Question about ''cut''

[Freakazoid]

In particular... fancy cut ''cuts''.

In terms of shopping online, is there any real foundation at all in places assignment of the quality of the cut, is it purely arbitrary, or do they know something they aren''t letting on.

For example, for a radiant.... According to the AGA charts (not knowing crown), this diamond would most likely be a 1A, and by numbers alone it would probably satisfy the RCDC cut possibly, however blue nile ranks it as a ''fair cut'' (which imo sounds extremely crappy in comparison to others).

1.27 ct radiant
F
SI2
60.3% depth
62% table
gd/gd sym/pol
thn-sl thk girdle
7.32*6.1*3.68

any thoughts? I could even understand a ''good'' cut, but what in the world would give the diamond that bad of a cut rating? Assuming of course they don''t know something else.

 

[Freakazoid]

On the flip side they have another diamond in their selection.

.90 ct radiant E/VS2, ''Very Good'' cut with a 73.8% depth and 78% table, medium to very thick girdle. 5.65*5.11*3.77.

And from everything I''ve learned with numbers that big, that will NOT be a good cut and probably going to have a decent amount of wasted ''carat space''

 

[JohnQuixote]

There's no way to be decisive about fancy shapes from the numbers. There are just too many variables. The AGA charts are useful guidelines but we would not advise making a sight-unseen decision about any fancy shape without seeing reflector images/light performance (at the least) and having a trusted professional - whether that be seller, appraiser or both - involved in analyzing the diamond for you personally.

 

[Freakazoid]

Thanks for the heads up John! I''ve definitely noticed that so far, and makes shopping quite a pain. However with some of the places that carry almost an entirely online inventory of fancy cuts, how are they getting these cut descriptions? I could understand if you have them in hand, and basing off that. However when you''re looking at, presumably, the exact same numbers I am, why would you be assigning a ''Fair'' cut to a diamond that by all ''facts and figures'' out there, should actually have a cut rating on the complete end of the scale.

I guess my question might be: Do the online resellers have access to information about these diamonds, that the public does not?

 

[JohnQuixote]

You're welcome. If you think it seems unregulated you're correct.

Date: 9/13/2007 11:58:03 AM
Author: Freakazoid
Thanks for the heads up John! I've definitely noticed that so far, and makes shopping quite a pain. However with some of the places that carry almost an entirely online inventory of fancy cuts, how are they getting these cut descriptions? I could understand if you have them in hand, and basing off that. However when you're looking at, presumably, the exact same numbers I am, why would you be assigning a 'Fair' cut to a diamond that by all 'facts and figures' out there, should actually have a cut rating on the complete end of the scale.

I guess my question might be: Do the online resellers have access to information about these diamonds, that the public does not?

Not usually. Seller cut "grades" for virtual stone listings (fair, ideal, etc.) are determined by the seller, usually with no more information than what's displayed. This can be confusing because such assessment is incomplete and not uniform from place to place. It's also compounded by frequent use of the term "ideal," which is often associated with the AGSL, but the seller's grade may not have anything to do with AGSL grading. For example, there is no such thing as an AGS Ideal marquise or radiant cut but some places use "ideal" in the cut assessment for these shapes in their virtual lists. This is not 'wrong' as one word alone does imply the AGS pedigree, but we frequently field calls from consumers who under the mistaken impression that they will be getting an 'AGS Ideal' marquise or radiant somewhere because of that word's use. It's an in-depth topic and we believe responsible sellers will communicate with their clients to clear up misconceptions.

The fundamental problem here is that suppliers provide limited information. In-house stones can be decisively assessed, but judging any diamond's cut by only table, depth, polish and symmetry is impossible. Nevertheless, sellers are competitive and it's standard to assign these labels. A consumer's best bet is to communicate with the seller, find out exactly what's implied by 'X' cut assessment and (most important) find out if they have, or will have, the diamond in-hand to confirm the assessment. If so, pictures, ideal-scope images, etc. should be easy to acquire at that stage - per my post above.