Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

the best round diamond cut parameters: easy question, hard answers.

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
carried over from another thread that went all over the place...

The question:
Where are the edges of the range of the best cut for a RB diamond?
Where does one draw the line?

Easy question isn't it? but the answers are hard and depend on who you ask and which day it is. There are no solid answers just opinions.

Whats your opinion? How do you draw the line and where? What tools do you use to set that line?
Im not interested in why someone else is wrong but more like if you were the diamond king for a day and could say how all RB's would be cut how would they be cut?
What tools would you use to measure/grade/separate them?
 

Paul-Antwerp

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
2,852
So, basically, you are asking the minimum threshold, from where one considers a round brilliant to be considered top-quality.

The answer is different for every person or institution. For some, it is sufficient if a round brilliant has 57 (or thereabout) facets, while at the other end of the spectrum, some people (like you and I, I think) will want it to perform extremely well on any cut-grading-tool available.

Live long,
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 4/16/2007 4:30:29 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp
will want it to perform extremely well on any cut-grading-tool available.

Live long,
That defines the center, because there are combos that will do extremely well on any test.
I agree the edges are different for every person or institution.

Where are the edges in your opinion? Thats a much harder question and the main question.
 

Paul-Antwerp

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
2,852
Date: 4/16/2007 4:50:08 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/16/2007 4:30:29 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp
will want it to perform extremely well on any cut-grading-tool available.

Live long,
That defines the center, because there are combos that will do extremely well on any test.
I agree the edges are different for every person or institution.

Where are the edges in your opinion? Thats a much harder question and the main question.
It depends on which hat I am wearing.

When cutting, I accept close to no deviation from our goal.

As an example, when judging a grading-system of a lab, however, the situation is different. Strategically, it is important that I am not the only one achieving a certain grade from a lab. Because then, competitors will use another lab, and push the idea that this lab''s grade is equal to the one they could not attain. Competition then becomes a lot more difficult and complicated. This happened in the beginning of the princess-cut-grade, where competitors competed with GIA-graded stones at a lower price-level. It all improved for us, when more cutters started producing their AGS-0-version.

Within that wider area (for lab-use for instance), there is also the scientific hat. Here, I would say that unfamiliar combos (which are not commonly cut) should be possible within that wider top-grade.

So, within one person, you can see already that it is a matter of perspective.

Live long,
 

Garry H (Cut Nut)

Super_Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
15,141
Storm like Paul I find narrow questions like this almost a product of American B&W type thinking.

Ther is very little pure white and pure black.

I have always lived in the future. (or prefered to, unless Itally was an option?)

Consider who buys diamonds - and who are the repeat customers these days?

In my experiance they already have a few diamond pieces. And they are looking looking for something , well, a bit, but not too much different.

So the idea that you can have a range this big
0


Like tiny teensy tolerances

It indicates that everything should be the same. So American in thinking.

We had one of mine and hubby, one of Drenas and fiancee, and a friends daughter and boy friend over for dinner this evening. Most of us had to drink:
1. a belgian beer
2. a little French Bojalaise (sp?)
3. a huge Aussie Shiraz
3.1
3.2
4 a frozen Italian Limone in frozen glasses
a Spanis Ximinez Pedro

But you want us to specify one drink???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Well? Helllloooooo?


Storm et al, look forward to the time when there is a plethora of options.

So far you have discovered the asscher. But --------- wait -------------there is more...................

And if we wait for AGS et al to define beauty, we might never get past sexy looking donkeys, or maybbe if we are lucky - monkeys.

We are fortunate enough to be observers of a period in the history of a product that is about to burst out of its limited existence.

be afraid
be very afraid!!!!

A variety of diamonds is about to swamp your little pea brains
 

oldminer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Sep 3, 2000
Messages
6,376
"....so American in thinking."

Personally I take a certain degree of price in American thinking. This country is responsible for pulling the burning fat of Europe off Hitler''s griddle in WWII. We also had the task to stop Japan from conquering Asia. We ought not forget the past. Our thinking served the developed world pretty well, I believe. The ingenuity and free thinking of our educated society has also played its part in advancing technology. It wasn''t such a bad thing for many years, but there are downsides to everything, I suppose. In today''s world, the US admittedly has lost some of its luster with many overseas. Most Americans are far from happy about the politics and decisions of the past several years. Maybe we can dig ourselves out of this hole we seem to be making ever deeper. Its not up to the average citizen, unfortunately. Come 2008 I suspect the voters may change the current course history seems to be taking us on. The vote won''t change DIAMONDS,,,,, and that''s our subject.

When it comes to "the best" in diamonds, I believe it is up to the consumer to select a diamond which they prefer from those in the top tier. Experts can use various tools to describe the parameters or performance of these "top tier" stones, but every consumer is capable of deciding which single diamond combines the "best" in performance, price, color, clarity, weight and shape. This is not an expert thing, nor should it be. Consumers can be led to a group of ''best" and/or "better" diamonds, but we as experts should not tell them which to select. We can offer an opinion or give guidance when a consumer wants it, but ultimately it does not make a huge difference what a consumer buys so long as they remain pleased with their purchase.

I use the I-S and ImaGem to determine which diamonds perform in the upper range. We still use the AGA Cut Class charts to describe the upper tier of diamonds for most shapes. We rarely suggest one brand of diamond over another, or suggest one set of light behavior parameters over another. Even diamonds in the best tier do look differently from one another. The ultimate choice is a matter of personal taste regardless of what equipment of any kind might tell us.

If you remove price, color, clarity, and weight from the equation, we might be more able to cleary define what is "best" for a given shape, but it is a far more complex calculation in the real world.
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
lol Garry, I dont have my answer ready yet but its funny that you mention asschers.....

Yep I love asschers and the first thing I did is define my ideal for them.
oec''s are kewl too but first I need to define my ideal for them.
Why?
Because that is more fun than owning them :} and if I can only own one or 2 then they should be the very best looking which means the best cut I can find or design.
 

Garry H (Cut Nut)

Super_Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Aug 15, 2000
Messages
15,141
Date: 4/16/2007 8:37:38 AM
Author: oldminer
''....so American in thinking.''

Personally I take a certain degree of price in American thinking. This country is responsible for pulling the burning fat of Europe off Hitler''s griddle in WWII. We also had the task to stop Japan from conquering Asia. We ought not forget the past. Our thinking served the developed world pretty well, I believe. The ingenuity and free thinking of our educated society has also played its part in advancing technology. It wasn''t such a bad thing for many years, but there are downsides to everything, I suppose.
Point taken on the chin Dave.
Although I think if Australia was not quite so far away from Europe, and had more water, well- who knows - but we would have a Japanese Govt if the USa had not thrown a huge effort into recovering from Pearl Harbour.

On the effetiveness of your industrialization - it has worked and worked well. But there is no doubt in the minds of most not so poor people in the rest of the world - that your very high economic living standards and human education are sadly lacking in simple life style measures.

Fat may not always = happy. But lazy your nation is not. It is well led by an effective oliarchy and is blessed with plenty of lower cost labor.

But in terms of thinking outside the box - what I am prompting in my earlier post - there is a herd mentality that squashes all in its path in USA.
 

oldminer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Sep 3, 2000
Messages
6,376
I hear the sheep bahing all the time. No doubt about the herd mentality when it comes to the subject of diamonds. It is VERY difficult to get leaders of the diamond industry in the USA to listen and act in innovative ways. The value of doing it the old way is very numbing. In India, where we have frequent interaction, we find new and different thinking to be far more welcomed. Our big thrust is in India these days because we have been forced to reconcile ourselves that change will arise here which will be the thing we need to improve business. Survival is of ultimate importance.
 

JohnQuixote

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
5,212
It may be tough to get answers here Strm, for reasons stated.

Responsible professionals will answer as Garry, Paul and Dave have (sans yankee stereotyping & sabre rattling).


It will be hard for most consumers to comment.Unless I read this wrong you’re asking for opinion based on actual observations. We all see a lot of diamonds on the street, but one would need to have viewed a large sample set head-to-head in real life while knowing Sarin measurements on all diamonds compared to decide on meaningful range ‘edges.’

Some consensus already exists. We can look at the old AGA, old AGS Ideal and current GIA EX parameters.As a global community there is a historically ‘agreed-upon’ zone of overlap for the RB we all find attractive and (arguably) many find most attractive.But it’s not the only zone. Also, even with that ‘agreed-upon’ zone things like center-of-range (steep vs shallow), how wide it can be and many other particulars are subject to opinion and interpretation; thus the ‘blurry edges.’Further, and to Garry’s point, who knows what’s around the corner? Confining the question to the RB as I know it today ...Among professionals I most respect, the nuances of taste vary ever-so-slightly but their arrows are grouped within the same bullseye.

So even though I didn’t give an answer (sorry) I hope I addressed the question?
 

Cehrabehra

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
11,071
Date: 4/16/2007 11:40:03 AM
Author: JohnQuixote

It will be hard for most consumers to comment.Unless I read this wrong you’re asking for opinion based on actual observations.To answer, one would need to have viewed a large sample set in real life while knowing Sarin measurements on all diamonds compared to decide on meaningful range ‘edges.’

I haven''t seen as many diamonds as you by a long shot, or participated in blind studies (though that sounds fun!) but based on what I *have* seen and what I''ve learned, I have an opinion... hehehe... it is outside of both AGS and GIA ranges but this is the direction I''d push my stone - just to this side of the limit. So John, when you find one like this with about 80 lgf and SBF in the .4-.6 range, you let me know hehehehehe ;-)

Table 55
Depth 59
Crown 36
Pav 40
 

JohnQuixote

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
5,212
Date: 4/16/2007 11:49:21 AM
Author: Cehrabehra


Date: 4/16/2007 11:40:03 AM
Author: JohnQuixote



It will be hard for most consumers to comment.Unless I read this wrong you’re asking for opinion based on actual observations.To answer, one would need to have viewed a large sample set in real life while knowing Sarin measurements on all diamonds compared to decide on meaningful range ‘edges.’

I haven't seen as many diamonds as you by a long shot, or participated in blind studies (though that sounds fun!) but based on what I *have* seen and what I've learned, I have an opinion... hehehe... it is outside of both AGS and GIA ranges but this is the direction I'd push my stone - just to this side of the limit. So John, when you find one like this with about 80 lgf and SBF in the .4-.6 range, you let me know hehehehehe ;-)

Table 55
Depth 59
Crown 36
Pav 40
I think that's the problem I tried to illustrate, Cehra. The parameters you outlined don't exist: 55T, 36.0CA, 40.0PA would need to have 60.0D to have even a knife-edge girdle, and I would not recommend that due to durability.

So I'm going to deduce you have not seen this config (even if it could exist) nor have you been able to compare it live to 35.5/40.5 (etc) at 50, 55, 60 and 65 tables, not to mention 70, 75, 80 and 85 LH etc. Who knows; you very well may prefer B,C,D,E or F to A. Without seeing them all in-a-row I think it's a slippery slope to identify one as 'best.' It's double-slick to speculate without even seeing one, n'est-ce pas?
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 4/16/2007 12:41:58 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

I think that''s the problem I tried to illustrate, Cehra. The parameters you outlined don''t exist: 55T, 36.0CA, 40.0PA would need to have 60.0D to have even a knife-edge girdle, and I would not recommend that due to durability.

So I''m going to deduce you have not seen this config (even if it could exist) nor have you been able to compare it live to 35.5/40.5 (etc) at 50, 55, 60 and 65 tables, not to mention 70, 75, 80 and 85 LH etc. Who knows; you very well may prefer B,C,D,E or F to A. Without seeing them all in-a-row I think it''s a slippery slope to identify one as ''best.'' It''s double-slick to speculate without even seeing one, n''est-ce pas?
Hi Sir John,
The mk2 eyeball test is of course the final judge of any grading system but up until that point other means have to be employed otherwise no "out there" parameters will ever be explored.
For example the AGS0 princess cut grading would have never came about without virtual research.
Once just what a well cut diamond should act like under a bunch of different tools and lighting conditions we can move to virtual stones for research purposes.
 

Cehrabehra

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
11,071
Date: 4/16/2007 12:41:58 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 4/16/2007 11:49:21 AM
Author: Cehrabehra



Date: 4/16/2007 11:40:03 AM
Author: JohnQuixote




It will be hard for most consumers to comment.Unless I read this wrong you’re asking for opinion based on actual observations.To answer, one would need to have viewed a large sample set in real life while knowing Sarin measurements on all diamonds compared to decide on meaningful range ‘edges.’

I haven''t seen as many diamonds as you by a long shot, or participated in blind studies (though that sounds fun!) but based on what I *have* seen and what I''ve learned, I have an opinion... hehehe... it is outside of both AGS and GIA ranges but this is the direction I''d push my stone - just to this side of the limit. So John, when you find one like this with about 80 lgf and SBF in the .4-.6 range, you let me know hehehehehe ;-)

Table 55
Depth 59
Crown 36
Pav 40
I think that''s the problem I tried to illustrate, Cehra. The parameters you outlined don''t exist: 55T, 36.0CA, 40.0PA would need to have 60.0D to have even a knife-edge girdle, and I would not recommend that due to durability.

So I''m going to deduce you have not seen this config (even if it could exist) nor have you been able to compare it live to 35.5/40.5 (etc) at 50, 55, 60 and 65 tables, not to mention 70, 75, 80 and 85 LH etc. Who knows; you very well may prefer B,C,D,E or F to A. Without seeing them all in-a-row I think it''s a slippery slope to identify one as ''best.'' It''s double-slick to speculate without even seeing one, n''est-ce pas?
LOL its funny because I was going to put a 60 depth and I thought I''d just *squeeze* it a little more LOL And according to HCA it exists! hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............. ::raise eyebrow:: I know at 58 it said it couldn''t exist for lack of girdle, but it accepted 59 and 60. And of course it would be better to see them all in a row. And don''t tell anyone but I think I''d go for slightly longer lgf than I have always said I would because... well... things change :D I still think a stone a bit more crown heavy and in the FIC range would be more to my liking, but for a pendant I don''t even know that. For a ring I do know that, but for a pendant? I don''t. I need a trip to houston john! When are you nominating me for the blind study? ;-)
 

JohnQuixote

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
5,212
Date: 4/16/2007 5:41:53 PM
Author: strmrdr

Hi Sir John,
The mk2 eyeball test is of course the final judge of any grading system but up until that point other means have to be employed otherwise no 'out there' parameters will ever be explored.
For example the AGS0 princess cut grading would have never came about without virtual research.
Once just what a well cut diamond should act like under a bunch of different tools and lighting conditions we can move to virtual stones for research purposes.
What do you consider 'out there' for rounds? There is an extremely wide range of combinations to see if you visit an array of live markets, but the reports many sellers use don't disclose measurements. One can say 'wow, massive table' or 'that pavilion depth is incredibly shallow' but to get answers for your original question one would need to know precisely what he/she is looking at.

Unless...


Date: 4/16/2007 11:40:03 AM
Author: JohnQuixote

It will be hard for most consumers to comment.Unless I read this wrong you’re asking for opinion based on actual observations. We all see a lot of diamonds on the street, but one would need to have viewed a large sample set head-to-head in real life while knowing Sarin measurements on all diamonds compared to decide on meaningful range ‘edges.’
...I read this wrong.
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 4/16/2007 5:51:37 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

LOL its funny because I was going to put a 60 depth and I thought I''d just *squeeze* it a little more LOL And according to HCA it exists! hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............. ::raise eyebrow:: I know at 58 it said it couldn''t exist for lack of girdle, but it accepted 59 and 60. And of course it would be better to see them all in a row. And don''t tell anyone but I think I''d go for slightly longer lgf than I have always said I would because... well... things change :D I still think a stone a bit more crown heavy and in the FIC range would be more to my liking, but for a pendant I don''t even know that. For a ring I do know that, but for a pendant? I don''t. I need a trip to houston john! When are you nominating me for the blind study? ;-)
A large culet would make your combo work.

A better combo would be:
55 table
36CA
40.5 pavilion
80% lgf%
61.9% depth
see attached gem file.
 

Attachments

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
here is your combo with a L culet.
 

Attachments

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 4/16/2007 6:18:19 PM
Author: JohnQuixote




Date: 4/16/2007 11:40:03 AM
Author: JohnQuixote

It will be hard for most consumers to comment.Unless I read this wrong you’re asking for opinion based on actual observations. We all see a lot of diamonds on the street, but one would need to have viewed a large sample set head-to-head in real life while knowing Sarin measurements on all diamonds compared to decide on meaningful range ‘edges.’
...I read this wrong.
any way you want too do it is acceptable.
If a cut and shoot off is the way you would do it that is totally valid, but no i'm not limiting it to that.
To be honest I'm not ready yet with my answer its not an easy one.
Knowing me I think you know my dilemma.
 

Cehrabehra

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
11,071
Date: 4/16/2007 6:23:13 PM
Author: strmrdr
A large culet would make your combo work.

A better combo would be:
55 table
36CA
40.5 pavilion
80% lgf%
61.9% depth
see attached gem file.
that is GORGEOUS storm!!! Beautiful! I like the balance of the 55 table with the 80 lgf andd the crown is beautious...
 

Cehrabehra

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
11,071
Date: 4/16/2007 6:25:13 PM
Author: strmrdr
here is your combo with a L culet.
yeah... no... I don''t like that as well. As much as I love culets on oec and omc, I really don''t like them in irbs. There''s something about the chunkier facets of the omc that gives balance to the culet. And omcs can have the biggest culets at all and look attractive to me. Not sure... its a balance thing with the rest of the facets I guess and my eye. It was interesting to see, but I do like yours better.

how high could you go like 37 or 38 on the crown angle, keep the 55 table... what would the pavillion need to be? under 40?

I say this because if my one and only main stone was a round I would definitnely want a megafirey stone but the reality is that when I get my next it will be for a pendant and just white brilliance plays a larger role in what I want for that. But I still like thinking about what my ideal ring-round would be!
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 4/16/2007 6:33:24 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 4/16/2007 6:23:13 PM
Author: strmrdr
A large culet would make your combo work.

A better combo would be:
55 table
36CA
40.5 pavilion
80% lgf%
61.9% depth
see attached gem file.
that is GORGEOUS storm!!! Beautiful! I like the balance of the 55 table with the 80 lgf andd the crown is beautious...
I thought so.
nice out of the box combo.
If I was having one custom cut id go with a 37 degree crown and a shallower pavilion and match the c/p angles like I did in that one to min. the obstruction issue.
 

JohnQuixote

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
5,212
Date: 4/16/2007 5:51:37 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

LOL its funny because I was going to put a 60 depth and I thought I'd just *squeeze* it a little more LOL And according to HCA it exists! hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............. ::raise eyebrow:: I know at 58 it said it couldn't exist for lack of girdle, but it accepted 59 and 60. And of course it would be better to see them all in a row. And don't tell anyone but I think I'd go for slightly longer lgf than I have always said I would because... well... things change :D I still think a stone a bit more crown heavy and in the FIC range would be more to my liking, but for a pendant I don't even know that. For a ring I do know that, but for a pendant? I don't. I need a trip to houston john! When are you nominating me for the blind study? ;-)
Actual observation will burst myths. I graded a round in my last workshop that was 35.5/39.8 with 57 table. That's close to your 36/40. I didn't put anything remarkable in my notes about it, but you may have thought it was the bees knees Cehra.

It sounds like you went into a live situation where you could compare a host of different diamonds and make an informed decision about LGF...one which burst a preconceived myth Cehra. Awesome. That's the best way to make up your mind; because you're relying on your own eyes - not someone else's opinion. In fact, once you've done the technical homework, actually going out and seeing diamonds is more valuable than reading all the tutorials in the world. It takes time and energy to do this if you're not in the trade but GIA has made it easier by including full measurements on their reports for RBs.
 

JohnQuixote

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
5,212
Date: 4/16/2007 6:33:24 PM
Author: Cehrabehra


Date: 4/16/2007 6:23:13 PM
Author: strmrdr
A large culet would make your combo work.

A better combo would be:
55 table
36CA
40.5 pavilion
80% lgf%
61.9% depth
see attached gem file.
that is GORGEOUS storm!!! Beautiful! I like the balance of the 55 table with the 80 lgf andd the crown is beautious...
Sorry Strm/Cehra. I was on a different page - nevermind the last post. I brought a real-live shovel to your virtual sandbox.
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
37/40.3/55/62.3 depth
 

Attachments

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 4/16/2007 6:44:42 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 4/16/2007 6:33:24 PM
Author: Cehrabehra



Date: 4/16/2007 6:23:13 PM
Author: strmrdr
A large culet would make your combo work.

A better combo would be:
55 table
36CA
40.5 pavilion
80% lgf%
61.9% depth
see attached gem file.
that is GORGEOUS storm!!! Beautiful! I like the balance of the 55 table with the 80 lgf andd the crown is beautious...
Sorry Strm/Cehra. I was on a different page - nevermind the last post. I brought a real-live shovel to your virtual sandbox.
no problem John we are getting off topic with these combos a little but in the context of the original post its kewl.
You starting to talk about real world shoot offs is what I expected :}
and its a valid way of doing it.
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
38/40.2/80/62.8
 

Attachments

Cehrabehra

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
11,071
Date: 4/16/2007 6:41:51 PM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 4/16/2007 5:51:37 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

LOL its funny because I was going to put a 60 depth and I thought I''d just *squeeze* it a little more LOL And according to HCA it exists! hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............. ::raise eyebrow:: I know at 58 it said it couldn''t exist for lack of girdle, but it accepted 59 and 60. And of course it would be better to see them all in a row. And don''t tell anyone but I think I''d go for slightly longer lgf than I have always said I would because... well... things change :D I still think a stone a bit more crown heavy and in the FIC range would be more to my liking, but for a pendant I don''t even know that. For a ring I do know that, but for a pendant? I don''t. I need a trip to houston john! When are you nominating me for the blind study? ;-)
Actual observation will burst myths. I graded a round in my last workshop that was 35.5/39.8 with 57 table. That''s close to your 36/40. I didn''t put anything remarkable in my notes about it, but you may have thought it was the bees knees Cehra.

It sounds like you went into a live situation where you could compare a host of different diamonds and make an informed decision about LGF...one which burst a preconceived myth Cehra. Awesome. That''s the best way to make up your mind; because you''re relying on your own eyes - not someone else''s opinion. In fact, once you''ve done the technical homework, actually going out and seeing diamonds is more valuable than reading all the tutorials in the world. It takes time and energy to do this if you''re not in the trade but GIA has made it easier by including full measurements on their reports for RBs.
No... I mean I routinely go into pretty much every store I pass and see what they have just to make mental notes, but that''s not why John. I have this beautiful stone that does amazing things that I daresay a round just cannot do.... so why would I want a round that tried really hard to do those things and fall short? Why not embrace what a round does best and just get that? That''s where its coming from. I *have* an old fashioned chunky stone with a HUGE crown... might as well get a sleek modern stone with roaring flashlight abilities and emphasis on twinkle over chunkle. All of that said, I still would love to see (or have haha) a beautiful high crowned OEC with very short LGF, but I think the answer that I''m coming to at least is - have MORE diamonds sara - don''t try to roll everything into one ;-)
 

Cehrabehra

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
11,071
Date: 4/16/2007 6:58:05 PM
Author: strmrdr
38/40.2/80/62.8
are these two both 55 table and 80 lgf? gosh, I think I like the 36 better... but I''d like this last one if the lgf were say.... 65 or so?
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 4/16/2007 9:51:03 PM
Author: Cehrabehra


Date: 4/16/2007 6:58:05 PM
Author: strmrdr
38/40.2/80/62.8
are these two both 55 table and 80 lgf? gosh, I think I like the 36 better... but I'd like this last one if the lgf were say.... 65 or so?
yep....
lgf% of 65
 

Attachments

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top