- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,096
I thought this could be a good topic!
Let see to what extreme we can take the "NORMS" of Diamond cutting!
Lets think outside the box...
Let see how extreme and stay in agreements!
Anyone??
Garry said that a round brilliant can earn a AGS0 grade with a table% of 47%>
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-tiffanys-really-that-much-more-expensive.83449/page-7
"Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Peter Yantzer said ''if people can cut a diamond that gets our performance criteria, then it can have any proportion set as long as it meets our spread and durability criteria etc'' or words to that effect.'' 47% is theortecally possible for a table on the spread and durability rules, and can meet the light performance criteria based on models."
I have no comment on GIA''s sym and polish, but in my experiance sym and pol cause far less ugly diamonds than bad propotrion combinations
Diagem: "Garry..., smaller than 47% is theoretically not?"
Garry H (Cut Nut): "tHE WEIGHT RATIO takes a hit DG, but the light performance apparently holds up.
Strmrdr showed an example which can earn a possible AGS0 consisting a 40% table!
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-tiffanys-really-that-much-more-expensive.83449/page-7
Strmrd: "40% table that should get AGS0
I will see if I can get it ran thru the AGS software on tue or wed.
If it dont it will be for table contrast."
Lets try to see how extreme examples of Diamonds can still be awesome looking Diamonds!
More examples:
The Asscher Me and Strmrdr worked on:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/why-cut-asschers-with-small-corners-and-windmills.78433/
The Cut Cornered Rectangular Step Cut:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/cut-cornered-rectangular-step-cut-strmrdr.80512/page-5
Let see to what extreme we can take the "NORMS" of Diamond cutting!
Lets think outside the box...
Let see how extreme and stay in agreements!
Anyone??
Garry said that a round brilliant can earn a AGS0 grade with a table% of 47%>
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-tiffanys-really-that-much-more-expensive.83449/page-7
"Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Peter Yantzer said ''if people can cut a diamond that gets our performance criteria, then it can have any proportion set as long as it meets our spread and durability criteria etc'' or words to that effect.'' 47% is theortecally possible for a table on the spread and durability rules, and can meet the light performance criteria based on models."
I have no comment on GIA''s sym and polish, but in my experiance sym and pol cause far less ugly diamonds than bad propotrion combinations
Diagem: "Garry..., smaller than 47% is theoretically not?"
Garry H (Cut Nut): "tHE WEIGHT RATIO takes a hit DG, but the light performance apparently holds up.
Mind you the ''verticle spread'' makes such a diamond ''stand out'' like Dolly Parton."
Strmrdr showed an example which can earn a possible AGS0 consisting a 40% table!
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-tiffanys-really-that-much-more-expensive.83449/page-7
Strmrd: "40% table that should get AGS0
I will see if I can get it ran thru the AGS software on tue or wed.
If it dont it will be for table contrast."
Lets try to see how extreme examples of Diamonds can still be awesome looking Diamonds!
More examples:
The Asscher Me and Strmrdr worked on:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/why-cut-asschers-with-small-corners-and-windmills.78433/
The Cut Cornered Rectangular Step Cut:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/cut-cornered-rectangular-step-cut-strmrdr.80512/page-5
300x240.png)