Let’s Play a Game ... Can You Differentiate the 76 vs. 77 LGFs?

[the_mother_thing]

I know, I know ... you can’t always tell certain things from pictures. But in many cases, pictures are what we start with when considering a diamond for purchase. Discussion about a week or so back, talking about LGF preferences, got me thinking that when time allowed, I wanted to see if - based on pictures alone, I could tell the difference in such a minute variation in criteria when other cut specs are also relatively ‘close’.

For this ‘test’, I intentionally chose super-ideal diamonds from the same vendor/brand as a control group of sorts ... in this case, Whiteflash, given there was a good variety of diamonds in the spec range I was aiming to see. Also, I went with a single source in hopes that ‘all things would mostly appear equal’ in terms of the photography, lighting, etc. I lined them up on a white background and cropped out the image background, but only to try and minimize the background color’s impact on my eye’s perception.

I thought it’d be interesting to see if others can differentiate which were 76 vs. 77. Anyone care to take a stab? I can/will post the ‘answers’ later.

 

[YoLaL]

Honestly, It's really hard for me to differentiate unless you give us some other proportions without the LGF number. from there it's easier.

 

[Bron357]

I don’t even know what LGF is but the diamond no 4 top row and the 1st and 2nd on the lower row are different to the others.

 

[erislynn]

Ok my guess is Top row: 76, 77, 77, 76, 77
Bottom row: 76, 76, 77, 76, 76

Honestly, they look the same after awhile, especially in photos.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Honestly, It's really hard for me to differentiate unless you give us some other proportions without the LGF number. from there it's easier.

May I ask, how is it easier if you have the other numbers? That’s part of what I was trying to test my own eyes and see if I can ‘trace’ the differences in appearances to other proportion factors.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I don’t even know what LGF is but the diamond no 4 top row and the 1st and 2nd on the lower row are different to the others.

LGF = Lower Girdle Facets
Whiteflash provides this overview, which isn’t too technical for me to folllow, thankfully.

 

[Starfacet]

No, I can't differentiate.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Well, I wouldn't even attempt that! I think most can tell the difference between 76 and 80. Other than that, it would be very hard to tell between 1%! In real life viewing, unless the stone is huge, it is even harder to tell than in these magnified images. I really don't worry too much about that number for that reason, especially in ideal cut stones.

 

[mwilliamanderson]

This is a great idea! I think diamonds 4 and 5 in the top row and 3, 4 and 5 in the bottom row have lgf 77.

 

[Wewechew]

I may be the queen of “my LGFs have to be 76, not 77”, but I already know from experience looking at stones online that sometimes I can’t tell based on a pic

 

[mwilliamanderson]

This is a great idea! I think diamonds 4 and 5 in the top row and 3, 4 and 5 in the bottom row have lgf 77.

I meant 76

 

[MMtwo]

I'll say they are all 77 and pray for a passing grade.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Well, I wouldn't even attempt that! I think most can tell the difference between 76 and 80. Other than that, it would be very hard to tell between 1%! stones.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I may be the queen of “my LGFs have to be 76, not 77”, but I already know from experience looking at stones online that sometimes I can’t tell based on a pic

I was thinking about you and our discussion re: LGFs when I was doing this.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting someone should choose a diamond solely based on pics, etc. This was just an exercise or experiment to see if - when scrolling through pics - I’d be able to differentiate between them based on the arrows’ appearance and trying to see if I could further hone my own preferences.

For those who chose to play along, I’m attaching the proportions for each diamond, as promised. The only ones that were 76’ers were the last 3 in the bottom row; all others were 77s. One or two, I felt I could differentiate pretty easily, but most of the others, I was kind of surprised to see how little they differed based on what I thought I should/would see & expect.

 

[Wewechew]

I know exactly the “game” you were playing with yourself over on the WF site. I’ve done it myself on more than one occasion

 

[OoohShiny]

I was thinking about you and our discussion re: LGFs when I was doing this.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting someone should choose a diamond solely based on pics, etc. This was just an exercise or experiment to see if - when scrolling through pics - I’d be able to differentiate between them based on the arrows’ appearance and trying to see if I could further hone my own preferences.

For those who chose to play along, I’m attaching the proportions for each diamond, as promised. The only ones that were 76’ers were the last 3 in the bottom row; all others were 77s. One or two, I felt I could differentiate pretty easily, but most of the others, I was kind of surprised to see how little they differed based on what I thought I should/would see & expect.

Very interesting!

Thank you for taking the time to put this together

 

[KKJohnson]

I am curious as to what kind of difference the LGF can make?

 

[Wewechew]

@KKJohnson I've found the lower LGFs make the stone brighter in low light.

 

[KKJohnson]

@KKJohnson I've found the lower LGFs make the stone brighter in low light.

ah, thank you

 

[kmoro]

@KKJohnson I've found the lower LGFs make the stone brighter in low light.

It is highly unlikely to see a difference in light performance between 76 and 77, imo. Both will be 75 on a GIA report. Also higher LGF can increase sparkle ....

 

[Wewechew]

It is highly unlikely to see a difference in light performance between 76 and 77, imo. Both will be 75 on a GIA report. Also higher LGF can increase sparkle ....

I’ve been able to tell a difference. Or I should say- the diamonds that I have owned I have been the most drawn to end up having 76 LGFs