What are princess ideal cut standards?

[axjxn]

Im looking to purchase a 1.49 carat E color vs1 princess cut stone. I think afer all the research ive done this is what i have selected. but i still dont know anything about the cut. There is no standard for ideal cuts in princess stones. Can someone help tell me what i should look for in the cut. I want the cut to be perfect as possible. All i know is that the ratio has to be as sqaure as possible in a princess stone. thanx

 

[cowboystu]

Since I didn't look at princess cut, I can't be of too much help, but I can point you to Dave Atlas' Site he has a chart there for grading classes.

Hope it helps, or at least tides you over until more people respond.

stu

 

[barry]

Dave Atlas chart is a good place to begin
to evaluate fancy cuts.

But numbers alone do not tell you
everything you need to know, as Dave himself
acknowledges. Various combinations of Table/Depth
and Crown/Pavillion angles will result in great looking
Princess Cuts. We have found that the best way
to evaluate Princess Cuts is with tools that
evaluate light output and light leakage such
as the BrillianceScope and ImageScope.

Barry
www.superbcert.com

 

[clementine]

I'm also looking for a princess cut diamond in the 1.4-1.49 range. Are you having much luck finding a jeweler who will give you more than one to choose from? Also, if you don't mind my asking, what kind of price range are you getting on that stone?

Clementine

 

[Iceman]

If there were going to be a standard for Princess cuts it would be the one Barry
produces. Ive been in business a long time and those are the finest cut princess you
will ever see.

I had a chance to see one of "Barry's" superb cuts princess cut diamonds, when a
customer mailed the diamond to me for immediate setting in a Vatch'e Mounting that
I carried.

Just my 2 cents

 

[oldminer]

I agree and disagree with Barry. The numbers do not tell it all. That is dead right. However, and Barry's great cutting will show, princess cuts that are superb looking and happen to fall into the AGA 1 standards, do look excellent (and they are).

Barry's best examples, the ones I have seen, do meet the AGA 1 standards. Now, he is using his skill as a diamond cutter and we have used our knowledge as diamond appraisers. These are different approaches, but when the results agree, we both have done something right.

You will not find the best princess cuts in the 3 or 4 AGA Cut grades. You might find a very nice one in the 2 AGA Cut Class range on occasion. When you do find a superb princess cut and check out the parameters, you will likely find it in an upper AGA Cut Class.

Keep in mind that in princess cuts, it is very common to find beautiful, brilliant but overly deep stones. To my mind "too deep" is a cutting fault. I don't care how brilliant it is, a diamond that weighs 1.00 ct and looks like it weighs only 0.75 ct is not "well cut" on the AGA Cut Class sytem. There is far more to cutting than brilliancy. A proper and appealing shape is a very major factor that the AGA Cut Class system addresses for consumers.

 

[axjxn]

i really havent gone shopping yet im still getting all my facts together before i do but i think 8000 for a perfect stone should be a good price

 

[barry]

Iceman, Dave;

Thank you very much for your kind words
regarding my SuperbCert Princess Cuts.

Dave; Your comments are well-taken.
There is definitely a correspondence between
the AGA scales and the diamond's visual performance.
The point I was trying to make is that it is very possible
to produce a top-visual performance Princess Cut with (3A-3B)
Total depths above 75% if other parts of the stone
such as the Table, Crown, and Star and Girdle facets are
cut in a certain way.

Barry
www.superbcert.com

 

[oldminer]

Barry;. I agree. The issue with "visual performance" is the definition of the term. I include all aspects which encompass diameter to width (apparent size), durability in regard to shallow crown angles, and beauty of the outline. Obviously, you, too, consider these of importance.

However, we see a growing approach to "visual performance" only to mean brilliancy or light return. This may become the accepted norm. It favors less skilled cutters and the general selling of diamonds, but it does not serve the consuming public with the best looking stones.

Light return or brilliancy is a standard of performance we can increasingly measure, but none of us should define the sum total of "cut quality" simply by an incomplete standard.

A 3a or 3b princess can indeed by very attractive. It can be highly brilliant. Undoubtedly some aspect of cutting will be "off". The price for the stone may therefore become a tempting aspect as we cannot forget the demands of individual budgets. In defining the "best" in diamonds, price and value really are not what we consider. Those are market considerations. Cutting has to do with skill, beauty and overall performance, but nothing to do with monetary concerns.

 

[axjxn]

Ok i hear what you guys are saying, but as someone who has no concept in the diamond indusrty, what should i buy. Could anyone give me numbers and a set of guideline to go by in reference to cut. So far i know...
-it should be as sqaure as possibly in reference to the ratio
-it should not be too deep b/c then my carat weight will look less
-and i should stick to the AGA 1 standards for the best porportions

what i dont understand is on the AGA 1 scale there are two sets of numbers such as table% 62-68 / 61.9-60 and what does thin to medium mean compared to medium to thick... thanx

 

[oldminer]

QUOTE:

-it should be as square as possibly in reference to the ratio
-it should not be too deep b/c then my carat weight will look less
-and i should stick to the AGA 1 standards for the best porportions

what i dont understand is on the AGA 1 scale there are two sets of numbers such as table% 62-68 / 61.9-60 and what does thin to medium mean compared to medium to thick...
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

1. square or rectangle is a matter of personal taste.
2. Yes, not overly deep.
3. Cut class1 is a great guide for most stones, but hard to find. 2 is pretty darn good.
4. If 1A is 62 to 68 then we must allow for larger or smaller tables. Most are larger, but not all.

I hope that clears this up.