cut grade affected by brillianteering?

[Linda74]

What does this mean on a GIA report?

 

[Skippy123]

I am guessing sparkle. Did you see this? http://diamonds.pricescope.com/brill.asp
I didn''t see that on my GIA cert. Where are you seeing this?

 

[johngalt2004]

Maybe it means it was penalized for digging?

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/girdle-treatments-cheated-girdles-tweaked-girdles-digging-painting.36102/

 

[strmrdr]

It means it has digging or painting that affects face up appearance.
The huge debate comes in whether its a bad or good affect and at what point the line is drawn between the two.
Frankly other than the very small amount that is present in all diamonds I don't want either painting nor digging in one I buy.
Some will strongly disagree with that and thats kewl too but its a line I draw for myself.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

To the best of my knowledge GIA do not look at diamonds appearance and sparkle. (although girdle thickness is assessed by eyeballs)
They take the scanner output and assess the brillianteering (painting or digging) based on the numbers.

In my opinion this is wrong. Some times painting can be a benefit.
The other sad thing is these rules seem to be secret rules. And that is bad.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

Date: 10/5/2007 11:57:59 PM
Author: johngalt2004
Maybe it means it was penalized for digging?


https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/girdle-treatments-cheated-girdles-tweaked-girdles-digging-painting.36102/

I wonder if JQ ever got to cut that diamond?

 

[oldminer]

Painting and digging really should not have an effect on the "cut grade". How the diamond performs is of huge importance. Measuring this performance is what constitutes the beauty aspect. Any manner of traditional, accepted faceting to certain parameters can be graded seaparately, but it does not bear on the beauty aspect. EGL-USA calls the beauty aspect the diamond''s DNA and we call it the diamond''s Light Behavior Index. We look at Durability, Finish and Size on a different grading scale.

 

[stebbo]

Date: 10/6/2007 1:37:26 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
To the best of my knowledge GIA do not look at diamonds appearance and sparkle. (although girdle thickness is assessed by eyeballs)
They take the scanner output and assess the brillianteering (painting or digging) based on the numbers.

The GIA paper on brillianteering seemed to suggest they eyeball the girdle profile to estimate the level of painting/digging, but that was 2 years ago.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 10/6/2007 12:08:10 PM
Author: stebbo

Date: 10/6/2007 1:37:26 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
To the best of my knowledge GIA do not look at diamonds appearance and sparkle. (although girdle thickness is assessed by eyeballs)
They take the scanner output and assess the brillianteering (painting or digging) based on the numbers.

The GIA paper on brillianteering seemed to suggest they eyeball the girdle profile to estimate the level of painting/digging, but that was 2 years ago.

That was the first impression we received too Stebbo, but it was clarified at JCK that this was a guideline for GGs away from the lab. GIA GTL uses scanner data to make the determination.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Linda - this article is somewhat technical, but it''s an overview of how different degrees of painting and digging may affect diamonds with top cut precision (we see a lot of fine makes on PS).

http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/45/1/Visible-Effects-of-Painting--Digging-on-Superideal-Diamonds.aspx

In general, digging is not good. Painting is not an easy topic, as some diamond makes are negatively affected by X level, others are not impacted at all and yet others might be helped.

PS: WHFSR - not yet, but I still aim to.

 

[Linda74]

I guess I will just have to see this stone, as that seems to be the only negative or maybe it is a positive?, everything else in the GIA report looks good...and it gets to a point where it is all just too technical for my brain.....I will have it put next to a stone without brillianteering and see if we notice a difference.

 

[belle]

Date: 10/8/2007 9:50:02 AM
Author: Linda74
I guess I will just have to see this stone, as that seems to be the only negative or maybe it is a positive?, everything else in the GIA report looks good...and it gets to a point where it is all just too technical for my brain.....I will have it put next to a stone without brillianteering and see if we notice a difference.

great idea! hopefully the stones will be of the same cut quality otherwise so you can get a real head to head comparison.
let us know how it goes!

 

[dps777]

Linda- what happened to the other stone you had created a post on...re: clouds?

 

[Linda74]

Whiteflash looked at the stone and said it was indeed cloudy throughout.

 

[dps777]

That''s too bad. I hope you find one soon.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Saw some stones around 34.5C 41.2Pav today with GIA certs. Some were not painted and looked terible, but rated EX EX EX. One looked great but seemed to have been downgraded to VG because it was painted. It looked great. So there is painting and there is painting.