depth numbers don''t add up??? Please help - I was thinking of buying this one!

[:)]

Hi, I was looking at the info on a report - the table is 57, the depth is listed as 60.5 - however the crown % is 14.5, the pavillion % is 42.5. The girdle is listed as 1.2-2.3%. If I add it up manually I get a depth of 58.2 if I use the smaller girdle value, and 59.3 if I use the larger girdle value. Huh? Do I use the listed value on the report as depth? The manually calculated one? Why am I getting different values? I was really thinking about purchasing this stone! Please help!

(The pavillion angle is 40.5, the crown angle is 33.

Cut advisor is 0.5 if I use depth of 60.5, if is 0.2 with depth of 58.2, and then 0.4 with depth of 59.3

Thank you!

 

[Regular Guy]

Dear Typewriter smiley face,

I wouldn''t worry about the depth adding up. For that guy that talks about warped diamonds and such, I know that''s his thing. I think, at least for using the HCA as it''s intended to be used, you use the 60.5 as reported, and get (at least I get) either .5 (with 33.8 & 40.5, preferred) or .8 (%s with 14.5 & 42.5). Either way, your choice is at least reasonable, if not great.

Recent discussions from Paul and reviewed more recently by Wink aside, that is.

Warm regards,

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

It is and was a standard practice to report the girdle thockness at the the valleys or thinnest part.
But there is about 1.75% difference usually between valley and thickest peaks of girdles. So what you see is normal.

Fred Cuellar probably has told you differently. He is not respected by diamond experts.

 

[:)]

Thank you - I actually was not worried about the warping thing (I have read the stuff on it in here), what I was worried about was figuring out how to use the holloway properly. THen I got worried that maybe the report had been altered. If I understand correctly, then the depth I should be using is the one listed by them on the report, so I will do so! Thanks!

 

[:)]

Thank you - I actually was not worried about the warping thing (I have read the stuff on it in here), what I was worried about was figuring out how to use the holloway properly. THen I got worried that maybe the report had been altered! If I understand correctly, then the depth I should be using is the one listed by them on the report, so I will do so! Thanks!

 

[niceice]

Date: 7/26/2006 5:30:02 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Fred Cuellar probably has told you differently. He is not respected by diamond experts.

So I realize that I should probably let this go, but I just can''t stop laughing about this statement

The numbers will never add up, they are the result of the average measurments of the diamond and therefore they simply can''t. The only thing "warped" here is Cuellar''s theory.

The words Respect and Cuellar in the same sentence, Garry you''re killing me!