OEC Out of Round

[plummiecat]

I've caught the OEC bug after seeing all the beauties on PS. I purchased a nice one set in a pretty ring from ebay and I'm in love with the beautiful chunky faceting. However the stone is out of round. I found another one with a GIA cert stating "good" for symmetry so I figured I was safe, but this one looks even more out of round, as if a small corner is missing. I know this is a common feature of OECs and maybe I'm being too picky. Does this bother other OEC lovers? It wasn't easy finding these 2 stones within my price range. Should I keep looking or is out of round not a big deal? Thanks for any opinions.

 

[Mayk]

Have you considered a bezel setting... If you lve your stone..

Mine is a little off too... My setting should be done next week. I went with a bezel...

 

[madelise]

I like em off round gives it a more authentic real oldie feel.. Pics?

 

[plummiecat]

Here's a link to the first one: http://www.ebay.com/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&item=251091640261&nma=true&rt=nc&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_from%3DR40%26_nkw%3D251091640261%26_rdc%3D1&si=JgTIdH6XWipFmoMF1H9%252FuNSPcQo%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc#ht_2008wt_952

I'm not good at taking pics of jewelry with my camera. It's difficult to tell in these pics, but in the second pic the bottom right portion of the stone is out of round. You need to tilt your head to the right so you are facing the prongs sitting horizontally. The section most out of round is the top left portion of the stone in the second pic.

 

[Gypsy]

I wouldn't have an issue with it. I loved that listing and would have snapped it up too.

 

[Mayk]

I love your ring! Beautiful!

 

[MissGotRocks]

It looks like a very pretty stone - would love to see magnified shots of it.

I think most all of these old cuts are out of round - cutting was done differently back in the day. I think if you want absolute precision, you've got to stick with the MRBs. I honestly don't know if I'd tolerate these issues well either though.

 

[plummiecat]

Thanks for all of your responses! If I keep the first one, I will keep it in the mounting it's in now. Here's the second one:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&hash=item1e70b78bf5&item=130740095989&nma=true&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&rt=nc&si=JgTIdH6XWipFmoMF1H9%252FuNSPcQo%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc#ht_10666wt_952

This stone is out of round, too even though the GIA cert has symmetry as good. If I keep this one I will eventually mount it in a bezel or framed type setting. This stone has beautiful faceting but not quite as chunky as the first. This one is a tad whiter and a little larger than the first one and it has a GIA cert and was $2000 more. I could probably get some money back by selling the setting when I'm ready to have it re-set. Which stone to keep? I can't keep both. Please help me decide.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I don't think symmetry of "good" is any guarantee at all of whether the stone is out of round. I do love all these beautiful stones and enjoy seeing them here! But for me, I have determined that finding a very good to excellent cut old stone is like finding a needle in a haystack (since there are virtually none for me to look at locally), so I will likely stick to AVR's (or AVC's) if I am able to get an old style cut. I originally came here because I wanted an excellent cut mrb, and I still want excellent cut in any diamond I buy. There are excellent old cuts because I have seen them in old Tiffany jewelry, but those are going to be very pricey! There's a home for almost every diamond, so we just have to each find one that we love! (The second one has a big advantage in having a GIA cert for color and clarity, though, if the stone is as pleasing to you.)

My best advice is on my tagline if you can see it...if you love it totally, keep it, but when in doubt, don't.

 

[Mayk]

Not sure.. if M is too warm.. and in EGL but this diamond looks pretty.. and has the report from GOG and a nice spread not to mention price... again.. I'm no expert, I'm just lurking...

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9609/

 

[Enerchi]

I'm not sufficiently educated in the ins and outs of the OEC's (enjoying learning/reading/appreciating the threads tho!) but to my untrained eye, I'd prefer the 2nd stone and rationale being the GIA cert.

You'll have to see them in person to be certain which appeals to you - visually and financially which you are most comfortable with keeping. Just looking at the rest of both sellers stores, I think the pricing of the 2nd seller seems more inline with reality. The first seller seems more retail pricing - which isn't what I'd be expecting to pay on eBay. Just my thought....

Good luck - enjoy the hunt!

 

[plummiecat]

I have both stones in my possession right now but I keep going back and forth on which one to keep.

 

[Enerchi]

can you post a collection of up close pics for us to look at? Maybe highlight your concerns re: each one?

 

[Gypsy]

Thanks for all of your responses! If I keep the first one, I will keep it in the mounting it's in now. Here's the second one:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&hash=item1e70b78bf5&item=130740095989&nma=true&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&rt=nc&si=JgTIdH6XWipFmoMF1H9%252FuNSPcQo%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc#ht_10666wt_952

This stone is out of round, too even though the GIA cert has symmetry as good. If I keep this one I will eventually mount it in a bezel or framed type setting. This stone has beautiful faceting but not quite as chunky as the first. This one is a tad whiter and a little larger than the first one and it has a GIA cert and was $2000 more. I could probably get some money back by selling the setting when I'm ready to have it re-set. Which stone to keep? I can't keep both. Please help me decide.

I'd buy that setting from you. I love it.


Can you take some pics of both of them on your hand?

 

[Mayk]

I have both stones in my possession right now but I keep going back and forth on which one to keep.

I'm a digbat... I didn't realize you had them both.. I thought you were still shopping... that's a tough decision.. they both look fabulous!

 

[plummiecat]

Thank you so much for all of your responses! I really value your input. This is the best picture I have right now. Please excuse my horrible nails. They are both truly beautiful stones; my pictures don't capture the beautiful faceting patterns on both. I asked a highly respected PS appraiser is the DC area to take a quick look and he said both stones were equally nice as far as the cut and faceting goes.

Stone A is on the right: J/K VS1 uncertified, 7.6mm, set in a ring that I love, slightly out of round when viewed perpendicular to how the ring is shown (I don't see any inclusions with 10x)
Stone B on the left: J/VS2 GIA 7.69x7.84, set in a setting I would eventually change to a bezel or framed setting, out of round as seen in the bottom right portion in the pic, inclusion off center easily viewed by 10x

Stone B costs $2000 more but is slightly larger and whiter. I keep leaning toward stone A because it is most different from my 2.08 RBC ER. However, I feel stone B is a better "deal" or investment. I'm going to wear the one I decide on as a RHR. I know I would love either stone but I have to make a decision. Please help!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Both of those are really gorgeous diamonds and both are really well cut in my opinion. I was looking at the 1.78 from lajolla myself, and you got a really good price on it! The other is gorgeous too. You have them in your hand so you can make up your mind based on your eyes. You paid under retail on both by a fair margin. Wear the stones in many different lighting environments, and especially take them into the lighting where you spend most of your time. Choose the one with the opitcs -- fire, brightness, scintillation, patterning -- that you enjoy the most. You can set them to minimize the wonk, or you can consider a slight girdle polish/recut if you want.

My stone is not round, but it is subtle. I can't recall the measurements but I think its about 7.8mm at its smallest and 8.05mm at its biggest diameter. If I look really close I can see how the stone is off roune because there is a microscopic "gap" between the stone and bezel at one part of the stone (my stone is prong set into an octagonal bezel). It does not bother me at all.

Does this help: These diamonds were cut about 100 years ago. The master who cut them did not have a sarin. Or a computer to help plan the cut. He used his eyes and a magnifying loupe and other mechanical tools to examine the rough. He planned how to cut the stone to have the best appearance, most weight retention, and best clarity -- all without the aid of any computer programes! He then cut that stone BY HAND by grining it against another diamond, again either by hand or using a foot pedal powered wheel. It took him weeks to cut that stone. Its not round? Who the heck cares. It is a piece of history, and art, and an example of the finest craftsmanship of its time. The cutters of both the diamonds you have were TRUE masters of their craft to create such amazingly cut stones. Cut them a break and appreciate their work.

 

[Dreamer_D]

The photo does not help me much. I don't think the GIA report makes stone B a better investment, since you can send Stone A to GIA if you like.

If it matters, I like stone A a little better in terms of cut: smaller table and nice bubbly pattern. Stone B is very nice but has a 50% table but appears to have shorter LGF -- with a larger table I tend to like a smaller table. But you have them in person, you are the only one who can really decide.

 

[plummiecat]

Thanks Dreamer! I've seen your stone and admired it. What is LGF?

 

[Laila619]

Thanks Dreamer! I've seen your stone and admired it. What is LGF?

Lower girdle facets. It's basically how thick or thin the arrows in the stone will appear.

 

[Dreamer_D]

The photo does not help me much. I don't think the GIA report makes stone B a better investment, since you can send Stone A to GIA if you like.

If it matters, I like stone A a little better in terms of cut: smaller table and nice bubbly pattern. Stone B is very nice but has a 50% table but appears to have shorter LGF -- with a larger table I tend to like a smaller table. But you have them in person, you are the only one who can really decide.

I realize this statement makes no sense I meant to say with a larger table like that stone (50%) I prefer longer lower girdle facets (LGF), like my stone has, to create a little more "action" under the table. Otherwise I like really small tables, like 45% or smaller.

BUT I can't really tell what the lower halves are like on these stones from the photos. I really just mean with the GIA stone you want to take it into many lighting environments and see how it performs, with a particular eye to how active and dynamic the facets under the table are to your eyes. I would look at both stones in many lights and from different angles of viewing and just go with the one you really love.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Thanks Dreamer! I've seen your stone and admired it. What is LGF?

Lower girdle facets. It's basically how thick or thin the arrows in the stone will appear.

Yes. In old cuts it is even more than thin or thick arrows, just to be precise Arrows like you see in an MRB or like I see in my diamond only really become evident when lower halves get into the 60% or longer range, which is not common. In addition, to see true arrows the diamond must be cut very precisely -- so the faceting on one half of the diamond must be mirrored exactly on the other in terms of angles etc. That type of precision is what creates the arrows. Most old cuts do not show arrows because a) lower halves tend to be shorter (less than 50% in most) and b) they are not cut as precisely as modern stones because they were done by hand!

The reason lower halves matter in old cuts is not about arrows, then. It is instead more about how "active" the under table area will look. Short lower halves, say under 50%, can mean under the table all you see are the eight pavilion mains (looks like a pie) and in that case I personally think it looks better with a very small table so that the central area does not look too "lazy" in comparison to the outer areas. Slighly longer lower halves, even just approaching 50%, "breaks up" the under table area into more facets -- both real and virtual -- creating more action and scintillation.

All this is more technical than you need to get to pick a nice old cut. If you have seen a few in person you will just know what your eyes prefer.