What constitutes for a perfect cut?

[AlmostMarried]

So the word 'Ideal' when talking about a cut, that has to constitute for a specific number range? Whats the 'Best' cut that you can get. Price varies drastically when talking about this so that is why I ask. The below diamond is listed as 'Ideal' cut. But what really does that mean.

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/princess-cut/1.36-carat-i-color-vs1-clarity-sku-236345

Is this diamond here a 'perfect' cut or is there no such thing...help!

 

[JulieN]

My pancakes rise higher than that crown.

 

[smilligan]

My pancakes rise higher than that crown.

What brand of baking powder do you use? but seriously, it is flat. Since GIA doesn't have a cut grade for princess cuts, "ideal" is the term assigned by JA, which means very little, IMO. Not that they are untrustworthy, but anyone can call something ideal.

 

[ecf8503]

Are you looking specifically for a princess? If so, AGS does grade cut on princesses - look for AGS 0 in light performance. That way you know you are getting a stone with great optics.

 

[JulieN]

Smilligan, you have to use the aluminum free kind!

 

[denverappraiser]

'Ideal' doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. AGS started using the term back in the 90-s to describe a specific set of ranges around the cutting of a round brilliant diamond. They changed the rules in 2005 but not before a fair number of other people started using it to describe their own ranges. They're not all the same. They started grading Ideal princess cuts in 2009 but the parameters are a bit different and it's not based on ranges of the parameters, it's based on raytracing a computer model of the stone. GIA, the lab that graded this stone, doesn't use the term on ANY of their scales, and they don't assign any sort of cut grade on princesses.

So what does JA mean by calling that one 'Ideal'? I haven't a clue. Ask them. They're pretty cooperative folks. It's not an industry standard thing and I"ve never seen the scale they use. Taken isolation, it doesn't mean much and it definitely doesn't mean perfect.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Ideal has a definition but sadly it has been bastardised.
AGS started it, as Neil mentioned, and when they did, they had an appallingly bad definition.
So it is now a generic term that anyone can own and abuse.
(I am not saying JA or anyone else is guilty of that, I am saying its a term that should mean perfection but no longer does, the way Blue White diamonds died from abuse of traders)

Its like GIA Good Cut = really lousy cut.

(Off to eat some more razor blades)

 

[Rockdiamond]

I'm not 100% sure- but wasn't it Lazaare Kaplan that first started using the term "Ideal"?

In any event, I agree with Garry- and Neil - the term has lost a defined meaning at this point.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I'm not 100% sure- but wasn't it Lazaare Kaplan that first started using the term "Ideal"?

In any event, I agree with Garry- and Neil - the term has lost a defined meaning at this point.

..RD, are you drunk?..

 

[diagem]

...sorry about the double post...

 

[diagem]

IMO the term "Ideal" should be accompanied with a report produced by AGSL. After all they are the folks who stand behind the science!
AGSL Ideal LP designation = proven science as presently known.

But again..., there is no such thing as "perfect" in the world of Diamond Cutting

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Ideal has a definition but sadly it has been bastardised.
AGS started it, as Neil mentioned, and when they did, they had an appallingly bad definition.
So it is now a generic term that anyone can own and abuse.
(I am not saying JA or anyone else is guilty of that, I am saying its a term that should mean perfection but no longer does, the way Blue White diamonds died from abuse of traders)

Its like GIA Good Cut = really lousy cut.

(Off to eat some more razor blades)

Hi Garry,

A question out of curiosity: If you call the original AGS-definition of Ideal (not in use anymore) appallingly bad, how do you describe the currently used GIA-definitions (and those of other labs) of Excellent?

I hope that you accompanied those razor blades with a glass of good Shiraz .

Live long,

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Ideal has a definition but sadly it has been bastardised.
AGS started it, as Neil mentioned, and when they did, they had an appallingly bad definition.
So it is now a generic term that anyone can own and abuse.
(I am not saying JA or anyone else is guilty of that, I am saying its a term that should mean perfection but no longer does, the way Blue White diamonds died from abuse of traders)

Its like GIA Good Cut = really lousy cut.

(Off to eat some more razor blades)

Hi Garry,

A question out of curiosity: If you call the original AGS-definition of Ideal (not in use anymore) appallingly bad, how do you describe the currently used GIA-definitions (and those of other labs) of Excellent?

I hope that you accompanied those razor blades with a glass of good Shiraz .

Live long,

The old AGS (maybe LK?) approach was out of convenience and had little to do with nature or physics.
e.g. 53% T 35.8 C 41.2P was AGS 0 and is GIA Good.
Many other rules were too stringent, e.g. larger table sizes.

I make it very clear that I do not approve of many GIA steep deeps, but at least they made it clear that they too changed to a fit with nature.
And sadly, no shiraz tonight.
2 glasses of Pol Roger bubbles at an auction preview, and one Rhone Grenache with dinner.

For RD - the auction had some bin ordinaire Harry Winston jewels. notably this one http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/21296/lot/99/ which was dead set fugly.

 

[Rockdiamond]

For RD - the auction had some bin ordinaire Harry Winston jewels. notably this one http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/21296/lot/99/ which was dead set fugly.

Thanks Garry- we know that any diamond cut by the house of Winston is automatically perfect

Seriously- I can recall no stone looking like that being offered as a Winston stone when I worked there- but of course that was ...like 100 years ago.

The truth is, it's a great example of buyer beware - just because a ring has a tradestamp does not guarantee that the stamp is accurate- and further, a trade stamp on the setting itself does not mean the diamond set into it was sold by that seller.
We're in agreement that the stone, as pictured, and described in the GIA report is likely horrible.
I'd like to believe that Winston would not offer such a stone - even nowadays-but anything is possible