Let me asscher you a question (generic convo; not buying)

[the_mother_thing]

Not interested in buying an asscher, nor am I going to buy this one; rather, the dimensions were so different from what I’ve seen that I thought it’d be a question to post to the step cut gurus for thoughts. What might one expect to see (as it relates to step cuts) in a diamond like this?

Note: I don’t mean the inclusions; I just included the plot as it pertains to the pavilion.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I have no idea about the light return on such a stone, but it basically has a huge flat surface on top. I find that very undesirable in any stone, and especially in an asscher. The shallowness may result in obstruction, but that's just a guess. It would be interesting to see photos, though.

 

[Karl_K]

At the hand of the most cutters a total dud.
In the hands of a skilled step cut cutter it could be bright in the right lighting but a bit of a dud with one dimensional play of light and limited favored light conditions.
By one dimensional I mean mostly all very large(relative to the diamond size) and slow flashes which while interesting in the the sense of hey this thing is strange but it is kinda boring.
I would call it lack of life.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I wish there were pictures available of this diamond so I could see it myself and share; alas, there are none available with the listing ... at least not on the vendor’s site where I stumbled upon it. Considering the price tag - just shy of $500K, I’m kind of surprised.

Here are the rest of the stats:


Down my rabbit hole I go, because my curiosity has been piqued, I found a few more of these not-so-‘little guys’, and in almost all of them, I see similar tables > depth dimensions. Weight retention purposes aside, is it the case that - above a certain size - that combo actually produces a brighter diamond? I wouldn’t think so, but I’m not an expert/cutter.

Here’s another (no pic available).


Now this one, I found a picture for, and while I know it’s not everyone’s cup of tea, I actually kind of like this blocky/asscher-ish look (which is probably why I liked the Tycoon so much when I found/saw it). And I like that the contrast pattern is actually somewhat ‘a pattern’/consistent around the diamond. Is there an industry term for this type of ‘square emerald’ (besides ‘square emerald’)?



Here’s another one I found with a picture, and I’m actually sad for this diamond ... someone plucked it out of it’s comfy little home, and it probably had big disco-ball aspirations where it’d dazzle admirers at a major auction house or while gracing the hands of some stupidly-wealthy celebrity being plastered across magazines. Instead ... it just looks dark & sad.



So why is it that - in these larger sizes - there seems to be a table > depth approach? Almost every single one I found in this size range, that seems to be the case. In this price range, I’d like to think that a potential buyer is going to do some level of due diligence to know if they are buying a dazzler or dud, so why not cut that material to it’s full potential?

 

[Karl_K]

The first is actual an emerald cut not an asscher it has a keel.
But it is funny you found examples of just what I was talking about.
As to why, one answer is tops and the other answer is while the xray machines before the crushers find large rough before it gets crushed it does not prevent damage in the extraction process.

What was the price on them?

 

[the_mother_thing]

@Karl_K the first was just shy of 500k, and the most expensive was over a million; I don’t remember exactly, but none were under $500K.

 

[the_mother_thing]

PS - most/all of them can be viewed via the PS search tool; just filter the criteria to asschers >15cts. I didn’t want to link to any specifically so that the discussion could be ‘neutral’.