Looking for Advice on 1940s Diamond

[SpecialSundae]

Hi,

This is my very first post, and I hope I'm posting in the right place, but my grandma gave me her engagement ring (via my fiance) when I got engaged and I don't know a vast amount about it. She got engaged in 1946 or 1947 and it's an antique brilliant (two valuations have it variably at 1.12ct and 1.24ct but no read-out on colour or clarity) with two baguettes (approx 0.1-0.12ct each).

My grandma had taken a few chips out of the girdle over the years that she'd had it. They're not dreadfully obvious but I'm not sure of how much of an effect they have on the diamond (as I suspect they were there long before I was born). Do chips have a terrible effect on the sparkle?

I absolutely love my ring (especially living in a country where 0.5ct is considered quite large) but sometimes I get very insecure about it when other people are talking about their diamonds with near-perfect cut, clarity and colour and I really don't know anything about mine. The only person I've found who would do a full gem report would charge me nearly £200 and I'm not sure how badly they'd remark on the chips.

I'd be delighted for your views, advice and any help any of you could give.

Many thanks,

Sundae

 

[armywife13]

First off, let me say that I love your ring! It is beautiful.

With regards to the chips, anyone can feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think small chips will have much affect on the sparkle of the diamond. My main concern would be that the chips could lead to cracks and more severe damage of the diamond if it gets bumped or hit. They can usually be polished out of the diamond.

I really wouldn't worry about people talking about how ideal their diamonds are. It's my opinion that old cuts are in a category of their own, it is hard to compare which is better because modern and old cut diamonds are so different. Your diamond is unique and has a distinct pattern that is original from every other diamond, no old cut is ever exactly the same as another. Plus, your diamond and ring have a great history to them!

 

[ruby59]

I inherited my mom's diamond which was also from the 1940's. You cannot compare them to diamonds cut today because the technology did not exist back then. But that does not make them any less beautiful in their own right.

As far as the chips in the diamond, you could always put it in a bezel setting to give it more protection.

Not to hijack your thread, but I had a question. Did modern brilliant diamonds exist in the middle to late 1940's? My mom was married in 1948. I have no clue how to upload pictures, so I can only describe. After much research, my mom's diamond does not look like an oec or transitional after comparing it to other posters' photos. I did read where the ability to cut modern round brilliant diamonds did exist after World War II.

So am I correct that all 3 styles of cut -oec, transitional, and modern were used during the 1940's.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Are you able to post any better pictures that show detail of the stone? Beyond saying it looks like a nice size and the setting is pretty, there is not much useful information I can glean from that picture

ETA: Chips don't affect sparkle. They could pose a durability risk, but frankly, if the stone is 70+ years old it seems like the diamond is pretty durable as it is

 

[Dreamer_D]

Not to hijack your thread, but I had a question. Did modern brilliant diamonds exist in the middle to late 1940's? My mom was married in 1948. I have no clue how to upload pictures, so I can only describe. After much research, my mom's diamond does not look like an oec or transitional after comparing it to other posters' photos. I did read where the ability to cut modern round brilliant diamonds did exist after World War II.

So am I correct that all 3 styles of cut -oec, transitional, and modern were used during the 1940's.

Yes, all three existed I am not sure european cuts were actively being cut in the 1940s (that is the style that came after OECs, it is more symmetrical). But the 40s was a period of transition and some cutting houses had more developed methods than others so the stones they produced look more like modern RBs than european cuts.

 

[ruby59]

Thank you, Dreamer for your very informative answer. It is much appreciated.

 

[SpecialSundae]

I'm not sure these are any better. I hope so.

I wouldn't change the setting as that's a large part of what I love about it. I'm sort of just hoping that it survives and preparing to source another stone if it doesn't.

I actually have nightmares about the stone shattering, although I feel much happier now that I have others to talk to about it.

I can definitely see the culet, but it's not huge. The table isn't symmetrical, so I'd suspect quite a few of the other facets aren't either. It really does flash like a disco ball in the right light.

And I just checked the certificate again and the smaller estimate was 1.15ct rather than 1.12ct.

 

[SpecialSundae]

I hope this one is a better photo.