Re-Cutting Pavilion and or crown on 4.35 CT

[sunlvr]

Hi-

My jeweler has offered to re-cut a stone I am considering purchasing so the proportions are better. I wanted to see if anyone has experience re-cutting to get better results. He said cost would add ~$1,000, Any advise on the following proposals

The stone has the following:

Now:
J
SI2
4.35 ct
57% table
35.5 degree crown angle
55% star facets
62.2% depth
40.8 pavilion angle
LGH 80%
Med Blue Fluorescence
GIA triple X

HCA is 2.6

Proposed:
Fix steep crown
56% table
34.5 degree crown angle
61.9 to 62% depth
40.8 pavilion angle
Med Blue Fluorescence
star facets ??
LGH 80%
HCA might hit 1.3
loss of pt not determined

or
Make less deep and fix pavilion angle
57% table
35.5 degree crown angle
~62% depth
40.6 pavilion angle
LGH ??
Med Blue Fluorescence
HCA 1.4
Maybe loose 10pts or so

Stone is very white and sharp 10.44mm diameter
Stone as is is $45K

My concerns are:
1.) The star facets are 55% (long), should I fix the crown to improve on crown depth and fix star facets?
2.) Should I just fix the pavilion to have a better HCA and try for shorter LGH to 77%?
3.) have the whole stone re-cut crown and pavilion?
3.) Move on to another stone and avoid this hassle?


Here are photos in the current state

 

[whatmeworry]

I would leave it alone. There's nothing wrong with those proportions. Are you considering cutting it because you don't like the way it looks or because you want a better HCA score? There's nothing wrong with an HCA score of 2.6. Some folks even prefer a higher crown on a diamond, so I would not mess with it.

 

[sunlvr]

Hello-

My bad, in the current state HCA as is at 2.7.

I am concerned that the crown is a bit steep and could be a not as "perfect" by the numbers as I would like.

Am I putting just too much emphasis on the numbers? I just think I will be bothered if I do not get the exact proportions that are "ideal".

Thank you.

 

[denverappraiser]

Why are you doing this? We don't know if AGS would call it 'ideal' but GIA is already calling it 'excellent', their top grade. What exactly is your target?

 

[yssie]

No... NO WAY.

There is always some risk when you talk about re-cutting and re-polishing. The numbers on your stone are just fine - it must be stunning IRL!!

You can't do or die by HCA. Picture perfect H&A may or may not translate into a visual difference IRL to you. denverappraiser asks a good question - what's the goal here? From what you've said and posted I can't think of a single good reason to even contemplate it

ETA: you'd need to send it back to GIA for regrading, which will add to the cost and time, and it may or may not come back J SI2 EX/EX/EX depending on what happens.

ETA: can't see what polish is - maybe not EX/EX/EX right now, my mistake.
Okay, done editing now.

 

[NiceSmile]

leave it be. get a different stone if you want different proportions

 

[sunlvr]

Hello-

I guess I would like a stone that falls below the HCA 2.0. 2.7 shows very good performance. Bu tnot Excellent on HCA.

Maybe I should get the Ideal scope images and see the stone under that condition. I am really worried that the 35.5 crown angle will be a less than optimal diamond.

I was also considering a 3.9 J Si1 with med blue fluor,

55/62
34 degree crown
41 degree pavilion
50 star
80 LGH

10.05 mm
HCA of 1.4

about same price.

I just don't want to spend decent money on a OK stone. i would like something that is really great. Yes this is GIA triple X but could it be better or should I look for better. That's why I have been playing with the HCA numbers.

See the HCA number now: with 35.5 and 40.8 57/62.2, J Med Blue Fluor

 

[sunlvr]

Here are the offical numbers:



The stone is eyeclean. A very nice SI2.

 

[JulieN]

GIA rounds too much for you to finely slice between HCA 2 and 2.7, it is not useful.

Even if Ideal Scope shows some minor leakage, you can't see it with your naked eyes, it will be stunning.

 

[yssie]

I repeat: you can't do or die by HCA.

HCA is a weeding tool, not a selection tool. It can help you narrow a wide selection by giving you a starting point - it suggests only whether a stone is likely worth further investigation.
It does not say that a stone that scores <2 is a winner - you have to investigate further.
It does not say that a stone that scores >2 is a doozy - you have to investigate further.

It was created at a time when there were few other tools available to the general public. You're looking at rare stones, you don't have the luxury of eliminating potential beauties using a blunt weeding tool - you need to jump to the 'investigate further' bit right away.

Julie brings up a very good point - since GIA's numbers are averaged and rounded, and HCA accepts only four inputs... Let your eyes judge the stones.

 

[04diamond<3]

I would also recommend leaving it alone. The IS looks beautiful!!

 

[sunlvr]

Some actual photos and potential mounting:

 

[ecf8503]

Leave it alone! Or get a different stone that already fits your strict criteria.

 

[04diamond<3]

Some actual photos and potential mounting:

Wow!!! It looks beautiful and will look stunning in that setting! That is some finger coverage!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would spend a few bucks and get an idealscope so you can know for sure if the stone has leakage. And unless you are buying from Brian Gavin (or Good Old Gold and a certain cutter does it), I wouldn't dare let anyone else touch it.

I like the idea of the fluorescence in the other J stone, but the decision for me would rest a lot in which was the most eyeclean from top and sides since these are large stones with SI clarity.

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

the best would be to move on to another stone. Although it is tough to find something else at such a big carat size, unless you are in a rush, i would advice you to think over it. cutting the stone doesn't seem like a good option in this case.

 

[04diamond<3]

the best would be to move on to another stone. Although it is tough to find something else at such a big carat size, unless you are in a rush, i would advice you to think over it. cutting the stone doesn't seem like a good option in this case.

I don't think that this is the "best" thing and I wouldn't suggest this. OP - it looks like the blue IS looks good and if you can get it for a good price I'd leave it alone. For a J it is very white and looks pretty clean. Winner to me...

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The lower and upper girdle (star) are not at all a problem - where did you get that idea?
GIA sym is excellent so it cant be that bad.
keep it clean or find another stone.
But really, its on a border in my book and way away from a train wreck.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think the 4.35 looks really nice from the arrows image and the actual photos. I would not risk a recut, particularly with an SI2.

If you need a truly mind clean stone then keep looking. But this one look promising to me and I would check it out in person if you have not already, or compare to other contenders in person to be sure the mind clean issues are worth the other compromises you may need to make. Finding eye clean SI2s in that size is haaaaarrd! If this stone is really eye clean for you, then finding another one that is better cut to boot could be hard. Or cost you.

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

the best would be to move on to another stone. Although it is tough to find something else at such a big carat size, unless you are in a rush, i would advice you to think over it. cutting the stone doesn't seem like a good option in this case.

I don't think that this is the "best" thing and I wouldn't suggest this. OP - it looks like the blue IS looks good and if you can get it for a good price I'd leave it alone. For a J it is very white and looks pretty clean. Winner to me...

the blue scope isn't an idealscope image. that picture shows nothing except for optical symmetry. taking pictures through the scope with a mobile will result in a highly inaccurate picture. like what garry says, this diamond is sitting at the border. in gia's grading of excellent, it is at the border too due to its high crown angle.

there's a trade off with higher crowns. do you want better fire dispersion or sacrifice it for better brilliance?

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

and by my standards of judging optical symmetry for hearts and arrows based on the 2 scope images, the diamond fails miserably.

 

[04diamond<3]

and by my standards of judging optical symmetry for hearts and arrows based on the 2 scope images, the diamond fails miserably.

This is your opinion and you're the only one that feels this way about the stone. This isn't your stone and for a stone that size, it's cut really well. Besides having other positives.

 

[Karl_K]

The gia numbers are rounded then averaged then grossly averaged they are not accurate enough to judge this stone in any way. Within the GIA rounding there is room for it to be a top of the line stone.
Get an IS or ASET image.

The heart and arrow images are not high enough quality to judge h&a status but optical symmetry it at least very good in my book. To rate near-h&a or h&a better images would be needed to see the actual optical symmetry.
Recutting this stone would be nuts.

 

[Karl_K]

and by my standards of judging optical symmetry for hearts and arrows based on the 2 scope images, the diamond fails miserably.

That can not be determined by the images, they are badly taken and the diamond is not properly centered in the scope.

 

[04diamond<3]

The gia numbers are rounded then averaged then grossly averaged they are not accurate enough to judge this stone in any way. Within the GIA rounding there is room for it to be a top of the line stone.
Get an IS or ASET image.

The heart and arrow images are not high enough quality to judge h&a status but optical symmetry it at least very good in my book. To rate near-h&a or h&a better images would be needed to see the actual optical symmetry.
Recutting this stone would be nuts.

thank you

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

that's what i mentioned in my earlier post. pictures taken with mobile cameras through the scope are going to be very inaccurate. for people to make recommendations that based on inaccurate scope pictures doesn't help the poster at all and it surprises me to see people offering advice based on the scope images.

based solely on the inaccurately taken pictures, the hearts patterning itself looks real bad. if you disagree, just compare those with what GOG, whiteflash, BGD have.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I was not under the impression that the OP wanted a true H&A stone If so, then he/she will need to pony up for that and buy from a company specializing in those cuts. But I can see enough from those images to see that the cut looks good -- there are distinct arrows showing and nice patterning. GIA concurrs. Seems worth more information to me.

ETA: never mind, not worth the argument.

 

[Laila619]

I'd leave it, IMO! It'd be a real shame to cut that nice crown down.

 

[madelise]

Gary and Karl have spoken. Do not touch!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Looking at this from another perspective, it gives me the following impression, sunlvr:

It is similar to a fan of 'Grey's anatomy', attempting to DIY-brain-surgery on the basis of a first examination by a general practitioner.

It is unclear what your starting-stone exactly is, what final result you would want, and your jeweler is probably quoting you a cost, that is not realistic for what you want.

Live long,