Small tables?

[february2003bride]

Cany anyone tell me why smaller tables are not recommended? Mine is 53% and the diamond is amazing! I''ve searched through PS for the answer but have ony found why larger tables should be avoided.

Thanks!

 

[strmrdr]

With the proper crown and pavilion angles a 53% table rocks there is no issue there.
Saying your diamond has a 53% table is like telling someone your house has black shingles, its just a small part of the story.

 

[february2003bride]

Date: 12/17/2007 10:37:35 PM
Author: strmrdr
With the proper crown and pavilion angles a 53% table rocks there is no issue there.
Saying your diamond has a 53% table is like telling someone your house has black shingles, its just a small part of the story.

Thank you storm! Here is the rest of my diamond''s info:
Shape and Style: Round Brilliant
Measurements: 7.10 - 7.13 x 4.38 mm
Cut Grade: AGS Ideal 0
Light Performance: 0
Proportion Factors: 0
Finish: 0
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Color Grade: AGS 3.0 (J)
Clarity Grade: AGS 6 (SI2)
Carat Weight: 1.33
Fluorescence: Medium Blue
Comments:
"AGSL 8245501 H&A" has been inscribed on the girdle of this diamond.
Table: 53.0%
Crown Angle: 34.4
Crown Height: 16.1%
Girdle: 0.7% to 2.9%
Pavilion Angle: 40.7
Pavilion Depth: 42.8%
Star Length: 54%
Lower Girdle Length: 77%
Total Depth: 61.6%
Culet: Pointed


I understand that the table is just one element of the diamond, but what range - min to max- that should be avoided?

 

[strmrdr]

awesome numbers :}

it depends I dont like 60% tabled rounds but some experts still swear by them.
In general with the proper angles and including some odd balls in the mix lets say 47% to 58% with the most comon spot 55-57 for super ideals.
That does not mean there is anything wrong with the others that is just where a lot of cutters draw the balance between yeild and performance with common rough.
Likely a smaller table will be cut too remove an inclusion or from an odd shaped rough or a recut of a broken stone, they arent that common.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 12/17/2007 10:40:09 PM
Author: february2003bride

Date: 12/17/2007 10:37:35 PM
Author: strmrdr
With the proper crown and pavilion angles a 53% table rocks there is no issue there.
Saying your diamond has a 53% table is like telling someone your house has black shingles, its just a small part of the story.

I understand that the table is just one element of the diamond, but what range - min to max- that should be avoided?

You answered the question yourself and Strm gave a great comparison.

So...turning the question around...what color shingles should be avoided?

Like XY and Z shingle colors may be most common, table sizes 55-56 have the most possible configurations that earn GIA EX & are predicted to earn AGS0 but diamonds can look equally beautiful as long as all measurements work together correctly. Each diamond must be taken as a whole.

In broad terms, as the table gets smaller the crown gets higher (and more fire-friendly), and as the table gets larger the crown gets lower (brightness-friendly). That's why diamonds with crowns >60% look best under bright spotlights like you find in jewelry stores and can lose much of their colored sparkle when you remove them from that environment.

In commercial markets you'll find an abundance of larger tables, frequently into the high 60% range. This is because of how diamonds are cut; since the rotary saw evolved (and now lasers) one piece of octahedron is sawed in two, with the sawing plane becoming the table for each diamond. Before the rotary saw was introduced in the late 1800s one point of the rough octahedron was ground away until it created the table...this resulted in the much smaller tables and high crowns seen in antique styles. Today's rounds with tables near 50% or in the high 40s are not as plentiful as larger table sizes and when they are cut they often emulate antique/cushion cuts.

 

[february2003bride]

Thank you so much Storm and John!

 

[strmrdr]

welcome
Is that the diamond in your aviator?
looks awesome :}