shopping for a setting -- why do jewelry stores use those weird lights?

[Stephan]

Date: 8/8/2009 11:48:29 PM
Author: jstarfireb
I''ve had the same experience, and every time it baffles me. My stone is an I color ACA princess that performs beautifully under a variety of lighting conditions. But when I take it into a jewelry store like Helzberg or even Tiffany, it looks dull, the sparkle is nonexistent, the I color looks murky yellow (which is not at all what the true color is), and I feel almost embarrassed pulling it out to compare to the bright sparkling fireballs from the store. So I guess what puzzles me is why jewelry store lighting makes diamonds of lesser cut quality look so good, whereas it is the least flattering for well-cut stones. Or in the case of Tiffany, their diamonds are certainly not poorly cut, yet they still look great under the lights whereas my stone looks dull. Sometimes it makes me second-guess my choice of an ACA princess for a split second (then I walk outside and remember why it''s an AGS ideal). What am I missing?

Did you compare your princess to round diamonds or to other princesses?

 

[Lynn B]

Well, this may be a bit off topic, but I was in a rather "nice" (higher-end) jewelry store the other day (not T&Co, but not the mall, either!) and the guy did have some lovely, well cut, (and BIG) stones that he was showing off. But what I noticed was how carefully he handled his diamonds, always wiped them off with a soft cloth before he presented them, etc., but he sure handled MY ring (an AGS-0 2.36 RB) differently. Every time he touched it (which was a LOT), he made a point to touch the table and finger the stone. It was getting dirtier and smearier by the minute! And it was so obvious! And he kept saying stuff like, "So let''s compare this one to yours..." Finally I spoke up and said, "Well, before we do any MORE ''comparing'', you are gonna have to clean mine!" He looked a little sheepish and said, "OK, OK..."

After which, my diamond certainly held its own, even among some much larger stones.

But, gah! I hate stunts like that!!!

 

[jstarfireb]

Date: 8/9/2009 3:22:34 AM
Author: QueenMum

Date: 8/8/2009 11:48:29 PM

Author: jstarfireb

I''ve had the same experience, and every time it baffles me. My stone is an I color ACA princess that performs beautifully under a variety of lighting conditions. But when I take it into a jewelry store like Helzberg or even Tiffany, it looks dull, the sparkle is nonexistent, the I color looks murky yellow (which is not at all what the true color is), and I feel almost embarrassed pulling it out to compare to the bright sparkling fireballs from the store. So I guess what puzzles me is why jewelry store lighting makes diamonds of lesser cut quality look so good, whereas it is the least flattering for well-cut stones. Or in the case of Tiffany, their diamonds are certainly not poorly cut, yet they still look great under the lights whereas my stone looks dull. Sometimes it makes me second-guess my choice of an ACA princess for a split second (then I walk outside and remember why it''s an AGS ideal). What am I missing?

Did you compare your princess to round diamonds or to other princesses?

Most often rounds, but at times both. There were just a lot more rounds to look at in the stores. I doubt it''s a round vs. princess issue though. I have both AGS0 round and princess diamonds, and the princess definitely gives the round a run for its money in the sparkle department. So I don''t think it''s the "round sparkles more than princess" argument if that''s what you mean. Next time maybe I''ll bring my round pendant to the store and see if it has the same effect; that will be the clincher!

 

[Stephan]

That''s interesting, jstarfireb.
In matter of round diamonds, I don''t know how T&co do choose their diamonds.
Perhaps could an expert explain why your diamond looks dull when comparing it to others at T&co?

 

[jstarfireb]

Yup Stephan, I would love to hear some input from the experts too! Particularly for Tiffany in particular; their diamonds are considered very well-cut, whereas mall store diamonds aren''t...but in similar lighting, both Tiffany and mall store stones perform well, whereas my AGS0 doesn''t. That''s what confuses me most.

 

[niceice21]

Jstarfireb, your story has me intrigued. Especially the part about your ACA not performing in a Tiffany''s store! This has me perplexed because I was definitely leaning towards getting an ACA round from WF because I had heard such good things about them (especially compared to HoF) and I liked how WF had all of the images available to compare online (aset, idealscope, hearts, etc). Can people who have these types of stones weigh in? Or some of this forum''s experts? What''s going on here? Have others experienced this? The last thing I want is my girl walking into a jewelry store to have her ring cleaned and wondering why her diamond doesn''t look as nice as the rings in the store...

 

[Lula]

As Lynn B mentioned, stores work really hard to keep their stones super-clean. When your girlfriend walks in the store to have her diamond cleaned, it may not sparkle the same way that the stones in the store do, but I believe that when she leaves with a clean diamond, it will sparkle as much or more.

When I went to look at the HOF diamonds at a local retailer, I noticed the same thing Lynn B did -- the sales associate kept wiping the stones with a special cloth as he brought them out for me to look at.

I looked at my Infinity (the J I owned before I bought my M, and that did not change color under their lights) and saw that it was not as bright. The SA asked me at some point (as many of them do) if I wanted them to clean my ring, and after it came out of their cleaner, it sparkled the same as the HOF.

Stores seem to have a million tricks to make their merchandise stand out, so I wouldn't worry about an ACA being a non-performer. They're chosen for their high level of beauty and performance.

 

[D&T]

Date: 8/9/2009 8:49:04 PM
Author: niceice21
Jstarfireb, your story has me intrigued. Especially the part about your ACA not performing in a Tiffany's store! This has me perplexed because I was definitely leaning towards getting an ACA round from WF because I had heard such good things about them (especially compared to HoF) and I liked how WF had all of the images available to compare online (aset, idealscope, hearts, etc). Can people who have these types of stones weigh in? Or some of this forum's experts? What's going on here? Have others experienced this? The last thing I want is my girl walking into a jewelry store to have her ring cleaned and wondering why her diamond doesn't look as nice as the rings in the store...

I have a WF ACA RB and honestly, its just under terrible MALL jewelry store that distorted the color of my diamond I have a K so I would think anything above that color which you seem to be looking for would do fine, also I may not have cleaned my diamond before looking at theirs, and I knew that in certain lighting it will appear "murky" however, this is just particular store I'm talking about (my high end jewelers- my diamond performs just as well if not better in their lighting), You shouldn't worry at all, really, the ACA will perfom in many many lighting condition very well all the time, unlike mall diamonds TRUST me (I have one of each!) You are just looking at one variable- which is CERTAIN terrible lighting.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The ACA with even a finger wipe across the top will loose some life - to compare you need to clean your diamonds very well and wrap up - then take out and do the side by side.

As to stores that use too much light - here is an example that shows what happens

 

[Lula]

Thanks, Garry, for your input.

If I remember the previous thread with this photo in it, the gist was that the diamonds that performed better (looked brighter) with the lights off, went "dark" under the spotlighting?

Also, thanks for the reminder of the connection between smudge/grease on diamonds and performance. If I remember right, there was an earlier thread where you did a comparison between two earring studs to show the effect of smudge on diamond performance as it related to diamond proportions, with a shallower cut diamond performing better when dirty -- is this right?

And can someone please chime in on the role of lgf length on diamond performance under specific lighting conditions? I may start a new thread on this, because as the previous owner of a diamond with long lgf's (81%) with a 57 table and a 60.9 depth, 34.5 crown angle, and 41.0 pav angle, AGS0 graded, I noticed that this diamond blew other diamonds out of the water under bright, direct lighting -- jewelry stores, restaurant lighting, sunlight, but was rather blah under incandescent or low lighting.

The two Crafted by Infinity diamonds I've owned with 77-78% lgfs and super-ideal proportions are certainly no slouches under direct or jewelry store lighting, but they are far and above better performers under office lighting or incandescent and low lighting than the diamond I owned with longer lgf's.

I'm asking about this because niceice21 (and other newbies reading this) may be getting very confused about the appearance of super-ideals in various lighting conditions from the comments in this thread.

IMHO, YES, without a doubt, the price difference is worth it to get a super-ideal; the two Infinity diamonds I have owned are consistent and beautiful performers across many lighting conditions, which is what was important to me.

If I worked in a casino on the Vegas strip, I might be more inclined to go with a diamond that has super long lgf's! But, alas, I work in an office and in the evenings come home to a house lit with incandescent light!

 

[lisa1.01fvs1]

Date: 8/9/2009 4:19:57 PM
Author: jstarfireb
Yup Stephan, I would love to hear some input from the experts too! Particularly for Tiffany in particular; their diamonds are considered very well-cut, whereas mall store diamonds aren''t...but in similar lighting, both Tiffany and mall store stones perform well, whereas my AGS0 doesn''t. That''s what confuses me most.

Hi jstar and QueenMum,

I have a Tiffany RB and went to Kay''s the other day and my F looked yellowy and washed out

also murkey/opaque.

I keep it really clean too.

I compared it to a RB (I think the Leo) they had in the case which was a H and theirs looked better all around.

So I was left feeling strangely about the whole experience just like OP and others here.

Then I went to a graduation in a theater and the whole diamond fired like mad!!!! It was distracting really.

It goes dark in direct sunlight and glows under a table although is has a steeper CA than those preferred here.

It looks great in most lighting environments and has that liquidy, silvery, celophane quality when it''s not in direct sun.

I don''t get it.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

k

Date: 8/10/2009 10:14:23 AM
Author: sarap333
Thanks, Garry, for your input.

If I remember the previous thread with this photo in it, the gist was that the diamonds that performed better (looked brighter) with the lights off, went ''dark'' under the spotlighting?
specifically the type of twin 2 foot fluoro desk lights used by the trade for color and clarity - they are too close and too bright for cut grading - and that is what you see in the picture - the rounds appear less bright that the princess cuts - which shows what was being discussed on page 1 - that very very bright lights can mislead consumers.

Also, thanks for the reminder of the connection between smudge/grease on diamonds and performance. If I remember right, there was an earlier thread where you did a comparison between two earring studs to show the effect of smudge on diamond performance as it related to diamond proportions, with a shallower cut diamond performing better when dirty -- is this right?
that is right - and Drena also wore her earrings with one shallow and one Tolkowsy to the vegas trade fair and all the regulars, including Peter yantzer from AGSL, all picked and preferred the shallow stone in the pepsi test.

And can someone please chime in on the role of lgf length on diamond performance under specific lighting conditions? I may start a new thread on this, because as the previous owner of a diamond with long lgf''s (81%) with a 57 table and a 60.9 depth, 34.5 crown angle, and 41.0 pav angle, AGS0 graded, I noticed that this diamond blew other diamonds out of the water under bright, direct lighting -- jewelry stores, restaurant lighting, sunlight, but was rather blah under incandescent or low lighting.

The two Crafted by Infinity diamonds I''ve owned with 77-78% lgfs and super-ideal proportions are certainly no slouches under direct or jewelry store lighting, but they are far and above better performers under office lighting or incandescent and low lighting than the diamond I owned with longer lgf''s.

I''m asking about this because niceice21 (and other newbies reading this) may be getting very confused about the appearance of super-ideals in various lighting conditions from the comments in this thread.

IMHO, YES, without a doubt, the price difference is worth it to get a super-ideal; the two Infinity diamonds I have owned are consistent and beautiful performers across many lighting conditions, which is what was important to me.

If I worked in a casino on the Vegas strip, I might be more inclined to go with a diamond that has super long lgf''s! But, alas, I work in an office and in the evenings come home to a house lit with incandescent light!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 8/10/2009 10:41:32 AM
Author: lisa1.01fvs1

Date: 8/9/2009 4:19:57 PM
Author: jstarfireb
Yup Stephan, I would love to hear some input from the experts too! Particularly for Tiffany in particular; their diamonds are considered very well-cut, whereas mall store diamonds aren''t...but in similar lighting, both Tiffany and mall store stones perform well, whereas my AGS0 doesn''t. That''s what confuses me most.

Hi jstar and QueenMum,

I have a Tiffany RB and went to Kay''s the other day and my F looked yellowy and washed out

also murkey/opaque.

I keep it really clean too.

I compared it to a RB (I think the Leo) they had in the case which was a H and theirs looked better all around.

So I was left feeling strangely about the whole experience just like OP and others here.

Then I went to a graduation in a theater and the whole diamond fired like mad!!!! It was distracting really.

It goes dark in direct sunlight and glows under a table although is has a steeper CA than those preferred here.

It looks great in most lighting environments and has that liquidy, silvery, celophane quality when it''s not in direct sun.

I don''t get it.

perhaps the stores have cream or yellowish ceilings - that will cause a drop in color