Trying again. Possible OEC and question.

[Ellen]

I posted this before in another old cut thread, but didn''t get an answer, so thought I''d try again. I got this out of my moms bank box. It looks like an OEC, from comparing of pics I''ve done, but of course I''m not sure. The pics show a pattern that looks kind of like contrast, but I''m wondering if it''s actually leakage. The stone "seems" to be steep/deep. I can''t tell entirely because there is a metal piece over the bottom half of the stone, except for a tiny hole where the culet is. But judging from everything, it seems like it is. And I can see this patteren in some dimmer lighting at a distance. Does this look/sound right for a steep/deep? I can also get a dark rim right under the table (not all the way around) when I take pics at an angle. And in dimmer lighting, there is always a darker spot to the left of the center of the stone, no matter which way I put it on. (but there also appears to be a chip on the pavilion, as I can see it through the loupe. Would that do anything?) It seems rather beat up, girdle is very thin and rather rough. I''m wondering if it was in another setting (more open) before this....

I''m really just curious.

The pattern.

 

[Ellen]

Dark rim at top corner.

 

[glitterata]

Wow, that is super charming! Classic Art Deco setting, I'd say from the 1920s.

The stone looks like an OEC, with its high crown. Or a transition cut, maybe, because the culet is pointed? "Steep deep" is a term they use for modern brilliants, but as I understand it many OECs were cut deep with steep crowns, and that's not necessarily considered a bad thing in these stones.

I'm not an expert in cutting, though, so hopefully some more-informed members will chime in here.

Girdles from that period often look rougher than the girdles of new stones, partly because of the more primitive cutting technology back, partly because they often left them unpolished on purpose, then and partly just from wear and tear. Unless there are big chips, I wouldn't worry about it.

What's the history of this ring in your family? Just curious, if you'd care to share.

 

[Upgradable]

Ellen, I''m sorry, I can''t answer your question either. But I wanted to chime in and say that the ring is STUNNING!! What a wonderful keepsake to have!

 

[LGK]

I'd guess later OEC leaning towards transitional, it looks like your usual OEC outline with the high crown/small table, though the culet is quite small. The girdles of most old stones are pretty rough and chipped- I'd say it's around 50% that seem to have bearding & actual chips. The very thin girdles that were often done didn't stand up real well to 80-100 years of wear & tear. The setting looks appropriate to the period of the stone. I'd say it's more likely it just got worn hard, a lot of women wear their rings all the time and a lifetime of wear, even in a protected setting, takes it's toll on a thin girdle.

I would doubt that the chip would cause leakage- it's probably one facet being weirdly off. My 1.22 ct OEC has this one facet in the center that catches the light all the time, it's extra bright, so I'd guess it's like yours but resulting in the opposite effect- there's one facet somewhere that's at a different angle.

The pattern it shows is neat and quirky, I like it. So many of the old stones are a bit wonky in cut. My guess is the pavilion is on the somewhat extreme side, either deep or shallow (and there were a good number of OECs that were very shallow despite "ideal" that they're deeper than a RB usually). Is it firey in the center? If not, maybe it's rather shallow?

Gorgeous ring, there's been so much great old cut eye candy lately

Oh, and edited to add: the dark rim when tilted is normal in an OEC with a high crown. All mine do it. It's something people refer to as windowing, though it's usually only described that way when referring to CZs (which do that a lot more prominently than diamonds). At least that's what I think I'm seeing in your pic! You're looking at the dark pie-slice shape, right? That's normal in an OEC.

 

[kcoursolle]

Hmmmm, I''m no expert on old stones...but it looks like an OEC to me with a pointed culet and a little leakage around the table. It''s beautiful though, I don''t think you can judge these stones the same way you can modern stones! I actually like the contrast around the table and the setting Ellen is to die for!!

 

[swingirl]

Looks like an OEC to me. It''s beautiful! My guess is that''s the original setting and teens or 20s sounds about right. What a nice piece to own!!

 

[strmrdr]

I would say transitional and it is steep deep.

 

[chrono]

The pattern looks like a transition cut with a small culet and some leakage as seen as a dark ring.

 

[Ellen]

Wow, thank you all for your input!


glitter, yes, the culet is pointed. And I realize the term steep/deep is normally referred to with todays rounds, but it best described the cut of this stone. (at least by my judgement) I know they were cut this way, but somewhere there needs to be a cut off, and I think this one goes slightly past that. As for the girdle, I wasn''t really worried, just commenting on it''s current state. I was just kind of surprised at the shape it was in, compared to my OMC that''s in a similar (protective) setting. No huge chips that I can see.

As for the history, I believe this was my great aunts ring on my mothers side. And thanks again for your info on the period!



upgradable, thank you!



LGK, yes, quirky and wonky would describe it well! I do think the pavilion is on the deep side, I''ll post a couple more pics that may help show why. It is fiery, though not quite as much as my round. The scint is close to my round, but again, not as bold. It''s a pretty stone though, despite everything.

As for the dark rim, I mean that crescent shaped black area just under the northmost corner of the setting.


k, no, I realize one can''t judge these the same. And I don''t mean to be judging/criticizing, just learning about it!

swingirl, thanks!


strm and chrono, thanks for chiming in, I appreciate it! Seems I was seeing what I thought I was.




So I am still not sure what it is, lol, except, it''s a diamond! I think we all agree on that.

And it doesn''t really matter in the scheme of things.

I''ll post a few more pics. This first one is a better crown shot. The girdle hits just slightly under the top rim of the metal corners, it''s not resting on the floor of the setting. So there''s a fair amount of pavilion showing, though you might not see it in the pics.

 

[Ellen]

And this is the bottom of the setting. The tip of the culet is right inside the edge of the metal hole. So that''s a pretty steep pavilion to me.

 

[Ellen]

Different view of the stone.

 

[Ellen]

Head on shot without so much leakage showing.

 

[:)]

I like the head on shot!

 

[Ellen]

Last one.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/4/2008 10:19:30 AM
Author:
I like the head on shot!

Me too! This stone shows a lot of different looks compared to my OMC.


Cleaning this ring is going to be a challenge. As you can see, the underneath is covered, not sure how I''m going to properly get at the stones, especially the melee, with using an US.

 

[Al Gilbertson]

The crown facet style appears to be rounded Old English Star cut (see Tillander’s book for an example) and the pavilion seems to be some variation of a standard round—although from the picture the pavilion facets are hard to see. Be very careful about the terms OEC and transitional—they have wide meanings in the trade.
I would have an expert look at the ring to determine what the stones are. The only time I have seen this facet combination on a gem, the stones have been glass. The accent stone also appear suspicious in the photo.

Al Gilbertsonhttps://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/trying-again-possible-oec-and-question.94240/

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/4/2008 10:35:38 AM
Author: Al Gilbertson
The crown facet style appears to be rounded Old English Star cut (see Tillander’s book for an example) and the pavilion seems to be some variation of a standard round—although from the picture the pavilion facets are hard to see. Be very careful about the terms OEC and transitional—they have wide meanings in the trade.
I would have an expert look at the ring to determine what the stones are. The only time I have seen this facet combination on a gem, the stones have been glass. The accent stone also appear suspicious in the photo.

Al Gilbertsonhttps://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/trying-again-possible-oec-and-question.94240/

Hi Al, interesting. Question, can glass have/show fire?

 

[Rhino]

Hi Ellen,

Was going to play a bit with DiamCalc when I got up to the store to see what could be duped in the program unless strm beats me to it of course.

Hi Al!!! It''s great to see you around these parts!

 

[Ellen]

Hey Jon.

Looking forward to it.

 

[Ellen]

...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/4/2008 10:54:43 AM
Author: Rhino
Hi Ellen,


Was going to play a bit with DiamCalc when I got up to the store to see what could be duped in the program unless strm beats me to it of course.

Hi Al!!! It''s great to see you around these parts!

lol I did that last night.
I couldn''t easily duplicate the unsymmetrical optics but did get similar leakage.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/4/2008 10:35:38 AM
Author: Al Gilbertson

I would have an expert look at the ring to determine what the stones are. The only time I have seen this facet combination on a gem, the stones have been glass. The accent stone also appear suspicious in the photo.

Al Gilbertsonhttps://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/trying-again-possible-oec-and-question.94240/

I wondered about that with the what appears to be some tilt windowing but did duplicate the windowing and the RI appears to high to be glass.

Having an expert look at it in person is a good idea to get it properly insured if your going to wear it.

 

[Kelli]

Although it''s not exactly the same look, my steep deep did have a dark ring in the center (smaller in sze, but very noticeable in a lot of lighting) and showed pretty much the same "windowing" effect when tilted even the slightest bit. Mine is a RB which of course is different, so it''s currently being recut. In a gorgeous heirloom piece like that, it seems to add to the charm of it. Your ring is beautiful!!

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/4/2008 11:28:13 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/4/2008 10:35:38 AM
Author: Al Gilbertson

I would have an expert look at the ring to determine what the stones are. The only time I have seen this facet combination on a gem, the stones have been glass. The accent stone also appear suspicious in the photo.

Al Gilbertsonhttps://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/trying-again-possible-oec-and-question.94240/

I wondered about that with the what appears to be some tilt windowing but did duplicate the windowing and the RI appears to high to be glass.

Having an expert look at it in person is a good idea to get it properly insured if your going to wear it.

Oh yes, I will have someone look at it. Not going to wear it for right now, it''s going back in the box.

But can you shed some light on my question about glass throwing fire? I have no idea, never tried it, but I''m thinking not?



Kelli, thank you, and thanks for the info!

 

[glitterata]

Sure glass can throw fire. Ever seen a prism? Or try holding a piece of broken glass in the sun.

 

[Al Gilbertson]

Glass has a variety of RI, depending upon material used to make the glass. I have a sample of glass, whose RI is nearly that of diamond, but it is quite yellow. High-lead content glass is used to make prisms and used for chandeliers to throw prismatic colors on walls.

 

[decolady]

The bottom of the ring is very suspicious of it being glass. It looks more like pot metal. I would get it checked out Asap. It''s pretty none the less

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/4/2008 12:23:20 PM
Author: glitterata
Sure glass can throw fire. Ever seen a prism? Or try holding a piece of broken glass in the sun.

Thank you for answering me.

I've never held a broken piece of glass (which is what I was thinking of) in the sun. But yeah, now that you mention it, a prism does.


ETA Thanks Al and decolady!

 

[strmrdr]

do you have a loupe?
Can you try taking a picture thru one if you do?