Size with regards to Light Return

[poopoojones]

I notice that a lot of people here say that cut is the most important factor in determining which diamond to purchase since, in theory, a better cut diamond will return more light.

Many people are sacraficing size for cut ''quality''.

Nobody has mentioned, though the idea that a bigger diamond will return more light, just because it is bigger. It can accept more light due to it''s size and therefore can return more light then a smaller diamond even if the percentage of returned light (reflection/refraction) is greater in the smaller diamond.

At what point is a larger, ''less ideal'' cut diamond better then a smaller ''ideal'' cut diamond?

Does anyone have ideas?

 

[poopoojones]

Noboady has any opinions about this?

 

[Rank Amateur]

No one can guess if a person's eyes and brain will like a shallow and overly-spready diamond over the same weight well-cut stone.

In the end most of the poorly cut stones are cut deeper with smaller diameters than well-cut stones, not shallower and wider. I suspect this has something to do with the octahedral(?) shape of the rough.

Maybe we could get Rich to post a simulated Garry-scope of a shallow absurdly spread stone. I don't know if the diacalc software quantifies light return but I suppose you could look at % return times the different diameters and try to make sense of the output.

 

[Rhino]

Hey poopoo,




In one of our demonstrations of cut I show our clients a .59ct stone and a 1.01ct stone of the same monetarily value side by side and while there are differences in clarity/color between the 2, the primary difference is cut quality (which directly affects the beauty of the stone more than clarity or color) and ask this question often. If you're ever in the NY area come take the Pepsi challenge and see if you still hold to that position.

Rhino

 

[Mara]

I don't necessarily agree that a larger non-well cut stone would return more light than a well cut stone (not even excellently cut). Take for example a 2c crappy stone like the ones you see on eBay so often. Do you think that cloudy mess reflects ANY amount of decent light? Much less as much light, fire, brilliance etc as a well cut 1c would against that 2c monster? No way! If you are talking about a decently cut stone vs an excellently cut stone, sure...the tradeoff may be so small that the human eye (nontrained) will not notice (you will notice things like symmetry though IMO). But be specific. Just any old larger stone will not reflect as much *anything* if it is not cut at least semi-well.




My two cents..take a look on eBay for yourself and you will be horrified at what people sell and BUY just to have a diamond.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

like this one

 

[diamondlil]

What the . . . . . I can honestly say I hever seen anything that bad in person. Where did you get this picture, Gary? I would presume the vast majority of people would not even consider spending their hard-earned dollars on a diamond that poor just to say "it's a real diamond." I'm not a cz fan, but I would certainly take one over a hunk-of-junk any day!




Mara, is right. Consideration must be taken regarding the degree of cut excellence (very good vs. excellent). The difference in light return between a poorly cut stone and an excellently cut stone will be obvious. The difference between very good and excellent my not be so apparent to the (untrained) human eye.




Diamondlil

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 9/25/2003 3:09:06 AM Mara wrote:


I don't necessarily agree that a larger non-well cut stone would return more light than a well cut stone (not even excellently cut). Take for example a 2c crappy stone like the ones you see on eBay so often. Do you think that cloudy mess reflects ANY amount of decent light? Much less as much light, fire, brilliance etc as a well cut 1c would against that 2c monster? No way! If you are talking about a decently cut stone vs an excellently cut stone, sure...the tradeoff may be so small that the human eye (nontrained) will not notice (you will notice things like symmetry though IMO). But be specific. Just any old larger stone will not reflect as much *anything* if it is not cut at least semi-well.


My two cents..take a look on eBay for yourself and you will be horrified at what people sell and BUY just to have a diamond.

----------------

I agree with the premise of Mara's response. Also, many of those stones on ebay have "transparancy" problems to begin with. I suspect the cut to be the least of their problems.

To add, Yes, a nicely cut larger stone will be larger than an excellent cut smaller stone. PERIOD.

To compare a larger crappy stone to a smaller nice stone is just plain stupid. In the real world, the comparision is somewhere in the middle.

 

[Mara]

lil--check out eBay..there are some really scary specimens--along the lines of Gary's find--that really make you shudder. The sellers are obviously blind the way they market these things ('sparkling light return' and 'great clarity' 'an amazing deal on a lovely stone') And yes people pay for them, bid on them..win...etc. And somewhere in some strange land...they wear them.

This is kind of along the lines of valeria's poll about if the stone is smaller and more well cut, would you buy it over a larger not as well cut stone. It's definitely a personal preference on where that *line* lies for you.

 

[magna2]

The picture of the stone that Garry posted reminds me of the stone - I can't bear to call it a diamond - that a mall jewelery store that starts with Z, but shall remain nameless, shown me five years ago when I was shopping for an E-ring. Being clueless then (just a little bit more knowledgeable now), I was asked what I was looking for so I told the salesman that I knew nothing about diamonds but my budget was $xxxx. So he proceeded to show me a diamond similar to what Garry posted that was like a dead stone - no life to it and must have been a I2 or worse. When he saw the disappointment that was written across my face, he then pulls out another stone that, when compared to the dead hunk of a rock, was clearly much better than the first diamond that he said was on special sale that week for the same price as the first. My BS radar (and I don't mean Brilliance Scope) immediately started up and I high tailed out of there.

But knowing what I know now and thinking back to that shopping trip, even the second diamond that was shown to me was not overly impressive in terms of brilliance and fire even though it was shown to me under those hot bright jewelery store lights.

 

[hero_vc]

Hi all

The stone Gary posted was really scary. But I have a question??
What make this stone this "dead"?
Is it because of it's cut or clarity?

VC

 

[fire&ice]

I would suspect all of the above is wrong with this stone.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Now, THAT is one fugly stone...

Even that stone's momma would slap it.

 

[Hest88]

----------------
Even that stone's momma would slap it.
----------------

Oh, I nearly spewed water all over my monitor!