dimensions
- Thread starter icey
- Start date
- Status
Mara
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2002
- Messages
- 31,003
Dimensions are diameter x depth....
So for example an excellently cut 1c stone would have dimensions of 6.5mm x 4mm. So something along the lines of:
6.48-6.52 x 3.99 or
6.49-6.51 x 4.01 would most likely be acceptable
If you are looking at a 1c stone and it has dimensions of
6.25-6.38 x 4.08
that means that the stone looks smaller up top than a 1c (looks more like a .90c maybe), and the depth is too deep at 4.08, so you are carrying extra weight in the pavilion that is not visible to the eye (diameter up top is what is visible). Also the range between the diameter is .13mm which means that this stone may be slightly out of round...which is why you ideally want a stone that has less range between the two numbers...hence something like a 6.49-6.51 is better because it only has a range of .02 meaning that the stone is almost perfectly round.
On the same vein, if you are looking at a 1c stone and it has dimensions of
6.60-6.65 x 3.90
that means that the stone has a larger diameter (and probably a larger table than typical) and looks larger than a 1c...maybe more like a 1.10c stone, and the depth is more shallow rather than deep...so your stone is carrying more weight up top where it can be visible to the eye, and less in the bottom. Some people like these stones because they look bigger to the eye, and carry less weight in the pavilion where it goes unseen anyway. You can find a great stone like this, but its tricky, too shallow of a depth and too large of a table/diameter may give a fish-eye effect or you can lose fire in the stone.
Hence that is why more people who know the details may tend to go more for the more 'ideal' dimensions to use as their model, as to go one way (too deep) or the other (too shallow) can be tricky!
Hope that helps...
So for example an excellently cut 1c stone would have dimensions of 6.5mm x 4mm. So something along the lines of:
6.48-6.52 x 3.99 or
6.49-6.51 x 4.01 would most likely be acceptable
If you are looking at a 1c stone and it has dimensions of
6.25-6.38 x 4.08
that means that the stone looks smaller up top than a 1c (looks more like a .90c maybe), and the depth is too deep at 4.08, so you are carrying extra weight in the pavilion that is not visible to the eye (diameter up top is what is visible). Also the range between the diameter is .13mm which means that this stone may be slightly out of round...which is why you ideally want a stone that has less range between the two numbers...hence something like a 6.49-6.51 is better because it only has a range of .02 meaning that the stone is almost perfectly round.
On the same vein, if you are looking at a 1c stone and it has dimensions of
6.60-6.65 x 3.90
that means that the stone has a larger diameter (and probably a larger table than typical) and looks larger than a 1c...maybe more like a 1.10c stone, and the depth is more shallow rather than deep...so your stone is carrying more weight up top where it can be visible to the eye, and less in the bottom. Some people like these stones because they look bigger to the eye, and carry less weight in the pavilion where it goes unseen anyway. You can find a great stone like this, but its tricky, too shallow of a depth and too large of a table/diameter may give a fish-eye effect or you can lose fire in the stone.
Hence that is why more people who know the details may tend to go more for the more 'ideal' dimensions to use as their model, as to go one way (too deep) or the other (too shallow) can be tricky!
Hope that helps...
- Status
300x240.png)