Is there such thing as a 2.88ct excellent cut?

[Samara83]

Maybe I''m confused, but I read that anything between "magic weights" (1,1.5,2 etc..) equals faulty or poor cutting. Is this true? I found a 2.88ct excellent cut round brilliant - is the cert. on that wrong or is it possible for a non-"magic weight" to be an excellent cut?
That said, is there anything wrong with that size of carat or should I be sticking to either 2.5 or 3?

 

[Andelain]

It''s very possible to have a diamond in that or any other size that''s cut well. Those magic numbers are price points. the price per carat jumps if the diamend is a whole carat as opposed to .98, 3 carats as opposed to 2.88. So 2.88 is a nice size if it''s a good stone. You''d be saving a chunk off a full 3 carat stone of the same quality.

 

[bgray]

Date: 4/7/2010 8:00:57 PM
Author:Samara83
Maybe I''m confused, but I read that anything between ''magic weights'' (1,1.5,2 etc..) equals faulty or poor cutting. Is this true? I found a 2.88ct excellent cut round brilliant - is the cert. on that wrong or is it possible for a non-''magic weight'' to be an excellent cut?

That said, is there anything wrong with that size of carat or should I be sticking to either 2.5 or 3?

actually its more likely to be the opposite (yes those are price bands). a 3.0 carat diamond has a strong liklihood of being cut to stretch to that magic 3 whereas a 3.09 was too far away from either price band to be affected. personally i find that the stones with odd carat sizes in between magic weights to be the better buys with less liklihood of being cut poorly to maximize weight

 

[iota15]

The magic weights have nothing to do with whether a diamond is well-cut.

People usually try to find a stone slightly below a magic weight (1, 1.5, 2) because it''s cheaper. 2.0 carats is much more expensive than a 1.95 or 1.9 - and the increase in price is not proportional to the 0.5 or 0.1 increase in carat weight.

Broadly speaking, you''re probably more likely to find poorly cut stones that are on magic weight mark - stones that are Exactly or just above 2.0, 1.5, etc. because cutters know that if they hit that mark, they can get much more money for the rough. Sometimes, rough material that would lead to a beautiful, well-cut 1.96, for example, are turned into a slightly poorer 2.0 carat to hit the magic weight.

I''m not surprised you found a beautiful 2.88. If the rough could have supported a a 3.0 carat rock, I''m sure the cutter if would have been made a 3.0 - even if it meant sacrificing the sparkle (cut). There''s not that much increase in value between 2.88 and 2.93, for example, so why not just make it nice one.

Congrats on the find!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 4/7/2010 8:27:23 PM
Author: bgray

Date: 4/7/2010 8:00:57 PM
Author:Samara83
Maybe I''m confused, but I read that anything between ''magic weights'' (1,1.5,2 etc..) equals faulty or poor cutting. Is this true? I found a 2.88ct excellent cut round brilliant - is the cert. on that wrong or is it possible for a non-''magic weight'' to be an excellent cut?

That said, is there anything wrong with that size of carat or should I be sticking to either 2.5 or 3?

actually its more likely to be the opposite (yes those are price bands). a 3.0 carat diamond has a strong liklihood of being cut to stretch to that magic 3 whereas a 3.09 was too far away from either price band to be affected. personally i find that the stones with odd carat sizes in between magic weights to be the better buys with less liklihood of being cut poorly to maximize weight

Ditto.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/7/2010 8:27:23 PM
Author: bgray

Date: 4/7/2010 8:00:57 PM
Author:Samara83
Maybe I''m confused, but I read that anything between ''magic weights'' (1,1.5,2 etc..) equals faulty or poor cutting. Is this true? I found a 2.88ct excellent cut round brilliant - is the cert. on that wrong or is it possible for a non-''magic weight'' to be an excellent cut?

That said, is there anything wrong with that size of carat or should I be sticking to either 2.5 or 3?

actually its more likely to be the opposite (yes those are price bands). a 3.0 carat diamond has a strong liklihood of being cut to stretch to that magic 3 whereas a 3.09 was too far away from either price band to be affected. personally i find that the stones with odd carat sizes in between magic weights to be the better buys with less liklihood of being cut poorly to maximize weight

Bgray is right, and there is a definite chance a 2.88 could have an excellent cut, always go by the desirable visual and physical properties of a diamond to evaluate the cut quality. If a 2.88 is well cut then it could be a definite option, if you want post all the info on this diamond here then we can take a look for you.