Guess who else thinks 60/60 is as good as Ideal- GIA!!!!

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 8/5/2005 4:12:46 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren
Funny thing how people seem to attack 60/60.
There was the case of one member that swore up and down they had the ugliest 60/60 EVER.
Except, in the end, it was simply their idea of what 60/60 was- they had NO gia rpeort to prove the ugly diamond was 60/60

david
that was my stone.you''re correct,no gia report but the vendor call it a 60/60 and 6 yrs later a independent appraiser also call it a 60/60 stone.i had it recut into a H&A.the difference in sparkles, it''s like day and nite.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 8/5/2005 7:29:26 PM
Author: RockDoc

Hi David....

I think its obvious that the term 'better' is a relative point. What some perceive as better, another person doesn't. Sometimes the person who thinks one thing is better, makes the decision to take that position because they haven't really been taught to tell the very succint differences.

RIGHT ON.....and what David keeps missing (I swear by choice!) is that he's trying to use a subjective term and get everyone to agree to have the same opinion. It's just an opinion.....not everyone has to agree. Something as subjective as beauty cannot be FACTUALLY DEFINED AS BETTER THAN OR EQUAL TO.

He's arguing that ideals aren't "better" than ideal cuts, but I don't recall anyone else saying ideals are "BETTER" in the first place. He's trying to prove the worthiness of 60/60 stones to people who never knocked them in the first place.

Crazy. Again.....uncle, David. I don't know what it will take to make you happy or satisfied unless the entire of PS embraces 60/60 as the holy grail, and it ain't gonna happen....the same way not everyone embraces online vendors, even here. I don't know what motivates this charging-the-nonexistent-windmills mentality on proving the equalness of what you like, but I'm inspired by your energy, if not by your argument.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Rocdoc-
Of course I knew of Mr Goldberg- The consummate saleman, Willie was one of the world''s finest diamond men. He was personally responsible for some of the world''s finest cut diamonds. May he rest in peace.
I disagree with the use of his name to promote a brand though.

Roc- please look at the conversation you entered.
Al compared this conversation to debating which is better , Vanilla, or Chocolate. Not whether Godiva is worth more than Hershey''s

Aljdeway mentioned that Joe Consumer could not could not discern a difference between an E IF ,and G VS.
I maintain that two well cut RBC''s - both in Tiffany settings- many people will be able to see the difference between an E and a G.
However I also said that only a few would be able to see a difference between D and E- do you agree?

AS you point out, colorless, and near colorless diamonds are graded loose- upside down.
Of course any smart buyer will "face up" the stone to see how the top looks.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Date: 8/5/2005 7:41:42 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 8/5/2005 4:12:46 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren
Funny thing how people seem to attack 60/60.
There was the case of one member that swore up and down they had the ugliest 60/60 EVER.
Except, in the end, it was simply their idea of what 60/60 was- they had NO gia rpeort to prove the ugly diamond was 60/60

david
that was my stone.you're correct,no gia report but the vendor call it a 60/60 and 6 yrs later a independent appraiser also call it a 60/60 stone.i had it recut into a H&A.the difference in sparkles, it's like day and nite.

WOW, becoming an uncle so painlessly- I am SO honored!

( edited to say-ooops- you said uncle, did not callme uncle- oh well.....)


I guess we'd need to look each other in the eye and talk- maybe you'd understand your crazy uncle.

I want to say to everyone, that I apologize if I may seem combative- I am passionate about what I love- as are many of you.
Hearts and Arrows are NOT a fad.
Ideal Cut diamonds cost more to cut than a typical well cut 60/60- therefore ideal cut diamonds are worth more. I feel confident, they will continue to be.
I simply do not want people who don't haver an ideal cut diamond to feel like their diamond is lesser.
AS evidenced by Daing Fire's post, there is a lot of misconception.
DF, please look at this objectively. You read Pricescope- If anyone else came on here and used the evaluation of a seller and an un-named independant appraiser to claim a diamond was say, a G/VS1, would you believe the grade? Without GIA?- OF COURSE NOT- you'd tell that person they need a GIA report to properly evaluate the stone.
Gauging a diamond's depth is a matter of measuring it with a millimeter gauge and dividing the height by width- a mathmatecal calculation.
Table size, on the other hand, is far more difficult to accurately measure. Without a GIA report, saying you had an "Ugly 60/60" is simply a knock at 60/60.
Which is why I may get over zealous at times.
I appreciate the conversation, and thank each and every person that's participated

 

[Dancing Fire]

david,
if anything about this thread, you did accomplish one thing: bringing Alj down to her knees and say uncle. Alj is one of the best debaters of our time. You deserve a gold medal for this accomplishment.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/5/2005 10:26:16 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
david,

if anything about this thread, you did accomplish one thing: bringing Alj down to her knees and say uncle. Alj is one of the best debaters of our time. You deserve a gold medal for this accomplishment.

gota say i never thought id see the day.....

 

[strmrdr]

btw super-ideals rule and 60/60''s drool :}

 

[RockDoc]

David wrote:

"Gauging a diamond''s depth is a matter of measuring it with a millimeter gauge and dividing the height by width- a mathmatecal calculation.
Table size, on the other hand, is far more difficult to accurately measure. Without a GIA report, saying you had an "Ugly 60/60" is simply a knock at 60/60."

____________________________

Gee, David

I think measuring table is easy. Of course the almost effortless way is to have a Sarin.

If you don''t have that GIA sells two types of table measuring tools... a guage and a microfilm plastic template. Just put the stone in the diaphragm opening, adjust it for size and then measure it with the microfilm things under magnification. Not that hard to accomplish.

You can also use their proportionscope as well.

or use the sight estimation technique.

As far as Bill Goldberg''s comment, I didn''t make it to push a brand. I just sort of quoted (not verbatim) what he thought of the diamond of Richard''s when he saw it.

Peter Yantzer has also publicly voiced an opinion too.

So evidently some of us can see a difference. We''re not debating cost here. That is certainly another subject. If we want to analyze what is the "best" for the price charged, that would be entirely a different subject to discuss.

As I''ve written before there is the "Ivory Tower World" and the Practical World. Since what the consumer sees as beauty can vary, that IS personal preference, and to be respected, PROVIDING the customer believes the difference of product is equal to the premiums one charge for the Ideal/H&A type stones.

Just for the record, I have also seen a stone cut to "way off" proportions, and it was incredibly lively, brilliant and dispersive. Yet by the numbers, everyone would say it was a dog. Even when sent to the AGS lab it got a cut grade of 10 ( the lowest grading they provide). I''ve only seen one stone cut to these specs, but shortly I am to get two more to judge the consisitency of the very unusual results.b

So as I''ve also been writing, it''s really a stone by stone call, not something that is totally and accurately predictable for appearance based on just the numbers. So to an extent, I agree with you, but the conclusion should be more qualified than just the 60/60 terminology.


Rockdoc

 

[Iiro]

removed by iiro.

Sorry, this was irrelevant info.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Wow!
A few days away and stuff happens

Only had a 3 minute play so far.
1. They need to tighten up the girdle thixckness calculator to catch people entering incorrect data as it is possible to enter a diamond with a negative girdle thickness. (Leonid can show them how if they want to know the trig calculations which are publically displayed on HCA).

2. Rhino did i skim right?
A 56% table gets a lower grade than a 60% with all else held the same? You better check you did not get knocked down by the girdle thickness estimator?

3. Another GIA messup. It seems they have stuck with girdle thickness measurements at the thin valley part????? Since AGS moved to the correct bezel mains and minor half facet position, gIA is now alone in the world. This is going to be soooo confusing and it means they wasted a huge opportunity.

4. Anyone know if they are going to print actual stone proportions on the little graphic on the report? the image on their sight is too low res to discern???

 

[Eightball]

Elexese Diamonds likes 60/60 too. In fact their whole brand seems to be built on 60/60.
http://www.elexese.com/round-diamonds.html


Gotta love diamond videos ! Watch The Elexese Diamond Video
http://www.weddingband.com/elexese/ElexeseFancy002.wmv

 

[Iiro]

Same 60/60 story here
http://www.robbinsdiamonds.com/elexese-round-diamonds.php

How about this: The greatest research on diamond brilliance relates to the round brilliant-cut diamond. A good rule of thumb here is the "60-60 rule." If the round diamond has around a 60% total depth and a 60% table it will have "preferred proportions," allowing for more brilliance.
http://kantordiamond.com/buying_tips.htm

 

[Richard Sherwood]

I heard somebody made Alj cry "uncle".

Is this true? Is it possible?

My faith in the permanence of the universe is shattered...

 

[RockDoc]

RE: Elex site

Very slick website... Someone spent a ton of money producing it.

However, I believe some of their claims are a bit exaggerated.

I took a look at some of their DMG members... I wouldn''t say they are the "most reputable and distinguished jewelers" in America. They seem to make a big deal out of the Diamond Masters Guild, saying that the 12 experts of the world, selected the proportions. Funny, as I think some of the top people of the world are here on PS and not one of them was in this group.

Since Hearts on Fire trademarked the most perfectly cut diamond etc.... it may get them a litigation treat. HOF has been known to enforce their trademark legally.

I sort of find it astounding ( as I am sure many consumers do ) that everyone seems and claims to have the most brilliant and perfectly cut diamonds.


But I will say they certainly have a very attractive marketing program and website.

Rockdoc

 

[fire&ice]

I wonder if the only way to resolve this is do a taste test in NYC.

It''s no secret I''m not a gaget or numbers girl. And, I really do think at the end of the day, it all comes down to personal choice. My OEC is an AGL 3 in their cut scale. Yet, it''s beautiful in it''s own right. I kinda like the regal presense of a high tabled deep stone. It''s rich looking to my eye. But, I also like the looks of my other stones.

Really, isn''t it all about personal preference? And, I wonder if a group would have a consensus. Certainly when we are talking dog to very good. But, I simply can not think that someone would be able to discern the excellent polish to the very good polish. I wonder, also, would the naked eye be able to discern a true H&A vs. a stone possessing good symetry?

My preference is all about value. I wouldn''t pay a premium for a super duper louper ideal. I like mine in the very good make range at a cost savings. I''d have an open mind for a 60/60. I''m sure I''ve seen them -just not identified as such.

All that being said as opinion, I think as a consumer buying sight unseen, I would be more inclined to go with what I preceive as the best cut according to the numbers. But, I would allow myself to call three stones (one being just outside ex/ex).

Interesting discussion.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 8/5/2005 10:26:16 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
david,
if anything about this thread, you did accomplish one thing: bringing Alj down to her knees and say uncle. Alj is one of the best debaters of our time. You deserve a gold medal for this accomplishment.

That''s what makes this thread a part of PS history DF. LOL!

 

[Rhino]

Date: 8/5/2005 7:57:48 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 8/5/2005 7:29:26 PM
Author: RockDoc

Hi David....

I think its obvious that the term ''better'' is a relative point. What some perceive as better, another person doesn''t. Sometimes the person who thinks one thing is better, makes the decision to take that position because they haven''t really been taught to tell the very succint differences.

RIGHT ON.....and what David keeps missing (I swear by choice!) is that he''s trying to use a subjective term and get everyone to agree to have the same opinion. It''s just an opinion.....not everyone has to agree. Something as subjective as beauty cannot be FACTUALLY DEFINED AS BETTER THAN OR EQUAL TO.

He''s arguing that ideals aren''t ''better'' than ideal cuts, but I don''t recall anyone else saying ideals are ''BETTER'' in the first place. He''s trying to prove the worthiness of 60/60 stones to people who never knocked them in the first place.

Crazy. Again.....uncle, David. I don''t know what it will take to make you happy or satisfied unless the entire of PS embraces 60/60 as the holy grail, and it ain''t gonna happen....the same way not everyone embraces online vendors, even here. I don''t know what motivates this charging-the-nonexistent-windmills mentality on proving the equalness of what you like, but I''m inspired by your energy, if not by your argument.

Well put Al.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 8/6/2005 7:18:01 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Wow!
A few days away and stuff happens

Only had a 3 minute play so far.
1. They need to tighten up the girdle thixckness calculator to catch people entering incorrect data as it is possible to enter a diamond with a negative girdle thickness. (Leonid can show them how if they want to know the trig calculations which are publically displayed on HCA).

2. Rhino did i skim right?
A 56% table gets a lower grade than a 60% with all else held the same? You better check you did not get knocked down by the girdle thickness estimator?

3. Another GIA messup. It seems they have stuck with girdle thickness measurements at the thin valley part????? Since AGS moved to the correct bezel mains and minor half facet position, gIA is now alone in the world. This is going to be soooo confusing and it means they wasted a huge opportunity.

4. Anyone know if they are going to print actual stone proportions on the little graphic on the report? the image on their sight is too low res to discern???

Hey Garry,

On point 4 the answer is yes. They will be including on their reports a graphic demonstrating the actual profile view of the diamond in question along with
all the measurements you see in FAcetware. While I do favor the AGS system, one factor GIA is doing which I prefer is the inclusion of lower girdle and star data on their new reports.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/6/2005 1:15:44 PM
Author: Rhino

Date: 8/6/2005 7:18:01 AM

Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Wow!

A few days away and stuff happens

Only had a 3 minute play so far.

1. They need to tighten up the girdle thixckness calculator to catch people entering incorrect data as it is possible to enter a diamond with a negative girdle thickness. (Leonid can show them how if they want to know the trig calculations which are publically displayed on HCA).


2. Rhino did i skim right?

A 56% table gets a lower grade than a 60% with all else held the same? You better check you did not get knocked down by the girdle thickness estimator?


3. Another GIA messup. It seems they have stuck with girdle thickness measurements at the thin valley part????? Since AGS moved to the correct bezel mains and minor half facet position, gIA is now alone in the world. This is going to be soooo confusing and it means they wasted a huge opportunity.


4. Anyone know if they are going to print actual stone proportions on the little graphic on the report? the image on their sight is too low res to discern???

Hey Garry,


On point 4 the answer is yes. They will be including on their reports a graphic demonstrating the actual profile view of the diamond in question along with

all the measurements you see in FAcetware. While I do favor the AGS system, one factor GIA is doing which I prefer is the inclusion of lower girdle and star data on their new reports.

actual or rounded?

 

[pricescope]

How far steep/deep one can go within Excelent cut grade using GIA Cut Estimator? 35.5° & 41.4°; 36.5° & 41.2°; 36.0° & 41.4°?

From GIA Assumptions Regarding the Software:

The predicted cut grade is not a valuation, appraisal or guarantee and it is not a warranty or representation of the diamond’s final cut grade as determined by GIA. The predicted cut grade may not be referred to as any of the foregoing.

 

[pricescope]

for comparison, 36.5° & 41.2° crown and pavilion angles are getting AGS 5 cut grade and rather low light return results with DiamCalc. (Light return 1.0 corresponds to Tolkowsky proportions)

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 8/6/2005 9:49:44 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood
I heard somebody made Alj cry ''uncle''.

Is this true? Is it possible?

My faith in the permanence of the universe is shattered...

yep, it''s true. the three knock down rule was in effect. after Alj cried "uncle" three times, the match was over

. she is no longer undefeated

.David gets a 5ct 60/60 cut as prize money.

 

[Mara]

Quite possibly Al was just having a bad day and wasn''t up to her ''true form''. I don''t think that this ''uncle'' should count.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Date: 8/6/2005 9:04:05 AM
Author: Eightball
Elexese Diamonds likes 60/60 too. In fact their whole brand seems to be built on 60/60.
http://www.elexese.com/round-diamonds.html


Gotta love diamond videos ! Watch The Elexese Diamond Video
http://www.weddingband.com/elexese/ElexeseFancy002.wmv

WOW- Live and learn!!!!

That''s the first itme I''ve seen a marketing campagn specifically for 60/60 diamonds- thank you to 8ball, and Iiro who have pointed us in the right direction!


The video made me want to throw up!!!!

Just as I disagree with saying ideal is " better"- I feel the same about making claims for 60/60 somehow being "better"
It IS a question of preference- both are beautiful. I find it to be as big a crock when they say 60/60 is " the worlds finest cut"

The video is fraught with innaccuacies- and misleading statements.


Iiro- thank you for pointing out those sites
I also felt the buying guide was way off base- We know simply saying - "go for 60/60", is not enough. If an honest seller understands diamonds, they wil be offering nicely cut diamonds- be they ideal, or 60/60. In the real world, it may be hard for everyone to find such knowledgable sellers.
It takes a lot of investment of time and money to sell diamonds- still many major jewelry stores have to hire people that don''t have the basic knowledge to participate in this conversation.
SO it''s clear consumers need help in this area- hopefully the GIA''s new cut grade will begin to do that

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 8/6/2005 9:49:44 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood
I heard somebody made Alj cry 'uncle'.

Is this true? Is it possible?

My faith in the permanence of the universe is shattered...

Heh - not really, Rich.......can't continue to debate when David can't even decide what his position is!

First, he says this: "Maybe Corey also believes that a wel cut 60/60 is just as nice as a H&A- which does bring a higher price."

Then, in the same post, he says this: "I am suggesting here, that GIA is agreeing. GIA is saying that a well cut 60/60 is equal in value to an Ideal Cut diamond"

Now, he's flip-flopped yet AGAIN: "Ideal Cut diamonds cost more to cut than a typical well cut 60/60- therefore ideal cut diamonds are worth more. I feel confident, they will continue to be."

Someone's been taking lessons from the master, Sen. Kerry! Wonder who that could be?

Which is it, David?

He also cannot seem to figure out if he's talking about an objective measurement (dollar worth) or a subjective measurement (beauty).

Here's what's REALLY at the heart of his evangelical crusade in defense of 60/60s: "I simply do not want people who don't haver an ideal cut diamond to feel like their diamond is lesser. " Has it occurred to you, David, that by your making SUCH a huge fit about it, YOU might be reinforcing that notion? "Why would a jeweler have to defend something that hard if it were worthy on its own merit? Hmmmmmm."

Hey, I feel like my Isuzu Rodeo is "lesser" strictly in terms of dollar value when compared to a Ferrari.....but that doesn't mean I shouldn't love it. And believe me when I tell you, I'm certainly not gonna lose any sleep over the notion that someone else might think my diamond is lesser than theirs. Those who would be so affected probably have larger issues than whether or not their diamond is cut a given way, hmmmmm?

At least three other people in this thread have made a comment along the lines of this: "Some people will prefer 60/60s over ideals; some will prefer ideals over 60/60. PREFERENCE ISN'T WRONG."

Let me say that again: preference isn't wrong....whether it's for an ideal or well-cut 60/60. The only one who can't seem to accept that notion on face value is David. I like him, but gosh, it's tiring trying to figure out which end of the debate he's on!

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 8/5/2005 10:26:16 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
david,
if anything about this thread, you did accomplish one thing: bringing Alj down to her knees and say uncle. Alj is one of the best debaters of our time. You deserve a gold medal for this accomplishment.

I have to admit I'm a bit weakened....the last few days here on PS have just denigrated into a free-for-all that's just ridiculous. A crazy, touchy-feely, god-forbid-anyone-has-a-differing-opinion free-for-all. It's revolting.

Yes, in retrospect, I was too hasty in calling uncle. I'm still getting used to the new rules of engagement. I forgot that instead of calling uncle or continuing to civilly debate, I could have simply reverted to what seems to be the new protocol here. I could have just simplified things and called David a jaded cow.

 

[Kaleigh]

Seems to me that Alj. has made a great point so lets wipe the slate clean and start all over, if anyone can stand that!!!!! I just think that we need to come to some conclusion here???

 

[Rhino]

Date: 8/6/2005 3:56:15 PM
Author: Pricescope
How far steep/deep one can go within Excelent cut grade using GIA Cut Estimator? 35.5° & 41.4°; 36.5° & 41.2°; 36.0° & 41.4°?

From GIA Assumptions Regarding the Software:

The predicted cut grade is not a valuation, appraisal or guarantee and it is not a warranty or representation of the diamond’s final cut grade as determined by GIA. The predicted cut grade may not be referred to as any of the foregoing.

Very interesting Leo. Are those the steepest/deepest combo''s you''ve found allowable for grade 1?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Well Al, why not go back to the GIA cut grades? As it now appears that David (thanks to Iiro) has worked out why many of us do not like the 60:60 concept.

Look at Leonids screen shot posts about 10 back.

I think we must assume GIA has a different approach to leakage.
In the foundation article late last year they mentioned the trays they placed the stones in.

Observing diamonds on a white background allows diamonds with lots of leakage to look brighter than they are. Observing diamonds on a black background emphasizes the leakage, but GIA mentioned this made diamonds look worse than when mounted. This is of course debateable and my debate is what about the dirt effect?
Anyway they tried various colored trays—including I believe, flesh colored. They found the best to be a light gray tray. All the final visual grade thresholds were set with the use of a lighter gray tray. I seem to remeber reading or maybe hearing from experienced participants in the survey (even some that sell brand name hearts and arrows) they chose RD 08 over RD01, which could indicate the partial leakage in the table was lessened by the lighter shade of tray.
(This lines up with my belief that H&A''s patterns are a learned preference)

So if GIA thresholds were set by blind observations based on this tray shade assumption, then this could explain the steep deep combinations of proportions of leaky stones that are upsetting Paul from Antwerp.
But I still do not buy it entirely because the tray will take out the effect of the contrast that the H&A''s star pattern lovers love. This slide from the Cut Groups Indian presentation shows the effect that I am trying to describe.

The tray color selection is absolutely critical. I see now that it has had a huge impact. Some of my earlier surveys were done with stones mounted in bezel settings and simple 6 claw rings. I think this will be a very important for decision for all future studies.

 

[pricescope]

Date: 8/7/2005 12:31:13 AM
Author: Rhino

Very interesting Leo. Are those the steepest/deepest combo''s you''ve found allowable for grade 1?

Yes, I posted screenshots above where these steep/deep combinations are getting Excellent cut grade on with GIA Cut Evaluator.