Real H&A or ?

[RaymondW]

I didn''t want to hijack another recent Hearts and Arrows thread, but it raised a question in my mind. When is a H&A diamond a H&A diamond? I recently bought a diamond (it''s currently being set at Gelin Abaci) and among the supporting test results and pictures provided by my jeweler were these:

http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/d910cJjp9wYWa8oyYf3wy5BQP5MWT8LdeVdLv4xQp5Fd3Ig=_l.jpg
http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/d910cJjp9wYWa8oyYf3wy5BQP5di*b-3WZd5v4xQp5Fd3Ig=_l.jpg

http://links.pictures.aol.com/pic/d910cJjp9wYWa8oyYf3wy5BQP42RiqdtZABiv4xQp5Fd3Ig=_l.jpg

It looks like H&A to my untrained eyes and my jeweler described it as such, but the GIA report doesn''t mention anything about H&A. Is it possible for a diamond to look like H&A but not be a real H&A diamond? If so, what constitutes a true H&A diamond if not the visual appearance? Does the GIA not describe H&A on their reports? Is there something about this "H&A" diamond that makes it only appear to be a H&A diamond but not be a true H&A?

I didn''t pay a premium. In fact, we knew what the price would be before she got the diamond in and that was based on the reported proportions without mention of H&A. Only after she received it did she take and share those images.

 

[strmrdr]

GIA doesnt grade h&a.

After a quick 3:30am bleary eyed glance at the images..h&a yes...

Click here for Brian''s opinion:
https://www.pricescope.com/hearts_grading_hearts.asp

Personally and many people agree with me that the he is too conservative on the clefts and it shows his personal bias for lgf% which is fine for his preferred combo but not so fine for other combos.

 

[strmrdr]

Also different h&a scopes will show slightly different images for the same diamond so its not an exact science.

 

[RaymondW]

Date: 4/2/2008 4:33:46 AM
Author: strmrdr
GIA doesnt grade h&a.

After a quick 3:30am bleary eyed glance at the images..h&a yes...

Click here for Brian''s opinion:
https://www.pricescope.com/hearts_grading_hearts.asp

Personally and many people agree with me that the he is too conservative on the clefts and it shows his personal bias for lgf% which is fine for his preferred combo but not so fine for other combos.

Okay, so if GIA doesn''t grade H&A, that would explain why it doesn''t appear on their report. Good to know.

I''d seen Brian''s article before but didn''t read it too closely at the time. I''m sure he would object to the clefts in the hearts of my diamond. Mine seems to fall somewhere between what he calls "phony hearts and arrows" and perfectly shaped hearts and arrows. Nothing is missing. Gaps are where they should be. But there are those clefts. And I suppose one could say that some of the shafts aren''t perfectly aligned with the arrow heads, but that could be due to the quality of the image.

You would consider this a H&A diamond, then. It will be interesting to see what other opinions surface as well.

Mind you, this isn''t going to effect my opinion of this diamond. I still like it a lot and think I got a good deal. H&A or not. I just don''t want to tell my fiance that this is a H&A diamond and have her learn later that it really isn''t.

Thanks for your feedback. I appreciate your opinions.

 

[strmrdr]

the diamond isnt perfectly level in the arrows pic and that "can" explain the arrows.
If the hearts are good the arrows follow, its all in the hearts.
So im inclined to say its a tilt problem with the image.

The cleft is dependant on the lgf% all they being a little long means is they are around 80 or a little over.
That is my preferred range for them too be with many combos and doesn''t hurt in many others.

 

[RaymondW]

I think the report shows 75% for the lower girdle facets. Am I misunderstanding or misinterpreting that measuement?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/2/2008 9:02:02 AM
Author: RaymondW
I think the report shows 75% for the lower girdle facets. Am I misunderstanding or misinterpreting that measuement?

75 is rounded they could range up too 77.49 for the average and GIA would still call them 75..
By the hearts image which isnt that accurate id say most of them are closer too 80...
*shrug*

Your safe calling it h&a a lot worse has been sold as h&a....

 

[RaymondW]

Ah, I follow you on the 75% v 80% thing. Thanks.

 

[mfg0313]

I think you might be mentioning my recent post.....in my case the dealer is insisting on charging a premium for the stone based on the comment on the certificate that it has "hearts and arrows effect." In my case, there are many other very comparable stones for 20% less then what he is wanting to charge for this stone......in my opinion, this simple comment is not worth the premium.....It is a great stone but not worth a 20% premium. I am doing some more research on the hearts and arrows distinction so we will see what happens in the end.

 

[RaymondW]

mfg0313, it was your thread I was referring to. The cool thing in my case is that there was no premium. I saw the stone on another site, asked my jeweler to find something similar and she got the actual stone. The first site didn''t mention H&A so when she brought it in for me, she agreed to match their price before we saw it. I guess it''s possible that someone might have eventually bought the stone for their own inventory and marked it up as a H&A diamond. But since we''d already agreed on a price pending my approval, we completed the deal without me paying anything extra for the H&A pattern. That''s why I was wondering if this is really an H&A in the minds of most (meaning I got an even better deal) or if this just looks like an H&A and really isn''t (in which case I still got a good deal IMHO).

If it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, is it a duck or just a close cousin?