If I''d only known... There are good Princess Cuts.

[perry]

WOW ! It so good I have to say it backwards. WOW !

The new AGS 0 Princess cut diamonds.

Back when I started my initial eduacation on diamonds I looked at Princess cuts - but was not impressed (or rather - was impressed the "wrong" way).

Yes, Princess cut diamonds are cheaper per carat as they use more of the rough. But it seemed that finding a great looking was was on the order of finding a needle in a haystack.

I was able to drop in on Wink Jones during my vacation, and we talked Kayay racing - and diamonds.

He showed me the AGS 0 Princess cut. I looked at it in ordinary light, jewelry store spotlight, with the Idealscope, and with the new AGS multicolored scope.

WOW !

The only thing that comes close is the HOF Dream, and my memories is that it was not as good.

Might there be a Pricncess in my future (the diamond kind)?

Of course, it is more costly than most Princess cuts because they use less of the rough. But well worth it. Extra diamond does not seem to add value in this case.

Folks, I highly recommend one of these if you can get one.

Perry

 

[Maxine]

From the pics posted a few months ago here, those new princess cuts are really beautiful!!!!!

 

[kenny]

How much more do the cost?
To compare apples to apples, I''m talking about in the same store for the same size, clarity and color.

20% more?
30% more?
Double?

Love to hear from Wink Jones on this question.

 

[Maxine]

Wink now has some posted on his site....you can go there and check!!!!

 

[moremoremore]

If only they weren't so small

Those are really deep stones...

edited* I'm talking about compared to other princess stones, not rounds

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 7/22/2005 9:06:06 AM
Author: moremoremore
If only they weren''t so small

Those are really deep stones...

Yes, it would appear so, until you realize how the stones are measured.

When we measure rounds we measure at the diameter which also happens to be the biggest measurement and express the other measurements as a % of the diameter.

When we measure the princess cuts we also measure at the diameter from flat to flat, which happens to be the smallest measurement, and express the other measurements as a % of the diameter. If we were measuring from point to point, those measurements would not seem so out of line from that of a round.

I know this because I made the same comment to Paul Slegers (Antwerp Paul) while we were in Vegas and he spent many minutes explaing it to me in much more exquisite detail than I can share it with you, but I have given you the meat of the explaination.

Perhaps he can give you a more detailed explaination. To put it simply, they may look deep on paper, but they ROCK when seen... Paul may have led the pack in introducing them to the market, but I am told by the AGS that many more cutters are starting to produce them too. You will be seeing them a lot in the years to come

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 7/21/2005 10:54:08 PM
Author:perry

I was able to drop in on Wink Jones during my vacation, and we talked Kayay racing - and diamonds.

Perry

LOL! We talked so long about kayaking and racing and some of the racers that we both know that there was precious little time to discuss diamonds. I was at one time a qualified kayak racing judge. Perry it turns out actually developed some of the course work I had to do to become qualified. (Feel free to jump in here with the correct details Perry.)

It was great to get to meet another Pricescoper, the only downside was that he got into town way to late to have steak dinner. Maybe another time.

Wink

 

[moremoremore]

I mean compared to other princess stones out there Wink!

I understand the 'circle of the same diameter as a square will still fit inside the square' thing ... I dig. I mean compared to princess stones out there with depths around 70 and lower... I wouldn't buy a 75 depth princess. Just wouldn't. Size is too important to me. I realize I'd lose out on optics..but it's a trade off for me

 

[noobie]

mmm,

Have you had a chance to see one in person? You know I feel the same way about the spread, but after holding one in my grubby little hands, it wouldn''t keep me from buying one. They are amazing!

 

[belle]

johnquixote did a graphic explaining the depth somewhere...but i can''t find it now. (which is no help, i know)
i will keep looking.

 

[moremoremore]

LOL..grubby little hands. They look outstanding online ... and I"''m sure better in person...but size is just too important to me noob.

 

[moremoremore]

I don't need no stinking fancy graphic LOL

...The circle of a same diameter will fit inside a square of the same diameter...so the princess points helps it look larger and you also get more "on the sides".... i dig

 

[belle]

are you an archaeologist or what?
you dig?

the graphic wasn''t soooo fancy anyway, just informative.
and i''m still gonna find it!

 

[moremoremore]

LOL...No you''re not. I don''t want it!!

(of course, just kidding belle...but I know you know that my glycolic friend)

 

[JohnQuixote]

You are all too funny.

Here is the thread Belle referred to. Graphics about halfway down illustrate that Princess cuts can have the same face-up appearance in size/spread but have dramatically different depths (allowing for a range of different performance dynamics).

I know some already get the concept. This is for anyone who doesn't, or is not an archaeologist, nuclear brain surgeon or jedi knight

 

[belle]

thank you sir john, for rescuing this damsel in distress

now click the link mmm.....or i will bring those graphics over here myself!

(where can i get the 18%?

)

 

[perry]

Author:perry

I was able to drop in on Wink Jones during my vacation, and we talked Kayay racing - and diamonds.

Perry

LOL! We talked so long about kayaking and racing and some of the racers that we both know that there was precious little time to discuss diamonds. I was at one time a qualified kayak racing judge. Perry it turns out actually developed some of the course work I had to do to become qualified. (Feel free to jump in here with the correct details Perry.)

It was great to get to meet another Pricescoper, the only downside was that he got into town way to late to have steak dinner. Maybe another time.

Wink

I got my International Juding Credential in 1987 (you had to have 5 years experience and get a 100 to pass the test - and I know a lot of people who did not pass). Back in those days there was no National level certification program. In the early 90''s it was felt that there needed to be a National level program to develope people and to keep track of their experience so that people knew they were clearly qualified if they wished to persue the Internationl certification.

I had a lot of input into the design of the National Judging program as there have never been that many people in the US with the International Credential - and I was actively working 6 to 8 races a year back then, and involved in the national level committies related to Whitewater Slalom Canoe/Kayak racing.

Hope that helps for any who are interested.

It was nice meeting someone else who had been involved.

I am no longer as active as a Judge and typically only work 1 or 2 races a year now; but I maintian my international credential and have judged 2 world championships and one olympics (and was scheduled to judge the 2001 world championships - that were cancled after Sept 1, 01).

I''m off in a few hours to judge a race this weekend.

Perry

 

[perry]

Wink,

On the next trip I will plan on getting there in time to go kayaking in the afternoon and then take you up on that steak dinner. We can continue our discussion on Kayaking...

Correct me if I''m wrong. We spent about 2 hours talking kayaking and racing and 45 minutes talking diamonds...

Perry

 

[valeria101]

As long as that extra depth is above the girdle and the spread is ok, well... whatever total depth is I wouldn''t care all that much. Is there a target range for the spread of these princess cuts ?

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 7/22/2005 9:06:06 AM
Author: moremoremore
If only they weren''t so small

Those are really deep stones...

edited* I''m talking about compared to other princess stones, not rounds

The truth is: they are not that small, even though they are indeed fairly deep. In princess-cuts, there is no (absolutely none) relationship between depth and spread.

It is frustrating for me that I have to repeat the same message over and over again. A rule for rounds is not necessarily a rule for fancy shapes. In this case, depth in a princess-cut has no relationship to the spread.

To put it into figures:

The P2-angle is the one, which sets the pavilion depth. The P1-angle sets the weight. In a traditional princess-cut, expect that angle to be around 65° or higher. In an AGS-0 that will be around 59°. Remember, this angle makes NO difference in depth.

In the crown-area, the C1-angle in an AGS-0 will be around 34°. In most traditional princess-cuts, this is aroung 42°. Again, this has no effect on depth.

Therefore, it is not because an AGS-0 princess-cut has more depth, that it has less spread. To the contrary. Please, also check this article: article

I am preparing another article on this subject.

Live long,

 

[laughinggravy]

When I compared the 1.40c AGS 0 Princess that we are picking up from Paul soon, (yessssss), I was very favourably impressed by the spread.

All I can say is that the mmxmm width doesn''t actually give you enough data because you also have to factor in the way the thing looks. So I''m not talking about depth spread ratios here, I wouldn''t be able to, being ''mathematically challenged"!!!! For me it was more a case of being happily surprised that the stone looked so big, both tip to tip and across the width. I imagine it is because they are so well cut that they appear so very full of light. They just appear to be bigger than you would expect from the numbers alone.

In any case, if you can, and you''re interested then check one out. I think most of his US suppliers will have very fair return policies - no? Certainly anyone from the UK or this part of Europe could easily combine a visit to Paul with a little city break.

I think I too would have been put off on paper, also having other princesses I''ve seen in shops as a reference point. I wasn''t even considering a Princess, I was looking at his rounds, which are also very lovely. But when he showed me the Princesses, it really was like looking at a different cut.

I''ll post photos as soon as I can, of my ''asscher'' 1.17c, my 1.20 OEC and the new Princess, 1.40c - it''ll be interesting. (If I can work out how to take the shots!!!)

Have a good week one and all,
Abi

 

[moremoremore]

so sorry you're frustrated from repeating it over and over again. . is there a thread dedicated to this subject?

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 7/22/2005 12:22:23 PM
Author: perry
Wink,

On the next trip I will plan on getting there in time to go kayaking in the afternoon and then take you up on that steak dinner. We can continue our discussion on Kayaking...

Correct me if I''m wrong. We spent about 2 hours talking kayaking and racing and 45 minutes talking diamonds...

Perry

Did we really spend that much time on diamonds?

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 7/24/2005 10:16:40 AM
Author: moremoremore
so sorry you''re frustrated from repeating it over and over again. . is there a thread dedicated to this subject?

I don''t think there is a thread, but the article that he referenced in his reply gives a pretty good explaination. It has to do with math and angles, so it makes my head hurt but I think the gist of the matter is that the spread of the stone is determined by the size of the rough, the depth is determined by the angles that you want for P1 and P2 etc. So you can not make the spread any bigger than the rough, but you can cut for brilliance or you can cut for weight.

I will take brilliance and beauty any time.

Wink

P.S. Not being a cutter I am sure to have misstated something, but this is what my non mathmatical mind has grasped. Paul or John Quixote may feel free to jump in and correct me on the details...

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 7/25/2005 1:09:39 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 7/24/2005 10:16:40 AM
Author: moremoremore
so sorry you're frustrated from repeating it over and over again. . is there a thread dedicated to this subject?

I don't think there is a thread, but the article that he referenced in his reply gives a pretty good explaination. It has to do with math and angles, so it makes my head hurt but I think the gist of the matter is that the spread of the stone is determined by the size of the rough, the depth is determined by the angles that you want for P1 and P2 etc.

True.

It's a matter of approach. There is a recent re-thinking of princess spread/depth, causing a paradigm shift for many who are cutting, especially from the perspective that you can have a deep princess without sacrificing spread.

* Note: These wireframes are virtual models to exaggerate the point in the thread about spread being identical while depth can vary greatly. The first configuration is possible but not entirely practical.

Examples of princess cuts with the same spread. Diameter, crown and weight are identical. The only difference is in depth: 75% versus 65%. For the record, C1 is 36.50 degrees and C2 is 31.00 degrees on both.

This image: Total depth = 75%. P1 56.5 degrees, P2 43.57 degrees. Weight is 1.16 Cts. Spread is 6x6mm.

 

[JohnQuixote]

This image: Total depth = 65%. P1 to 59 degrees, P2 to 38.3 degrees. Weight is still 1.16 Cts. Spread is still 6x6mm.

 

[JohnQuixote]

The point is that with multiple angle configurations you can’t blindly say that surface area is greater on a princess with a shallower depth. Depth can vary notably without changing spread – or even weight.

I do realize that most of us in this thread 'get it,' and am including these here for future reference. There was a similar example in the thread I linked above, and Paul's article explains it very well, but it doesn't hurt to have illustrations out -n- about, hither and thither.