shape
carat
color
clarity

question about hearts and arrows

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

notdocyet

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 3, 2003
Messages
23
Please allow me to clarify something with the experts. I think that I understand a H&A diamond will sparkle more and be more brillant, will it look any bigger? I also noted that there is no published data to confirm that the H&A diamond is superior. I have also been looking for some.9 diamonds these seem to be hard to find? I would still love a 1.2 but I am not sure if the budget will work. Thanks so much. Leslie
 
Hi, Leslie, I''m not an expert, just a consumer! But you want to focus on an ideal cut diamond because it will have more brilliance or fire. A well cut diamond may look a little bigger than a poorly cut one. Hearts and Arrows diamonds have outstanding optical symmetry. But as long as you stay within the AGS 0 light performance parameters, you should do well!

Stones in the ranges just under the next price category are harder to find. Stones at .90-.99 and 1.40-1.49 and 1.9-1.99 are desirable from a price standpoint, but when stones are close to this size, the cutter will try to get the stone up to the next price category if he can. Therefore, they are harder to come by.
 
>>H&A diamond will sparkle more and be more brilliant

Not at all. H&A just guaranties great symmetry and something to talk about
3.gif
Some experts and consumers like it but it doesn't mean that you will not like the look of an ideal cut stone that doesn't have H&A symmetry.

>>will it look any bigger?

Depends from which direction you look. From table-up direction, spread (diameter) is bigger for the shallower diamonds than the deep ones. From the side, diamonds with higher crown look larger (vertical spread)

>>.9 diamonds these seem to be hard to find

Here I posted distribution of the availability vs carat size

AvailCarat_2005_04.gif
 
The distribution chart is very cool, thanks!


Date: 10/1/2006 11:00:19 PM
Author: Pricescope
>>H&A diamond will sparkle more and be more brilliant

Not at all. H&A just guaranties great symmetry and something to talk about
3.gif
Some experts and consumers like it but it doesn''t mean that you will not like the look of an ideal cut stone that doesn''t have H&A symmetry.
Not sure if Paul agrees...though the perspective that, in the bigger scheme of factors, pavilion angle, with respect to crown, will be the first order of business to get right...this idea seems to have no challenges.
 
Date: 10/1/2006 10:43:47 PM
Author:notdocyet
Please allow me to clarify something with the experts. I think that I understand a H&A diamond will sparkle more and be more brillant, will it look any bigger?

A H&A cut diamond may not actually be any more brilliant than another diamond cut to equal proportions, but the symmetry of the H&A cut and the improved on/off flash provided by the
symmetry may give the impression of greater brilliance due to the way our eyes perceive light and edges. We are hard wired to perceive edges and contrast and the H&A cut does provide greater contrast than a diamond with poorer symmetry. In two diamonds with equal brilliance, the one with the greater contrast will be perceived by our eyes as more brilliant. (I am not a light scientist, this information comes from my conversations with Peter Yantzer and Jim Caudill at AGS who have both been part of the team at AGS working on the AGS diamond performance grading research.)

Often a well cut diamond will look bigger than a poorly cut diamond because of the way the brilliance extends from edge to edge. It is hard to give you a good answer to this part of your question unless we know if you are asking does a H&A look bigger than another ideal cut, or does it look bigger than another diamond that is not as well cut of equal diameter. I posted long ago a picture of two diamonds side by side, one that was physically larger in diameter than the other, but the smaller diamond looked larger than the bigger one because of how well it was cut. Perhaps one of our great search artists can find it for us...

Wink
 
Date: 10/2/2006 8:09:23 AM
Author: Wink

Date: 10/1/2006 10:43:47 PM
Author:notdocyet
Please allow me to clarify something with the experts. I think that I understand a H&A diamond will sparkle more and be more brillant, will it look any bigger?
A H&A cut diamond may not actually be any more brilliant than another diamond cut to equal proportions, but the symmetry of the H&A cut and the improved on/off flash provided by the
symmetry may give the impression of greater brilliance due to the way our eyes perceive light and edges.
Wink
It is an arguement that seems to make sense Wink, but I can still find nor see the evidence to support this high moral arguement.
It does not mean that we will not one day proove it to be true - but at this time I have yet to hear an arguement from anyone that is truly convincing.

One of the reasons I prefer slightly shallow commercial grade non H&A''s diamonds is that if there is any symmetry variation the stone does not "fall away" as badly in the steeper deeper parts of the stone. But I can not proove that theory either. (I dont actually prefer ''commercial grade diamonds BTW - it is an example only)
 
Date: 10/1/2006 11:54:12 PM
Author: Regular Guy
The distribution chart is very cool, thanks!



Date: 10/1/2006 11:00:19 PM
Author: Pricescope
>>H&A diamond will sparkle more and be more brilliant

Not at all. H&A just guaranties great symmetry and something to talk about
3.gif
Some experts and consumers like it but it doesn''t mean that you will not like the look of an ideal cut stone that doesn''t have H&A symmetry.
Not sure if Paul agrees...though the perspective that, in the bigger scheme of factors, pavilion angle, with respect to crown, will be the first order of business to get right...this idea seems to have no challenges.
Well, indeed, I am not sure whether I agree with this, but, on the other hand, I do partly agree. The difference is probably perspective.

The term ''H&A'', just like the tem ''Ideal'' is used for many items, which do not entirely cover the original content of the term.

There was a recent thread, which already is historic, that covered the use of the term ''Ideal'', and the consumers'' conclusion was that ''Ideal'' for most people means ''a well-cut stone'', while for purists, like myself, it means at the minimum a stone graded Ideal by AGS. The reason is that too many professionals have borrowed the term ''Ideal'' as a marketing-term without offering the product.

In the same way, the meaning of the term ''Hearts and Arrows'' has become less strict. Here, the deterioration is also a result of loose usage of a marketing-term, but there is also a technical reason. At first, when the Japanese suddenly developed a desire for the symmetry and the romantic idea of a ''Hearts and Cupids''-diamond, most cutters were not prepared for this demand, neither psychologically nor technically. In other words, they had never known customers who would pay more for this kind of symmetry, and their tools were not adapted to offer this kind of symmetry.

Seeing the extra dollars, a few cutters concentrated on this, and in order to make sure that they earned the extra, they made sure to work to the extremes of symmetry. Some people, who have followed this from the beginning, will testify that the H&A of the early days were cut much more strictly and looking much better than the average H&A of today. The reason: well, after the first few cutters did financially clearly better, others started copying them, specific tools were developed to make it easier, and H&A became mainstream-cutting, where it started as the specialisation of a few extremely talented people. At the same time, the Japanese labs, which do offer a grade on H&A, were probably not prepared to a supply of various quality-layers in H&A. And one, who is ill-prepared seldomly takes the correct decision. Therefore, even the Japanese labs now offer a very loose grade on H&A.

On top of that, H&A is a contrast-pattern, which in essence is only suitable for rounds. Contrast-patterns are very important, not only because people are hard-wired for contrast (like Wink said), but also, because they are the basis of scintillation. Now, this might sound like blasphemy, but H&A are definitely not the only eye-pleasing contrast-pattern. In rounds, any contrast-pattern will however always be arrows-lookalike, but in other shapes, one can see many other patterns of contrast. On a side-note, that is why I think that H&A in square-ish, false round shapes are more marketing than actual improvement of light-performance.

So, we come to the question, what is more important, a combination of great proportions or H&A-symmetry? Again, there is no easy answer, it depends.

I would say that if two stones have so-and-so average proportions, that a good H&A on one of them will look better.
In the same way, if two stones have the most ideal average proportions, the one with a good H&A will look better.
However, the big question is if we have to choose between a stone with perfect ideal average proportions but no or a so-so H&A, and a stone with so-so average proportions but with great H&A. I think that there is no easy question on that one, it will depend on the situation.

And then comes the final question: knowing all this, what would you as a consumer be happy with. If you only want the best of the best, then make sure to get great average proportions, combined with the best possible H&A. Also, make sure that you can afford a small premium for this. And finally, do not expect that you can find all this in any store near your doorstep. The best-of-the-best is a rarity, and by definition, it will take some effort and time to find it.

If you are happy with ''better-than-average'' or even ''a-lot-better-than-average'', there will be many more options, including weighing off the necessity of H&A or the most-ideal proportions.

For those who have read until the end, let me re-phrase this into a short conclusion:
1. Beware, there are different levels of quality in what is sold as H&A
2. All other things equal, the symmetry of good H&A in a round will be better
3. In the end, the consumer needs to decide which cut-quality he or she is happy with. Therefore, any advice is conditional.

Live long,
 
Great post, Paul. Did you see Part 3 of Maarten interview?
 
Not yet. I have it scheduled for later today. I am getting jealous though, of all these guys that you are interviewing.
 
We can't wait to film you Paul, but of course it will mean that you will never be able to walk down the street without a mob following with autograpgh books. You are far too good looking and charming to boot!!! (Not to mention the kewlest spec's)

Re your assertions on H&A's over so-so symmetry - how did you test to arrive at that conclusion?
I find it interesting because Peter Yantzer has yet to arrive at this conclusion, and the GIA survey did not (although the dealers bias' may have scewed the results because the foundation article implied dealers of H&A's prefferred H&A's and the others didnt - and obviously there were more nondealers surveyed)
 
Nicely said Paul!

Leonid, I watched the video early this morning. Very interesting and Maarten is a great subject for your interview because he is so clear in his message. Someday I hope you will also interview Paul who is another quality individual in the trade and here at Pricescope.

Wink
 
I think Paul will have to wait for alternate spots. I heard that in consideration for the second and 4th spots running next are Martin Short and Steve Martin. Now...maybe Paul''s middle name is Maarteen...which could be another story....

38.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top