searching for a stone you can find and afford). Put me in the category of being accepting of the non standard (lower colors, SI2 or I1 clarity or less perfect cut) in order to get a larger size and/or rare and eye-beautiful cut...

 

[Dancing Fire]

I can understand your hesitation DF. Especially looking at discussions here over the years.
Did you know that Yoram cuts some AMAZING flat stones. Flat as a pancake, in some cases. Imagine sitting with Yoram, looking stones he's cut and prohibiting him from showing you any stones with nonclassical proportions. You'd miss out on some of his most remarkable work.

RBs?

 

[Rockdiamond]

RBs?

I'll have to ask him DF- none that I've seen. I'll bet he has.....
I have seen remarkable and shallow Pear Shapes, Emerald Cuts, Cushions ( both CB and CMB) Ovals cut by Yoram- and a few others.
Remember, we're talking about a mineral, which is mined from the earth.
Octahedrons are great. We can discuss exactly how to make a round perfect using an octahedron. What if the rough is oddly shaped- yet possesses great optical potential?
In many cases, such rough is shallow. So a great cutter can take this rough and make a HUGE looking diamond for it's weight.
A round is a round is a round- but in the case of fancy shapes, my advice is to be open to new ideas. Wait, we agree again??? You love Octavia too, yes??? That was a new idea too......

 

[Dancing Fire]

A round is a round is a round- but in the case of fancy shapes, my advice is to be open to new ideas. Wait, we agree again??? You love Octavia too, yes??? That was a new idea too......

Don't think he can cut a flat Octavia...

 

[Rockdiamond]

No, of course not. The Octavia has very specific design parameters. The strictest standards of any diamond cut I believe.
I don't know of any other cutter who could do an Octavia, to the degree of calibration Yoram achieves..

But I have also seen Yoram break every rule, and cut gorgeous stones in the 40's.
Personally, I am over the moon happy he does both

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

On a flight. Google it.

Please share and explain what DiamCalc is to us novices...

Thanks to everyone for contributing to this very informative discussion.

https://www.pricescope.com/tools/what-is-diamond-calc