Guidance by parameters. Initial screening tools.

[oldminer]

The biggest leap of faith in buying a diamond on the Internet is the belief that you stand a better than average chance of getting a diamond which is totally right for you, your eyes and your wallet. There are many strangely shaped diamonds which can possibly perform well and look okay, but for safety one should be fairly conservative on what to screen out when the diamond can''t be examined up front. While not comprehensive, the following list ought to help consumers to know they are getting to the very safe zone when the diamond they are selecting fits within these parameters. Again, there may be a great stone for YOU outside these borders, but I promise you, it won''t be way outside without some other issue cropping up. We do admit that AGS0 princess cuts may be deeper and we really like their appearance, but in the overall, they fit this guide. Besides, there are many times as many non-AGS princess cuts floating about which need more caution such as provided here. Way too many flat top, ultra-deep ones are around which just are not maximum beauty stones. Their best performance is in a lower price and for several good reasons.


Princess
Table 72% to 60%
Crown Height 16% to 8.5%
Total Depth 75% to 64%

Emerald - Radiant
Table 68% to 59%
Crown Height 16% to 11%
Total Depth 65% to 60%

Pear - Heart - Marquise - Oval
Table 61.5% to 53%
Crown Height 16% to 11.5%
Total Depth 63% to 59%

Fancy shape diamond girdles
ALL FANCY SHAPES V. Thin to Sl. Thick OR Thin to Thick

Fancy shape L:W ratios are a personal choice
Most popular and likely to please:
Pear 1.5 - 1.75 : 1
Heart 0.98 - 1.02 : 1
Marquise 1.75 – 2.25 : 1
Oval 1.33 – 1.66 : 1
The L:W ratio does not set a grade.

Fancy shape Polish / Symmetry
Excellent to Good

Round
Table 60% to 52%
Crown Height 16.8% to 13.5%
Crown Angle 33 to 35.1
Pavilion Depth 43.5% to 42.5%
Total Depth 62.99% to 58.3%
Girdle V. Thin to Medium OR Thin to Sl. Thick
Polish / Symmetry Excellent to Very Good

 

[jet2ks]

Excellent "Cliff''s Notes" on initial screening of fancy shapes. Thanks, Dave, it will be very helpful.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 6/29/2009 3:00:27 PM
Author: jet2ks
Excellent ''Cliff''s Notes'' on initial screening of fancy shapes. Thanks, Dave, it will be very helpful.

Definitely helpful, thank you Dave

 

[Rockdiamond]

HI David,
NO question, your intention is to assist shoppers....but just to be clear- these are your own opinions, correct?
Surely there are others in the trade that agree with your numbers- isn''t it also true that many caring professionals that do not agree with your numbers?


I''ve found MANY of the nicest stones - especially in fancy shapes- fall outside your numbers- some far outside- with no deficiencies whatsoever in appearance.


As I said- I know these guides are designed to help shoppers- and they very may well do that in some cases- but in other cases there will be shoppers who miss the stone they would have loved if they used your parameters.

 

[Gypsy]

Hi Dave, I think we all have personal preferences. I''m not an expert by any means, but your cliff''s notes on ECs (smaller tables than 59% are frequently great performers, and total depths of up too 67% still maintain the spread pretty well, also Symmetry needs to be Very Good and above for EC''s generally) and ovals and pears (it does seem that ovals and pears with depths in the 64-65 range frequently have less of a bowtie and shallower ovals and pears have a more pronounced bowtie) don''t match up to my personal preferences and observations.


But I do use your ranges as guides and do appreciate your expertise and time and effort in putting them together.

 

[ts44]

Rockdiamond - he does say that people may find lovely stones outside these parameters, but for the novice on the internet, this is an extremely helpful guide.

If I had the time to go through two hundred stones in brick and mortar stores I'm sure I would find one outside this range that I thought was perfectly nice. I don't have that time, and I'm shopping on the internet. I use this list.

 

[strmrdr]

I prefer pictures, videos, IS and ASET to screen fancies.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 6/29/2009 5:02:05 PM
Author: ts44
Rockdiamond - he does say that people may find lovely stones outside these parameters, but for the novice on the internet, this is an extremely helpful guide.

If I had the time to go through two hundred stones in brick and mortar stores I'm sure I would find one outside this range that I thought was perfectly nice. I don't have that time, and I'm shopping on the internet. I use this list.

ts44- I have a lot of respect for David Atlas- and I like him personally as well.
His efforts are on the consumers behalf, 100%.

If you were going to buy a diamond sight unseen, and need to use a chart, David Atlas' numbers are as good as any numbers chart about the cut of a diamond.
But they are all subjective.
The reason I feel the charts don;t help shoppers is that I would not recommend buying a diamond sight unseen- especially a fancy shape.

As with everything else there are also other ways of looking at how to select a diamond.
For example- say someone is shopping for a fancy cut diamond.
My advice would be to shop for the dealer you felt would best serve you.
Let them suggest stones.
There's plenty of effective means of getting the point across for an online dealer.
I agree with Storm about pictures and video being effective at conveying the subtle aspects of the shape. Far more than measurements and numbers.
IS ASET are also great tools.

 

[jet2ks]

I don't think anyone is saying to use the numbers to find a stone (at least I'm not saying it). I totally agree with Storm that pics, images and video are better. I'm thinking more on the line of the poster who comes along saying "I don't know anything about diamonds. My girlfriend wants a XXXXXX shape. What do I look for?" (or some variant of that). Some of those will be willing to let others suggest stones, some really want to pick out the stone themselves.

That last one is the person that you can use this data and say, "Here is a good starting point. Look at some diamonds that fall in these parameters to get a better idea of what that shape should look like." That can give them the confidence to actually start looking, instead of being overwhelmed by all the possibilities.

That is the scenario that popped into my mind immediately upon reading Dave's post. That data table is just a tool, and like any tool, you must know when and how to use it. My spark plug socket may only see the light of day once or twice a year, but when I need it, nothing else in the toolbox will do the job. I consider Dave's chart one of those tools. The appropriate opportunities to use it may be rare, but they will occur.

 

[Lula]

Rockdiamond, I am sure you are an honest business person, and from what I have seen on your website, your stones are gorgeous. That said, as someone who has recently survived the diamond shopping experience (I looked at B&M stores in several small cities and at many online vendors' sites), I found the guidelines listed in this post and in others posted by vendors and pro-sumers alike to be very helpful when I began learning about diamonds. I also found the tutorials about how to use tools like ASET and IS to be helpful as well. Does this replace actually looking at the stone and making a decision based on the visual appearance of the stone? No, absolutely not! I purchased two stones (both beautiful; both ideal cut) and kept one and returned the other because I preferred the visual qualities of one over the other.

But if a vendor refuses to discuss a stone's cut parameters with me or refuses to use performance assessment tools like ASET and IS, that's his/her choice. And it is my choice to find that choice paternalistic and old-fashioned and it's my choice to take my business elsewhere. At the very least, I expect the vendor to explain to me why he/she chooses not to use the new technologies, and I expect a more detailed and thoughtful answer than "you buy the stone, not the paper" -- which is what I was told over and over.

Again, this may not be the way you, Rockdiamond, run your business, but the feeling I got after visiting many, many B&M stores is "don't bother your pretty little head about that technical stuff; we, the business owner, know best; trust us to show you what you need to see." In most cases, the SA's (and often the store's owner) either were not knowledgeable or refused to discuss the technical aspects of the diamonds I was looking at. This happened to me at stores where I looked at ideal cut HOF and where I looked at traditionally cut RBs. The end result was that I did not trust any of the B&M vendors to show me or sell me a quality stone -- no matter what the paper said!

I'd be willing to "look beyond the paper" and consider the stones on appearance only if I truly felt I could trust the vendors I met; unfortunately this was not the case. It was like taking a trip back to the 1950s, but not in a "kewl" kind of way.

A big turnoff.

 

[Todd Gray]

Given that many of the people who frequent the forum have likely either purchased a diamond online, or are using the forum to learn about diamonds before purchasing a diamond... I believe that knowing where to begin a search "by the numbers" is an excellent place to start. This provides consumers with a method which is rather effective for weeding out the wheat from the chaff so to speak. It is the basic premise behind the Holloway Cut Adviser.

Frequent visitors to the forum are likely to know that the numbers are just the start of the adventure and they are likely to seek out those vendors who like to work with diamonds they have physically seen and can provide detailed insight for... Images such as ASET, Ideal Scope, Gems Fantasy Scope (H&A) are generally readily available from those vendors because it''s kind of necessary to actually see the diamond to capture the images...

I believe that more experienced internet diamond buyers don''t simply rely on the numbers, they use them as a starting place and fine tune their selection process as they go to maximize the odds of a successful internet diamond buying experience. Thanks for the post Dave, I''m sure lots of people will benefit from it and will combine it with Strmrdr''s suggestion for obtaining additional data from the various scopes which are readily available to assist with determining the optical symmetry of the diamond.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Sarapj- Thank you!
What you said makes perfect sense. I''ve heard so many horror stories about walknig into a jewelry store and being spoken down to. It''s a shame that happened and so often.
Jewelers that "poo poo" the idea that cut is important- or take a "trust me, I know what I''m doin''" type of attitude are a large problem and should be mentioned in this type of conversation.

As someone who stocks the stones we sell, how these diamonds look is the most important aspect- and cut is clearly critical. It''s not definable in a chart.
If we were to use the parameters David Atlas lays out above, we''d have to pass on some stones that are truly remarkable. Many beautiful fancy shpaed diamonds that people are still enjoying.

Clearly a lot of buyers want to buy by the numbers, or don''t know there are sites offering far more info. The number one volume site offers neither photos nor ASET/IS

So, on the one hand we have sellers trying to convince buyers to accept poorly made goods by claiming they know better and are selling "ideal cut" diamonds. Which leads to many people mistrusting dealers as a whole leading to the desire to use the list.


As someone who does not fit into either category, I feel that the buying of fancy shaped diamonds is an art. Far beyond the realm of a chart.
The ASET and IS are valid tools that we choose not to use as I don''t find the results are relevant to what my eyes see- but they are valid tools.
We use photographs and videos to demonstrate why we felt the stone we bought was worthy of joining our stock.

As a dealer, my words could easily be taken to be purely mercenary- only to make sales.
But if I was not selling diamonds, and simply advising someone based on 35 years experience in the trade- my advice would be exactly the same.

I''d tell them to find a dealer who can demonstrate a vision you find attractive- by showing you stones with photos, videos, in person- or with ASET IS.
Make sure you get a good money back guarantee, and work with the dealer.
Don''t restrict them with a chart if they don''t use it- most of the best dealers of fancy shapes will not be using a chart.

That is honestly what I''d say - even if I was not a dealer.
Still, I''m sorry for what happened to you and I''m glad you found the charts helpful!

 

[oldminer]

I would be willing to bet a reasonable sum of money that diamonds which dealers have in stock which fit inside the supplied parameters are all really lovely stones with no durability issues. (other than ones which might arise from Imperfect clarity grades or glass filling) Dealers avoid ugly outlines and ugly diamonds like the plague. Once a diamond is cut within these parameters I feel it is a 100% safe bet for excellent cut quality combined with an excellent to very good appearance. Appearance is subjective and what is excellent for me may be only very good for you.

There is no argument at all that there are many stones outside of these parameters worthy of consideration because of their price or simply because they happen to look great although they may not be so well fashioned in some respect or another. While the seller is not likely to point out why they fall out of these parameters and explain the downside, you might really like such a stone anyway. In fact, the seller might not consider that there is any downside to more depth or a thicker girdle, but I do. This is my expertise, so it is something I can express a valid opinion on. I have no bias to selling anyone a diamond, so judge the adviser as well as the advice.

People shopping on the Internet have far less opportunity to search around the fringes than when shopping in a store. A store is a far better place to shop when you want to see them all, touch them all and compare them in the same lighting. I do believe these parameters increase the guidance to zones of safety for anyone who wants to do the job carefully and with caution. When you find a diamond within all these specs, it is highly unlikely to be a one with an ugly outline or any other real or serious problem not addressed by these parameters. Like I said, I''d bet money that no one has even one example which fits these parameters yet has a ugly or poor appearance or a durability problem (except low clarity).

 

[Todd Gray]

I''m reminded of an experience I had shortly after wandering into the ideal cut diamond arena back in 1996 (I''ve been in the business since 1985) when one of our existing diamond dealers who was feeling jilted because we had stopped purchasing diamonds from him dropped by for a visit. After the usual schmoozing he pulled a diamond out of his bag and said "you and your ideal cut diamonds, I''ll show you a diamond that is just as beautiful and which is not cut to ideal proportions" and he proceeded to show us a diamond which was cut to 64% total depth with a really shallow crown and a very small table - it looked more like the sharpened tip of a #2 pencil than a diamond, but he was right, it was gorgeous! Out of curiosity, we popped it on the Sarin machine and it wandered in somewhere in the land of "poor" and he scoffed "see, this is proof that your numbers system is absurd!" to which I replied "So you have what, about a thousand diamonds in that duffel bag of yours? Show me five or six more like this one and you''ll have my interest."

But he couldn''t produce another diamond with visual performance to rival "the one" diamond which he had to offer that did rival the visual performance of the round brilliant cut diamonds which we had in-stock at the time. And that is the problem, the guy had a thousand diamonds in his bag of tricks and only one that offered a level of visual performance that was comparable to that of the ideal cut diamonds we bring in for evaluation every day "by the numbers".

Imagine how many diamonds we would be sending back and forth trying to find "the one" if we did not use the proportions of a diamond as an initial filtering system! What a waste of time and $$$

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 6/30/2009 12:21:23 PM
Author: Todd Gray
Imagine how many diamonds we would be sending back and forth trying to find ''the one'' if we did not use the proportions of a diamond as an initial filtering system! What a waste of time and $$$

That is true but even fewer diamonds need to be shipped if you know a supplier for well cut ones you trust and you call him on the phone and say hey I need one of these what do you have?
Even fewer yet need to be shipped if that persons sends you pictures.

The average consumer is better off working with a good vendor or asking on here for a list to have checked on with a good vendor as a starting point then getting pictures than using any numbers list.

I have a lot of respect for Dave and his heart is in the right place but I see a bunch of pitfalls already with that list if someone tries to follow it blindly.
For example it could be read that a v-thin girdle all around is a safe choice.
No mention that good polish and symmetry can sometimes have eye visible effects.

 

[Stone Hunter]

When I was searching I read all of the cushion threads on PS. Looked a the numbers for the stones I liked and then searched PS vendors with those numbers. I still had plenty of variety to choose from. BUT the numbers gave me a starting point, which is what novice diamond buyers need.

 

[oldminer]

When I made up the original charts over fifteen years ago now, there were FEWER well cut rounds and VERY FEW well cut fancy shapes. Fancy shapes were especially problematic in that people went to find a 1B cut and could find none. I re-worked the charts a bit to allow a bit more leniency in fancy shapes because there just was nothing around for people who cared enough to shop for a finely cut diamond. They had to be able to find something decent. Most fancy shapes have a range of girdle thickness far wider than round diamonds simply due to the geometry of the diamond''s outline. I have not found any particular problem with very thin girdles on normal depth stones. A very thin on a shallow stone does set the powner up for eventual chipping. The reason I extended the polish & symmetry to Good was that most well cut stones are better than "good" by default, but the little differences between very good and good often are quite subjective, not always, but often. I do encourage actually looking at a diamond before purchasing it, and I want to be fair to sellers that they should have a chance to sell the diamond they have in stock, but the consumer must be the judge. I just didn''t want to eliminate "Good" from fancy shapes.

If you take the worst cases of every parameter quoted here you would have a borderline stone, not a mid-point finest stone. I tried to fine tune enough to make every stone included a vry good diamond, but I kept in mind the commercial reality we live with.

Working with a good vendor and trusting their guidance will be as good or even better sometimes than going by the numbers. However, some diamonds must be described and this is a valuable tool for discrimination at long distance. I also think that in the real world, you''ll find few available diamonds with problematic individual parameters yet great overall cut. Cutters spend the time to perfect such potentially fine cut stones and don''t leve many with one weak issue. In theory, they could, but in reality they tend to do the job fully.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 6/29/2009 6:28:19 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 6/29/2009 5:02:05 PM
Author: ts44
Rockdiamond - he does say that people may find lovely stones outside these parameters, but for the novice on the internet, this is an extremely helpful guide.

If I had the time to go through two hundred stones in brick and mortar stores I''m sure I would find one outside this range that I thought was perfectly nice. I don''t have that time, and I''m shopping on the internet. I use this list.

ts44- I have a lot of respect for David Atlas- and I like him personally as well.
His efforts are on the consumers behalf, 100%.

If you were going to buy a diamond sight unseen, and need to use a chart, David Atlas'' numbers are as good as any numbers chart about the cut of a diamond.
But they are all subjective.
The reason I feel the charts don;t help shoppers is that I would not recommend buying a diamond sight unseen- especially a fancy shape.

As with everything else there are also other ways of looking at how to select a diamond.
For example- say someone is shopping for a fancy cut diamond.
My advice would be to shop for the dealer you felt would best serve you.
Let them suggest stones.
There''s plenty of effective means of getting the point across for an online dealer.
I agree with Storm about pictures and video being effective at conveying the subtle aspects of the shape. Far more than measurements and numbers.
IS ASET are also great tools.

David,

I considered buying an EC trinity ring from your site about 2 months ago due to your great pictures, video, and description but my GF decided she didn''t want a trinity for an E-ring so we are going another way.

Your posts in this thread and in others however seem to serve your own purposes far more than they do anyone here trying to learn.

1) YOU list a hyperlink tagline in every one of your posts.
2) YOUR website has many "unique" diamonds (ie a cushion with 47% depth, a cushion with a purple hue etc etc.) that usually appeal to people with very specific tastes and fall outside the normal range of diamonds with good optics. In the description of the diamonds you have a narrative describing why this diamond is unique not withstanding its flaws and should be viewed as beautiful "IN YOUR OPINION".
3) YOUR POSTS are like a broken record "Good diamonds can fall outside of ideal ranges" "For fancy cut diamonds find an an expert you can trust and go with what they choose for you"
(Which could easily be interpreted as ignore any education you have been given it will just confuse you and you may reject MY DIAMONDS because they might fall outside of the normal ranges).

A thread like this doesn''t support your niche market of "unique" diamonds so STAY OUT OF IT.

Your opinion is pretty much the same as every two bit B&M store owner who says "Don''t buy diamonds from the internet I had a kid come in last week who got burned instead trust ME I have been in the diamond business X years and I will find you one."

If you want to help users here than be more selective in what general rules you try to pick at. These ranges that Old Miner has given for diamonds are broad and general enough to encompass the large majority of diamonds which would be considered desireable. He has very carefully avoided the controversial ranges and tried to avoid getting more specific than necessary so that most good diamonds fall into the range. Just because your niche is diamonds falling outside of these ranges and your opinion is that these are more desireable or as desireable as the ones within the range only helps those customers who decide to come to you to use "YOUR EYES" to find their diamond.

I wish you were more of an educator here and less of a salesman as this is certainly not the purpose of these forums.


CCL

 

[Dancing Fire]

RD
in other words...IYO

no tools on earth or any parameters is more reliable than your pair of eyes,right? so if RD say...this is a beautiful diamond then the world must agree ? 60/60 = your mind is stuck in the 60''s and you must be 60 yrs old.

 

[oldminer]

CCL, thanks!.

I have no problem with the other David in this thread. I have gently battled this sort of seller my entire working life without any build-up of antagonism. We, Rockdiamond & I, come at the subject from different routes of education and experience. He believes in his methodology and dogma, and surely has done okay with it. However, my take is different and very apparent to you and to many others. In some sense people come to Pricescope not only for diamond education, but to immerse themselves in the views of the industry. Obvious to anyone paying attention, we do not all think alike. Lurkers love the controversy and are entertained. Others get the eductaion and the tools to handle themselves better in the retail arena. Sometimes you have to be tough to make a good purchase. You have to know as much as the seller and that may not be easy. Participation here is undoubtedly very useful to hundreds of thousands of diamond consumers. That's what counts for me.
(added) Oops! I'm the one who is 60.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 6/30/2009 3:19:53 PM
Author: ChunkyCushionLover

David,

I considered buying an EC trinity ring from your site about 2 months ago due to your great pictures, video, and description but my GF decided she didn''t want a trinity for an E-ring so we are going another way.

Your posts in this thread and in others however seem to serve your own purposes far more than they do anyone here trying to learn.

1) YOU list a hyperlink tagline in every one of your posts.
2) YOUR website has many ''unique'' diamonds (ie a cushion with 47% depth, a cushion with a purple hue etc etc.) that usually appeal to people with very specific tastes and fall outside the normal range of diamonds with good optics. In the description of the diamonds you have a narrative describing why this diamond is unique not withstanding its flaws and should be viewed as beautiful ''IN YOUR OPINION''.
3) YOUR POSTS are like a broken record ''Good diamonds can fall outside of ideal ranges'' ''For fancy cut diamonds find an an expert you can trust and go with what they choose for you''
(Which could easily be interpreted as ignore any education you have been given it will just confuse you and you may reject MY DIAMONDS because they might fall outside of the normal ranges).

A thread like this doesn''t support your niche market of ''unique'' diamonds so STAY OUT OF IT.

Your opinion is pretty much the same as every two bit B&M store owner who says ''Don''t buy diamonds from the internet I had a kid come in last week who got burned instead trust ME I have been in the diamond business X years and I will find you one.''

If you want to help users here than be more selective in what general rules you try to pick at. These ranges that Old Miner has given for diamonds are broad and general enough to encompass the large majority of diamonds which would be considered desireable. He has very carefully avoided the controversial ranges and tried to avoid getting more specific than necessary so that most good diamonds fall into the range. Just because your niche is diamonds falling outside of these ranges and your opinion is that these are more desireable or as desireable as the ones within the range only helps those customers who decide to come to you to use ''YOUR EYES'' to find their diamond.

I wish you were more of an educator here and less of a salesman as this is certainly not the purpose of these forums.


CCL

WOW!! CCL...you are one smart dude for a newbie.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Guys- use whatever you feel is neccesary to buy what you want.
Peace!

 

[Todd Gray]

Date: 6/30/2009 2:43:50 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 6/30/2009 12:21:23 PM

Author: Todd Gray

Imagine how many diamonds we would be sending back and forth trying to find ''the one'' if we did not use the proportions of a diamond as an initial filtering system! What a waste of time and $$$

That is true but even fewer diamonds need to be shipped if you know a supplier for well cut ones you trust and you call him on the phone and say hey I need one of these what do you have?

Even fewer yet need to be shipped if that persons sends you pictures.

Exactly! And thankfully suppliers who are interested in being "the diamond cutter" (primary) for his customers will usually meet with those customers throughout the year to discuss the practicality of their production needs. Thus each vendor is able to create a synergistic working relationship with diamond cutters with a similar mind set. And many diamond cutters have the capability of providing their customers with detailed computerized proportions analysis which cuts down on shipping costs further - but then again, this is only of interest to diamond dealers who buy by the numbers, so I suppose it is a bit of a Catch 22 for this conversation

 

[Rockdiamond]

ccl- thanks for your opinion.
My efforts here ARE to assist consumers. Many people do want to know how others feel about this. If we all agree, where''s the conversation?
Any dealer, or Gemologist posting here has a professional interest in giving advice- it may help them .
Professionals participating certainly enrich the forum- although it stands to reason that any professional posting does have an agenda.
Still, there is a lot of benefit.
It''s possible to be a dealer, yet give advice that is in the consumer''s best interest- regardless of who is doing the selling.

For example, I really do feel that many of the most beautiful pear shapes I''ve seen had depths outside 63-59% ( for example) no matter who is selling them. I''ve seen David''s lists referred to in the past, and seen them used to knock stones that might have been a great choice for the consumer- not my stones- stones of other sellers. As I feel it''s important, I was glad for the opportunity to discuss that aspect.

I''m sorry if you had bad experiences with sellers trying to push something one you- but I ask respectfully- don;t put words in my mouth. I''ve never said anything like what you wrote- nor do I feel that way. Given that we sell diamonds on the web, I''d be just as insulted as you at the statement you attributed to a B&M store owner.

The fact is that many professionals don''t agree with these ranges. That is part of the conversation- and indeed- if this is about education, doesn''t hearing other viewpoints broaden the education here?

 

[Rockdiamond]

To David Atlas: Dave- I want to emphasize again that I know your efforts are made genuinely to assist consumers.
As such, any discussion that questions your charts is sensitive- obviously.

Although I do disagree with the guidelines in some cases, and feel that it''s important to hear another side to this, I want to make it clear that I have nothing but respect for David Atlas, and the efforts he puts forth.

 

[iota]

As a soon-to-be consumer of an online diamond, I must say that David Atlas'' post is extremely helpful. I had already been using the AGA fancy cut parameters set out on this website: http://www.gemappraisers.com/oldcutgraderules.asp (found through the PS tutorials). I understand Mr. Atlas was formerly involved with AGA and the parameters from both sources closely correlate.

For the Diamonds By Lauren David, let me tell you that you were my first introduction to online diamonds (through ebay). I would ABSOLUTELY NEVER have considered buying a diamond online if it were not for your very informative, photo and video-heavy, detailed analysis of each diamond you carried. I spent way too many hours pouring over your gorgeous inventory. Alas, I am in the market for a near-colorless radiant (or oval), which your beautiful (colored diamond-heavy) inventory inspired.

Of course, there is absolutely no substitution for the eyes. Unfortunately, many of the internet dealers (UNBELIEVABLY, IMO) do not provide idealscope, Aset, or even photos of the diamonds. I do not understand how the online diamond industry has developed such that they can expect people to spend thousands, NAY, tens of thousands of dollars on a diamond the person has no connection with and cannot even see. I find the offer of a GIA certificate in place of a photo INSULTING. However, uninformed consumers are abound. SOMEONE must be buying these certificates that come with a diamond.

What I find interesting for the future of the online diamond industry, as consumers mature (hopefully, please...), is that the cutters and retailers will need to mature with it. I see two streams for the online market:

1) What I will call the "Diamonds By Lauren" approach (only because you were the "first" of your kind that I encountered): Unmistakenly beautiful, in-house diamonds, shown with flaws acknowledged, detailed write-ups, photos and videos. A one-on-one connection with the diamond by the consumer. The certificate, whatever the heck it says, is entirely secondary. The gorgeous "sharpened tip of a #2 pencil" diamond would be given their time of day in this stream.

I have not been searching for very long but I would squarely put Good Old Gold and Erica Grace, which I just recently discovered, in this category. I apologize for missing any other fine dealers that fit in this stream. If there are anymore out there, I would appreciate the heads-up because I am looking for you. (Perhaps Lorelei or Gypsy can help).

I understand, however, this stream carries with it higher overheads - time spent photographing, describing, investing, heck, probably even the interest payments on all the in-house diamonds you carry are not cheap. This will increase the diamond mark-up but it will also cater to the internet consumers looking for a relatively high-value diamond.

As long as the quality is higher and the price is a good deal lower than the B&M''s, this stream will have a firm share of the online marketplace. For all this talk about trusting your dealers, while true, internet shopping carries with it risks - risks that must be reflected by a lower price (no face to face and no B&M to run crying to creates a somewhat "nervous consumer", there''s difficulty with suing a company outside of your jurisdiction if something goes wrong, shipping and length of time it takes to repair as a result of distance, what the diamond actually looks like in your hand, etc.). These photos and videos AND consumer''s trust in you lowers consumers fears of sending tens of thousands of dollars across the country or even into another country, as will be in my case. I just wanted to tell these retailers that I appreciate what you do and with your service comes our trust in you.

2) The line that Mr. Atlas is spawning provides consumers variety and at least some assurance of quality. Cutters who will cut to certain "good" specifications because retailers and more importantly, consumers are demanding it. Search engines like those found on pricescope will make it more and more difficult for diamond listers to just put up certificates that don''t fit within these "good" criterias. Mr. Atlas'' post promotes diamond internet shopping. It also promotes, if the parameters are relatively correct, more beautiful and sturdy diamonds on the market overall. Not that anyone is suggesting it, but this cannot be a bad thing... except for diamonds that do not fit these criteria AND are not picked up by the GOG-typed stream.

The overhead for these retailers is, of course, lower - less service is required, although I still think, IS and Aset should still be mandatorily provided to consumers. Consumers will also need to trust whoever is eyeballing the diamond prior to shipping it over. From what I''ve read on this site so far, it appears Brian Gavin, Whiteflash, Wink, James Allen and Jonathan at GOG have done a fantastic job at cultivating this reputation - well deserved, I''m sure. There''s still room out there, I believe, for a few fancy cut experts to develop a reputation for "an eye for fancies", especially where their business model is centered around massive diamond lists. The parameters only help us wade through the sea of information. Someone still needs to see the diamond. Please cultivate your reputations judiciously.

I honestly didn''t know what to think when one of the above companies I called said I would be charged $35+0.3% of the value of the diamond if I called in AND rejected a diamond from a list, which they held to be "a good diamond". Well, what is a "good diamond" in your eyes. At this rate, how many fancies can I call up? I don''t want to waste my time, nor that company''s time, and that''s where the parameters also provide some value. At least, I can hope, that whatever I call up will fall into the "okay" diamond range... regardless of whoever''s eyes I''m trusting to look over the diamond.

Anyways, I''ve written far more than I ever intended to. However, I noticed a lot of dealers were taking part in this thread. I thought it would be helpful, for least at the dealers, to know the thought process of someone who is about to purchase the most expensive thing she has ever bought in her young life. (It will be the second highest for her boyfriend as his car will have cost slightly more.) Unlike a car, however, which I''d rather buy online if somehow the price was cheaper, each diamond is unique....

Anyways, PS dealers who I''ve encountered here and am about to encouter here, keep up the good work. I look forward to dealing with you. As for the other ''scopers, good luck and have fun shopping.

 

[oldminer]

"For example, I really do feel that many of the most beautiful pear shapes I''ve seen had depths outside 63-59% ( for example) no matter who is selling them."


I''m certain most of the ones you appreciate for light return were deeper, not below 59%. These deep stones are most common because the motivation to cut less deep stones is constrained greatly by financial elements and because of the lack of accepted standards. Cutters want to keep all the weight they can and to meet the highest important weight level within a reasonable appearance of the stone. Also, due to lack of true standards, consumers and dealers have no road map to providing better diamonds than what is commonly found. However, there are better diamonds. "Good enough" just is not good enough to always be excellent. The acceptance of cut standards and increased demand will promote the cutting of more diamonds with better proportions and create a premium category, where none currently exists, for these special cut diamonds. This premium will make up for the added weight loss to cut truly "fine" makes.

What I have provided is a screening tool for people to sort thorugh the huge number of diamonds available and to pinpoint those most likely to have ALL the attributes of beauty, durability and reasonable spread for their weight. Anyone can make a smart compromise later if they can''t find the top end. Anyone can decide that a beautiful diamond with a 66% depth is okay for them. However, I want them informed when they make this decision. Dealers and retailers have misused and abused the descriptions of "Excellent" and "Fine" for so long that these words virtually are left without any valuable meaning when it comes to the cut quality of a fancy shaped diamond. As I see it, nearly every fancy shaped diamond that looks passable is sold as a fine make or an excellent cut. Totally bogus! It reflects back on all of us and it is unacceptable.

We all want consumers to find a beautiful diamond in the price bracket they can afford. By learning about reasonable standards of cut, the consumers becomes better buyers and dealers are forced to become more professional in their sales approach. I see this as a good thing and progress in the right direction.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/1/2009 8:38:23 AM
Author: oldminer

We all want consumers to find a beautiful diamond in the price bracket they can afford. By learning about reasonable standards of cut, the consumers becomes better buyers and dealers are forced to become more professional in their sales approach. I see this as a good thing and progress in the right direction.

Good Morning Dave.
We all want that.
The problem is that parameter lists are not the best tools for the job these days.
I have proven time and time again that numbers are less than 10% of the information you need to buy an asscher/SE/EC and that applies to other shapes as well.
They can even prevent someone from considering the diamond of their dreams.
I am not picking on you I have the same problem with lab cut grades.

 

[oldminer]

No offense taken. I don''t say pick your diamond by the numbers, but I am saying eliminate the duds before lose yourself in the hunt for the best one.

A diamond with one or more parameters way off the chart will have "issues" that near perfectionists and careful shoppers would not be willing to accept. Sellers often pooh-pooh these problems as non-issues and consumers just fall for it, rightly or wrongly. A parameter near the chart may be a fine choice for many people since most people do compomise in other respects when buying a diamond: weight, color, clarity. A reasonable compromise in cut is okay with me. Many diamonds off the chart have fine light performance and great looks, but something is not as good about them. This is my way of telling this part of the story with less smoke and mirrors.

 

[DiamondFlame]

Well said, iota.

Oldminer is simply offering ONE guide, and it doesn't have to be the first or only piece of info you use to screen your diamonds. I've seen many newbie buyers trusting PS'ers 100% to pick a diamond for them, based on 'ideal' parameters and nice looking ASET/IS images. Whether they are missing out on other pretty stones with better value-for-money is really none of my business since these newbies choose not to educate themselves on diamond cuts and even worse, opt not to 'own' the selection process. It's not so different from going to a trusted vendor and asking him to pick a few stones for selection.