Correct Table size on an Emerald Cut??

[klayman]

I thought I had found a great stone, but the more I read it looks like I may be mistaken. The one I am looking at has a table of 76% and a depth of 65.8%. It seems like everyone here says to stay under 70 for the table. What is the reasoning for staying below 70. I am not sure if I fully understand this number even after reading the tutorials. Could someone please give feedback on this issue? Thanks in advance for the help.

 

[oldminer]

Here is the top end of the AGA emerald cut chart.

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

1A to /www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]
1B/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Ideal Cut to Premium Cut/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Table %/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

59.0%-68.0%/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

Crown Height %/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

11.0%-16.0%/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

Girdle Thickness/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Very thin to Slightly thick
Or
Thin to Thick /www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

Total Depth %/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

60.0%-65.0%/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

Polish / Symmetry1/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Good to Excellent/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]

 

[klayman]

Thank you for your chart, but I am still a little confused. I have actually used the DIY cut grading report on your site and it gave me a final grade of 4A. I am not sure if I am entering the information correctly though. From the information provided to me off of the GIA Cert I only have a depth%, not a crown height. Would this make a difference in the grade? Here is all of the information I have on this stone.
Emerald Cut
7.58 x 6.05 x 3.98
1.59 carat
65.8% Depth
76% Table
Medium to Slightly thick Girdle
Culet = None
VVS1 Clarity
F color

When I see the stone in person it is gorgeous, and I was able to compare it to a similar stone. Unfortunately the only info I have on the other stone is
1.51 carat H VVS2
Does the table make that much of a difference in the DIY grade when combined with a good depth?

 

[oldminer]

1. You need the crown height percentage or you will get no final grade.


2. I put in your existing parameters and got 3B for table size, 2B for depth% and 1A for girdle thickness.


3. There is no overall grade calculated unless you have the crown height.




The DIY grader seems to be working properly, but it needs certain fields filled in.

 

[klayman]

Thanks again for the feedback. I will call the jeweler and see if he can give me that information. If all he has is a GIA Cert should he be able to get this number, or is it something he will have to measure and get back to me? On the GIA sheets I have looked at it doesn't have anything about Crown%, only a category labeled Depth, unless I am just totally missing something?

 

[reena]

you are correct, the GIA cert will not have that information. i believe the jeweler will have to run a sarin.

 

[chrono]

Klayman,
I've been wondering about the same thing and nobody has been able to answer my questions either on the emerald cut. My EC has a depth of 76% and a table of 63.6%. The DIY cut advisor says my EC is a poorly cut stone too because of these parameters, yet it is gorgeous in person. So what gives?

 

[moremoremore]

As Dave will surely agree, the cut charts are intended by him as a guide. No chart can measure the beauty of a stone. It is an extremely useful tool, but not a true measure of quality. There is no guarantee that a 1A will please your eyes more than a 2B would, etc!

 

[klayman]

Thanks to all that have replied. I have a call in to the jeweler and hopefully he will get back to me soon. This has not been much information, but it has helped me to feel better about the stone. I guess all that really matters is if my future fiance likes it when I propose. I thought it was beautiful, and two of her friends have been helping me look as well. One of whom is her roommate. They both also thought it was amazing and that out of all we looked at it would be the best. I guess I just wanted some reassuarnce that I was getting something great. I tend to over analyze things a bit. It is also good to know that I am not alone in my confusion with the emerald cut stones.

Thanks again,
Bill

 

[JC]

Take it from David Atlas. He's the pro....

 

[Hest88]

A huge table gives a flat glassy appearance I tend to dislike.

The other thing about it looking great in person is also dependent upon experience. The EC might indeed be incredible, or you might just have never had the opportunity to see the top end of ECs. 10 years ago I pretty much thought any diamond that wasn't yellow and obviously included was pretty, but now I'm so much more discriminating.

 

[klayman]

Hest88,
You are correct, I do not have any experience at all. Do you think that all of the other aspects color/clarity/depth combined with the larger table would help out or would it still be considered flat and glassy?

I have it on hold with a 100% refundable deposit, so I by know means am obligated to go through with the purchase. I think what I really liked about this jeweler was the fact that he is willing to work with me.

I am not 100% sure if my hopefully future fiance wants an Emerald Cut, but I can't ask anymore without ruining the surprise. That just happens to be the last thing we decided on a few months ago. For all I know she may have changed her mind. The jeweler did say that it would be completely safe since he would trade the stone in for something else, ie different shape/size if she decides she doesn't like the emerald cut.

 

[oldminer]

I often see diamonds that do not score well in the AGA system that look lovely. Usually, someone already has bought the stone and also likes it. I have no problem with this, but every diamond which scores below the top grade has some degree of craftsmanship issue that may go unseen and unappreciated by many dealers and nearly all consumers. Dealers want a liberal system of cut grading. I don't blame them for turning a bit of a blind eye on this issue and focusing more on light performance. BOTH are important to getting the VERY BEST stone.




Diamonds that look great, but are cut too deep, end up looking smaller than they should. This is noticeable with many Asscher cuts. Princess cuts, too.




Diamonds with large tables can be brilliant, but they suffer from less scintillation or less fire.


Diamonds with very small tables may prove to be pretty, but the economics of cutting them may be problematic. You would not want to pay extra to get less when you could get the same light performance and more weight, and finely cut, for the same price.



Diamonds with heavy girdles look small in diameter. Who wants to pay for depth which is invisible? A brilliant diamond, with a fat girdle, may be the one you choose to keep within a budget, but it is not going to be "ideal" regardless of light performance. You may want to know how good that perfomance is, but the overall diamond should not be judged alone on that result, no matter how excellent..




All diamonds, when cut by a good cutter, can look pretty good, even when their proprtions are just fair. This is why AGS is going to open up some parameters for the newer version of AGS 0. I probably will continue to say and think many of these new "ideal" cut stones are not as well cut as some others. I believe there is room for differing opinions in this marketplace. Just because a diamond has very fine light performance does not assure the consumer that the stone looks its size, is durable as it should be, or is crafted properly for long term satisfaction.




You can screen diamonds, to an extent, with the AGA proportion charts, but it is a combination of how lovely it looks (the light performance, symmetry and outline), combined with a judgment of the craftsmanship based on experience and parameters that take into account the inherent nature of diamond, its chemical and crystalographic characteristics that all come together to determine when one has a truly "Ideal" stone. As they should be, truly "Ideal" diamonds are rather rare. Good imitations or partially Ideal ones are a lot more commonplace.

 

[valeria101]

It would be nice to just turn a diamond into numbers and get a perfect model of the stone back for critique (what you have tried with the AGA).

This cannot work perfectly, and definitely cannot work perfectly with three numbers (not sure if more help either).

You do have the diamonds infront of you and, with the previous post by David Atlas, a pretty good guide of what you could look for. The Pricescope way also includes one IdealScope - if anything, the little toy can help pinpoint details that whatever particular lighting you have may play down.

Just my 0.2, of course. There is allot of great advice on this thread already

 

[Hest88]

Klayman, if you're happy about it and if all the other specs check out, I'd say go for it. Table size actually, IMO, is one of the least important factors, so if everything else balances out (especially crown height), I wouldn't get it completely deter you. Ideally the jeweler will let you buy it contingent upon a professional inspection. That would mean you could have complete peace of mind.

Also, I think that if she'd changed her mind about ECs and sort of knew you were looking already she'd find a way to give you a hint.

 

[klayman]

Well I was able to get my girlfriend into the jewelry store on a completely different premise. She lost a small stone in another ring and needed to get it repaired. I called the jeweler to tell him we would be coming in and to not let on that he knew me. It worked beatifully. He pulled it off and was actually able to show her some similar stones/settings as the one I had been looking at. That being said she loved the other things he showed her. I still do not have a sarin report on the stone, but I did find out the polish/symmetry/floro. The price he is quoting is still $11,000. After looking at the stone again alone I am happy with the larger table size since the depth is very good. I want to thank everyone that has responded and I will post picks when they finish the custom setting. One last question though. Is that price still acceptable when you add the new information to the stone?

Shape and Cutting Style Emerald Cut
Measurements 7.58 x 6.05 x 3.98
Weight 1.59 carat
Proportions
Depth 65.8%
Table 76%
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick
Culet None
Clarity Grade VVS1
Color Grade F
Polish Very Good
Symmetry Good
Fluorescence Faint
Comments None

I also went through many of the web vendors on PS and a similar stone priced out pretty close to this...

 

[moosewendy]

A big table is considered undesireable in an amerald cut for 2 reasons. 1.- if the table is too big, you can't see the other crown facets, and 2.- a big table is usually indicative of a flat crown. Emerald cuts cannot have good life without a full crown. If the crown height is 12-15%, you can have a nice stone, even if the table is big, and, if the crown height is OK, the table can be reduced for very little weight loss.