Perfect hearts vs Non-perfect hearts

[teobdl]

How much of a real-life light-performance difference will there be between absolutely perfect hearts vs close-to perfect hearts? Is it a "mind clean" issue (i.e. perfect hearts as humanly possible:near-perfect hearts :: IF:VVS1)? Can lay-people and/or experts tell the difference just from looking at them with the un-aided eye?

I'll use some GOG diamonds in their Hearts and Arrows/Ideal inventory as examples because they're the only site that actually shows H&A images for diamonds that just missed.

Close to it (GOG premiums):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10945/
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10944/

Vs perfect hearts like this (GOG superior... and similar hearts and arrows at WF, BG, Crafted by Infinity):
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9144/

No need to comment on these specific diamonds, but I linked them to give parameters of what I'm talking about.

 

[diamond-enthusiast]

Most lay people can't. If you had seen enough diamonds, you can easily discern this even with the naked eye based on the contrast patterning.

 

[teobdl]

DE--what is your background for saying that? Have you seen this for yourself in a similar comparison? I'm asking because levels of expertise are not immediately apparent on PS.
Forgive me for doubting you, I'm still skeptical that, to the naked eye, the contrast pattern would be discernibly different between the near-hearts and hearts diamonds that I listed for comparison.

 

[Niel]

Most lay people can't. If you had seen enough diamonds, you can easily discern this even with the naked eye based on the contrast patterning.

Ive actually heard a few tradespeople on here say that a triple EX stone and a H&A are hard to see. So much as to say they wouldnt bet one way or the other based just on naked eye comparisons.

Ill try and find the thread about it OP

 

[Niel]

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/h-a-vs-non-h-a-is-there-a-visual-difference.152720/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/h-a-vs-non-h-a-is-there-a-visual-difference.152720/[/URL]

found it

 

[bunnycat]

This is just my own person subjective experience with various diamonds talking but here is my own take (so far).

I have H/A branded cut earrings and a branded cut e-ring stone that does not guarantee H/A but is cut to the specifications of the brand (BG in this case) and when I compared my old stone (a non branded AGS 000 ideal cut) to the new one side by side I could tell a difference between the quality of the branded cut versus the non branded cut and so could hubz and I'm sure I'll pay the premium for a fantastically cut stone again in the future. My advice is don't sell those branded cuts short and just say "oh, close enough is close enough" and a non branded stone is just as good as a branded one (and there may indeed be some out there that are!) unless you have seen them in person. I do consider the ones I've seen so far prettier than non branded stones that just "accidentally" hit the ideal proportions.

With that said, true H/A precision is lost of me and I don't really notice a difference between my "almost" H/A branded e-ring stone and and my earring stones. They are both top notch to me. The way it was explained to me was having perfect H/A was like having perfect mirrors in the stone and some people may notice it and some people may not. (I'm one of the nots, it seems.....)

And so I would quote Wink:

It is a shame you are not able to compare two or more of the stones at the same time.

If you were able to do a "blind taste test" by having someone put two or more stones on a slotted trey and not tell you which is which, you would find that in most cases one or another would appeal to you more than the others.

Even though all stones might have the same cut grade on paper, in real life they will not look identical. More often, it is diamond from a house that takes the time to hand select their diamonds that will look the best to you. They may both have an HCA of 0.9, but there will be a reason why BGD put one in his top sort, and another in his secondary sort.

If you could see them both side by side, especially without knowing which was which, then you could rank them according to YOUR EYE and then decide if the difference in beauty was worth the difference in price, TO YOU!

In today's world diamond prices are very competitive and although some branded stones will be more than the run of the mill stones of the same cut grade (There is a top and a bottom of every grade you know) you will be very surprised at the difference in beauty that often goes along with the price.

Wink

 

[yssie]

Most lay people can't. If you had seen enough diamonds, you can easily discern this even with the naked eye based on the contrast patterning.

Really?
Well, I'm not going to waste my time articulating my disagreement with another of your assertive one-liners bestowed yet again sans any semblance of background, explanation, example, description of terminology, documentation, or supporting personal annecdote. I do feel compelled to point out that they're at best unhelpful and confusing, and only serve to make others question your credibility.

We're all enthusiasts here... it is, to me, reasonable to expect that an enthusiast would take pride in both his/her enthusiasm and his/her expression of it.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

(I was wondering if a poster on this thread recently changed their user name since the posts seem extremely familiar to me.)

I never told my family or friends that I switched out my absolutely perfect H&A (and I mean one with the tightest proportions almost ever seen) with a GIA XXX that was not perfect H&A and no one ever noticed the difference. It was still a great performing stone and I had no problem with it other than it was a tiny bit smaller and I could see the size difference. If the recipient doesn't know about H&A or doesn't have a strong preference for it, then it won't be a mental thing for them! I appreciate precision cut stones and have WF ACA's for earrings and now have a perfectly cut GOG AVR in a ring. I suppose I lean toward the mental aspects of very best cutting, higher clarity, etc. But these are not things that can be seen.

 

[yssie]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

 

[bunnycat]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can totally dig what you and DS are saying. I think I am more proportion driven than optical symmetry driven since I can't really see a difference between my non H/A ring stone and my H/A earrings (and couldn't when I looked at a H/A stone side by side with the stone i have now either) but I am really particular about proportions and cutting style and I think that tends to show up in branded stones, perhaps, as opposed to stones that just happen to fall in to ideal proportions when they are cut. There's just so many little details that go in to how a stone plays with lights that goes past the basics (and stuff I only barely understand). I just needed to get behind a cutting style I can appreciate as opposed to continuing to randomly try to find what I was looking for in a stone. It was exhausting having specific things I wanted to see and just keep trial and error choice up. So I made the switch to something where it will be much easier to find what I like and I think that was worth it in the end...my bank account hated me for awhile though....

 

[Niel]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can totally dig what you and DS are saying. I think I am more proportion driven than optical symmetry driven since I can't really see a difference between my non H/A ring stone and my H/A earrings (and couldn't when I looked at a H/A stone side by side with the stone i have now either) but I am really particular about proportions and cutting style and I think that tends to show up in branded stones, perhaps, as opposed to stones that just happen to fall in to ideal proportions when they are cut. There's just so many little details that go in to how a stone plays with lights that goes past the basics (and stuff I only barely understand). I just needed to get behind a cutting style I can appreciate as opposed to continuing to randomly try to find what I was looking for in a stone. It was exhausting having specific things I wanted to see and just keep trial and error choice up. So I made the switch to something where it will be much easier to find what I like and I think that was worth it in the end...my bank account hated me for awhile though....

That's what I was thinking bcat. I know you often say you can see a difference between your BG blue and your JA stone you had. I don't thing either were graded h and a right? But I know the quality of cutting is apparent to you.....

 

[yssie]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can totally dig what you and DS are saying. I think I am more proportion driven than optical symmetry driven since I can't really see a difference between my non H/A ring stone and my H/A earrings (and couldn't when I looked at a H/A stone side by side with the stone i have now either) but I am really particular about proportions and cutting style and I think that tends to show up in branded stones, perhaps, as opposed to stones that just happen to fall in to ideal proportions when they are cut. There's just so many little details that go in to how a stone plays with lights that goes past the basics (and stuff I only barely understand). I just needed to get behind a cutting style I can appreciate as opposed to continuing to randomly try to find what I was looking for in a stone. It was exhausting having specific things I wanted to see and just keep trial and error choice up. So I made the switch to something where it will be much easier to find what I like and I think that was worth it in the end...my bank account hated me for awhile though....

I completely understand!! I upgraded through WF to take advantage of my trade-in and I was looking for an RB with very specific proportions - higher crown and shorter LGF than WF's ACA brand specifications allow, and of course I was still picky about having excellent optical symmetry. OMG it was a total PITA! Searching for stones, calling manufacturers and hoping they're available, waiting for the okay to ship, actually getting them shipped out only to find they aren't appropriate for some other reason... it really is very stressful!! I was so relieved when WF pulled my current stone and okay'd it - if we hadn't found it then I'd have seriously considered scrapping my requirements and choosing one of their in-house stones just to avoid the headache. And I snorted out loud, there goes my soapbox because that decision would have been based solely on ease of purchase

 

[diamond-enthusiast]

Wow. Such hostility faced here.

Most lay people can't. I wonder what's wrong with that statement? I think we are all in agreement that most people can't see the differences. I don't think any 10 paragraph sentences or 5 paragraph sentences or even a one liner will serve to change that conclusion. Does typing a 1000 word essay change the point made here with a short sentence?

You are asking a subjective question and yet seem to be demanding objective answers. Perhaps you want to get GOG to do a video for you for these 3 diamonds or spend some constructive time to dig through old videos and see if you notice any differences for yourself.

p.s: K.I.S.S => Keep It Simple S.....

 

[Niel]

Wow. Such hostility faced here.

Most lay people can't. I wonder what's wrong with that statement? I think we are all in agreement that most people can't see the differences. I don't think any 10 paragraph sentences or 5 paragraph sentences or even a one liner will serve to change that conclusion. Does typing a 1000 word essay change the point made here with a short sentence?

You are asking a subjective question and yet seem to be demanding objective answers. Perhaps you want to get GOG to do a video for you for these 3 diamonds or spend some constructive time to dig through old videos and see if you notice any differences for yourself.

p.s: K.I.S.S => Keep It Simple S.....

I just think people are dissagree with your offhanded remark that after some study they are easily discernable. Especially considering those in the trade after years of being around diamonds cannont just glance at a diamond and know if its a true h&a, so painting such broad strokes isn't always helpful.

 

[diamond-enthusiast]

Once you look through thousands of diamonds with your unaided eyes under different lighting, it shouldn't be that tough. There's always some reason why the hearts aren't perfect.

Let's use the example teo used => http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10944/

The reason for the "kink" in the hearts lies with a facet that leaks light. You can see this from the ASET image clearly. Besides other minor issues like unsymmetrical arrows also contribute to the hearts pattern seen. It shouldn't be tough to pick that up from a face up view under appropriate lighting with some experience.

I still stand by what I said earlier. Most lay people can't tell the differences. But once you reached a certain level of looking at stones, a little "unbalancing" in contrast patterns observed will tell you that the hearts and arrows isn't perfect.

Is it that important? Do you really need heats and arrows for a beautiful stone. Well, that's a subjective question. I personally kind of like it. However, nobody can answer that for you except yourself.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Once you look through thousands of diamonds with your unaided eyes under different lighting, it shouldn't be that tough. There's always some reason why the hearts aren't perfect.

Let's use the example teo used => http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10944/

The reason for the "kink" in the hearts lies with a facet that leaks light. You can see this from the ASET image clearly. Besides other minor issues like unsymmetrical arrows also contribute to the hearts pattern seen. It shouldn't be tough to pick that up from a face up view under appropriate lighting with some experience.

I still stand by what I said earlier. Most lay people can't tell the differences. But once you reached a certain level of looking at stones, a little "unbalancing" in contrast patterns observed will tell you that the hearts and arrows isn't perfect.

Is it that important? Do you really need heats and arrows for a beautiful stone. Well, that's a subjective question. I personally kind of like it. However, nobody can answer that for you except yourself.

You answer these kind of questions from a professional/vendor/trade viewpoint. That is where the problem comes in for me. Identify your background and maybe we can understand better where you are coming from. I think you are a vendor (or in the trade) and are not identifying yourself, which is in violation of the policies here. Newcomers here are either consumers who are coming here to educate themselves or people in the trade who have to identify themselves. You came and immediately began giving advice that sounds like it is coming from a trade person. I think you started posting at exactly the time that diamondloveaffair stopped, so I suspect you may be the same person as the postings seem identical to me.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can totally dig what you and DS are saying. I think I am more proportion driven than optical symmetry driven since I can't really see a difference between my non H/A ring stone and my H/A earrings (and couldn't when I looked at a H/A stone side by side with the stone i have now either) but I am really particular about proportions and cutting style and I think that tends to show up in branded stones, perhaps, as opposed to stones that just happen to fall in to ideal proportions when they are cut. There's just so many little details that go in to how a stone plays with lights that goes past the basics (and stuff I only barely understand). I just needed to get behind a cutting style I can appreciate as opposed to continuing to randomly try to find what I was looking for in a stone. It was exhausting having specific things I wanted to see and just keep trial and error choice up. So I made the switch to something where it will be much easier to find what I like and I think that was worth it in the end...my bank account hated me for awhile though....

I completely understand!! I upgraded through WF to take advantage of my trade-in and I was looking for an RB with very specific proportions - higher crown and shorter LGF than WF's ACA brand specifications allow, and of course I was still picky about having excellent optical symmetry. OMG it was a total PITA! Searching for stones, calling manufacturers and hoping they're available, waiting for the okay to ship, actually getting them shipped out only to find they aren't appropriate for some other reason... it really is very stressful!! I was so relieved when WF pulled my current stone and okay'd it - if we hadn't found it then I'd have seriously considered scrapping my requirements and choosing one of their in-house stones just to avoid the headache. And I snorted out loud, there goes my soapbox because that decision would have been based solely on ease of purchase

Oh, and I bought my non-H&A stone through GOG because they would evaluate optical symmetry for me. I would never buy a rb stone without excellent optical symmetry regardless of whether it meets true H&A standards or not. That is why my two diamonds appeared similar. In addition, BG recut a family stone to me that did not end up at BG Signature level, but I love it and think it turned out beautifully! Again, great optical symmetry and light performance but not in that top 1%!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can agree on round brilliants, but I would be very hard pressed to find an antique stone that came close to the optical symmetry and light performance of my AVR. I'd LOVE to have one, and some people here have searched, bought repeatedly, and eventually found one, but I didn't want to invest the time, energy, and money (having to resell stones, etc.) in that process. Not to mention true I color or above is extremely rare in the 2+ ct range in OEC's. Charmy found one, but she had quite an adventure getting her stone, and it was a totally unique situation!

I will say that it was the best decision for me to go with ACA's for earrings since I have used their upgrade policy!

 

[yssie]

Once you look through thousands of diamonds with your unaided eyes under different lighting, it shouldn't be that tough. There's always some reason why the hearts aren't perfect.

Let's use the example teo used => http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10944/

The reason for the "kink" in the hearts lies with a facet that leaks light. You can see this from the ASET image clearly. Besides other minor issues like unsymmetrical arrows also contribute to the hearts pattern seen. It shouldn't be tough to pick that up from a face up view under appropriate lighting with some experience.

I still stand by what I said earlier. Most lay people can't tell the differences. But once you reached a certain level of looking at stones, a little "unbalancing" in contrast patterns observed will tell you that the hearts and arrows isn't perfect.

Is it that important? Do you really need heats and arrows for a beautiful stone. Well, that's a subjective question. I personally kind of like it. However, nobody can answer that for you except yourself.

Can you elaborate?
Why is the "facet that leaks light" the "reason for the kink"?
Why exactly do asymmetric arrows "contribute to the hearts pattern"?
What, precisely, are the relationships between these various artifacts?
This is the sort of response that could be really interesting and educational but as it is, it's a bit wishy washy IMO - assertions alluding to examination of the nitty-gritty with no actual explanation of any of said nitty-gritty or consequences thereof. And yes, I have some thoughts, but I'll spare everyone the thousand word essay if you'll KISS it instead

 

[yssie]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can agree on round brilliants, but I would be very hard pressed to find an antique stone that came close to the optical symmetry and light performance of my AVR. I'd LOVE to have one, and some people here have searched, bought repeatedly, and eventually found one, but I didn't want to invest the time, energy, and money (having to resell stones, etc.) in that process. Not to mention true I color or above is extremely rare in the 2+ ct range in OEC's. Charmy found one, but she had quite an adventure getting her stone, and it was a totally unique situation!

I will say that it was the best decision for me to go with ACA's for earrings since I have used their upgrade policy!

I totally agree, especially after seeing your AVR in-person! Maybe that, rather than discussions using MRBs, is the best explanation of the "crispness" that precision-cutting for high optical symmetry yields...those very clear, very sharp, very predictable delineations between the various areas of stone as they cycle through returning light to obstructing to leaking?

I gotta be honest, I don't think you'd have ever found an antique that returns light like your AVR. Charmy's stone is STUNNING from her pics and I really want to meet it IRL one of these days! And the story is one for the books, but I wouldn't expect it to exhibit the perfect precise crispness that yours does IRL - it's an antique and it's beautifully charming for a host of reasons, and I just don't think it's fair to judge antiques and modern precision-cut stones by the same metrics - the methodologies and technologies and priorities were just SO different... for someone who values that precision of symmetry it doesn't get more 'mind-clean' than an AVR!!

 

[msop04]

...I have some thoughts, but I'll spare everyone the thousand word essay if you'll KISS it instead

This made my morning! HA! (I work in a pharmacy, so to laugh is refreshing!)

I am no expert by any stretch of the imagination, so I thought I'd tell my personal experience...

While searching for my ering/stone, I looked at SO. MANY. DIAMONDS. Good, not-so-good, branded H&A, and lots of GIA XXX and AGS 0 stones. I honestly couldn't tell the difference in the H&A and XXX/0 diamonds. A good many SAs (who sold the both types of diamonds) tried to show me the difference between them and I just nodded... they all looked great to me (shows how much I know, huh??)

My SA at Diamonds Direct also tried... I think he gave up! LOL Anyway, he had been in diamond sales for almost 27 years (at the time) and he told me that he had to look very very closely with an aided eye to tell -- and couldn't all the time! <--- at least he was honest!

So, I don't think it's quite fair to say that once you've looked at a lot of diamonds, you would easily be able to differentiate between branded H&A and XXX/0 stones.

 

[kathley]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can agree on round brilliants, but I would be very hard pressed to find an antique stone that came close to the optical symmetry and light performance of my AVR. I'd LOVE to have one, and some people here have searched, bought repeatedly, and eventually found one, but I didn't want to invest the time, energy, and money (having to resell stones, etc.) in that process. Not to mention true I color or above is extremely rare in the 2+ ct range in OEC's. Charmy found one, but she had quite an adventure getting her stone, and it was a totally unique situation!

I will say that it was the best decision for me to go with ACA's for earrings since I have used their upgrade policy!

I totally agree, especially after seeing your AVR in-person! Maybe that, rather than discussions using MRBs, is the best explanation of the "crispness" that precision-cutting for high optical symmetry yields...those very clear, very sharp, very predictable delineations between the various areas of stone as they cycle through returning light to obstructing to leaking? I gotta be honest, I don't think you'd have ever found an antique that returns light like your AVR. Charmy's stone is STUNNING from her pics and I really want to meet it IRL one of these days! And the story is one for the books, but I wouldn't expect it to exhibit the perfect precise crispness that yours does IRL - it's an antique and it's beautifully charming for a host of reasons, and I just don't think it's fair to judge antiques and modern precision-cut stones by the same metrics - the methodologies and technologies and priorities were just SO different... for someone who values that precision of symmetry it doesn't get more 'mind-clean' than an AVR!!

I would love to see an AVR in person to experience first hand the beauty in comparison to my stone They sure look gorgeous on my monitor! Unfortunately, I have not heard of anyone in St. louis owning an AVR

 

[bunnycat]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can agree on round brilliants, but I would be very hard pressed to find an antique stone that came close to the optical symmetry and light performance of my AVR. I'd LOVE to have one, and some people here have searched, bought repeatedly, and eventually found one, but I didn't want to invest the time, energy, and money (having to resell stones, etc.) in that process. Not to mention true I color or above is extremely rare in the 2+ ct range in OEC's. Charmy found one, but she had quite an adventure getting her stone, and it was a totally unique situation!

I will say that it was the best decision for me to go with ACA's for earrings since I have used their upgrade policy!

I totally agree, especially after seeing your AVR in-person! Maybe that, rather than discussions using MRBs, is the best explanation of the "crispness" that precision-cutting for high optical symmetry yields...those very clear, very sharp, very predictable delineations between the various areas of stone as they cycle through returning light to obstructing to leaking?

I gotta be honest, I don't think you'd have ever found an antique that returns light like your AVR. Charmy's stone is STUNNING from her pics and I really want to meet it IRL one of these days! And the story is one for the books, but I wouldn't expect it to exhibit the perfect precise crispness that yours does IRL - it's an antique and it's beautifully charming for a host of reasons, and I just don't think it's fair to judge antiques and modern precision-cut stones by the same metrics - the methodologies and technologies and priorities were just SO different... for someone who values that precision of symmetry it doesn't get more 'mind-clean' than an AVR!!

I'd tend to agree with you re antique stones. I love my wonked out OEC with all it's flaws and actually prefer an actual antique stone to the AVR's I looked at when it comes down to it for antique styled stones. For modern stones however, I truly appreciate the "perfection" as it were, that goes in to stones cut for really fantastic proportions and symmetry.

 

[bunnycat]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can totally dig what you and DS are saying. I think I am more proportion driven than optical symmetry driven since I can't really see a difference between my non H/A ring stone and my H/A earrings (and couldn't when I looked at a H/A stone side by side with the stone i have now either) but I am really particular about proportions and cutting style and I think that tends to show up in branded stones, perhaps, as opposed to stones that just happen to fall in to ideal proportions when they are cut. There's just so many little details that go in to how a stone plays with lights that goes past the basics (and stuff I only barely understand). I just needed to get behind a cutting style I can appreciate as opposed to continuing to randomly try to find what I was looking for in a stone. It was exhausting having specific things I wanted to see and just keep trial and error choice up. So I made the switch to something where it will be much easier to find what I like and I think that was worth it in the end...my bank account hated me for awhile though....

That's what I was thinking bcat. I know you often say you can see a difference between your BG blue and your JA stone you had. I don't thing either were graded h and a right? But I know the quality of cutting is apparent to you.....

That is correct. The first stone I had was a AGS 000 ideal non H/A stone. When I was looking to switch I looked at a stone that did have H/A patterning and the one I got, which doesn't quite make hearts. Comparing all 3 side by side, I did see a difference in the branded stones versus my original. It took months to find that original, and it was a pretty darn good stone, but the one I have now is better. I just like those odds more when dealing with the possibility of upgrading down the line so I made the switch. It took viewing 2 stones to find a "fit" for me instead of over half a dozen.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I like bastet's and DS's responses - opposite ends of the spectrum in some ways!

I definitely think there are lots of good reasons to buy branded H&As - seeing a difference, not seeing a difference but wanting "mind-clean" optical symmetry, not seeing a difference but believing that one may come to appreciate it down the line when one's eyes are more accustomed to discerning nuances, branded stones usually come with more generous policies and procedures...

I personally don't believe I could see the difference between near-H&As and "true" H&As - I can appreciate differences in light return that different proportions yield, but I think I could never be sure of whether any differences I'm seeing are due to optical symmetry or proportions! And I'm rather the opposite of DS in that I'm of the 'if I can't see it I'm not paying for it' sort so for me the real incentive to buy branded is the policies.

I can agree on round brilliants, but I would be very hard pressed to find an antique stone that came close to the optical symmetry and light performance of my AVR. I'd LOVE to have one, and some people here have searched, bought repeatedly, and eventually found one, but I didn't want to invest the time, energy, and money (having to resell stones, etc.) in that process. Not to mention true I color or above is extremely rare in the 2+ ct range in OEC's. Charmy found one, but she had quite an adventure getting her stone, and it was a totally unique situation!

I will say that it was the best decision for me to go with ACA's for earrings since I have used their upgrade policy!

I totally agree, especially after seeing your AVR in-person! Maybe that, rather than discussions using MRBs, is the best explanation of the "crispness" that precision-cutting for high optical symmetry yields...those very clear, very sharp, very predictable delineations between the various areas of stone as they cycle through returning light to obstructing to leaking?

I gotta be honest, I don't think you'd have ever found an antique that returns light like your AVR. Charmy's stone is STUNNING from her pics and I really want to meet it IRL one of these days! And the story is one for the books, but I wouldn't expect it to exhibit the perfect precise crispness that yours does IRL - it's an antique and it's beautifully charming for a host of reasons, and I just don't think it's fair to judge antiques and modern precision-cut stones by the same metrics - the methodologies and technologies and priorities were just SO different... for someone who values that precision of symmetry it doesn't get more 'mind-clean' than an AVR!!

You are right, Yssie, that we cannot really compare antique and modern cut antique style stones. They are both beautiful in their own way.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would love to see an AVR in person to experience first hand the beauty in comparison to my stone They sure look gorgeous on my monitor! Unfortunately, I have not heard of anyone in St. louis owning an AVR

Kathley, yours is cut SO much like mine! It is one of the prettiest OEC's I have ever seen!

 

[Christina...]

IMO the differences between a true HA and a non HA are usually quite obvious in actual images and reflector images, however that all changes once the stone in hand and viewed IRL, for me anyway. There is a huge difference between static images and real world viewing environments and once in that real world viewing environment the once obvious difference become much more difficult to discern. For me personally, TRUE HA isn't so important, nor have I read any convincing argument that leads me to believe that perfect optical symmetry correlates in anyway to it's beauty. I've determined what proportions are most appealing to ME and think that the differing personalities of diamonds is much more appealing and interesting than a standard HA.

 

[Niel]

IMO the differences between a true HA and a non HA are usually quite obvious in actual images and reflector images, however that all changes once the stone in hand and viewed IRL, for me anyway. There is a huge difference between static images and real world viewing environments and once in that real world viewing environment the once obvious difference become much more difficult to discern. For me personally, TRUE HA isn't so important, nor have I read any convincing argument that leads me to believe that perfect optical symmetry correlates in anyway to it's beauty. I've determined what proportions are most appealing to ME and think that the differing personalities of diamonds is much more appealing and interesting than a standard HA.

+100

 

[teobdl]

Once you look through thousands of diamonds with your unaided eyes under different lighting, it shouldn't be that tough. There's always some reason why the hearts aren't perfect.

Let's use the example teo used => http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10944/

The reason for the "kink" in the hearts lies with a facet that leaks light. You can see this from the ASET image clearly. Besides other minor issues like unsymmetrical arrows also contribute to the hearts pattern seen. It shouldn't be tough to pick that up from a face up view under appropriate lighting with some experience.

I still stand by what I said earlier. Most lay people can't tell the differences. But once you reached a certain level of looking at stones, a little "unbalancing" in contrast patterns observed will tell you that the hearts and arrows isn't perfect.

Is it that important? Do you really need heats and arrows for a beautiful stone. Well, that's a subjective question. I personally kind of like it. However, nobody can answer that for you except yourself.

Can you elaborate?
Why is the "facet that leaks light" the "reason for the kink"?
Why exactly do asymmetric arrows "contribute to the hearts pattern"?
What, precisely, are the relationships between these various artifacts?
This is the sort of response that could be really interesting and educational but as it is, it's a bit wishy washy IMO - assertions alluding to examination of the nitty-gritty with no actual explanation of any of said nitty-gritty or consequences thereof. And yes, I have some thoughts, but I'll spare everyone the thousand word essay if you'll KISS it instead

Maybe I'll attempt with my rudimentary physics...

Why is the "facet that leaks light" the "reason for the kink"? The kink in the heart is a product of a facet that was not cut flatly on the plane it should occupy for optimal symmetry. As a result, light that should have been reflected off that lower facet and eventually back at the viewer is actually veering off and exiting out of a non-viewer-oriented facet ("leakage").

Why exactly do asymmetric arrows "contribute to the hearts pattern"? Hearts are the result of arrow-creating-facets (pavilion mains) being reflected off the table/crown and landing on the opposite side next to each other to create the heart images. By "contribute to the hearts pattern," I think the poster means that the asymmetric arrows (read: pavilion mains) create asymmetric hearts.

What, precisely, are the relationships between these various artifacts? Described in the previous two answers, and described here:
http://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/how-hearts-and-arrows-diamonds.htm and discussed quite well here beginning toward the bottom of page 1: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-significant-are-the-star-facets-and-lower-girdles-info.31985/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-significant-are-the-star-facets-and-lower-girdles-info.31985/[/URL]


Please correct me if my reasoning is off. Thank you, DE, for pointing out the connection between the ASET and the Hearts view. I'm still disoriented as to which facets are shown where in the hearts view and the arrows view, and then where light should be seen as lost as a result of deviation from optimal symmetry.

But I did want to clarify some relationships between terms. If I'm not mistaken, "optical symmetry" should really be equated with "cut symmetry" and "balance." Deviation from optimal cut symmetry is what creates unevenness in brightness along a circumferential path within a diamond (excluding intended contrast areas). Depending on the degree of facet variance, the differences in brightness might appear as hot spots, dimness or frank leakage. Because each light ray takes one path, if you have a hot spot (buildup of light rays in a spot), you'll get a dim spot somewhere else. Since hearts are the result of a symmetric cut within good proportions, perfect hearts are the byproduct of a precisely cut and well-planned diamond. With hearts, you will get balanced light return within a given proportion's potential. It's for this reason that symmetry (read: hearts) is desired.

But back to my original question: can the viewer tell the difference? Stated otherwise, can the viewer SEE these minor light imbalances in a well-proportioned diamond?

I think the answer, for most people including many vet's around here, is NO. Still, I think the craft of it is quite something.

I'm buying a HA diamond this week and will be comparing it to, what I think, is a great-looking non-HA diamond. I hope to see a difference, even if subtle (fingers crossed!). It comes with a hearts viewer, so I'll be able to make a pretty informed comparison of the two.

 

[kathley]

I would love to see an AVR in person to experience first hand the beauty in comparison to my stone They sure look gorgeous on my monitor! Unfortunately, I have not heard of anyone in St. louis owning an AVR

Kathley, yours is cut SO much like mine! It is one of the prettiest OEC's I have ever seen!

Thank you for your kind words diamondseeker and I can't help but notice how mine is cut so much like yours too. Your diamond is truly one of the most gorgeous ones I have ever seen. And now I have my daughter gasping at your stone too! LOL