How to view Steep/Deep at a B&M establishement?

[fiftysevenfacets]

Greetings all,

I get it I get it, Steep/Deep is a bad thing......hehehe....but if I''m purchasing at a B&M establishment, what things should I look for when it comes to dark tables ect...assuming that the B&M can not produce any images from any tests except a certificate.

I understand that most here would never dare to buy from a B&M let alone a deep/steep but if you had to , what things you would look for? How would u confirm your view that this stone shows flaws in performance because its a steep/deep vs a non-steep/deep if both diamonds are excellent cut/excellent symmetry/excellent polish and everything else being equal?

Thanks.

 

[Regular Guy]

I''ve peeked into the several threads on this...but haven''t been able to keep reading. Aren''t 1/2 the contributions in each from one person?

I think if you establish this is reasonable to be concerned about, the next logical decision (others, check me on this), is to invest in an IS. Here. It''s designed, I think to help you not be concerned about lighting environments, and identify problems with this sort of characteristic anyway.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Hello 57,

I notice a lot of commotion about steep/deep on PS recently, and I am sometimes surprised how quickly a diamond is called steep/deep nowadays.

Like RG said, an ideal-scope would be a good investment.

Also, just checking the report (preferably GIA or AGS) will help you weed out the undesired combos. First attention should go to the pavilion angle. Do not go over 41.0 there. A secondary check should go to the crown, with either crown-angle to be 35.0 max, and/or crown height 15.5% max.

This should help you avoid the true steep/deeps. Then, if you want, you can go further into detail in order to find the very best cut. But for sure, the above rules help you to avoid the true steep/deeps.

Live long,

 

[Todd Gray]

"How to view Steep/Deep at a B&M establishment?"

In most cases, just ask them to see a diamond! Ha!

You can avoid the entire "steep / deep" scenario if you limit the diamonds which you consider to those which fall within the following range of measurements:

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)

* notice that I referred to 'angle' and not depth percent... The machines which measure diamonds actually measure the crown and pavilion angle, but estimate the depth measurements so relying on the angle measurements is more accurate.

Punch the numbers represented by this range into the Holloway Cut Adviser and you'll see that it's a nice place to be and you won't find a steep / deep in the pile.

Problem solved

 

[fiftysevenfacets]

You see, it has already determined by the kind people on this website from an earlier post of mine that the diamond in question is too steep/deep! (I''ve referenced the specifics below)

And I know its been a hot topic lately, so without an idealscope or any other tool....the question is posed to the people who are advocates of the hallaway method (given that I have no other access to another tool or provided by one through the B&M), what should I be able to see in the excellent GIA cut diamond that is too steep/deep vs. a GIA excellent cut diamond that scores well on the HCA.

Certainly there must be a several flaws that are inherint to an excellent cut diamond by the community who are averse to a steep/deep stone! so I''m wondering how a novice is able to see these poor performance. Note; that the diamond below scores a 4.9 on HCA.



Measurements: 6.39 - 6.48 x 4.04mm
1.02 Carat , Color F, Vs2, Cut Grade: Excellent
Proportions:--
Depth: 62.8%
Table: 57%
Crown Angle: 35.5°
Crown Height: 15.5%
Pavilion Angle: 41.4°
Pavilion Depth: 44.0%
Star Length: 50%
lower half: 80%
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted (3.5%)
Culet: NoneFinish:--
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Flourescence: None

 

[Regular Guy]

Hmmm....

My other friends here I think were suggesting some methods, with respect to the reporting of proportions. You seem to want to look at what you can see, and I would say that, rather than stipulate:

Date: 11/24/2009 1:50:22 PM
Author: fiftysevenfacets

so without an idealscope or any other tool....

...why so stipulate? Unless you want to read those other threads and figure it out...pay the man the $25. That''s your cost. If you''re concerned for a good viewing environment, and you don''t personally trust the halloway method, the tool will help. The other reported proportions may titrate more than you need for your particular question...but you can judge that way, too.

Or, maybe the answer is in those threads, or maybe someone else will condense and put it right here for you.

Otherwise...I was suggesting that for $25 you CAN get a shortcut.

 

[stone-cold11]

This?

Try the stone between the finger trick. If you can see you skin through the pavilion of the stone, it is much too steep/deep.

 

[John P]

Date: 11/24/2009 1:50:22 PM
Author: fiftysevenfacets

You see, it has already determined by the kind people on this website from an earlier post of mine that the diamond in question is too steep/deep! (I've referenced the specifics below)

A borderline case. A high level of cut precision + a bit of painting could help it in fact. It is outside my threshhold of recommendation but unlikely to be a "bad" diamond.

And I know its been a hot topic lately, so without an idealscope or any other tool....the question is posed to the people who are advocates of the hallaway method (given that I have no other access to another tool or provided by one through the B&M), what should I be able to see in the excellent GIA cut diamond that is too steep/deep vs. a GIA excellent cut diamond that scores well on the HCA.

Certainly there must be a several flaws that are inherint to an excellent cut diamond by the community who are averse to a steep/deep stone! so I'm wondering how a novice is able to see these poor performance. Note; that the diamond below scores a 4.9 on HCA.

Find a diamond with angles such as Todd gave of the same-size. Using tweezers or a black background hold them together under bright spotlights so they are both showing brightness, fire & scint. Then move them into a darker area (under the counter if it has a protrusion - under the lip of a desk - cup your hand around both). Watch as you do-so. If leakage is an issue the deeper diamond may seem to slightly shrink in size at the girdle or become less bright overall when you put them in soft/indirect light.

Certainly there must be a several flaws that are inherint to an excellent cut diamond by the community who are averse to a steep/deep stone! so I'm wondering how a novice is able to see these poor performance. Note; that the diamond below scores a 4.9 on HCA.

That might be personal. Just as some people see differences in color better than others 'cut perception' varies as well. I see far more now than I did when I entered the profession. I have encountered couples where one person clearly sees differences (in color, clarity, cut or a combination of them) and the other does not see them as readily. Like wine tasting, some people have a knack. Others may develop a palate.

 

[fiftysevenfacets]

Thank you all for responding, your points are well taken and appreciated.

You see, on a personal preference, my favorite stones are ones that perfrom strong on the brilliance/brightness as opposed to fire/scintilation, although I understand they are all intertwined together, but I''d rather see a one with brightness rather than fire...I did notice in the stone in question, that I overwhelmingly saw more fire in it rather than brightness. What is interesting is the HCA gives light return "Good" while fire and scintillation was awarded "fair".

Is it possible that so much fire is created that it hinders the brightness?

also, if brightness is what I''m after, is there something I should be aware of, I mean should someone look for a balance between all aspects of performance rather than one particular aspect. Is it ignorent of me to place more emphasis on the brightness of a diamond?

 

[fiftysevenfacets]

Date: 11/24/2009 2:10:35 PM
Author: Stone-cold11

This?

Try the stone between the finger trick. If you can see you skin through the pavilion of the stone, it is much too steep/deep.

Stone-cold....excuse my ignorence but what am I looking for here...lol...Are these supposed to represent the same stone? Is this an example of a steep/deep?

 

[stone-cold11]

yes. This is the same stone.

From this page.
http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/37/5/GIA-Excellent-Cut-Grade-Case-Study.aspx

 

[John P]

Date: 11/24/2009 3:46:33 PM
Author: fiftysevenfacets
Thank you all for responding, your points are well taken and appreciated.

You see, on a personal preference, my favorite stones are ones that perfrom strong on the brilliance/brightness as opposed to fire/scintilation, although I understand they are all intertwined together, but I'd rather see a one with brightness rather than fire...I did notice in the stone in question, that I overwhelmingly saw more fire in it rather than brightness. What is interesting is the HCA gives light return 'Good' while fire and scintillation was awarded 'fair'.

Were you under numerous direct light sources from above? That would make sense with this configuration. What did it look like when you placed it in an area where there was soft or indirect light return?

also, if brightness is what I'm after, is there something I should be aware of, I mean should someone look for a balance between all aspects of performance rather than one particular aspect.

Yes. a 60/60 can be balanced for more birghtness than fire. If the crown and pavilion angles are good you'll see a lot of brightness in those stones.

 

[fiftysevenfacets]

Date: 11/24/2009 4:30:23 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 11/24/2009 3:46:33 PM
Author: fiftysevenfacets
Thank you all for responding, your points are well taken and appreciated.

You see, on a personal preference, my favorite stones are ones that perfrom strong on the brilliance/brightness as opposed to fire/scintilation, although I understand they are all intertwined together, but I''d rather see a one with brightness rather than fire...I did notice in the stone in question, that I overwhelmingly saw more fire in it rather than brightness. What is interesting is the HCA gives light return ''Good'' while fire and scintillation was awarded ''fair''.

Were you under numerous direct light sources from above? That would make sense with this configuration. What did it look like when you placed it in an area where there was soft or indirect light return?

Yes I was under numerious direct light sources, lots of lights in the store, but its more of a flourecent lighting (kinda like an office lighting) as opposed to spot lights...not sure if this is good or not...but does that make sense why fire would be seen more?

also, if brightness is what I''m after, is there something I should be aware of, I mean should someone look for a balance between all aspects of performance rather than one particular aspect.

Yes. a 60/60 can be balanced for more birghtness than fire. If the crown and pavilion angles are good you''ll see a lot of brightness in those stones.

Very helpful thanks.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi all,
fiftyseven, you''ve asked some great questions.
I also agree that the photo stone posted does not look to me like a badly cut diamond.
I''m not saying it''s well cut or badly cut, just that to me, the photos don''t show any clear cut problem.
I''m also sure Todd''s guidelines would be helpful for someone looking for that type of diamond- that being a smaller table look.
However limiting your table size to 57% leaves a lot of really great stones on the table- and quite possibly from your statements, one you might even prefer to a smaller table stone.
I wish 60/60''s were more common today- but maybe you can get to look at some stones that are a bit spreadier.

Besides the angle guides given you can check that any EX cut grade stone is spreading in the correct range.
If it is, and you like how it looks, I believe you will be fine.

Hope this helps!

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 11/24/2009 4:58:07 PM
Author: fiftysevenfacets

Date: 11/24/2009 4:30:23 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 11/24/2009 3:46:33 PM
Author: fiftysevenfacets
Thank you all for responding, your points are well taken and appreciated.

You see, on a personal preference, my favorite stones are ones that perfrom strong on the brilliance/brightness as opposed to fire/scintilation, although I understand they are all intertwined together, but I''d rather see a one with brightness rather than fire...I did notice in the stone in question, that I overwhelmingly saw more fire in it rather than brightness. What is interesting is the HCA gives light return ''Good'' while fire and scintillation was awarded ''fair''.

Were you under numerous direct light sources from above? That would make sense with this configuration. What did it look like when you placed it in an area where there was soft or indirect light return?

Yes I was under numerious direct light sources, lots of lights in the store, but its more of a flourecent lighting (kinda like an office lighting) as opposed to spot lights...not sure if this is good or not...but does that make sense why fire would be seen more?

also, if brightness is what I''m after, is there something I should be aware of, I mean should someone look for a balance between all aspects of performance rather than one particular aspect.

Yes. a 60/60 can be balanced for more birghtness than fire. If the crown and pavilion angles are good you''ll see a lot of brightness in those stones.

Very helpful thanks.

FiftySevenfacets,

I don''t want to touch the viewing in person argument or what to look for, I think your eyes can tell you which one is more brilliant to you and you don''t need an expert to do that, just make sure you measure brilliance of two diamonds in different lighting especially by the window and under the table shots. The bright jewelry lights are going to be much less useful.
I love seeing brilliance in a dark room with only candlelight or a fireplace, my Fiance''s cushion which is cut for brilliance and not so much fire certainly shines in this environment.

As far as Idealscope, you can see leakage with your eyes just place the stone on the v of your fingers and see how much skin you can view underneath especially in moderate lighting or put a red cloth or paper underneath the diamond and look for red, that will help you more if you don''t have an idealscope with you. You may not care that an idealscope will show you leakage to a greater accuracy than your eyes may be able to readily observe, but for the highest precision and consistent viewing the scope will help you provided you backlight the same for each diamond.

What you might be after is a BIC (Brilliant Ideal Cut) http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/23_bicfic.htm
I wouldn''t get all caught up with how large the table is or the depth of the diamond just yet, but these cuts have a crown angle less than 32.5 and since fire isn''t as important you can get a smaller depth and larger table (more spread) if desired.

Maybe someone can tell us how to optimize brilliance by the numbers as its not readily apparent to me assuming no balance for fire required?

Regards,
CCL