TIC & FIC of HCA

[duriofont]

Hi all! Am still reading posts and trying to learn all I can about my future diamond purchase and am grateful for the commitment you all have to helping us learn. Thank you!

Have noticed the TIC & FIC abbreviations that are part of the HCA evaluations. Although I''ve seen TIC on some of the diamonds I''ve researched, I''ve never ran across any that have FIC in the HCA. I ask because I remember someone posting the HCA of their diamond and subsequent comments about FIC but can''t remember which post had this info. What does TIC & FIC mean, how does one find a diamond with FIC, and is this designation important?

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Hi,

From my current understanding and studying of the HCA chart… FIC relate to those with shallower crown and pavilion angles than the TIC… which I believe is a fallacy on – with the TIC being a set single parameter of the crown is THIS and the pavilion is THIS, while the HCA chart refers diamonds as being TIC if its proportions of crown and pavilion angles are between THIS and THAT – and related to the AGS cut grade of ‘0’

I think I did read somewhere on here that those cut in the FIC range, with their shallower angles are more suited to pendants and earrings, and they don’t get scrutinised quite as closely as that of a ring, and look much better from a further distance than a TIC/AGS 0 cut, where head shadow isn’t as much as a issue.

But I am just a rank amateur in this, and there are those with far more knowledge than me to help you.

I’m sure Garry will be along at some point to pick great gaping holes in what I have said and give you the real answer.

 

[Regular Guy]

For some background, see here.

They''re hard to get on purpose; I got one by (relatively fortunate) accident, essentially drawing on the Quick search utility here. The diamond had been categorized as ideal cut; don''t know whether this was a mistake, or not. Since Garry, shooting from the hip, reports these show up one in 2000, not sure about any useful strategies to advise to find one.

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Date: 1/24/2005 11:22

0 AM
Author: Lord Summerisle

Hi,

From my current understanding and studying of the HCA chart… FIC relate to those with shallower crown and pavilion angles than the TIC… which I believe is a fallacy on – with the TIC being a set single parameter of the crown is THIS and the pavilion is THIS, while the HCA chart refers diamonds as being TIC if its proportions of crown and pavilion angles are between THIS and THAT – and related to the AGS cut grade of ‘0’

I think I did read somewhere on here that those cut in the FIC range, with their shallower angles are more suited to pendants and earrings, and they don’t get scrutinised quite as closely as that of a ring, and look much better from a further distance than a TIC/AGS 0 cut, where head shadow isn’t as much as a issue.

But I am just a rank amateur in this, and there are those with far more knowledge than me to help you.

I’m sure Garry will be along at some point to pick great gaping holes in what I have said and give you the real answer.

See i knew i would get somthing wrong somewhere!

FIC=steeper crown angles than TIC & BIC cuts!

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!

*note to self, keep mouth shut...

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Well Done my Lord

Most cut grading systems down grade these stones - so cutters will not produce them - but some new systems being released next year agree that steep crown shallower pavilions are good.
So we should be able to buy them in a years time

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 1/24/2005 3:23

9 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Well Done my Lord

Most cut grading systems down grade these stones - so cutters will not produce them - but some new systems being released next year agree that steep crown shallower pavilions are good.
So we should be able to buy them in a years time

cut nut
these FIC must be rare animals just don''t see them anywhere.we have to wait a couple of more yrs for them to be common?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

GIA put a comment on the cert - Crown angle over 36, crown angle over 37 etc

AGS give them low grades because they need to have shallower pavilion angles

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/25/2005 51:14 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
AGS give them low grades because they need to have shallower pavilion angles

Anything "BAD" about these stones with most of their weight above the girdle ? I only see really old ones cut this way... but good optics seem perfectly feasible

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Note all the values with the red boxes.
This 1ct stone would have a diameter of a a 0.95ct.
But note also that it has a great vertical projection - like Bridgette Bardot on steroids.

This stone would look great - if you could find one!!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/25/2005 5:38:39 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

This 1ct stone would have a diameter of a a 0.95ct.
This stone would look great - if you could find one!!

Well, what difference d those last 5 points make ? Am I wrong saying that such small weight differences are always swamped by cut

There are a few hundreds of 1 carat stones with the same 63% depth and about the same 6.3-ish diameter in PS''s database right now - priced for their carat. ''Bet they are flat faced instead and not as appealing as the lovely onld timer in your model

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Yes Ana - the stone would look like an old mine cut from the side view - but unlike the old miner - this one would have un believable scintillation and 4 times as many flashes of fire (but they would be smaller).

It''s DiamCalc contrasst is 1.09 and light return is around .95 - pretty good huh?l

And for a manufacturer cutting from a dodecahedra makeable piece of rough - this would get a much better yield.

Can you see why we say that labs grading standards have cost the world billions of dollars of waste by the stoopid garbage they write on reports.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/25/2005 4:37:15 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Can you see why we say that labs grading standards have cost the world billions of dollars of waste by the stoopid garbage they write on reports.

Yes sir!

However, more often than not it seems that the effort to fabricate empty words pay better than the effort to create wonderful diamonds...