Comparing 2 cuts

[Tomdiamond]

Hi,

I know this is hard especially with no pictures but in you guys opinion if everything else being exactly the same, colour, carat and clarity then what would be the best? Both are triple excellent GIA cut.

first
Table 59%
depth 60.8%
crown angle 33%
pavillion angle 41%

second
Table 58%
depth 62%
crown angle 36%
pavilion angle 40.6%

i know these are not the most ‘ideal’ proportions but just looking to see what people think is the best

 

[OoohShiny]

Run the figures through the HCA tool to see what they score. (I think there are only limited free uses so perhaps wait until you are pretty sure about an option.)

The stones listed will have different 'flavours' but I believe they will both 'work' in the HCA tool.

 

[jasper]

I assume that your "angle" measurements are in degrees (°), not percentage points (%).

The first stone's crown and pavillion angles complement each other better. I posted a chart about this at: http://www.folds.net/diamond/index.html#girdle

If the stones are under a carat each, the girdle thickness is reasonable. If the stones are over a carat, a possibly-noticeable amount of weight is hiding in the girdle of both stones. By "possibly-noticeable", I mean that looking at the diamond face-up, you might be able to see a difference in size compared side-by-side to an equal-weight similarly-cut stone with a medium girdle.

Unfortunately, the GIA's cut grading scheme has major flaws, including over-rounding of measurements. I estimated the girdle thickness using software available at: http://www.folds.net/diamond/software_help.html#dimension A jeweller with a scanning machine scan could give you less-rounded numbers, which would let the HCA give you more useful results.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I assume that your "angle" measurements are in degrees (°), not percentage points (%).

The first stone's crown and pavillion angles complement each other better. I posted a chart about this at: http://www.folds.net/diamond/index.html#girdle

If the stones are under a carat each, the girdle thickness is reasonable. If the stones are over a carat, a possibly-noticeable amount of weight is hiding in the girdle of both stones. By "possibly-noticeable", I mean that looking at the diamond face-up, you might be able to see a difference in size compared side-by-side to an equal-weight similarly-cut stone with a medium girdle.

Unfortunately, the GIA's cut grading scheme has major flaws, including over-rounding of measurements. I estimated the girdle thickness using software available at: http://www.folds.net/diamond/software_help.html#dimension A jeweller with a scanning machine scan could give you less-rounded numbers, which would let the HCA give you more useful results.

Hello Jasper, welcome back!
For those who do not know Jasper is a mathematician made some great discoveries around Tolkowsky's work 100 years ago.
Especially the relationship between ideal table size vs girdle thickness.
Mr T did his calculations with no girdle. Adding a girdle requires a larger table size which is why we now prefer about 57% rather than his 53%.