Wait??? Round vs. Fancy? Fancy is cheaper for same size?

[lovindiamonds]

Ok, so newbie confusion here!! So, I''m finding conflicting information here and I''d like to clear this up....

Rounds are more sought after than "fancy cuts" therefore the same carat weight and specs lets say would be more expensive if it were a round over lets say a cushion cut??

Hmmmm, however could the reason be that the rounds for the same carat size are usually bigger than a fancy the same weight?

I do understand that table, depth and all of that make a big difference, I''m just wondering if this is generally true?

 

[stone-cold11]

1st point is true.
2nd point is sometimes true. Oval, Pears and Marquise can sometimes face-up bigger than an Ideal cut RB. Ideal cut princess, cushions, emerald cut are usually smaller face-up in the same comparison.

If none ideal RB, anything could happen.

 

[mrssalvo]

depends on the cut of the stone but yes ideal cut rounds will usually face up larger than some fancy shapes of the same weight. it''s important to look at each stone''s diameter when determining the face-up size, not just the carat weight.

 

[lovindiamonds]

The more and more I read, the more scared it makes me to make the wrong decision!!! This is not easy!

 

[Rockdiamond]

lovingdiamonds- the first thing that strikes me, is to say....relax, have fun!
Shopping for a diamond should, and can be a really fun experience!

The fancy shaped diamonds indeed, are priced less per carat as compared to round brilliant cut diamonds.
There's a number of reasons.
The main reason has to do with how much rough diamond it takes to end up with a polished one.
To oversimplify, say we have a 5carat piece of rough diamond.
Cut it to a princess, you might have say, 3.75carat finished diamond.
Polish off those corners, to make a round, and now you're looking at a 3 carat diamond. That's the main reason rounds are more expensive. Also more demand.

But my advice is not to let any of the background stuff bother you- instead, as you see different type of diamonds, decide what you like and go for it!

 

[asforhim]

Ditto what''s been said.. but the number one reason RB''s are mroe expensive is that they are most in demand. The RB makes up greater than 40% of the cut, polished diamond business worldwide.

Things are changing though. Fancy cuts are slowly becoming very popular and demand is increasing. Check out the most recent diamond prices and trends. RB''s in the US (in most ct weights) are declining rapidly... 20% plus drop year over year (check out dimex index). Many of the fancys (larger ct wts) didn''t see much if any drop in value... some even increased.

I think much of this has to do with celebrity interest in fancys and the uniquness of owning a fancy... google any major celebrity and they all have fancy engangement rings (no rounds as I can tell).

I wouldn''t be surprised to see fancys see a big increase in demand over the next 5-10 years as RB''s are now defined mostly mathematically (as is clear by this blog).

Each diamond is unique and the experience of buying and owning a diamond is a visceral, emotional thing. Fancys embrace this romance.

 

[Gypsy]

I''m a fancy girl. But... rounds are also easier to shop for and easier to find settings for. Nice fancies... if you want a well cut fancy you often have to broaden your preferences in other departments (not always, just often).

If you want an ideal AGS0 H VS1 at approximately 1.25 carats it would take most of a few minutes to find you at least three to chose from. Then the perfect setting... just describe it and we can probably find it for you in a couple hours top.

Try finding a minimal oval bowtie pear or oval with good spread EX/EX or VG/VG at 1.25 carats in a specific color and clarity (instead of a range)... then try to find the perfect stock setting for it. Lots of fun... I mean that HOURS of fun. DAYS of fun.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/24/2009 9:02:50 PM
Author: mrssalvo
depends on the cut of the stone but yes ideal cut rounds will usually face up larger than some fancy shapes of the same weight. it''s important to look at each stone''s diameter when determining the face-up size, not just the carat weight.

Ditto

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 2/25/2009 12:00:10 AM
Author: Gypsy
I''m a fancy girl. But... rounds are also easier to shop for and easier to find settings for. Nice fancies... if you want a well cut fancy you often have to broaden your preferences in other departments (not always, just often).

If you want an ideal AGS0 H VS1 at approximately 1.25 carats it would take most of a few minutes to find you at least three to chose from. Then the perfect setting... just describe it and we can probably find it for you in a couple hours top.

Try finding a minimal oval bowtie pear or oval with good spread EX/EX or VG/VG at 1.25 carats in a specific color and clarity (instead of a range)... then try to find the perfect stock setting for it. Lots of fun... I mean that HOURS of fun. DAYS of fun.

Ha ha, ditto this gypsy...and ditto what Mrs said to answer the Q.


Which is why I personally do not think that fancies will overtake RB''s - after all there is alot to say for classic when romance is involved.
Asforhim, yes ideal cut rounds (and other shapes) are cut to mathematical precision - to some, that may take the emotion out of it - I don''t see it that way. If you''re buying a true ideal cut for your partner, you are seeking out the most perfectly cut diamond you can for your engagement. I find that quite romantic and unique, as its not likely many around you will have one

Let''s keep in mind I''m quite sure math has almost always been involved in cutting gems - it''s only in recent times that consumers have been bought in on the "background details" of the numbers..

I do understand what you are saying about fancies and celebrities for sure, and I must say we have seen surge toward cushions around here lately - heaps of em!

 

[megeve]

Date: 2/25/2009 12:00:10 AM
Author: Gypsy
I''m a fancy girl. But... rounds are also easier to shop for and easier to find settings for. Nice fancies... if you want a well cut fancy you often have to broaden your preferences in other departments (not always, just often).

If you want an ideal AGS0 H VS1 at approximately 1.25 carats it would take most of a few minutes to find you at least three to chose from. Then the perfect setting... just describe it and we can probably find it for you in a couple hours top.

Try finding a minimal oval bowtie pear or oval with good spread EX/EX or VG/VG at 1.25 carats in a specific color and clarity (instead of a range)... then try to find the perfect stock setting for it. Lots of fun... I mean that HOURS of fun. DAYS of fun.

Ditto, Gypsy! I spent almost a year PS-time to find my ec.

 

[Sharon101]

Date: 2/24/2009 9:23:06 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
lovingdiamonds- the first thing that strikes me, is to say....relax, have fun!
Shopping for a diamond should, and can be a really fun experience!

The fancy shaped diamonds indeed, are priced less per carat as compared to round brilliant cut diamonds.
There''s a number of reasons.
The main reason has to do with how much rough diamond it takes to end up with a polished one.
To oversimplify, say we have a 5carat piece of rough diamond.
Cut it to a princess, you might have say, 3.75carat finished diamond.
Polish off those corners, to make a round, and now you''re looking at a 3 carat diamond. That''s the main reason rounds are more expensive. Also more demand.

But my advice is not to let any of the background stuff bother you- instead, as you see different type of diamonds, decide what you like and go for it!

Excellent advice. You explained that so well.

 

[ring tutor]

round brilliants will always cost more than fancy shapes because more rough is lost when cutting a round brilliant. the majority of rough diamonds are found in the shape of octahedrals (picture two pyramids, their bases touching, one on top of the other. because rounds are so in demand, cutters must use this shape rough to get their rounds. so they cut two rounds, one small and one slightly larger out of each octahedral shaped rough. this does not magimize the rough, it wastes it, and drives the price of the rounds up higher. even consider the table percent of a round. cutting rough away to hit the 54%-64% table wastes a lot more rough than say maintaining a 70% table on an emerald cut. however, there will always be a market for the round brilliants because they reflect tradition, tremendous sparkle, and classic design.

 

[lovindiamonds]

Thank you for all of this GREAT education!!!! What knowledge you all have. With regard to saying that only the background mathmatics have become available in recent years, it makes me wonder if people have become more crazy about the math - the angle the measurements, etc......rather than just by going with the 4 C''s. I know there is more involved, but probably the advent of shopping on the internet rather than just putting the rock on your finger changed a lot of that??

I mean, if I put it on my finger and it''s sparkly and lovely....I probably won''t care about the pavillion!

 

[stone-cold11]

Pavilion is a major determinant of whether a cut is sparkley or not = determines the cut. So if you know that, better chance of find a good stone, right? Store lighting is selected so as to make average cut stone appears more lively than in normal everyday lighting. Rather than trust the SA, who could be trying to pawn off to you a less than ideal cut, by saying it is ideal cut?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 10:53:02 AM
Author: lovindiamonds
Thank you for all of this GREAT education!!!! What knowledge you all have. With regard to saying that only the background mathmatics have become available in recent years, it makes me wonder if people have become more crazy about the math - the angle the measurements, etc......rather than just by going with the 4 C's. I know there is more involved, but probably the advent of shopping on the internet rather than just putting the rock on your finger changed a lot of that??

I mean, if I put it on my finger and it's sparkly and lovely....I probably won't care about the pavillion!

Diamond cut is rather more complicated than the pavilion alone, and with fancy shapes the numbers don't tell you much at all, images are essential.

The best way to buy a round diamond is by choosing one with excellent proportions which has images such as ASET to determine light performance. With a fancy shape images are crucial in order to determine performance and beauty plus detailed photographs to help you choose.

 

[lovindiamonds]

I want to have fun with this, but I''m that crazy woman that will open 10 different websites to save $10 on a vacation!! With diamonds, all of the numbers and craziness make it so much harder to compare!

Can anyone do personal diamond shopping for me, lol?!?

 

[asforhim]

I don''t know of personal shoppers per se. The great diamond jewelry houses are personal shoppers in a sense. They only select the finest stones to sell at their boutiques, particularly in the fancy shapes. Harry Winston and Graff are especially nice when it comes to fancies. Of course you pay a hefty premium for the service and name recognition.

Maybe someone on the boards would be willing to help when it comes to rounds.

But as everyone has said, there is only one way to buy a fancy... lay your eyes on several.

 

[Gypsy]

Regarding our helping you with personal shopping, if you post what you want, and your budget is and ask for ideas and suggestions you will probably get a lot of help on here. We''ve helped quite a few people make ring decisions.


First step is to get yourself to a jewelry store and see what looks good on your hand, what draws your eye, and what doesn''t.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The explanations have been given (although the type of round diamonds preferred here typically have much lower yeilds that 60% as indicated earlier - more like 45% for well cut rounds or 2.25ct).

Some years back one of our particpants (Valeria?) did a survey and found that the surface area per dollars was similar for rounds and some fancies.

But another factor not covered is that almost all fancies have less light return at the edges and so they always appear smaller than the same cost round.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 2/25/2009 10:53:02 AM
Author: lovindiamonds
Thank you for all of this GREAT education!!!! What knowledge you all have. With regard to saying that only the background mathmatics have become available in recent years, it makes me wonder if people have become more crazy about the math - the angle the measurements, etc......rather than just by going with the 4 C's. I know there is more involved, but probably the advent of shopping on the internet rather than just putting the rock on your finger changed a lot of that??

I mean, if I put it on my finger and it's sparkly and lovely....I probably won't care about the pavillion!

This is a great point lovingdiamonds.
If a person is shopping for a round diamond, the "established parameters" are much easier agreed upon by those in the trade. Not to say everyone agrees on what looks the best, but the parameters are fairly well established.

There are efforts to "standardize" fancy shapes, but I feel that will never be practical as there's far more subjectivity involved.
After all, how many shapes can a round diamond be?
A cushion, for example, can be almost round, almost square, oval shaped, or rectangular.

In terms of which gives the most bang for the buck, again it's an interesting conversation- with no hard fast answer.
For example, some fancy shaped diamonds can be far more shallow than a round, and still manage to look very nice.
Generally a more shallow stone will have a greater "spread"- although this is not true in every case.
If we're considering emerald cuts, for the purposes of this conversation, we've seen some doozies that were cut to 50% depth. Such a stone could dwarf an emerald of similar profile cut to 70% depth- and both could be gorgeous.

AS I mentioned before, my method for selection is to focus more on the visual aspects. Of course knowing the numbers is vital, but if you're a "visually driven" shopper, looking for a fancy shape, don't let numbers cloud what you're looking at
.....use the force Luke

.......

 

[purrfectpear]

Date: 2/25/2009 4:36:08 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 2/25/2009 10:53:02 AM
Author: lovindiamonds
Thank you for all of this GREAT education!!!! What knowledge you all have. With regard to saying that only the background mathmatics have become available in recent years, it makes me wonder if people have become more crazy about the math - the angle the measurements, etc......rather than just by going with the 4 C''s. I know there is more involved, but probably the advent of shopping on the internet rather than just putting the rock on your finger changed a lot of that??

I mean, if I put it on my finger and it''s sparkly and lovely....I probably won''t care about the pavillion!

This is a great point lovingdiamonds.
If a person is shopping for a round diamond, the ''established parameters'' are much easier agreed upon by those in the trade. Not to say everyone agrees on what looks the best, but the parameters are fairly well established.

There are efforts to ''standardize'' fancy shapes, but I feel that will never be practical as there''s far more subjectivity involved.
After all, how many shapes can a round diamond be?
A cushion, for example, can be almost round, almost square, oval shaped, or rectangular.

In terms of which gives the most bang for the buck, again it''s an interesting conversation- with no hard fast answer.
For example, some fancy shaped diamonds can be far more shallow than a round, and still manage to look very nice.
Generally a more shallow stone will have a greater ''spread''- although this is not true in every case.
If we''re considering emerald cuts, for the purposes of this conversation, we''ve seen some doozies that were cut to 50% depth. Such a stone could dwarf an emerald of similar profile cut to 70% depth- and both could be gorgeous.

AS I mentioned before, my method for selection is to focus more on the visual aspects. Of course knowing the numbers is vital, but if you''re a ''visually driven'' shopper, looking for a fancy shape, don''t let numbers cloud what you''re looking at
.....use the force Luke

.......

If we are talking about colorless diamonds (opposed to fancy colored), then I think that an emerald cut with a 50% depth would indeed be a doozie, and not in a good way

It isn''t necessary to proclaim every oddball gorgeous even if you do run a diamond orphanage.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Purrfect- I think I''m allowed to like what I like, no?

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/24/2009 11:03:56 PM
Author: asforhim
Ditto what''s been said.. but the number one reason RB''s are mroe expensive is that they are most in demand. The RB makes up greater than 40% of the cut, polished diamond business worldwide.

You mean much..., much greater...

Things are changing though. Fancy cuts are slowly becoming very popular and demand is increasing. Check out the most recent diamond prices and trends. RB''s in the US (in most ct weights) are declining rapidly... 20% plus drop year over year (check out dimex index). Many of the fancys (larger ct wts) didn''t see much if any drop in value... some even increased.

overly simplistic assumption..., no?

I think much of this has to do with celebrity interest in fancys and the uniquness of owning a fancy... google any major celebrity and they all have fancy engangement rings (no rounds as I can tell).

I wouldn''t be surprised to see fancys see a big increase in demand over the next 5-10 years as RB''s are now defined mostly mathematically (as is clear by this blog).

Each diamond is unique and the experience of buying and owning a diamond is a visceral, emotional thing. Fancys embrace this romance.

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/25/2009 8:01:23 AM
Author: ring tutor
round brilliants will always cost more than fancy shapes because more rough is lost when cutting a round brilliant. the majority of rough diamonds are found in the shape of octahedrals (picture two pyramids, their bases touching, one on top of the other. because rounds are so in demand, cutters must use this shape rough to get their rounds. so they cut two rounds, one small and one slightly larger out of each octahedral shaped rough. this does not magimize the rough, it wastes it, and drives the price of the rounds up higher. even consider the table percent of a round. cutting rough away to hit the 54%-64% table wastes a lot more rough than say maintaining a 70% table on an emerald cut. however, there will always be a market for the round brilliants because they reflect tradition, tremendous sparkle, and classic design.

rt...

How the cutters life would be easier IF the majority of rough came in the octahedron shape..., (Ideal world, not Diamonds
In fact..., the majority of rough comes out of the ground in irregular shapes rather that the nicely shaped octahedron''s!

When planning cutting options..., there are way more (important and critical) factors to take into consideration than simply cutting two rounds (one big-one small) out of each octahedron shaped rough...

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/25/2009 4:49:15 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Purrfect- I think I''m allowed to like what I like, no?

Yes you are..., and I agree with you 100%!!!
If executed correctly...., a 50% total depth step-cut model can be awesome and gorgeous!

Not an easy find..., but I have seen a few floating around...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/25/2009 5:33:56 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 2/25/2009 4:49:15 PM

Author: Rockdiamond

Purrfect- I think I''m allowed to like what I like, no?

Yes you are..., and I agree with you 100%!!!

If executed correctly...., a 50% total depth step-cut model can be awesome and gorgeous!


Not an easy find..., but I have seen a few floating around...

Have to agree, when properly cut is the key point.
I have designs down to around 46% depth that rock.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Thanks Diagem!

Purrfect- if you think about it, you might actually love the type of look I, and I believe DiaGem and Karl are talking about.
For example, you can have a flat culet- like on an Old Mine Cut. That way the stone can have a low depth- even below 50%, yet have angles on the pavilion as if the depth was 60%.

 

[strmrdr]

There is a board problem right now when it is fixed I will post an image of a design at 48.4% depth with a closed culet, with an open culet it would be shallower.
The reason you don''t see these is rough availability and they are extremely touchy about what angles will work with them, much more so than the best stones in higher depths.
So you have limited rough being available and hard to cut equals very few of them on the market.

 

[diagem]

Date: 2/25/2009 6:28:22 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Thanks Diagem!

Purrfect- if you think about it, you might actually love the type of look I, and I believe DiaGem and Karl are talking about.
For example, you can have a flat culet- like on an Old Mine Cut. That way the stone can have a low depth- even below 50%, yet have angles on the pavilion as if the depth was 60%.

Its not just about the pavilion angles..., the right execution is based on a combination of applying the correct step-facet angles on both the crown and pavilion!
A critical issue is the division between crown height and pavilion depth.

 

[Imdanny]

Date: 2/25/2009 12:06:57 PM
Author: asforhim
I don''t know of personal shoppers per se. The great diamond jewelry houses are personal shoppers in a sense. They only select the finest stones to sell at their boutiques, particularly in the fancy shapes. Harry Winston and Graff are especially nice when it comes to fancies. Of course you pay a hefty premium for the service and name recognition.


Maybe someone on the boards would be willing to help when it comes to rounds.

Well, especially rounds (because they''re so standardized- frankly it''s easier to choose among them) but people will help you with other cuts too, if you can narrow it down to at least a shape.

There IS a lot to know in order to make a decision when you move away from RB''s so spend a lot of time, make sure you know what your choices really are.