Re cutting a diamond for more brilliance?

[Emeraldsaremyfavorite]

I know people often have diamonds recut for tiny chips or damage. However, has anyone had their diamond recut to maximize brilliance? The cost doesn't seem to high-200-300 per carat, why not take a "good" cut and make it "excellent?" I am assuming perhaps too much carat weight would be lost but maybe just a tweak would make a diamond look great?

 

[Irishgrrrl]

This is a great question! And wouldn’t the increased cut quality make up for the lost carat weight (and possibly even the cost of the recut)?

 

[Bron357]

I think only an experienced gem cutter can weigh in here but I imagine that the process of recutting a diamond to improve brilliance depends on the actual diamond after due assessment. However the carat weight loss could be significant and the reduction in size not compensated for the “improvement” in brilliance, especially in monetary terms.

 

[Emeraldsaremyfavorite]

I’m talking all hypotheticals by the way... haven’t found a specific diamond yet but got to thinking. For example, found a diamond for a great deal, it was only a good cut, and wasn’t right on the carat mark like 2.02. So what about paying the few hundred bucks, having it recut and staying in the current carat range?

 

[Bron357]

I’m talking all hypotheticals by the way... haven’t found a specific diamond yet but got to thinking. For example, found a diamond for a great deal, it was only a good cut, and wasn’t right on the carat mark like 2.02. So what about paying the few hundred bucks, having it recut and staying in the current carat range?

Depending on the current cut of the diamond, you could be talking 10% to 20% carat weight loss, not just a couple of “points”.
For eg, I have 6.19 carats ruby with a chip to the table. It’s not a huge chip by any means but I’m still having to hope that the recut repair will still keep it above 5 carats. To repair that one damaged facet, all the other table facets and the girdle will have to be adjusted and that starts adding up quickly into a carat weight reduction. So to improve brilliance, who knows how many facets have to recut to achieve that. It could be all of them.

 

[LaylaR]

There are quite a few people that have had their diamonds recut for performance.

 

[Emeraldsaremyfavorite]

Thanks for all the input. I find it very fascinating to think about turning “a diamond in the rough” or a “fixer upper”.... lol, and making it into a truly brilliant and perfectly cut diamond. Especially if you can get a not so great diamond at a pretty low cost. I remember someone posting about Brian Gavin cutting diamonds for a reasonable price and turning them into his signature diamond collection. Seems like a pretty economical way to improve a diamond’s beauty and worth.

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

There are people in the industry who do re-cuts - but in the majority of cases the carat loss outweighs the improved performance for most people.

There are 57 facets on a MRB diamond and they all interact with one another directly or indirectly for light performance. A 'minor' correction on one angle could require major compensation from other angles to make light performance improvements.

It really would take examination by an expert cutter to give an accurate assessment.

 

[nala]

Prices for recutting have gone up. Depends on carat size. Then factor in insurance, shipping, and recertifying and shipping associated with that. My 2.20 would have cost between 2000 to 2800.

 

[flyingpig]

Cut is the king. In reality, carat is the king. This is very true for benchmark carat weights such as 0.5c, 0.9c, 1.0c, 1.5c, 2.0c.
An average cut 1.0c will generally have higher price premium and bettet marketabilty than a well cut 0.9x.

 

[Tourmaline]

I inherited an ugly steep deep .992ct diamond and had it recut into a beautiful .85ct one, without losing much diameter. Here’s the thread about the experience:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/sent-an-ugly-1ct-diamond-to-brian-gavin-for-recut-analysis.203438

 

[ChristineRose]

Cut is the king. In reality, carat is the king. This is very true for benchmark carat weights such as 0.5c, 0.9c, 1.0c, 1.5c, 2.0c.
An average cut 1.0c will generally have higher price premium and bettet marketabilty than a well cut 0.9x.

Definitely true, but alas that doesn't mean that a crummy 1.0 can be turned into a nice .9, even if this could have happened when the stone was still rough.

 

[Tourmaline]

Definitely true, but alas that doesn't mean that a crummy 1.0 can be turned into a nice .9, even if this could have happened when the stone was still rough.

Often, though, it can be.

 

[rockysalamander]

Nothing new to add, but it really comes down to the particular diamond and what you will lose (weight/spread) and gain (performance/ cut-style from old to modern). Also, depending on inclusion placement and type, re-cuts can be very unwise or spectacularly successful. There really is no "trend" you can count on.

There is a trend, unfortunate in my mind, of taking old cuts and re-cutting them into modern diamonds. Certainly a few of those old cuts test the limits of the most passionate diamond lover for all their wonkiness and part of me loves the idea of bringing the old into new, but its a real loss of the tangible history of diamond cutting.

 

[cflutist]

Cut is the king. In reality, carat is the king. This is very true for benchmark carat weights such as 0.5c, 0.9c, 1.0c, 1.5c, 2.0c.
An average cut 1.0c will generally have higher price premium and bettet marketabilty than a well cut 0.9x.

This article has illustrations and actual examples showing how it’s more profitable for factories to force rough crystals to a higher carat weight, even if the performance is reduced. The cutters of superideal diamonds do not do that which also makes 2.70 to 2.99 more rare, a reason why I snapped up my 2.79 F-VS1 CBI.

https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/education/education-caratlimit

 

[Irishgrrrl]

There is a trend, unfortunate in my mind, of taking old cuts and re-cutting them into modern diamonds. Certainly a few of those old cuts test the limits of the most passionate diamond lover for all their wonkiness and part of me loves the idea of bringing the old into new, but its a real loss of the tangible history of diamond cutting.

I agree, it's so sad that this happens. I'm afraid there won't be any old-cuts left after awhile, and that's absolutely tragic.