crown angle vs pavilion depth?

[Luckiemeetoo]

I''m looking at two stones, and comparing them to the Tolkowsky ideal cut.
One the crown angle is a bit off for one and the other the pavilion depth.
Does anyone have an opinion as to which one would be more important to the beauty of a stone, the crown angle or the pavilion depth? thanks.

 

[John P]

The combination of angles is important. A little give here is ok with a little take there. They need not be spot-on Tolkowsky but the man pretty much nailed the bullseye of PA-CA combos.

With that said, the pavilion is the most critical. A 0.2 degree angular shift there is as meaningful as a half-degree of main crown angle movement in my experience.

If a culet is pointed, negligible or not present pavilion depth is ok to interpet. Otherwise we need pavilion angle (not depth).

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/17/2009 8:17:53 PM
Author: John Pollard
The combination of angles is important. A little give here is ok with a little take there. They need not be spot-on Tolkowsky but the man pretty much nailed the bullseye of PA-CA combos.

With that said, the pavilion is the most critical. A 0.2 degree angular shift there is as meaningful as a half-degree of main crown angle movement in my experience.

If a culet is pointed, negligible or not present pavilion depth is ok to interpet. Otherwise we need pavilion angle (not depth).

Ditto John, pavilion is crucial and you can have a lot more leeway with the crown than the pavilion.

 

[Luckiemeetoo]

thanks, now I know which I should eliminate.