Is this a good diamond for the price?

[cbrockman92]

I just received the ring a few days. I think diamond looks really good but I've never seen any other diamonds up close, so I have nothing to compare to. The more I look into the dimensions it doesnt exactly fall in the ideal range. I paid 1500 for it. I know dimensions arent everything and some diamonds with larger tables still look good. Would getting a diamond with more ideal proportions be worth it or would the differenace not be all that noticeable?

Diamond I purchased: https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...t-j-color-vvs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-12428601

 

[lovedogs]

Can you post the certificate? We cant see anything about the dimensions from the link

 

[cbrockman92]

Can you post the certificate? We cant see anything about the dimensions from the link

 

[lovedogs]

I would personally prefer different proportions. The crown and pavillion are both on the shallower side, and the table/depth are the same (often called a 60/60 diamond).

I don't know whether it would be noticable to you to get a more traditionally ideal cut or not, as that is a personal preference

 

[cbrockman92]

I would personally prefer different proportions. The crown and pavillion are both on the shallower side, and the table/depth are the same (often called a 60/60 diamond).

I don't know whether it would be noticable to you to get a more traditionally ideal cut or not, as that is a personal preference

Thanks for the reply. I am leaning towards sticking with it. Neither me or my girlfriend are diamond experts and the stone is really nice and sparkles a lot. I just don't know if the time and effort to replace would be worth while when she probably wouldn't even notice the difference.

 

[DejaWiz]

We usually advise to stay away from 60/60 style cuts, unless there are advanced images (ASET and/or IdealScope) provided to ensure proper light return and performance.

However, this is something that you can check for, yourself:

Tips: DIY ASET/IS. Light Performance. Diamond Photography.

I often see many members asking about diamond photography and assessing light performance when buying a diamond "blind" without ASET/IS. The best is to stick with a vendor who provide ASET/IS images or getting a ASET/IS for yourself (http://ideal-scope.com/). But if these are not your options...

www.pricescope.com

Here is your diamond side by side with another that falls into PriceScope member recommended (section #2) proportion ranges:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond.

www.jamesallen.com

I would urge you to perform a light leakage check on your diamond and, if there are no issues, then that's great news.
However, if there is leakage, then there will be quite a visual difference in light return and performance between it and another diamond that does not exhibit leakage. In that case, I would strongly advise you to return the diamond and purchase another one before your return period expires.

 

[cbrockman92]

We usually advise to stay away from 60/60 style cuts, unless there are advanced images (ASET and/or IdealScope) provided to ensure proper light return and performance.

However, this is something that you can check for, yourself:

Tips: DIY ASET/IS. Light Performance. Diamond Photography.

I often see many members asking about diamond photography and assessing light performance when buying a diamond "blind" without ASET/IS. The best is to stick with a vendor who provide ASET/IS images or getting a ASET/IS for yourself (http://ideal-scope.com/). But if these are not your options...

www.pricescope.com

Here is your diamond side by side with another that falls into PriceScope member recommended (section #2) proportion ranges:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond.

www.jamesallen.com

I would urge you to perform a light leakage check on your diamond and, if there are no issues, then that's great news.
However, if there is leakage, then there will be quite a visual difference in light return and performance between it and another diamond that does not exhibit leakage. In that case, I would strongly advise you to return the diamond and purchase another one before your return period expires.

Thanks, i'll try and do this tonight.

 

[mwilliamanderson]

We usually advise to stay away from 60/60 style cuts, unless there are advanced images (ASET and/or IdealScope) provided to ensure proper light return and performance.

However, this is something that you can check for, yourself:

Tips: DIY ASET/IS. Light Performance. Diamond Photography.

I often see many members asking about diamond photography and assessing light performance when buying a diamond "blind" without ASET/IS. The best is to stick with a vendor who provide ASET/IS images or getting a ASET/IS for yourself (http://ideal-scope.com/). But if these are not your options...

www.pricescope.com

Here is your diamond side by side with another that falls into PriceScope member recommended (section #2) proportion ranges:

All Diamonds - Magnified in 360° HD | JamesAllen.com

James Allen offers a wide selection of GIA, IGI and AGS certified conflict-free loose diamonds, all viewable in 360° HD. Take the guesswork out of buying a diamond.

www.jamesallen.com

I would urge you to perform a light leakage check on your diamond and, if there are no issues, then that's great news.
However, if there is leakage, then there will be quite a visual difference in light return and performance between it and another diamond that does not exhibit leakage. In that case, I would strongly advise you to return the diamond and purchase another one before your return period expires.

Thanks for sharing that thread @DejaWiz! Hadn't seen it before.

 

[Rockdiamond]

We usually advise to stay away from 60/60 style cuts

Uummmmm
No.
Pointing out leakage- as a stand-alone "problem" ignores so many other factors, and scares people...
I know that's not your intent at all.....but this does bring up some memories...the ridiculous advice specifying tables ONLY up to 58%..... just plain wrong ( again, not your intent to give anything but the best advice, as I've seen in your always informative and usefull posts @DejaWiz )

 

[cbrockman92]

Uummmmm
No.
Pointing out leakage- as a stand-alone "problem" ignores so many other factors, and scares people...
I know that's not your intent at all.....but this does bring up some memories...the ridiculous advice specifying tables ONLY up to 58%..... just plain wrong ( again, not your intent to give anything but the best advice, as I've seen in your always informative and usefull posts @DejaWiz )

Do you see any major flaws with this stone that would concern you? I know it won't be the best possible stone, but to an untrained eye would there be a major difference between this and a super ideal cut?

 

[Rockdiamond]

My comments are only general information. As a trade member I’m not allowed to comment on any specific stone being offered for sale.

to an untrained eye would there be a major difference between this and a super ideal cut?

Again, speaking in general terms:
If @DejaWiz picked a stone for you, I guarantee it would be super well cut and absolutely, undeniably gorgeous.
But there would be many stones which might be eliminated for reasons that make sense on paper....that you might prefer.
Some people prefer a stone with a different look than a "Super Ideal"- which tend to look exactly like each other.
When the term first gained popularity, I fought long and hard ( and unsuccessfully) against it.
In the ensuing 15 years, the average diameter of a one carat diamond has shrunk. The average depth increased. Guess who's making more money on these deeper diamonds....the cutters.

SO....Super Ideal is great- but do not fall hook line and sinker into the assumption you'll love it more than a well cut 60/60

 

[DejaWiz]

Uummmmm
No.
Pointing out leakage- as a stand-alone "problem" ignores so many other factors, and scares people...
I know that's not your intent at all.....but this does bring up some memories...the ridiculous advice specifying tables ONLY up to 58%..... just plain wrong ( again, not your intent to give anything but the best advice, as I've seen in your always informative and usefull posts @DejaWiz )

We, as in PriceScope enthusiast prosumers. OK, so not *all* of us PS prosumers, but there does seem to be a larger percentage of us that would advise caution when approaching 60/60 cuts because the angles can be (and usually are) all over the place. To my previous post, I should have added this: the inverse relationship between the CA and PA as well as the recommended ranges for the CA and PA angles still applies to a 60/60 cut, because the physics of light traveling through and reflecting within any diamond doesn't change.

I've got no problem with a 60/60 style cut as long as the proof, especially if it's for a ring and not an earring stud or pendant, is irrefutable that there are no light leakage issues with it: hence, the last part of the sentence (that you omitted from my quoted text), David.

Here's a great article about the subject at hand with references to the HCA, DiamCalc, and Bruce Harding:

The 60/60 Ideal Cut Diamond and Other Captivating Tales

The 60/60 Ideal Cut Diamond fallacy claims that table diameter and depth combination produce excellent light return without accounting for crown/pavilion angle.

niceice.com

Another great article written by PS's very own Texas Leaguer :

What are 60/60 Diamonds? | Whiteflash

Before gem laboratories began cut grading so called 60/60 diamonds were the default standard. Learn why 60 table and 60 depth is not always ideal.

www.whiteflash.com

 

[Rockdiamond]

eta- I just notice the 60/60 article you posted- I'll have a look...

Actually......before proceeding in an academic discussion.....one in which my position is simply an academic one....as opposed to @DejaWiz or other dedicated prosumers who can, and do advise on specific stones: the last thing I'd ever want to do is insult you- or question your knowledge, or dedication.....you ( and others) do a great job
anyway, kissy kissy- we're going to be able to discuss differences in a way that is respecting everyone.

but there does seem to be a larger percentage of us that would advise caution when approaching 60/60 cuts because the angles can be (and usually are) all over the place.

I honestly feel the preferences here were shaped more by commercial interests than actual diamonds, and how they look. That is not to say super ideals aren't lovely.
I don't disagree in any way that you can cut 60/60 and have them be ugly- it will be evident based on the CA/PA....and of course, by eye.
I had to pick diamonds and was taught how to grade the old fashioned way. By eye ( still do, old habits die hard). So I'm not sure what HW was cutting CA/PA for the 60/60's which were the best cut stones of my youth. I know they were never below 6.4mm.
At this point, the prosumers look more at- and are more conversant in CA/PA than I am.
So speaking from a position of total respect. The education you've gotten is truly stunning. I am pointing out that part of it was based on commercial interests, as opposed to purely scientific.

However, if there is leakage, then there will be quite a visual difference in light return and performance between it and another diamond that does not exhibit leakage

Many people will prefer a stone with minor leakage- and a larger spread.
*I'm picking a quote of yours that serves my point- but at the same time commending you because you generally would use the term "leakage problem" or something like that.

I just did a quick Rapnet search. Only a few parameters.
1.00 cts.
"Triple EX"
Table
Depth
18,500+- diamonds total, on the list.

I got these interesting results based on Table depth
60/60
58 diamonds worldwide
The smallest stone was 6.38mm-6.4mm
That was the only measurement on the list below 6.4mm

Based on a visual average of the list- I'd estimate 6.47+- was the average measurement.
The largest stone was 6.52-6.55 ( in fact the largest 8 were all 6.54-6.55 on the larger measurement)

57T/63D
174 diamonds worldwide
Smallest stone was 6.26-6.33
The largest stone was the only one with a measurement exceeding 6.4mm ( 6.39-6.44)
Eyeball average of the 174 diamonds ...6.34mm

6.47 versus 6.34 would be easily visible to pretty much any diamond buyer.
A little bit of leakage, at places where it's truly not an issue...almost no one can see that......

BUT- it's truly an academic discussion at this point- the days of those gorgeous, spready, perfectly cut 60/60....long gone......
And the cutters can now get away with squeezing all those 6.3mm, 1.00 carat stones into the market....profitability, increased yield.....that's why I said commercial interests.....


Big apologies for the threadjack!!

 

[mwilliamanderson]

@Rockdiamond
I have no doubt that a 60/60 diamond can be beautiful. But, speaking for myself, I doubt that I could help someone pick a winner. My standard reply is it may be a beautiful diamond but you're trading some fire for brightness because most of the 60/60 diamonds I see have been cut to a shallow crown angle. Often they're paired with a shallow pavillion. Talk about good spread! Garry and others have taught us that crown angle and pavillion angle should have an inverse relationship...a shallow crown works if paired with a steeper pavillion and visa versa.

Maybe you could write an educational article that would help us understand how to do this. You're right that a lot of us here cut our teeth on super ideal formula, so of course we think it's the standard of MRB diamond beauty. Still, everything that was once popular cycles around again. Look at the popularity of rose cut, omc and oec diamonds. Surely there's room for some glam 60/60 diamonds. But, there needs to be a structure/ guidelines for how to choose, like I said. You learned how to pick the good ones by sight when they were flooding the market. That's not a skill set we can acquire at this point.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Here's a great article about the subject at hand with references to the HCA, DiamCalc, and Bruce Harding:

I did a speed read....a lot of great info.....
Tell you what I could not find...a single mention of spread.


There were other parts that don't jibe with my experience.
Actually, it's life experience-so it will necessarily color my perception/judgment. For example, from the 60/60 article you referenced:
Apparently, anything with a 60% Table and 60% Total Depth would do and at the time I honestly didn’t know better.
I did know better. The cutters at Harry Winston were the best in the world when I learned and worked there in the '70's ( I'm admittedly prejudiced)
Assessing "make" was an important part of what it took to be a diamond trader in the '80's, (by that time, the house of Winston had changed from wholesale to primarily retail. It was never the same after Mr Winston passed away. )
In the 80's into the '90's "Russian Make" was the world's best- they were cutting 60/60's. 6.5mm+- 1.00 ct stones.
The cut grade changed everything.

But, speaking for myself, I doubt that I could help someone pick a winner.

If given the opportunity to select from diamonds in front of you, I'm pretty sure you could help someone.
But I would ask...where have you seen 60/60 diamonds?
You can see by my search results, almost no one is cutting them nowadays....
I don't mean to put any "blame" on folks recommending using the "cheat sheet"
A lot of what we're talking about is academic because we don't really have the same sort of choice today as we would 20 years back.
Even comparing to OEC/OMB'etcs...people are cutting replicas of those nowadays.
The best cutters, by and large- are going for the "Super Ideal" Hearts and arrows smaller table look. So there's not a selection of 60/60's readily available. They're out there, but not a wide selection.
If there was a battle, I lost it years ago

 

[Rockdiamond]

Also- the remarkable selection offered to the consumer due to the internet is a double-edged sword. You have this huge selection to choose from- yet you have to choose based on photos/videos/stats on a report. Totally different than choosing in person.
It makes sense to steer folks based on the info used here on PS- and the advice is good, based on the information available. People get lovely stones. Very few regrets.
All I'm saying is - in person, it would be a different experience, with different results.

 

[DejaWiz]

All I'm saying is - in person, it would be a different experience, with different results.

Absolutely. And, to add the most important factor, what I always tell people preferring to shop in-person is: different lighting conditions.

There's a photo that floats around the forum which shows that nice and big, spready diamond looking stunningly beautiful with a drenching downpour of dazzle lighting, but goes dark and boring when the lighting condition changes to indirect/shaded, showing the ideal cut diamond sitting right next to it is superior. Yeah, I get that it's only one example and the diamonds were likely vetted in a specific manner for the demonstration, but from an academic standpoint, it's crucial knowledge to possess and pass along.

 

[mwilliamanderson]

Also- the remarkable selection offered to the consumer due to the internet is a double-edged sword. You have this huge selection to choose from- yet you have to choose based on photos/videos/stats on a report. Totally different than choosing in person.
It makes sense to steer folks based on the info used here on PS- and the advice is good, based on the information available. People get lovely stones. Very few regrets.
All I'm saying is - in person, it would be a different experience, with different results.

@Rockdiamond

You're making my point for me, lol. If I, or anyone else, is going to point someone towards a ten thousand dollar purchase, I want to be darn sure that they're going to get a lovely proportioned, well performing stone, clarity and color preferences aside.

The men and women that come here asking for advice don't typically trust themselves to be able to discern subtle differences in sparkle and color and cut, etc. The OP here is a perfect example. Most buyers just want to know they are getting a good diamond, and numbers, angles and scientific jargon like light tracing etc are a comfortable and familiar territory, especially for the men.

Back to the topic at hand. I was looking at JA the other day for diamonds that leaned towards favoring brightness. LG diamonds are fun to look at there because the certs are readily available. I found these two and wonder if you think they'd qualify to be good 60/60 candidates?

Lab-Created 1.01 Carat round diamond

This True Hearts TM diamond, 1.01 carat Lab-Created F color vs2 clarity has ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from IGI

www.jamesallen.com

Lab-Created 1.31 Carat round diamond

This 1.31 carat Lab-Created round diamond E color vs1 clarity has Ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from IGI

www.jamesallen.com

 

[DejaWiz]

@Rockdiamond

You're making my point for me, lol. If I, or anyone else, is going to point someone towards a ten thousand dollar purchase, I want to be darn sure that they're going to get a lovely proportioned, well performing stone, clarity and color preferences aside.

The men and women that come here asking for advice don't typically trust themselves to be able to discern subtle differences in sparkle and color and cut, etc. The OP here is a perfect example. Most buyers just want to know they are getting a good diamond, and numbers, angles and scientific jargon like light tracing etc are a comfortable and familiar territory, especially for the men.

Back to the topic at hand. I was looking at JA the other day for diamonds that leaned towards favoring brightness. LG diamonds are fun to look at there because the certs are readily available. I found these two and wonder if you think they'd qualify to be good 60/60 candidates?

Lab-Created 1.01 Carat round diamond

This True Hearts TM diamond, 1.01 carat Lab-Created F color vs2 clarity has ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from IGI

www.jamesallen.com

Lab-Created 1.31 Carat round diamond

This 1.31 carat Lab-Created round diamond E color vs1 clarity has Ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from IGI

www.jamesallen.com

That 1.01 is beautiful - amazing brightness.