princess versus radiant

[girlsbestfriend]

Hi,I'm new to this whole diamond thing but recently got engaged and am now looking for that perfect ring. I've looked around and I like the squarish cuts, but not the emerald. I like the princess cut, but was looking through some websites and noticed the radiant cut as well, but can't really find a good explanation as to the difference, other than the fact that the radian has tapered corners. Is there a difference in terms of brilliance? Any guidance would be much appreciated.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I did find a nice radiant the other day - first i ever saw.
You really should not get too hung up on all this stuff if you like a fancy shape.
If you want to find the best you can then as Jonathon has been buying his better looking stones - use an Ideal-scope or Fire Scope(tm).
The choice really is shape or ideal cut round. There is nothing wrong with the shape choice.

 

[girlsbestfriend]

Thanks again...I'll check out the ideal scope site. Will probably be back in a few days with more questions!

 

[pricescope]

Here is another shape, Flanders:

www.flanders-brilliant.com Jonathan from Good Old Gold has an example of Flanders cut with Firescope image: www.goodoldgold.com/flanders_1_28ct_h_vvs2.htm

White areas show the light leakagehere is another one, http://www.goodoldgold.com/flanders_1_04ct_g_vs2.htm :

Not bad for fancy shape. Garry, what do you think?

 

[pricescope]

Now Radiant to compare:
www.goodoldgold.com/rad_1_35ct_g_vs2.htm

 

[girlsbestfriend]

Oh gosh..this ring choosing thing is going to be difficult (not that I'm complaining). Thanks for the info...I'll have to think about it, but looks like the flanders the way to go if I want a square shape. Do you happen to know if it's illegal to copy the lucida setting? My jeweller told me that Tiffanys has a trade-mark/patent or something like that and that she won't be able to make an exact replica, but she could do something similar. But I was on this website (www.dvatache.com) and some of their settings look identical to the lucida, so I'm a bit confused. I love that setting, but don't really feel like having my fiance fork out $20K if I can get a fairly decent replica legally.

 

[pricescope]

Hi GBF

It's nice to see more and more people from Toronto here

According to Garry Holloway (Cut Nut) you will find any non square stones look shocking thru Ideal-Scope - lots of light leakage. Not even 1 in 100 radiants pass his test, and about 1 in 10 princess's look fair to good thru the ideal-scope.

 

[pricescope]

No, it shouldn't be difficult. I just tried to demonstrate the light leakage thingy

You might just want to compare several diamonds and choose the one you like the most without all this rocket science

Here are some previous threads about Lucida. Although Lucida is a trademark you could find similar settings from other sources.
www.pricescope.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000155.html
www.pricescope.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000316.html

 

[girlsbestfriend]

Thanks. Not to sound like a moron (I told you I was new at this diamond thing!) but what's an ideal scope? It seems from your answer that if I'm set on a square shaped diamond, I'm better off with a princess rather than a radiant in terms of light leakage (which I take it is a bad thing)...does that sound right?

 

[pricescope]

Oh, I'm sorry...Here you can read about ideal-scope: https://www.pricescope.com/idealscope_indx.asp Basically it's a tool to visualize areas that leak light and hence reduce light return.As lower the symmetry of the stone as less light return will be. That is why round shape is the most brilliant.So there is better chance to get more brilliant princess if it has square proportions.However, when people buy fancy shapes they value the shape over the brilliance.