Is it worth it to get a diamond recut?

[winnietucker]

What specifically bothers you about the rock? The color or the depth?

If it's the latter I really think you're overthinking this and you're more in "mind clean" territory than anything. If the color is bugging you then that's understandable, but color is a totally subjective thing. Even though the brown Ks are less "valuable" as dictated by the market, I actually prefer their look to yellow personally.

I think it’s just knowing that this isn’t really the best in terms of cut. But I don’t mind the color at all. I’m not color sensitive.

 

[Karl_K]

I didn’t know that. I thought it all mattered.

AGS does not include the depth number in consideration of if a diamond is ags0 they use spread.
These combos can squeak in under that line with a reasonable girdle.

The keys to a RB diamond's light performance discounting for now any material defects: are the crown angle and table size compliment the pavilion angle and lower girdle angle and the upper girdles are not to steep combined with the facets being in the right place and aligned in 3d space. Add a reasonable girdle for durability.
Depth % is no where in there......

 

[headlight]

It's entirely possible that some of us said that 62.7 is deeper than we recommend (I might have said that, and it's true), but it doesn't mean your stone isn't beautiful or should be recut. the 36 crown is a bit steep, and the steep/deep combination can lead to leakage. However, since yours scores under 2 on the HCA, it means that at least the angles are complimentary, which is great.

Yours is so close to the ideal ranges that I think a recut will hurt more than help.

@lovedogs, How is it a steep/deep?... 43 pavilion is within AGS0 range, yes?... so wouldn't the pavilion be an acceptable parameter?

 

[lovedogs]

@lovedogs, How is it a steep/deep?... 43 pavilion is within AGS0 range, yes?... so wouldn't the pavilion be an acceptable parameter?

Because of the depth over the recommended 62.4 and the crown over 35. Not about the pavilion. I'm not saying the stone is bad by any means--just trying to explain.

 

[winnietucker]

AGS does not include the depth number in consideration of if a diamond is ags0 they use spread.
These combos can squeak in under that line with a reasonable girdle.

The keys to a RB diamond's light performance discounting for now any material defects: are the crown angle and table size compliment the pavilion angle and lower girdle angle and the upper girdles are not to steep combined with the facets being in the right place and aligned in 3d space. Add a reasonable girdle for durability.
Depth % is no where in there......

Thank you for sharing! It’s really sounding like I should just get over these hang ups as it’s not as big a deal as I thought. I appreciate the insight!

 

[headlight]

It’s very convenient that Pricescope saves all your photos!



That was one of the ideas floating around in my head! My only concern is I don’t wear necklaces often. My main jewelry staples are my 2 rings and my bangle. I want to be a variety kind of person, but I’m not.

My husband offered to take me to either Whiteflash or High Performance Diamonds this fall but it looks like our dog needs surgery and recovery is an 8 week ordeal according to our vet, so that’s being pushed off. Maybe until next year because there’s no way I’m traveling to anywhere that isn’t Hawaii in the winter. With the way everyone talks about their super ideals here though, I’m sure I’ll love them. Even if it’s just a mental thing.

Positive, healing thoughts for the pup

 

[headlight]

Because of the depth over the recommended 62.4 and the crown over 35. Not about the pavilion. I'm not saying the stone is bad by any means--just trying to explain.

Thank you... So the reference "steep/deep" has to do with the crown angle and the total depth?

 

[winnietucker]

Positive, healing thoughts for the pup

Thank you! He’s such a drama queen... I’m praying we can somehow avoid surgery all together. It’ll be a terrible experience for everyone if he has to go... the vet included.

 

[lovedogs]

Thank you... So the reference "steep/deep" has to do with the crown angle and the total depth?

yup! The combination of those 2 things.

 

[headlight]

AGS does not include the depth number in consideration of if a diamond is ags0 they use spread.
These combos can squeak in under that line with a reasonable girdle.

The keys to a RB diamond's light performance discounting for now any material defects: are the crown angle and table size compliment the pavilion angle and lower girdle angle and the upper girdles are not to steep combined with the facets being in the right place and aligned in 3d space. Add a reasonable girdle for durability.
Depth % is no where in there......

@Karl_K, if Depth % is no where in there, why is it even mentioned when diamonds are reviewed/evaluated here? Thx!

 

[lovedogs]

@Karl_K, if Depth % is no where in there, why is it even mentioned when diamonds are reviewed/evaluated here? Thx!

because spread is influenced by depth.

 

[headlight]

yup! The combination of those 2 things.

So more confusion lol! I thought @Karl_K said depth % not part of the keys to a RB diamond's light performance (see above)???
Yikes, I think I need a glass of wine...!

 

[headlight]

Don’t.
You will pay good money to lose carat weight and I doubt if after recutting the visual difference in sparkle will be worth the loss of size.
The stats on your diamond are perfectly good, I think you are focusing too much on perceived “faults” due to a higher HCA score.
You need to see some “more perfect” diamonds in person and alongside your existing diamond to decide whether or not the small visual difference is worth losing $1,300 plus reselling your existing diamond plus the extra premium to buy the super ideal.
I would sit tight, keep saving towards the super ideal diamond and rather than lose money on your existing diamond, turn it to a diamond pendant.

1.7 is a higher HCA score???

 

[headlight]

because spread is influenced by depth.

OOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHH... gotcha
More wine!

 

[lovedogs]

1.7 is a higher HCA score???

No. She was saying that she doesn't want the OP to worry about the stone, not that 1.7 is high.

 

[Karl_K]

steep/deep is a steep pavilion steep crown/deep pavilion normally.
This one is steep/just right to match it.

 

[lovedogs]

steep/deep is a steep pavilion steep crown/deep pavilion normally.
This one is steep/just right to match it.

haha maybe I've been thinking about it wrong the whole time!

 

[Karl_K]

@Karl_K, if Depth % is no where in there, why is it even mentioned when diamonds are reviewed/evaluated here? Thx!

tradition and a quick weed out.
An RB with a 63 depth is going to be steep/deep.
Many years ago, frankly before the tools and knowledge we have now cheat sheets were born and still being used.
They were also based on personal preference and one type of ideal cuts.
They are still useful but so is knowing when its safe to go outside them.

And yes there is a close but not perfect relationship of depth and spread in an RB but not fancy shapes.

 

[headlight]

yup! The combination of those 2 things.

And from what I'm coming to understand, this combo seems to be found in a good percentage of GIA3X??

 

[headlight]

You cannot provide personal contact details here.

But wouldn't it make it more fun lol!!!

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I think it’s just knowing that something better exists (and wanting it). I honestly thought cutting it could possibly be an easy way to make it a better performer. But I’m realizing maybe there’s more to recutting than I initially thought...

Here’s my ring.

oh its lovelly
i don't really know anything about nothing and ive made a few too many buying mistakes
im just hear to drool
and i love your ring

 

[Karl_K]

haha maybe I've been thinking about it wrong the whole time!

could be because they are often interchangeable, a diamond with a higher depth% is going to be steep deep often but not always.
or more clearly: a steep/deep is going to have a high depth % the majority of the time.

 

[lovedogs]

could be because they are often interchangeable, a diamond with a higher depth% is going to be steep deep often but not always.

I feel like I see a lot of 63 depth + 35.5 or 36 crown, so maybe that's where I got it from, but who knows!

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Thank you! He’s such a drama queen... I’m praying we can somehow avoid surgery all together. It’ll be a terrible experience for everyone if he has to go... the vet included.

oh dear
best of luck with his treatment

 

[headlight]

I would definitely get an ASET scope and see what you are dealing with before you go further. Small table, steep crown and very complimentary shallow pavilion is what many seek. Yes, it's a little deep but the ASET would tell you how much it's truly affecting the cut.

Honestly sounds like you guys did pretty good to not know anything when you bought. I wouldn't be so quick to dump it.

More to your question though, I don't think a recut is warranted or worthwhile in this case.

Re: Getting an ASET scope... sometimes maybe it's best not to know... she already knows it is a little "out of range"... I'm guessing, based on what I repetitively see here with so many of the 3Xs that just don't have good scope images (including my own)... is that OPs may also be amongst this large group (who also thought 3X was getting the gold standard, like me)... I know I don't have an ugly diamond, and I am sure hers isn't either, they just aren't to the level of what is advocated for here (i.e., no leakage). If she isn't going to pursue a change at this time, maybe it's just better to enjoy what she has until she wants to pursue it, rather than fret over her initial doubt and then if the angst is further fueled by a disappointing scope image. (Yes, I know, I know... if the scope image is good then it's like total happiness and relief!!!) I just feel like I can empathize with her because I have similar circumstances so I totally "get it".

 

[headlight]

I feel like I see a lot of 63 depth + 35.5 or 36 crown, so maybe that's where I got it from, but who knows!

"See a lot of"... as in GIA3X reports??!
Ugh, wish I knew this before
This brings me back to another thread where I discussed this exact thing of my experience as with so, so many others including OP here... that we thought GIA 3X was the gold standard... as in it's the GIA... as in, aren't they supposed to be "the authority". Yikes. Talk about loss of consumer confidence.

 

[sledge]

I suggested the ASET scope because it may provide some reassurance. From what I'm interpreting, she was happy. Then read here. Learned her specs were slightly outside the normal recommended and now worried her diamond isn't awesome.

This is a diamond I actually like, and is very similar to one of the stones I almost bought for my wife. It too had a 36/40.6 combo. Depth was slightly less at 62.4 but table was a little larger at 56. It was a near ACA miss and labeled as a premium select instead.

0.9ct G VS1, 56 table, 62.4 depth, 36 crown & 40.6 pavilion
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3945630.htm

When visiting with the WF folks, they compared against several ACA's and always felt this stone had more fire and was uncertain why it wasn't an ACA. At the time I didn't understand how proportions work as well as I do now, but the items that made it fail ACA criteria is part of what made it so lively. For the record, here's why it missed:

• 36 crown (ACA has to be 34-35)
• 62.4 depth (ACA has to be 59.5-62)
• 45 stars (ACA has to be 48-55)
• Minor variations in ASET and H&A images compared to ACA

https://www.whiteflash.com/a-cut-above-diamonds-specifications-and-qualifications/

My point in all this babbling is that this combo can be quite lovely. Personally I'm rooting for the OP to get a scope, find reassurance in what she has and find her happy spot.

 

[Serg]

P40.6 Cr36 is optically similar to P40.85 Cr34.5. If you increase Pavilion angle then you have to reduce Crown angle in 6 times. we name it as "SweetLine".


For my Knowledge, Experience and Taste a diamond with P41( and even 41.2) Cr34.5 has more "Life" than a diamond with "classical Tolkowsky" angles like P40.75Cr34.5.
A combination P40.6Cr36 at least not worse than P40.75Cr34.5.

Do not do your final decision by tools as ASET, IS, H&A. Its are not performance grading tools, they are cyclops rejection tools. You need use side by side comparison to select a best diamond for you .

There are many reasons why a diamond with "Bad IS, ASET" could be better that a diamond with perfect IS, ASET images even if they have same size, same cut, same color and same clarity and same polishing grades.
even diamonds with exactly same proportions could have very different performance

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thx, the inclusions sometimes cause less brilliance but this stone is all clear.

 

[Serg]

100 years the combination P40.75 Cr34.5 was perfect technical compromise between Shallow ( High head obscuration) diamonds P40-Cr34.5 and Deep( High leakage ) diamonds P41.5+Cr34.5.
I do not know which polishing and measurements accuracies were 100 years ago, but even 30 years ago its were not better than 0.5 degree.
So the combination P41Cr34.5 was more risky 100 years ago. With modern cutting and measurements technologies such angles combination has almost zero risk either for cutters or consumers.
In same time P41Cr34.5 has higher real Optical performance for Human observation for several reasons:
1) Higher DETAS : a diamond scans faster light environment , catches more light sources during small tilting
2) a diamond has Higher angular dispersion
3) a diamond has Higher binocular rivalry

Only a brainwashing from ASET, IS, H&A, etc reduces delivery better round diamonds to consumers.

P/s. I prefer even deeper Pavilion angles, as P41.2 Cr34.5 but due GIA rounding in grading reports such combination has not zero risk for consumers.