Is 62.9 depth still super ideal cut?

[Mlh]

56 table with 62.9 depth meet criteria for super ideal? Do you need the other stats to make that determination? Thanks!

 

[AV_]

I am not sure what a Super Ideal is - there are a few brands who do better than the rest, so 'Super' means them.

I may ask for all the stats, H&A images &/ an ASET shot to tell how close the stone might be to such paragons; guessing details of optical symmetry & finish is beyond the pale.

 

[TODiamonds]

No such thing as a "Super Ideal", it is purely a marketing team, crafted by the super-ideal marketing departments of the companies you often hear about on PS.

Generally speaking however, 62.9 would be too deep to be considered super-ideal, which generally falls below 62.5% (or 62% depending on who you ask).

 

[tyty333]

We usually reserve the term "Super Ideal" for branded stones that are vetted (measurements fall within certain ranges)
with all the images (asets, idealscope, H&A) and are usually AGS000.

62.9% would not fit into the range. To determine if a stone performs well you would also need the other numbers (table,
crown and pavilion) as well as images for the stone.

If you want PS input the easiest thing to do is put the stone on hold and give us the link.

 

[Mlh]

What do you think of this https://www.ritani.com/diamonds/round-diamond-0-91-Carat-G-color-GIA-certified/D-MW0FS5M

 

[sledge]

I'm glad you asked this question. Lately I've seen a few people toss around the term super ideal but not really using it properly.

Let's start with the basics.

GIA Excellent Cut
By far the bulk of diamonds sold is certified by GIA with many getting an excellent score in polish, symmetry and cut. Sometimes referred to as a triple X or XXX or 3X. The primary basis for meeting this designation is when the diamond meets a certain range of proportions that GIA has determined to be excellent.

Many of the conversations on this forum revolve around the fact most of us believe the defining parameters of GIA excellent is much too broad; therefore, making many "excellent" graded stones far from being truly excellent.

AGS Ideal Cut
While GIA and AGS grade color, clarity and carat weight the same there is a vast difference in how AGS grades cut quality.

First, we need to understand that AGS considers ideal to be their highest level. Additionally they assign a number grade to cut, where 0 signifies the best. As the number increases the stone is less ideal. Polish and symmetry are also graded with numbers so to get an AGS stone with ideal cut, polish and symmetry this is often called an AGS000.

If you look on an AGS report even color and clarity have a number grade next to the common GIA name descriptions such as G VS2.

But what really makes AGS different is how they assign cut grades. First, the range of acceptable proportions for ideal 0 is tighter. Even more importantly, AGS does a 3D scan of each stone submitted to gain the most precise set of measurements. When AGS reports those values they simply take the average of all those values and report them without further manipulation. Whereas, GIA not only averages but also rounds the values providing a less accurate picture when only looking at proportions.

AGS also utilizes the information from the SARIN scan to generate a computer modeled ASET image that allows them (and the consumer) to see the light performance of a stone in a rather simplistic image. Additionally a number grade is assigned for light performance and as you've probably guessed, the best is ideal 0.

A key thing to remember is that a stone graded AGS000 will also meet GIA XXX certification; however, very few GIA XXX stones will meet AGS000 certification.

Super Ideal Cut
When you combine an AGS000 ideal cut stone with true hearts & arrows (H&A) symmetry along with an even tighter set of proportions you now have a super ideal stone. Essentially, this sort of a stone offers the maximum light performance.

A few key things to keep in mind. It's possible to achieve H&A symmetry without having an ideal cut stone. Also, even poorly symmetrical stones exhibit some sort of a H&A pattern. The difference is a "true H&A" stone will have symmetrical precision not present in less precision stones.

A Guide to Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Cut Diamonds

Hearts and Arrows diamonds are cut with superior symmetry. Learn more about hearts and arrows diamonds and where to buy them at Whiteflash.

www.whiteflash.com

 

[sledge]

With the above in consideration, I'd like to further comment and say that we need more than just table & depth to determine the cut potential of any stone.

In fact, you have to try to assess all the proportions -- table, depth, crown angle, pavilion angle, girdle thickness, lower girdle facets, stars, etc. Most of the proportions have relation to one another so when one of those elements change, it can effect other proportions.

That said, with the information you initially gave I can tell you I like the 56 table but I have concerns about the 62.9 depth. My first instincts is that you may have a potential steep & deep stone, but we need to know more information to make a more educated guess.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

No such thing as a "Super Ideal", it is purely a marketing team, crafted by the super-ideal marketing departments of the companies you often hear about on PS.

Generally speaking however, 62.9 would be too deep to be considered super-ideal, which generally falls below 62.5% (or 62% depending on who you ask).

Hi TODiamonds,

Your reply indicates a lack of historic knowledge. Please allow me to clarify.

The term 'super-ideal' is over 20 years old, being first used on forums like Pricescope and the long ago dwindled DiamondTalk.

At the time, diamonds graded Ideal by AGS were getting serious attention, especially since GIA did not even have a cut-grade yet, and only listed table size and total depth on their reports. But also at that time, AGS-grading was still 2-dimensional, and savvy retailers concentrating on cut-quality, industry-evangelists like Garry Holloway and consumers pointed to the danger of less performing so-called steep-deeps being the majority of AGS-Ideal produced. What consumers really needed were AGS-Ideal diamonds, where the angles complemented one another, and they got the popular nickname 'super-ideal'.

Then, AGS changed their cut-grading-system to become 3-dimensional while GIA introduced a system also generally following the theory of complementary angles. But the term 'super-ideal' persisted, now commonly referring to brands or suppliers consistently offering a product of better overall performance within the grade of AGS-Ideal. None of this was schemed by some marketing-department, it largely happened in open communication and exchange, mainly on this forum, and based upon actual experience.

Now, frankly, I am going to admit that I personally am not a big fan of the word. Like every category, it creates a sense of 'equals' within that category. And if you are talking marketing, that is exactly what a marketing-department does not like. It is why personnel of Coca Cola is not allowed to order a Cola. Or why Audi or BMW will not describe their product under the general term 'German quality-car'.

Live long,

 

[Mlh]

With the above in consideration, I'd like to further comment and say that we need more than just table & depth to determine the cut potential of any stone.

In fact, you have to try to assess all the proportions -- table, depth, crown angle, pavilion angle, girdle thickness, lower girdle facets, stars, etc. Most of the proportions have relation to one another so when one of those elements change, it can effect other proportions.

That said, with the information you initially gave I can tell you I like the 56 table but I have concerns about the 62.9 depth. My first instincts is that you may have a potential steep & deep stone, but we need to know more information to make a more educated guess.

Thank you @sledge !

 

[Mlh]

This stone is the one I was referring to https://www.ritani.com/diamonds/round-diamond-0-91-Carat-G-color-GIA-certified/D-MW0FS5M

 

[sledge]

What do you think of this https://www.ritani.com/diamonds/round-diamond-0-91-Carat-G-color-GIA-certified/D-MW0FS5M

Thank you for sharing the link.

As I feared, this stone appears to be overly deep because it has combined a steep 35 crown with a steep 41.2 pavilion. This is not a very complimentary crown/pavilion angle combo, and my thoughts are further confirmed when you look at the HCA score of 3.4 and notice the estimated fire & scintillation is only "good". Also, weird things start to happen at a 41.2 and greater pavilion. Since GIA averages & rounds their values, the actual pavilion angle values could be greater than 41.2.

I believe we could help you find a better performing stone, and would personally pass on this stone unless you have some other compelling reason not to do so.

 

[Mlh]

Thank you for sharing the link.

As I feared, this stone appears to be overly deep because it has combined a steep 35 crown with a steep 41.2 pavilion. This is not a very complimentary crown/pavilion angle combo, and my thoughts are further confirmed when you look at the HCA score of 3.4 and notice the estimated fire & scintillation is only "good". Also, weird things start to happen at a 41.2 and greater pavilion. Since GIA averages & rounds their values, the actual pavilion angle values could be greater than 41.2.

I believe we could help you find a better performing stone, and would personally pass on this stone unless you have some other compelling reason not to do so.

Thank you @sledge!!

 

[Karl_K]

Super-ideal
GIA X or AGS0 check
Hca pass check
Then it must pass these tests to a very high standard.
IS/ASET - check
Hearts - check
Arrows - check

Branding has nothing to do with it but some are branded.

 

[sledge]

Thank you @sledge!!

You're very welcome.

If interested in a super ideal, here is one that may work for you:

WF ACA 0.831 G SI1 @ $3,917 wire

Diamond | 0.831 ct G SI1 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4156991

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 0.831 carat G color SI1 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4156991

www.whiteflash.com

Obviously it's less carat weight. But instead of focusing on the weight, I am looking at the spread because depending on exact proportions, there is a portion of the carat weight that gets sucked up in the depth of the stone. What we normally care about is the size, or spread, as it appears on the finger of the wearer.

This stone measures 6.03 x 6.07mm. The Ritani stone measures 6.15 x 6.21mm. This is a difference of about 0.12mm, or 0.00427 inches.

To put this in perspective, a piece of copy paper is roughly 0.10mm thick, or 0.0039 inches. So the difference is just sliver more than the thickness of a sheet of copy paper. The difference would be so small, it wouldn't be meaningful IMO.

Things I like about the stone is that it fits your budget, still a G color and while an SI1 clarity the WF website states it's eye clean. Also, the stone has AGS000 certification and has true H&A symmetry. Lastly, it has an ASET, idealscope and H&A images to confirm and prove the high level of light performance and symmetry the stone exhibits.

In short, it's an "easy button" solution to buying a great performing stone. Also, it comes with one of the best upgrade programs in the industry -- simply spend $1 more and you get full credit of the original stone to apply towards your new stone. This makes upgrading fun & easy. Plus WF has a large stock of stones, so that helps when it's time to upgrade as well.

 

[cflutist]

62.9% depth is too deep in my book.

Shoot for some numbers like the ones of my center stone in my 3-stone ring (actually all 3 diamonds are AGS0 CBIs).

 

[sledge]

62.9% depth is too deep in my book.

Shoot for some numbers like the ones of my center stone in my 3-stone ring (actually all 3 diamonds are AGS0 CBIs).

Make sure you buy a pair of shades when you buy a diamond like that -- all those big bold flashes of rainbow light is gonna put your eye out! LOL

Seriously -- gorgeous proportions!!!

 

[cflutist]

Make sure you buy a pair of shades when you buy a diamond like that -- all those big bold flashes of rainbow light is gonna put your eye out! LOL

Seriously -- gorgeous proportions!!!

Thanks @sledge , lots of fire

 

[Karl_K]

gorgeous proportions!!!

That cracked me up. rofl

 

[Mlh]

Thank you all!!

 

[TODiamonds]

Respectfully, I still disagree with the legitimacy of the term "super-ideal". It is in fact a marketing term or a subjective description at best.

I get that it's been around a long time, but tell me - what is the technical definition of a super-ideal diamond and more importantly, who is that definition recognized by? Is there a governing body that recognizes the criteria you guys are laying out here? Is it recognized within the broader industry?

Just because a tiny subset of the industry (ie: PS) and some long-standing, respected vendors of these stones call them "super-ideal" doesn't make it so. In fact, even on this very forum there are widely differing variations of what some users would describe as "super-ideal".

A GIA XXX (ignoring the recent shadiness) has concretely defined criteria that is recognized world wide. AGS000 ditto (albeit less globally). I can go to a local jeweler or high end chain and get a GIA XXX and I know what I'm getting. "Super-Ideal" - nope. Some of the stones marketed as super-ideal online are actually laughable.

I'm not saying the stones at CBI or WF aren't quality stones. They are amazing stones. I'm just trying to help educate people who incorrectly believe that "Super-Ideal" is an actual standard that is accepted in the industry just because it is overused in this community.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Respectfully, I still disagree with the legitimacy of the term "super-ideal". It is in fact a marketing term or a subjective description at best.

I get that it's been around a long time, but tell me - what is the technical definition of a super-ideal diamond and more importantly, who is that definition recognized by? Is there a governing body that recognizes the criteria you guys are laying out here? Is it recognized within the broader industry?

Just because a tiny subset of the industry (ie: PS) and some long-standing, respected vendors of these stones call them "super-ideal" doesn't make it so. In fact, even on this very forum there are widely differing variations of what some users would describe as "super-ideal".

A GIA XXX (ignoring the recent shadiness) has concretely defined criteria that is recognized world wide. AGS000 ditto (albeit less globally). I can go to a local jeweler or high end chain and get a GIA XXX and I know what I'm getting. "Super-Ideal" - nope. Some of the stones marketed as super-ideal online are actually laughable.

I'm not saying the stones at CBI or WF aren't quality stones. They are amazing stones. I'm just trying to help educate people who incorrectly believe that "Super-Ideal" is an actual standard that is accepted in the industry just because it is overused in this community.

Hi TODiamonds,

I think that we are gradually approaching agreement.

Initially, your statement was that 'super-ideal' does not exist. Now, you give further insight essentially confirming that there are higher sub-sets within the category of Ideal, but bringing forward the point that there is no agreed-upon technical definition, while certain outfits abuse the term. I think that I am with you on that.

Personally, I do not use the term. Just like I do not subscribe our product with other terms, whether a clearly defined term like AGS-Ideal or a more descriptive term. In my eyes, all these categorizations are confusing, creating the incorrect sense of 'equals' within such category, and not truly describing the products.

Live long,

 

[the_mother_thing]

@TODiamonds I don’t believe there is an industry standard technical definition for what constitutes a ‘super-ideal diamond’, nor anyone purporting such a thing (literally speaking) exists. And I appreciate @Paul-Antwerp ’s stance on the matter.

As a consumer, to a degree, I agree it is - in part - branding/marketing; but in my mind, there is a clear & easy distinction that any consumer can/should reasonably discern when comparing & discussing ‘super-ideal’ vs ‘ideal’ & ‘branding’:

~ a ‘branded’ diamond that has an AGS-ideal cut grade but no published criteria nor is it accompanied with light performance imaging and/or analysis substantiating that ‘branding’;​

​

or,​

​

~ a ‘branded’ diamond that has an AGS-ideal cut grade, and is substantiated/validated - transparently - with clear criteria exceeding that for a ‘standard‘ ideal cut to an even tighter set of requirements, and is accompanied - up front - by advanced light performance imaging, analysis, etc. substantiating that diamond meets the criteria/brand.​

The first simply applies a brand & marks up the price; the second applies a brand, backs up that brand, and marks up the price accordingly. Any mark-up - when substantiated and regardless of whether it’s diamonds or dishes - may not be ‘worth it’ to some or even most buyers, and I have no issue with that - their money is not my money, after all.

Where I do take issue/have trouble - and perhaps agree with you & Paul - is with those vendors who fall into the first category and appear to command more of consumers’ cash by way of a mark-up without providing any legitimate, substantiated ’added value’ except a cute & convincing logo while selling someone else’s product.

At the same time, I will not begrudge any vendor who: 1) invests in the research, skills, specialized staff, tools, education, etc., to offer a substantiated-superior product; 2) transparently shares information with consumers so they clearly understand the value being offered; and, 3) adds a price premium to their brand to help cover the cost of their investment ... because there is a cost to keep up with technology and continue offering that premium product for consumers who do see/want/demand that added value. Just like all GIA XXX diamonds are not the same, neither are all AGS-Ideal diamonds.

I appreciate that we have - as a choice - vendors who are willing to go above and beyond in that regard. And regardless of whether any ‘premium’ is substantiated by an ‘industry-accepted’ definition for that premium, it is ultimately incumbent on consumers to educate themselves about the product/s they’re buying, ask questions, and understand the value (or lack thereof) when spending their money.

 

[Karl_K]

The term super-ideal is slang, mainly PS slang.
It is a shortened version of super-ideal cut.
The historical and only right(in my opinion) definition is the one I gave above :}

 

[Victor Canera]

This is a great debate guys
@TODiamonds
Let’s put this question a different way. How do you propose that super ideal vendors highlight the consistently improved physical quality of our product? It seems to me that this debate is about the language used but there seems to be an underlying question as to whether the term is strictly marketing. Terms can be abused because there's no law that enforces language in this specific case. Speaking for my organization, it definitely is not marketing though. There is a tangible improvement in the craftsmanship and performance of the diamond that we offer. Producing a “super ideal” diamond absolutely does cost more in terms of the lower yield from a rough diamond, production costs and even the amount of time invested in tweaking a diamond to perfection. It’s a labor of love but some people would call what we’re doing torture.
Just one example for you; we have a high color and clarity diamond in production right now. Because of the high color and clarity, every point lost is valuable on this diamond. The stone could have been completed at the 2.8ct range easily getting a triple excellent grade and potentially an AGS000 grade as well. As it stands this moment, it’s at ~2.59ct because it needed to be perfect. That's a multi-thousands of dollars difference in price. I’ve been working on this diamond for about 2-3 months now. I’ve had weekly conversations about the stone. It's been a definite investment in time. Why shouldn't this diamond be highlighted from others because of the tangible improvement that occurred because of the painstaking care that was put into it?

The thing is that the term “super ideal cut” is being abused by outside vendors (not PS vendors) that use the term with their diamonds without the analytic information like scope images to backup the claim. A super ideal cut diamond should have the scope images like ASET, IdealScope to confirm the light performance and Hearts and Arrows to backup the optical symmetry of the diamond. Without these bits of information, the terms reverts to being strictly advertising in my book.

All the best

 

[Karl_K]

The thing is that the term “super ideal cut” is being abused by outside vendors (not PS vendors) that use the term with their diamonds without the analytic information like scope images to backup the claim. A super ideal cut diamond should have the scope images like ASET, IdealScope to confirm the light performance and Hearts and Arrows to backup the optical symmetry of the diamond. Without these bits of information, the terms reverts to being strictly advertising in my book.

All the best

Very good point, a super ideal claim without the images and data to back it up is just hot air.

 

[sledge]

Great response @Victor Canera.

I would just remind everyone that @Garry H (Cut Nut) probably already has copyrights on "supa dupa" just in case any of you were considering it.

Whatever we can agree to call them, I am thankful for vendors like VC, CBI, WF, BGD, etc. I like having a "supa dupa" option available. I'm okay with the cost because I know it's not just a name. I know it means a sacrifice to either my wallet or color, clarity or carat weight. However, for me, I want the best performing cut period. These guys make it happen. They may each feel they have their own magic sauce but together as a whole they are pushing the bounds of excellence. How can you not love that?

Ask me how I feel about JA TH or BN Astor lines and you will get a different sentiment.

We probably don't say it enough, but THANK YOU for your labor of love and giving us something that is truly beyond the status quo, even if not appreciated or recognized by all.

It's my hope that as consumers become more educated they too can see the difference.