Cushion-Emerald-Radiant (AGA Chart)~One more time!

[love rocks]

Okay, so I read on here somewhere (I think it was one of David Atlas''s posts), that in determining cut classes for Cushion cuts, one should look at the AGA table for emerald and radiant cuts at www.gemappraisers.com/chrt3.htm.

So here''s my question: If my DEPTH % (for the diamond that I am considering buying) falls within the "ideal" range (in this case it''s 65%), but my TABLE % falls in the "US domestic Average cut" range (in this case it''s 72%; what does that make me? A class 1A-B, or a Class 3A.

Thanks

- also, please offer some sort of explanation as to what these classifications mean as far as sparkle, fire, quality, etc. I.e., is a Class 3a still generally okay if all other things check out?

Thanks, and sorry if this is a dumb question! I''m new here!

 

[cmcwill]

There are a few rules to follow with the AGA charts...why not just use the DIY calculator? Its quick and easy for figuring out where your stone 'falls.' And PS tutorials has great information on the definitions you are looking for.

Colleen

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 6/7/2004 6:52:54 PM love rocks wrote:



[...] I.e., is a Class 3a still generally okay if all other things check out?

----------------

It's a very good question since the AGA charts do not claim to guarantee brilliance. Since all the details of the cut should add up to determien light return (and I have yet to find a simple rule to do that short of a 3D Sarin and some ray trace software), there is no way to tell what exactly that particular combination of proportions delivers.

The word is out that such a large table would actually need more depth to produce top brilliance, but this is not enough in itself either

Is there any way to get a IdealScope picture of this stone?