Does H&A = Light Performance?

[endlessfin1te]

Hey guys,

I've been plugging in countless table/depths/angles into HCA for the past three weeks and noticed that not all H&A rounds perform that well on the HCA (some are in the 2.9 range). I thought superior symmetry implies light return, is that not the case?

If just having Hearts & Arrows does not mean shiny diamond...that kind of kills the point of the whole H&A premium for me. Or are better performing H&As cost even more than ones that perform poorly?

 

[Gypsy]

No. Hearts and Arrows is patterning. You can have perfect hearts and arrows. And compromised light performance.

Light performance is a matter of angles. You can have ideal light performance without a perfect single heart or arrow.

Two different things.

Read this:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/likelihood-of-finding-a-signature-super-ideal-diamond.174235/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/likelihood-of-finding-a-signature-super-ideal-diamond.174235/[/URL]

 

[endlessfin1te]

Thanks Gypsy!

But isn't H&A also an angle and size thing? According to this site H&A leads to high light performance... http://www.heartsandarrows.com/hearts-arrows-diamond-ideal-cut-dna.aspx

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Like Gypsy indicates, patterning and cut precision can co-exist with less than optimal proportions and therefore you can have compromised light performance in an H&A diamond. Having said that, you will generally find that cutters that have spent the extra time to get facet alignment right in three dimensions, also have paid attention to proportions. But there can be significant variations in light performance between diamonds represented as H&A. That's where Ideal Scope and ASET images can demonstrate relative quality, along with the H&A reflector images themselves because not all diamonds marketed as H&A have the same level of cut precision.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

If just having Hearts & Arrows does not mean shiny diamond...that kind of kills the point of the whole H&A premium for me. Or are better performing H&As cost even more than ones that perform poorly?

As you alluded to in the article you referenced, a narrow definition of true H&A patterning will largely require proportion sets that will result in a "shiny" diamond (assuming no other factors undermine light performance). But as you see from the article there are ranges of proportions stated as well as "optimal" specs within those ranges. It states for instance that the proportion sets indicated in the chart can potentially result in both H&A and great LP.

Many people here put a great deal of emphasis on cut quality and light performance. The concept of "super ideal" is that combination of three dimensional cut precision together with optimal light performance. And, yes, a proven super ideal will cost more than an "industry standard" H&A.