Emerald Cut Diamonds Ideal Specs?

[jadeleaves]

I am currently in ''talks'' with my vendor to search for a 2ct emerald cut for a RHR. The search is plodding along slowly but surely, but I need some guidance with regards to emerald cut specs.

I''ve done a search here but can''t seem to find a definitive thread on the best possible specs for an emerald cut diamond. There are threads on asschers, heaps on RBs, even pears, but I haven''t found one on emerald cuts? Am I blind? Can someone point me to the right spot? I am finding it hard to make a decision based on looking at the certs being emailed to me.

Any help will be muchly appreciated, as always

 

[RADIANTMAN]

It''s hard to judge emerald cuts off the numbers commonly available. They really have to be seen to be sure . If you''re buying off the numbers, get a sarin and look for a depth and table in the low to mid 60''s, pavilion depth of 45% - 50%, and crown height of 12%-15%. If you can get the info, make sure the middle break on the bottom is 40- 42 degrees. Be wary of stones with 4 breaks on the bottom. Generally, that facet arrangement is used to disguise a stone with a swindled pavilion.

If you hit these numbers, the chances are pretty good you''ll have an extremely nice stone.

 

[jadeleaves]

Date: 8/22/2005 10:18:23 PM
Author: RADIANTMAN
It''s hard to judge emerald cuts off the numbers commonly available. They really have to be seen to be sure . If you''re buying off the numbers, get a sarin and look for a depth and table in the low to mid 60''s, pavilion depth of 45% - 50%, and crown height of 12%-15%. If you can get the info, make sure the middle break on the bottom is 40- 42 degrees. Be wary of stones with 4 breaks on the bottom. Generally, that facet arrangement is used to disguise a stone with a swindled pavilion.
If you hit these numbers, the chances are pretty good you''ll have an extremely nice stone.

Thanks for that! I have attached a cert of the stone I like - any red flags?

 

[AChiOAlumna]

Jade...the GIA report won''t have enough information to make a good decision about EC stones. Really, the number can only be a guide...for example, the depth is a bit large, but only your eyes can tell you if this stone is worth the time or money. Have you seen it in person? Have you been able to compare a good EC to a bad one? How does this one rate to you?

Step cuts can be maddening, as there is not set standard when it comes to the numbers. But they are timeless and classic, which is why I love them the most!

Good luck!

 

[moosewendy]

The cert looks fine. The only "red flag" is that it spreads a little small for its carat weight. Off the cert, there is no reason to think it doesn''t have good life.

I don''t agree that there are no "standards" for emerald cuts - of course there are. Since, as a cutter, I know how to cut a nice emerald cut, I must be cutting to a standard. I doubt anybody knowledgable about emerald cuts would disagree in any meaningful way with the guidance I gave above.

The problem is that a GIA cert doesn''t give enough info. I would need to know the angle and size of every facet in order to give an intelligent opinion, sight unseen. Since that info is not generally available, there is no real good alternative to seeing the diamond.

A nicer cut will blow away a lesser one when seen side by side, even to untrained eyes.

 

[oldminer]

Like the cutter said, there are standards. These standards have a lot to do with the economics of cutting, but this definitely includes making a pretty diamond versus cutting an ugly one. The cert copy you have has no clue for us that the stone is a poor one. The clues available are that it is a diamond worth considering and viewing in person. It might just be a very good one except for the thick girdle, but we can't be sure from limited sets of parameters such as you presently have. Let your eyes decide. There is nothing wrong with the evidence you presently have.

You can find the AGA Cut Class grades on my website for all standard shapes. These have a large following among appraisers and make sense in the world when it comes to screening potential choices that you can't see personally with your own eyes. Diamonds that grade 2B and up have no real cutting faults and all 2B and up MAY be beautiful. No doubt, some rare exception exists that has given us a 1A or 1B that someone says isn't pretty, but the general consensus is that those upper range diamonds are going to be really excellent cuts nearly every time.

In order to grade a diamond with the AGA Cut Class Do It Yourself grading tool you will need a few Sarin measurments. This further refines the screening, but still should not be your only way of selecting. The eyes are a great tool for the final step.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Let me start off by saying I am NOT an expert. I only have an EC e-ring and my best advice is to look at the stone in person. For example we saw stones that were more "typical" EC. Taller and narrow. Both my Fi and I picked the stone I have now b/c it is shorter and wider and personally we liked those dimesions better.

 

[jadeleaves]

Hmm.. the stone is being called in and the vendor will give me more info once he''s got the stone in hand. As for seeing the stone firsthand, I''m afraid it''s not possible as I am once again buying online

However, I trust this vendor implicitly, so if he says it''s a winner, I trust that it is. That said, I am trying to arm myself with as much knowledge as I can get on EC, and try to pick stones based on what ppl have said makes a good EC, as most of the time I only have the certs to go by before asking if the stone can be called in.

For this ring I think I want something that''s more rectangular, because I still have my eyes on the 3-5ct asscher

(3-5ct because the longer hubby waits, the bigger the desired rock *grows*)

What sort of ratio will give me the more rectangular shape I am after?

 

[RADIANTMAN]

1.3-1 to 1.45 -1 will look rectangular without being over-long, but it''s really a matter of taste. Some people like them shorter, some longer. If you''re not getting to see live stones to decide what shape you like best, then 1.35 - 1 is probably a safe ratio to go for.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

You can see my ring to the left and it is considered a shorter, wider stone but it is still clearly a rectangle. Why don''t you go to a local store just to see their EC and you can find out from there which dimesions you like, which you don''t. This will give you more knowledge to apply to your internet purchase. I think their are certain stones (asymmetical ones) that you need a clear knowledge which shape you like in order for you to be happy. Good luck!

 

[jadeleaves]

I have the info on the 2.01 G VS2! Here''s the clarity pic:

 

[jadeleaves]

Sarin:

 

[jadeleaves]

Another pic:

 

[jadeleaves]

Any thoughts on the info I posted?

I think the only thing I'm not sure about is the length to width ratio - I was expecting a longer rectangular stone

 

[windowshopper]

Date: 8/24/2005 9:33:42 PM
Author: JadeLeaves
Any thoughts on the info I posted?

I think the only thing I''m not sure about is the length to width ratio - I was expecting a longer rectangular stone

its absolutely gorgeous.................i love the high crown and the corners! (its actually the sister stone to mine!)

 

[jadeleaves]

*heh*

I like the pic where u can see the contrast in the steps.

Windowshopper - your emeraldcut ring is stunning. It''s good to see u validate the stone as gorgeous

I''m just waiting to hear abt the specks in the stone - Jon''s going to let me know if it is absolutely 100% eyeclean, as we all know that inclusions are more apparent in step cuts.

(he said he''ll let me have the crystals for free

)

 

[jadeleaves]

Here''s the lightscope pic:

 

[valeria101]

Yeah, really, WOW! Good find! And one of many good finds for you to boot !

Second windowshopper on this one.

It may not be the largest 2 cts out there (''guess the thick girdle accounts for that) but everything else stands high. I don''t think the picture shows clarity realistically - those inclusions are tiny and most likely invisible (not that anyone rised any concern... just to make sure it doesn''t happen).

 

[valeria101]

On the other hand, how about these guys:

2.1 cts G-VS2 at Icestore

Measurements 9.20*6.45*3.83
Length/Width 1.43
Depth 59.4
Table 63
Girdle thn-m
Polish Good
Symmetry Very Good
Culet Very Small
Fluorescence None


2.05 G VS2 at WF (or at sellers for either, these are just some listings)

Measurements: 9.19-6.38X3.79
Length/Width: 1.44
Depth: 59.4
Table: 66
Girdle: TN
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: No

I wouldn't rush to say that the 66% vs 63% table matters a load there - other details of cut may make these very different of very much alike. I just do not know. One detraction about them... they do not come from GOG! No joke

What does show in the numbers is no red flag and, of course, size and general shape (l/w that is). Does this make a difference ?

 

[windowshopper]

Date: 8/25/2005 2:30:14 AM
Author: JadeLeaves
Here''s the lightscope pic:

I know there are many who would not agree with me but I dont find clarity such an enormous issue --even with a step cut. My Ec is Vs2 and honestly if you squint and look hard you can see the little flecks...but I wanted a killer cut with a higher crown and a lot of presence and my stone (IMO) is cut so beautifully that I really dont care about the inclusions......they are lost in the flashes and ligt and brilliance. I had a VVS2 before and it was so badly cut-----this stone has elicited oohs and ahhs from many people who see the best so dont get too too hung up on the inclusions unless they are a distraction

 

[sevens one]

Oh JL- I can''t wait to see this new baby.

Your collection of stunning pieces is growing and growing.

 

[jadeleaves]

Date: 8/25/2005 7:19:07 AM
Author: valeria101
Yeah, really, WOW! Good find! And one of many good finds for you to boot !

Second windowshopper on this one.

It may not be the largest 2 cts out there (''guess the thick girdle accounts for that) but everything else stands high. I don''t think the picture shows clarity realistically - those inclusions are tiny and most likely invisible (not that anyone rised any concern... just to make sure it doesn''t happen).

Thanks! Actually I didn''t find this - I just told Jon that I want a 2ct emerald, max G & VS2, prefer longish rectangular shape, and trust that GOG will find one for me. I think that''s where working with a trusted vendor can really help - I know nothing about ECs and I am able to put myself in Jon''s very capable hands and know he''ll find a great stone for me!

Jon''s had a better look at the stone today and told me the crystals are dark, but very microscopic. He''s given it the ok though, so all I''m trying to decide is if I would prefer a longer rectangular stone. On one hand, I am not in any particular hurry because I am going to set this in a plain 4 prong setting until I get to meet up with LM/MM myself and have a chat abt the design. On the other hand, I do like the look of the stone and nothing''s stopping me from pulling the trigger and saying yes to this stone except for my preference for a longish stone this time.

Ahh decisions, decisions!

 

[jadeleaves]

Nan

I have vague ideas of the design for this ring - prob set east-west.

I''ve decided that I want Leon Mege or Mark Morrell to make this ring! However, I think I might save LM for the asscher

dream ring and get MM to make a simple flowing design for this EC.

Quest seems to be highly regarded too - any thoughts?

 

[Boom]

Date: 8/24/2005 9:24:31 PM
Author: JadeLeaves
Sarin:

That''s a gorgeous stone! I''m beginning to appreciate step cuts more and more.
One thing though, why does the sarin report say that the stone is 1.98 carats? 0.03 seems like a small but significant difference

.

 

[Kaleigh]

JL, that is an awesome stone!!!! It''s a wow in my book. I am having Quest do my asscher after a long hard time with my local jeweler. Quest has done great work for so many of our fellow PS''ers and I am very excited to work with them. That said Mark Morrell is awesome and well Leon is in a league of his own. Good luck and look forward to seeing what you decide.

 

[windowshopper]

JadeLeaves:

Just my 2 cents. I think that its that perfect matchbox shape that works well as a solitaire.........the longer rectangles do not work so well unless they have sides IMO

 

[jadeleaves]

Date: 8/25/2005 11:57:50 PM
Author: windowshopper
JadeLeaves:
Just my 2 cents. I think that its that perfect matchbox shape that works well as a solitaire.........the longer rectangles do not work so well unless they have sides IMO

Hmm I don''t intend to have side stones for this EC.. have u seen that gorgeous LM emerald cut solitaire with double claws? That''s to die for. I''ll try to dig up a pic!

 

[jadeleaves]

Here''s the one:

Although I won''t say no to this:

I wonder whats the L:W ratio on those stones?

 

[jadeleaves]

Kaleigh,

I''ve been following the ''saga'' you''ve had with your jewellers and hope you will have a gorgeous ring to show us soon

I''ll keep Quest in mind too!

 

[windowshopper]

yes delicious --that stone must be 10 carats...