If you didn''t know...

[About2ask]

... anything particular about diamonds, just the size and the place that sells them, what would you rather have? A big diamond (1.5ct) with a slightly lower cut, or a smaller diamond(1.0ct) with H&A?

 

[Gleam]

I notice a lot of people voted without explaining their thought process, and the larger size is winning. Interesting. I would've expected the ideal cut to be ahead by a lot.

Can anyone articulate why they chose the 1.5?

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 11/17/2009 1:21:35 AM
Author: Gleam
I notice a lot of people voted without explaining their thought process, and the larger size is winning. Interesting. I would''ve expected the ideal cut to be ahead by a lot.


Can anyone articulate why they chose the 1.5?

I voted for the larger one because he asked "if you didn''t know anything about diamonds" and I remember back in the day when size was king. I would prefer the smaller better cut stone (though I suspect by fiddling with things like clarity and color I could get half way between and have a 1.25 ideal on my finger which is REALLY what I would vote for!!) But, assuming ignorance I think size is the common choice. The group that would pick that also would typically only think of "cut" as the shape of the diamond.

 

[outatouch0]

Date: 11/17/2009 1:32:51 AM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 11/17/2009 1:21:35 AM

Author: Gleam

I notice a lot of people voted without explaining their thought process, and the larger size is winning. Interesting. I would''ve expected the ideal cut to be ahead by a lot.



Can anyone articulate why they chose the 1.5?

I voted for the larger one because he asked ''if you didn''t know anything about diamonds'' and I remember back in the day when size was king. I would prefer the smaller better cut stone (though I suspect by fiddling with things like clarity and color I could get half way between and have a 1.25 ideal on my finger which is REALLY what I would vote for!!) But, assuming ignorance I think size is the common choice. The group that would pick that also would typically only think of ''cut'' as the shape of the diamond.

Ditto

 

[Gleam]

Date: 11/17/2009 1:32:51 AM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 11/17/2009 1:21:35 AM

Author: Gleam

I notice a lot of people voted without explaining their thought process, and the larger size is winning. Interesting. I would''ve expected the ideal cut to be ahead by a lot.



Can anyone articulate why they chose the 1.5?

I voted for the larger one because he asked ''if you didn''t know anything about diamonds'' and I remember back in the day when size was king. I would prefer the smaller better cut stone (though I suspect by fiddling with things like clarity and color I could get half way between and have a 1.25 ideal on my finger which is REALLY what I would vote for!!) But, assuming ignorance I think size is the common choice. The group that would pick that also would typically only think of ''cut'' as the shape of the diamond.

Urgh, I really need to pay more attention when I read here late at night. Or late for me, anyway. My mistake!

 

[SB621]

Ok I voted larger but I wanted to explain myself and also put in a clause. To me- I''m a female- bigger is always better. However, if the cut is really horrible then I would go smaller. I would have to see physically see both diamonds and compare them to one another to make the final decision. What kind of cut does the large one have. Typically I believe a rule of thumb is to never go below Verg Good.

Goodluck!

 

[stone-cold11]

how low is lower cut. I will need the proportions.

 

[HVVS]

I do know, and I picked 1.5ct. The poll said **slightly** lower cut, which I took to mean not superideal H&A but anywhere from AGA cut grades 1A to 2B, and those still make excellent e-ring-worthy diamonds. There is a whale of a difference between 1.5ct and 1ct visually. So, I'd pick larger stone, probably even grade 2B, over the smaller ideal. (Example of a "good enough" diamond, lol.)

From another angle, If you had to recut the 1.5ct and it went down to a 1.3cto or even 1.25ct ideal, that's still bigger than a 1ct. and the recut costs hundreds of dollars, not thousands. So depending on price for the 1.5ct vs. the ideal 1ct... I guess they are all interchangeable parts to me.

 

[hihowareyou]

I voted smaller and better cut since that was my goal from the start, even when I didn't really know what a 'better cut' was.

That said (and excuse my ignorance about rounds), there still seems to be some confusion about cut quality and H&A. I was told here before that H&A is simply a patterning and doesn't need to be present in an ideal cut stone. So my understanding is that it is popular but doesn't directly correlate with ideal cut grades.

There seems to be two definitions of cut which is very confusing as a consumer.

1. Cut as it relates to facet patterning and shape
2. Cut as it relates to overall performance of the stone and grading (this is the 'official' use of the term?)

Or am I still horribly confused?

 

[Londongirl1]

Date: 11/17/2009 7:09:01 AM
Author: Sarahbear621
Ok I voted larger but I wanted to explain myself and also put in a clause. To me- I''m a female- bigger is always better. However, if the cut is really horrible then I would go smaller. I would have to see physically see both diamonds and compare them to one another to make the final decision. What kind of cut does the large one have. Typically I believe a rule of thumb is to never go below Verg Good.

Goodluck!

Ditto - bigger isn''t always better and I like to judge with my naked eye not just the stats

 

[D&T]

I voted for the bigger but need to explain myself.

The first thing people will immediately notice is size! but I would still want something sparkley (it doesn''t have to be ideal H&A) if i didn''t know anything about diamonds I would still want something that is well cut

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 11/17/2009 8:41:23 AM
Author: hihowareyou
I voted smaller and better cut since that was my goal from the start, even when I didn''t really know what a ''better cut'' was.

That said (and excuse my ignorance about rounds), there still seems to be some confusion about cut quality and H&A. I was told here before that H&A is simply a patterning and doesn''t need to be present in an ideal cut stone. So my understanding is that it is popular but doesn''t directly correlate with ideal cut grades.

There seems to be two definitions of cut which is very confusing as a consumer.

1. Cut as it relates to facet patterning and shape
2. Cut as it relates to overall performance of the stone and grading (this is the ''official'' use of the term?)

Or am I still horribly confused?

Yap, one is cut precision one is cut performance, one does not automatically means the other.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 11/17/2009 8:41:23 AM
Author: hihowareyou
I voted smaller and better cut since that was my goal from the start, even when I didn't really know what a 'better cut' was.

That said (and excuse my ignorance about rounds), there still seems to be some confusion about cut quality and H&A. I was told here before that H&A is simply a patterning and doesn't need to be present in an ideal cut stone. So my understanding is that it is popular but doesn't directly correlate with ideal cut grades.

There seems to be two definitions of cut which is very confusing as a consumer.

1. Cut as it relates to facet patterning and shape
2. Cut as it relates to overall performance of the stone and grading (this is the 'official' use of the term?)

Or am I still horribly confused?

The two things you will see a lot here are concerned with optical symmetry and optical performance.

Optical symmetry is the result of precision cutting resulting in a crisp and even hearts and arrows patterning. Optical symmetry is not the same thing as physical symmetry that the grading labs note. Physical symmetry is how the labs grade the actual alignment of the facets, culet, table and so on.

Optical performance relates to all the proportions of the diamond and how they work together to create fire, brilliance and scintillation.

You can have variations on both optical symmetry and optical performance. For example, the branded h&a will normally show top optical performance and top optical symmetry. In other words, top performing stones with precise h&a patterning. Other diamonds can show great optical performance but not have great optical symmetry and vice versa.

 

[Hest88]

I voted larger. Because I seriously doubt someone totally clueless about diamonds wouldn''t choose the larger stone (unless they felt it was too large for their finger etc). The general consumer isn''t going to choose the H&A unless he is abnormally sensitive or is first educated about it..

 

[About2ask]

Thanks everyone for your input. The reason for this poll is because my girlfriend is very superficial (ie, Tiffany anything is the best) which is not true in certain aspects. If I did opt for the H&A, I would have to explain to her the details about it, show the H&A images and tell her that it is in the top 99% of diamonds around. Maybe after that, she would research/get it appraised and realize that I wasn''t joking.

If I did just get her the bigger one, I wouldn''t have to worry about giving the facts because it would just be in the size. But... I would probably constantly be thinking, "I wonder how much MORE ''fire'' the H&A would have".

Lol, as if that wasn''t difficult enough, right now the poll is showing 23-22... decisions decisions!!!

 

[FancyDiamond]

Date: 11/17/2009 8:11:49 AM
Author: HVVS
I do know, and I picked 1.5ct. The poll said **slightly** lower cut, which I took to mean not superideal H&A but anywhere from AGA cut grades 1A to 2B, and those still make excellent e-ring-worthy diamonds. There is a whale of a difference between 1.5ct and 1ct visually. So, I''d pick larger stone, probably even grade 2B, over the smaller ideal. (Example of a ''good enough'' diamond, lol.)

From another angle, If you had to recut the 1.5ct and it went down to a 1.3cto or even 1.25ct ideal, that''s still bigger than a 1ct. and the recut costs hundreds of dollars, not thousands. So depending on price for the 1.5ct vs. the ideal 1ct... I guess they are all interchangeable parts to me.

Ditto.

I voted for larger size diamond before reading all the responses and this particular one. HVVS stated exactly the same reasons that I have for my vote. By "slightly" lower cut, I interpret as Expert Selection as opposed to ACA. In such a case, the difference in optical performance is less dramatic than the size difference from 1.5 ct down to 1 ct. If the size for the perfect cut iwere 1.25-1.30 ct, then my answer would have been smaller diamond.

 

[miraclesrule]

I voted for the smaller one, because I have been sufficiently educated by PS. I just can''t ignore the importance of cut anymore. All things being equal, who wouldn''t pick the bigger diamond?

Having said that, if I didn''t know squat about diamonds (and I am only at a knee-bend), I would have chosen to go larger.