Help me understand what I saw.

[imprezive]

First of all I want to thank pricescope and all the forum members for providing me with such a thorough education. I''ve been reading and reading..

..and reading and I finally felt like I had reached a point where I understood enough to start the buying process, but I hadn''t actually seen a single diamond in person. I went to a B&M store with the intent of looking at loose diamonds and getting a bit of a hands on education. I went to Jared. I had to sit through over an hour of the agonizing B&M sales spiel and endure the under educated sale associate before I got to meet the manager who was a little more to the point and actually let me see some diamonds. I must''ve rolled my eyes at least 10 times behind their backs

I''m kept thinking how happy I was that I didn''t walk in there like a poor ignorant cow being lead to the slaughter.

I went in thinking that I wanted something in the 0.8 - 0.9 range, ideal cut, H color, VVS2 - VS1 clarity, but after looking at the diamonds I found that my eyes pick up on color better than expected and pick up on the inclusions less than expected. I''m going to adjust my parameters a bit, but after leaving I was still a little confused on a few things. I think mostly because of a difference in lingo at the B&M vs PS.

I looked a "peerless" diamond vs a "leo" (with the extra facets) that was only ideal cut and I was able to notice a difference in fire and sparkle. (I looked at several others, but this side by side left me with questions that the manager didn''t give satisfying answers to)

I''m assuming the "peerless" is the same as a H&A. What I really wanted to do was compare a H&A vs an ideal cut with ideal symetry and sparkle and see if I could see a difference in fire and sparkle.

The "leo" seemed to have more white light, but less fire. Was this because the leo had a poorer cut or because of the additional facets? or just because of the particular diamonds? (sorry I don''t have their certs, but the peerless was 1c, H, "ideal ideal", SI1, and the LEO was 1c, excellent cut (GIA), G, SI1.... the manager seemed to also indicate that the additional fire from the peerless was due to its H color, but I''d never heard anything like that before.

Does the H&A/peerless/ACA have noticably more fire than an ideal cut or is the biggest difference the visual symetry? (I found I really like fire)

Are there any side by side pics of actual diamonds that would illustrate this? (not the magnified type pics on the websites)

Thanks in advance

 

[yssie]

Date: 3/21/2010 6:23:19 PM
Author:imprezive
First of all I want to thank pricescope and all the forum members for providing me with such a thorough education. I''ve been reading and reading..

..and reading and I finally felt like I had reached a point where I understood enough to start the buying process, but I hadn''t actually seen a single diamond in person. I went to a B&M store with the intent of looking at loose diamonds and getting a bit of a hands on education. I went to Jared. I had to sit through over an hour of the agonizing B&M sales spiel and endure the under educated sale associate before I got to meet the manager who was a little more to the point and actually let me see some diamonds. I must''ve rolled my eyes at least 10 times behind their backs

I''m kept thinking how happy I was that I didn''t walk in there like a poor ignorant cow being lead to the slaughter.

I went in thinking that I wanted something in the 0.8 - 0.9 range, ideal cut, H color, VVS2 - VS1 clarity, but after looking at the diamonds I found that my eyes pick up on color better than expected and pick up on the inclusions less than expected. I''m going to adjust my parameters a bit, but after leaving I was still a little confused on a few things. I think mostly because of a difference in lingo at the B&M vs PS. You could easily drop to VS2/SI and still have an eyeclean diamond, if you want to stay in that size bracket and go up in colour

I looked a ''peerless'' diamond vs a ''leo'' (with the extra facets) that was only ideal cut and I was able to notice a difference in fire and sparkle. (I looked at several others, but this side by side left me with questions that the manager didn''t give satisfying answers to)

I''m assuming the ''peerless'' is the same as a H&A. What I really wanted to do was compare a H&A vs an ideal cut with ideal symetry and sparkle and see if I could see a difference in fire and sparkle. Peerless are all AGS0 I believe? Does not mean H&A unless they show you hearts and arrows images. A H&A is an ideal cut diamond, it''s an ideal cut diamond that''s also perfectly optically symmetric.

The ''leo'' seemed to have more white light, but less fire. Was this because the leo had a poorer cut or because of the additional facets? or just because of the particular diamonds? (sorry I don''t have their certs, but the peerless was 1c, H, ''ideal ideal'', SI1, and the LEO was 1c, excellent cut (GIA), G, SI1.... the manager seemed to also indicate that the additional fire from the peerless was due to its H color, but I''d never heard anything like that before.

Does the H&A/peerless/ACA have noticably more fire than an ideal cut or is the biggest difference the visual symetry? (I found I really like fire)

Are there any side by side pics of actual diamonds that would illustrate this? (not the magnified type pics on the websites)

Thanks in advance

 

[stone-cold11]

Ditto.

Not sure about the leo vs peerless but I am guessing the extra facets is making the stone looks brighter. Try looking at GOG's video for a comparison between the different faceting stones and see if that is what you are seeing.

EDT:
This video.
http://vimeo.com/8141283

 

[HVVS]

Unless those B&M stones were graded by GIA or AGS, they might be inflated two color grades, i.e. what they call H might have been more like a K. Lately, I have been seeing some VS1 and VS2 stones in online vendor pics that have some (to me) obvious inclusions and are not eye clean at all. Maybe there is clarity inflation, too. Or the grader needs new bifocals.

Superideal H&A have plenty of fire. This is mine, it's in my avatar, and it has a small speck in the table area but I don't care, lol. (Good Old Gold has web service problems and their site is down.) http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/5380/

Go to gemex.com, enter BR135fsi210114008 for the jewelry ID number, and you can watch it "live" by clicking on Sparkle.

 

[HVVS]

There is a PS "cheat sheet" of values for RBs:

Todd at NiceIce.com

Table Diameter: 52.4 - 57.5%
Crown Angle: 33.7 - 35.8° degrees
Pavilion Angle: 40.15 - 41.20 degrees
Girdle Thickness: Thin, Medium, Slightly Thick
Culet Size: None, Pointed, Very Small, Small,
or Medium

Note that the Total Depth % of the diamond is not taken into account...This is because it is the Crown & Pavilion angles that control most of the brilliance and thus the Total Depth is not as important a factor. Just the same, we prefer that the total depth of a round brilliant cut diamond be somewhere between 59.0% and 61.8% with the ceiling being around 62.5% in our opinion. Although it is not uncommon to find AGS Ideal Cut diamonds with total depths as deep as 63.5% we recommend that you avoid them like the plague because they are simply too deep!"

swing the cut toward fire:

"Karl K has suggested a rough limit of 50T/80lgf/37c/40.5P/45 stars as a close to the edge of a well balanced FIC."
That would be very close to the ultimate FIC in my opinion.
I wouldn't push it much further.

Karl aka strmrdr
Diamond Designer

or toward brilliance (more white light & less fire = larger table & lower crown angle usually)

A good recipe for a diamond that has more brightness and less fire would be to have a larger table, flatter crown and deeper pavilion. Something along the lines of:

Crown angle: 33.0
Pavilion angle: 41.0
Table: 59-60%
Depth: 58-61%

The benefit of the above proportions is that the stone should have a slightly larger diameter for it's weight, due to the 1-2% shallower depth than your average Tolkowsky cut.

But that angle combination sits on a cliff-edge; just a small increase in either crown or pavilion (or a rounding-off error) can dramatically downgrade the light performance. Definitely don't go for a stone that's exactly on a carat boundary, because you can bet that the cutter compromised the beaiuty to attain the weight. 1.02ct or more should be safer, since the cutter had a little extra weight to play with, to create a good stone.

If the stone had strong or very strong blue flour, that would change the stone to a distinct lilac tint in bright daylight.

Going for a D-F body colour would minimise any yellow or "warm" tints in the stone and, when combined with strong fluor, the stone may be referred to as a "blue white" for obvious reasons.

Those are for round brilliants, and there will be different %s and angles for different diamond shapes, especially fancies.

 

[imprezive]

You could easily drop to VS2/SI and still have an eyeclean diamond, if you want to stay in that size bracket and go up in colour

Yup, that''s the idea

Peerless are all AGS0 I believe? Does not mean H&A unless they show you hearts and arrows images. A H&A is an ideal cut diamond, it''s an ideal cut diamond that''s also perfectly optically symmetric.

So.... the "optical symmetry" doesn''t actually make it "shine" more?

Peerless are all AGS0 I believe? Does not mean H&A unless they show you hearts and arrows images. A H&A is an ideal cut diamond, it''s an ideal cut diamond that''s also perfectly optically symmetric.

They all had certs.

swing the cut toward fire:

"Karl K has suggested a rough limit of 50T/80lgf/37c/40.5P/45 stars as a close to the edge of a well balanced FIC."
That would be very close to the ultimate FIC in my opinion.
I wouldn''t push it much further.

Karl aka strmrdr
Diamond Designer

So....if I don''t go H&A, make sure the specs are close to this for high fire?
Any way you could break down those numbers/letters a bit? Here''s what I''ve figured out so far: 50% table / 80 ? / 37 crown angle / 40.5 pavilion angle / 45 ? / FIC = ?

That seems like significan variation from H&A specs? I don''t want to go crazy with the fire...haha.

I''m going to be buying a RB


Thanks,
Chase

 

[imprezive]

Date: 3/21/2010 8:33:53 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Ditto.

Not sure about the leo vs peerless but I am guessing the extra facets is making the stone looks brighter. Try looking at GOG''s video for a comparison between the different faceting stones and see if that is what you are seeing.

EDT:
This video.
http://vimeo.com/8141283

That video was really helpful, BTW. Thanks.

 

[yssie]

Date: 3/21/2010 9:36:07 PM
Author: imprezive

You could easily drop to VS2/SI and still have an eyeclean diamond, if you want to stay in that size bracket and go up in colour

Yup, that''s the idea

Peerless are all AGS0 I believe? Does not mean H&A unless they show you hearts and arrows images. A H&A is an ideal cut diamond, it''s an ideal cut diamond that''s also perfectly optically symmetric.

So.... the ''optical symmetry'' doesn''t actually make it ''shine'' more? No it does not

Peerless are all AGS0 I believe? Does not mean H&A unless they show you hearts and arrows images. A H&A is an ideal cut diamond, it''s an ideal cut diamond that''s also perfectly optically symmetric.

They all had certs. For H&A you want hearts images and arrows images specifically - you won''t find them on certs, they''re taken through a H&A viewer.

swing the cut toward fire:

''Karl K has suggested a rough limit of 50T/80lgf/37c/40.5P/45 stars as a close to the edge of a well balanced FIC.''
That would be very close to the ultimate FIC in my opinion.
I wouldn''t push it much further.

Karl aka strmrdr
Diamond Designer

So....if I don''t go H&A, make sure the specs are close to this for high fire?
Any way you could break down those numbers/letters a bit? Here''s what I''ve figured out so far: 50% table / 80 ? / 37 crown angle / 40.5 pavilion angle / 45 ? / FIC = ?

That seems like significan variation from H&A specs? I don''t want to go crazy with the fire...haha. Yes, different from most H&A brand''s cherry specs. Those specs don''t make a diamond that produces more fire so much as a diamond that is more inclined to show fire in more types of lighting. In the right lights any diamond will show fire..

I''m going to be buying a RB


Thanks,
Chase

 

[Dreamer_D]

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/h-a-or-idealscope.139014/

This thread discusses the difference between ideal cut and H&A.

 

[imprezive]

Sweet. After reading your replies and those in another recent topic I finally "get it".

I think if I go "down" to a SI1, but up to G, and don''t go H&A, I may be able to afford something closer to the .9 carat range... or maybe even above!

 

[imprezive]

Date: 3/21/2010 9:58:06 PM
Author: dreamer_d

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/h-a-or-idealscope.139014/

This thread discusses the difference between ideal cut and H&A.

yup, that is the one I was just reading, thanks.

 

[Dreamer_D]

What is your budget?

 

[HVVS]

No FIC is H&A, I believe.

After having non-H&A and also a couple of super ideal H&As, I really prefer the symmetry and the performance of the H&As now. They are designed to have a good balance of brilliance, broad flashes, pin flashes and fire *in all lighting*. Since they don't leak, they are extremely active and lively stones all the time, plus the brilliance helps wash color in the H/I/J range so that it faces up pretty bright & white. My non H&A diamonds have more quirks and are also cut more for brilliance than fire. I really like how the H&A shows fire even in standard fluorescent office lighting.

50% table / 80 (% length of lower girdle facets, I think) / 37 crown angle / 40.5 pavilion angle / 45 (star facet ratio, I think) / FIC = firey ideal cut that has a steep crown angle, generally a taller crown, small table, shorter overall depth, and probably slightly smaller face-up size than the TIC (Tolk. ideal cut) or BIC (brilliant ideal cut.) FIC H&A may also look "dark" under the table. You can search FIC, TIC, and BIC. My F SI1 is TIC.

When Good Old Gold comes back up, check out their August Vintage rounds and cushions. Chunky facets. I
m not sold on that round, though. That pastel fire color from the table just doesn't hit me right. Also look through the Eye Candy thread in Show Me the Ring forum.

 

[HVVS]

This is my F SI2.

 

[imprezive]

Date: 3/21/2010 10:00:47 PM
Author: dreamer_d
What is your budget?

Total $5000. Setting will likely be in the $1000-$1500 range. Like many others I want as much rock as I can, but want to have a good quality vs size balance.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 3/21/2010 10:56:08 PM
Author: imprezive

Date: 3/21/2010 10:00:47 PM
Author: dreamer_d
What is your budget?

Total $5000. Setting will likely be in the $1000-$1500 range. Like many others I want as much rock as I can, but want to have a good quality vs size balance.

That is a large chunk of change for the setting, is that included in the $5k? I wonder if you have ever thought about a temporary simple gold solitaie ($250) to allow you to get a better diamond and then get her dream setting for an anniversary or wedding present when funds allow? The difference between $3500 and $5000 in diamond talk in a lot.

 

[imprezive]

Total budget (including setting) She has particular tastes in settings, but not as picky with diamonds. She actually wants me to get a CZ as the center stone and the setting she likes, but she thinks I'm working with about half the budget I actually have. She will be one very happy lady when it she gets it and sees not only that it is a decent sized rock, but also an actual diamond.

 

[HVVS]

I's still say put essentially all of the money into the diamond and get the plainer setting, for now. You can find some type of 1ct for around $5k. But if you drop down to $3500 or $4000 for the diamond, that puts you in the .73ot .8 range. And 6.3 to 6.5mm is a lot bigger look on the hand than 5.7 to 6mm RB. If you get a 1ct, it's always a good platform to work with regardless of how the ring styles change. No CZ looks like diamond, really. Otherwise, all of Pricescope would be wearing CZs, lol.

Here's another TIC RB you can play with at gemex.com br119gsi214811671 It's the first H&A I bought. It has some funky pin fire. GOG had a bunch of H&As cut like this (with tht pin fire) back in 2007 or so. They moved more toward broad flashes and I like my 1.35ct better.

 

[imprezive]

I appreciate your input and my first instinct was similar to yours, but in the end it is a gift for her so I'll be doing what I think she'll appreciate the most. I know she's going to be blown away, regardless, but .9 will be plenty. And knowing her tastes and mine, there will very likely never be any upgrade or change to the ring.
This is the kind of diamonds I've been looking at: http://www.abazias.com/database/NewDiamondInfo.asp?stock=78456001&flag=ps

You're looking at it from the viewpoint of a knowledgable diamond lover's view. She is not, nor am I really. I just like doing the research and getting "quality".

Getting up to 1ct is a non-issue.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 3/21/2010 11:24:52 PM
Author: imprezive
I appreciate your input and my first instinct was similar to yours, but in the end it is a gift for her so I'll be doing what I think she'll appreciate the most. I know she's going to be blown away, regardless, but .9 will be plenty. And knowing her tastes and mine, there will very likely never be any upgrade or change to the ring.
This is the kind of diamonds I've been looking at: http://www.abazias.com/database/NewDiamondInfo.asp?stock=78456001&flag=ps

You're looking at it from the viewpoint of a knowledgable diamond lover's view. She is not, nor am I really. I just like doing the research and getting 'quality'.

Getting up to 1ct is a non-issue.

Well then, good, we just wanted to make sure you had thought about your options.

Abazias does not really give ideal scope images or photos of the diamonds, I don't think. For good prices I like www.jamesallen.com. People have also had good success with www.exceldiamonds.com and www.idjewelryonline.com and www.uniondiamond.com . All of these vendors will provide the information you need to assess cut quality of the diamond. Trust us, THAT you will be happy you spent the money on. A sparkly shiny rock is really amazing to see. I bet once you and your gf see one in person you will be converts.

 

[imprezive]

Date: 3/21/2010 11:38:11 PM
Author: dreamer_d

Date: 3/21/2010 11:24:52 PM
Author: imprezive
I appreciate your input and my first instinct was similar to yours, but in the end it is a gift for her so I''ll be doing what I think she''ll appreciate the most. I know she''s going to be blown away, regardless, but .9 will be plenty. And knowing her tastes and mine, there will very likely never be any upgrade or change to the ring.
This is the kind of diamonds I''ve been looking at: http://www.abazias.com/database/NewDiamondInfo.asp?stock=78456001&flag=ps

You''re looking at it from the viewpoint of a knowledgable diamond lover''s view. She is not, nor am I really. I just like doing the research and getting ''quality''.

Getting up to 1ct is a non-issue.

Well then, good, we just wanted to make sure you had thought about your options.

Abazias does not really give ideal scope images or photos of the diamonds, I don''t think. For good prices I like www.jamesallen.com. People have also had good success with www.exceldiamonds.com and www.idjewelryonline.com and www.uniondiamond.com . All of these vendors will provide the information you need to assess cut quality of the diamond. Trust us, THAT you will be happy you spent the money on. A sparkly shiny rock is really amazing to see. I bet once you and your gf see one in person you will be converts.

Thanks. A few of those I haven''t look at yet. Right now I''m working with whiteflash and if the price is right they may make a custom setting for me. I''ve notice that their prices for loose stones are a bit more, but we''ll see. I don''t want to take us off topic.

 

[Dreamer_D]

It is your thread, you can talk about whatever you like, or you can start a new thread

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/21/2010 8:56:43 PM
Author: HVVS
There is a PS 'cheat sheet' of values for RBs:

Todd at NiceIce.com

Table Diameter: 52.4 - 57.5%
Crown Angle: 33.7 - 35.8° degrees
Pavilion Angle: 40.15 - 41.20 degrees
Girdle Thickness: Thin, Medium, Slightly Thick
Culet Size: None, Pointed, Very Small, Small,
or Medium

Note that the Total Depth % of the diamond is not taken into account...This is because it is the Crown & Pavilion angles that control most of the brilliance and thus the Total Depth is not as important a factor. Just the same, we prefer that the total depth of a round brilliant cut diamond be somewhere between 59.0% and 61.8% with the ceiling being around 62.5% in our opinion. Although it is not uncommon to find AGS Ideal Cut diamonds with total depths as deep as 63.5% we recommend that you avoid them like the plague because they are simply too deep!'

I don't think those are the values Todd normally uses to personally screen top cut inventory round brilliants, going that shallow on a pavilion angle could be potentially problematic....

These are the ones I have normally seen him use.


Total depth between 59 - 61.8%
Table diameter between 53 - 57%
Crown angle* between 34.3 - 34.8 degrees
Pavilion angle* between 40.6 - 40.9 degrees
Girdle between thin to slightly thick
Culet: GIA none or AGS pointed (same concept)

Now, these are very tight ranges and if you want to narrow the field considerably, you can certainly use these. Alternatively, you can use the numbers below, bear in mind they are to be used as a guide and diamonds with proportions outside of these ranges can be definite options.


depth - 60 - 62% - although my personal preference is to allow up to 62.4%
table - 54- 57%
crown angle - 34- 35 degrees
pavilion angle - 40.6- 41 degrees
girdle - avoid extremes, look for thin to slightly thick, thin to medium etc
polish and symmetry - very good and above

note - with crown and pavilion angles at the shallower ends ( CA 34- PA 40.6) and steeper ( CA 35- PA 41) check to make sure these angles complement in that particular diamond - eyeballs, Idealscope, trusted vendor input - check as appropriate!

As the above implies, configurations depend on each other. A little give here can still work with a little take there.

From expert John Pollard.

With that said, here's a "Cliff's Notes" for staying near Tolkowsky/ideal angles with GIA reports (their numbers are rounded): A crown angle of 34.0, 34.5 or 35.0 is usually safe with a 40.8 pavilion angle. If pavilion angle = 40.6 lean toward a 34.5-35.0 crown. If pavilion angle = 41 lean toward a 34.0-34.5 crown.

GIA "EX" in cut is great at its heart, but it ranges a bit wider than some people prefer, particularly in deep combinations (pavilion > 41 with crown > 35).

 

[tyty333]

Here is a Brian Gavin you might consider...
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond/diamond-detail/?product_id=AGS-1040397620047

BGD has a lot of Brian Gavin Select stones that fit into your specs/budget.

 

[HVVS]

Whiteflash should be releasing this one. When I spoke with them today, they thought it was still reserved by me even though I said to release it. The feathers don''t reach the surface. But I decided to pass anyway. YMMV. http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/round-cut-diamond-2192304.htm

Sorry about the wrong parameters. I have that stuff in a text file and I grabbed the wrong list.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/22/2010 10:21:15 AM
Author: HVVS
Whiteflash should be releasing this one. When I spoke with them today, they thought it was still reserved by me even though I said to release it. The feathers don''t reach the surface. But I decided to pass anyway. YMMV. http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/round-cut-diamond-2192304.htm

Sorry about the wrong parameters. I have that stuff in a text file and I grabbed the wrong list.

No problem HVVS, I have done it myself many a time and I thought that was what had happened!

 

[Bella_mezzo]

that Brian Gavin would be amazing and then you have the option to upgrade down the line if you/she want to (though I think that's a fantastci size for an ering!!!!)
what kind of setting are you looking for? Maybe we can help you find a more afforable version of it so that you can get the diamond you want in the setting she loves.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I do really like that BGD stone and the price is very nice.

 

[imprezive]

Date: 3/22/2010 11:16:32 AM
Author: Bella_mezzo
that Brian Gavin would be amazing and then you have the option to upgrade down the line if you/she want to (though I think that''s a fantastci size for an ering!!!!)

what kind of setting are you looking for? Maybe we can help you find a more afforable version of it so that you can get the diamond you want in the setting she loves.

Thanks so much for your help, and I''m sure I''ll need more of it, but I already posted a topic about the setting and I think the whiteflash people are going to really be able to make a beautiful and "better" version of what she wants for cheaper. Pics will eventually follow.

 

[yssie]

Imprezive - if I understand correctly, you're now thinking about working with the virtual inventory through WF, and having them custom make you a setting?



Four things (I'm doing the same now myself with WF):


1) It can take a while to find the right stone, since they have to rely on an outside vendor/cutter/manufacturer sending them the stone, adding that middleman's timetable into the picture, and sometimes stones you like are on hold/on show with another vendor/already sold and the listings haven't been updated yet. Not for the easily frustrated!
2) It can get expensive if you go through a few stones to find the right one - if WF approves a stone and you don't like it, you pay for the work done to run the scans and get the images, and return shipping (how much you pay is based on a sliding scale by value, I believe)
3) Upgrade and buyback policies may differ from the those posted on the site for in-house stones, be sure to call and specifically ask about your stone.
4) WF will not price match virtual stones with another vendor's listing. Since I was also buying a custom setting, they worked with me and if I like the stone we would split the difference between the other vendor's posted price and WF's wire-transfer price.