What makes a diamond ideal/ super ideal?

[blingblingdiamond]

Hi All,

I am really curious what makes a diamond ideal or super ideal? Are their any specs we can follow or it has to be determined case by case and we will have see it with our eyes instead of just looking at the numbers? Please advise!

 

[HDer]

AGS 0 is known as ideal, and I think when you ask people that should be the starting point for an ideal or super ideal diamond: it should at least have as good light performance as an AGS 0 stone.

As for super ideal it's really a marketing term more than anything. Certain weight saving techniques can be used even with an AGS 0 diamond and some brands with eschew them. But really it's about the brand's standards and consistency whether that brand is hearts on fire or CBI or BGD or ACA.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

AGS 0 is known as ideal, and I think when you ask people that should be the starting point for an ideal or super ideal diamond: it should at least have as good light performance as an AGS 0 stone.

As for super ideal it's really a marketing term more than anything. Certain weight saving techniques can be used even with an AGS 0 diamond and some brands with eschew them. But really it's about the brand's standards and consistency whether that brand is hearts on fire or CBI or BGD or ACA.

Thanks HDer! How about Blue nile signature and James allen true heart. I have read a thread recently saying that those two are not precision cut. Does it mean they are not ideal?

 

[HDer]

So once again it's a matter of marketing.

If you look up ideal stones on James Allen they're GIA 3X which people here would not necessarily consider ideal cuts. But if you look up their true H&A line you would see many of them carry AGL 0 certificates. So I would say they'd be considered ideal here. Are they super ideal? Well the problem is James Allen and Blue Nile source from a bunch of different cutters so there's no guarantee. But some of them might have the same light performance as a CBI or Hearts on Fire. There's just no guarantee and you need to evaluate the stones on a case by case basis.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

Thank you. Does it mean it is almost always safe to say that if its AGS 0 in cutting, then it is a high performance diamond?

 

[whitewave]

It's not so much marketing as it is science and technology based.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

It's not so much marketing as it is science and technology based.

Thanks Whitewave, do you mind sharing your thoughts on ideal/super ideal cut?

 

[whitewave]

From whiteflash: https://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/the-super-ideal-diamond-1376.htm

From Brian Gavin: http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/news/super-ideal-cut-vs-excellent-cut-diamonds/

From Crafted by Infinity: http://www.craftedbyinfinity.com/web/the-future-of-cut/

 

[whitewave]

Thanks Whitewave, do you mind sharing your thoughts on ideal/super ideal cut?

Well, I just bought my first one and now I am "ruined" lol. Can't go back now... the difference is noticeable.

 

[HDer]

Thank you. Does it mean it is almost always safe to say that if its AGS 0 in cutting, then it is a high performance diamond?

Let me turn that question around and ask you "if a diamond is GIA 3X does it mean it's a high performance diamond?" Ultimately "high performance" is in the eye of the beholder and each diamond should be evaluated individually to determine whether it fits your standards for performance. The differences between GIA 3X and AGS 0 are 1) fewer diamonds make the AGS 0 standard than the GIA 3X standard, 2) AGS uses a machine to determine light performance whereas GIA grades by eye, and 3) AGS calls their top grade "ideal" whereas GIA calls their top grade "excellent."

It's not so much marketing as it is science and technology based.

There's no industry consensus as to what constitutes a "super-ideal" diamond. Of the stones AGSL grades, a few of them make the "ideal" grade, but the vast majority of stones never make it to AGSL.

OP, to your original question, I think the main point is at some point people wanted to say that their diamonds were better than "Excellent" so they started calling their diamonds "ideal." Some point later, AGSL started calling their top grade "ideal." Later, some vendors wanted to state their diamonds were even better cut than the average AGSL ideal, so came up with the term "super-ideal" to indicate that in their opinion their diamonds have better light performance than a AGSL 0. But this is not an industry standard.

 

[whitewave]

Of course it isn't industry standard. Superideals are a subset, the cream of the crop of AGS 000 (ideal).

 

[whitewave]

I forgot these links too: https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/education/education-cut

https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/education/education-crafting

And the bottom line is, this is what makes my diamond a super ideal, this light and cutting pattern:

 

[John P]

There is much to unpack on this topic.

First and foremost: Nearly 70% of round brilliants for sale on the world's largest wholesale platform are "GIA Excellent." It's an extremely wide target, with a range of both character and quality differences incorporated.

Second: AGS Ideal is a far smaller target, with more diamond-specific analysis. But it's still wide, compared to what is possible in terms of purposeful crafting achievement. In fact AGS is issuing a further report, called a Light Performance Details Chart, which subdivides even "Ideal" diamonds according to what they are measuring (brightness, contrast, leakage and postulated dispersion).

Third: But even the above have to do only with averaged measurements correlated to a lookup chart (GIA) and studies in repeatable values for brightness, contrast and leakage (AGS).

No lab currently measures dispersion or scintillation. Why?

1. Hard to quantify: The world has an infinite panorama of illumination scenarios and each of them creates different output potential.

2. Human physiology varies: Average pupil diameter is different, person to person, and even changes with age, so some people perceive dispersed spectral fans as color (fire) better than others.

3. Economics. Today's cut grades are notoriously factory-friendly. Stricter requirements would meet heavy resistance from within the diamond trade.

Since they are not graded, there's no motivation for producers to develop the knowledge and spend the extra time and (most notably) expense of carat weight needed to fine-tune a diamond for optimum fire and sparkle. Most diamonds are planned and cut to minimum brightness level needed to "make the grade."

I'm pressed for time, but can return with specifics about increasing the integrity of diamond optics in three-dimensions: At its basis, dedicated fine-tuning can result in less broken internal mirrors, greater compound mirror integrity and larger spectral fans. And that's just the beginning. These are topics which are not discussed in casual commercial production, but are points of focus for those committed to optimizing what man is able to bring to the craft of diamond cutting. The science of this, and the optical results, are fascinating and fun to discuss. They're why I switched from a prior career to this business.

Thanks for raising the question. More later.

 

[whitewave]

Thanks Whitewave, do you mind sharing your thoughts on ideal/super ideal cut?

I mean, look... I just got my CBI/HPD today and I've been trying to take pics of this: .56 G SI1 and it is such a fireball and the facets are on steroids that here are my pictures lol:


I'm at it. It brings me such joy-- it is a little ball of fire. You can see the difference. It isn't marketing. It is a real world difference you can see with your own eyeballs.

 

[HDer]

Just to be clear: I view the term "super-ideal" as a marketing term. I don't doubt that companies like CBI or GOG sell very good looking diamonds. And I understand why people would use the term "super ideal" vs "very good looking, well cut AGS ideal diamonds."

 

[gm89uk]

It's not pure marketing such as True Hearts and virtual selection very well cut stones. Precision cutting is real, not just marketing. There are cutting houses that will spend considerably longer cutting rough to make them as symmetrical as possible. These are specially cut 'superideals'.

Coining them just as marketing discredits the effort that goes into making a precision cut diamond, with low variability in the averages of the facets (such as crown average and pavilion average).

There are also brands like James Allen true hearts, that is marketing. These diamonds are not especially cut or any extra effort has been taken from James Allen to acquire a diamond thats precision cut, it just happens to be a diamond in the virtual inventory that is especially well cut and then marketed AFTER it is cut as a true heart, rather than a mission before the rough is even cut.

I'm not sure if any of the 'superideal' vendors will also take beautifully cut stones and market them as superideal, don't see any harm in it, as long as the standard is met for consistency of the brand.

 

[cflutist]

I mean, look... I just got my CBI/HPD today and I've been trying to take pics of this: .56 G SI1 and it is such a fireball and the facets are on steroids that here are my pictures lol:


I'm at it. It brings me such joy-- it is a little ball of fire. You can see the difference. It isn't marketing. It is a real world difference you can see with your own eyeballs.

That diamond is blinding, congratulations on your new CBI. If you want to capture dispersion set your camera to f22 which most mimics the human eye. Learned that trick from my friend Wink.

 

[flyingpig]

It's not pure marketing such as True Hearts and virtual selection very well cut stones. Precision cutting is real, not just marketing. There are cutting houses that will spend considerably longer cutting rough to make them as symmetrical as possible. These are specially cut 'superideals'.

Coining them just as marketing discredits the effort that goes into making a precision cut diamond, with low variability in the averages of the facets (such as crown average and pavilion average).

There are also brands like James Allen true hearts, that is marketing. These diamonds are not especially cut or any extra effort has been taken from James Allen to acquire a diamond thats precision cut, it just happens to be a diamond in the virtual inventory that is especially well cut and then marketed AFTER it is cut as a true heart, rather than a mission before the rough is even cut.

I'm not sure if any of the 'superideal' vendors will also take beautifully cut stones and market them as superideal, don't see any harm in it, as long as the standard is met for consistency of the brand.

Amen

 

[Karl_K]

This is how I look at it.
For MRB diamonds:
Ideal: Cut to proportion set know to produce high brightness and overall great looking diamonds. AGS kinda stole the term ideal many years ago.
Modern day ags0 light performance is a pretty decent starting point for ideal.
That does not mean it has to be sent to ags to be considered ideal, just have similar performance levels.

Super-ideal: takes it to the next level. Add to ideal:
highest levels of polish and lab symmetry.
superior optical symmetry. also called H&A
High level of physical symmetry.
min. painting and digging.
Proof of the above.
Super tight angles and very high precision in cutting for a sub-set of super-ideal at the highest levels.

A diamond could have everything a super-ideal has but without proof it is not super-ideal.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Seeing is believing - once you've seen these super ideal cut stones, you'll be able to appreciate the difference!

 

[LLJsmom]

It's not pure marketing such as True Hearts and virtual selection very well cut stones. Precision cutting is real, not just marketing. There are cutting houses that will spend considerably longer cutting rough to make them as symmetrical as possible. These are specially cut 'superideals'.

Coining them just as marketing discredits the effort that goes into making a precision cut diamond, with low variability in the averages of the facets (such as crown average and pavilion average).

There are also brands like James Allen true hearts, that is marketing. These diamonds are not especially cut or any extra effort has been taken from James Allen to acquire a diamond thats precision cut, it just happens to be a diamond in the virtual inventory that is especially well cut and then marketed AFTER it is cut as a true heart, rather than a mission before the rough is even cut.

I'm not sure if any of the 'superideal' vendors will also take beautifully cut stones and market them as superideal, don't see any harm in it, as long as the standard is met for consistency of the brand.

THANK YOU.

 

[ratatat]

Just wanted to chip in quickly with my experience I had a GIA XXX HCA 1.1 and recently upgraded to a BGD signature. The difference in cut is definitely noticeable to me - the facets are a lot more crisp and precise and it is much sparklier. Would anyone else notice at a glance? Maybe, maybe not. But looking at my old diamond I always felt like I couldn't quite get it clean or like it wasn't quite as shiny as it could be. Never feel like that with the new one

 

[rockysalamander]

" But some of them might have the same light performance as a CBI or Hearts on Fire."
@HDer I have to totally disagree with you. The virtual diamonds out there may be able to reach the proportions and angles of an "ideal" diamond. They may even be able to be cut to the same proportions of a BGD Signature/Black/Blue, CBI, WF ACA, or HOF (aka super-ideals). But, they won't perform the same. There is far more involved that simply the angle of the cuts. All the points must meet perfectly (meet-point symmetry) and all the facets must be perfectly symmetrical. By that, I mean that the planes that make up each facet must be perfectly symmetrical with all the other planes of the same cut surface (i.e., crown facets) and they must all meet each other at the exact same point. That is the precision part. Further, every single super-ideal stone (maybe not HOF) provides documentation of their performance and they are screen for clarity and florescence impacting performance. They may or may not be eye-clean (although HPD and WF will say this on their website), but they disclose how that clarity impacts performance.

JA True Hearts are really focused on a cutting pattern, that has the result of improved performance, but that is not really the goal and they are not really H&A by most definitions. So, they are often better than the generic virtual inventory. What I really like about them is that you get imagery to evaluate the stone (IS, H&A). So, while an ASET is better, there is var less risk for a sight-unseen purchase.

BN Signature was simply a selection of the virtual inventory with a table 55-57% and depth 60.1-61.9% -- generally more of a 60/60 flavor diamond. No limits on crown or pavilion angles. I have not spent enough time with Astor to have an opinion. Adiamor Affinity is similarly a screen of virtual diamonds, rather than having actual cutting and they also don't go through AGS certification on cut (which is stricter than GIA). They seem to be screening for Depth ~59.6-62.7 and table 55-59 (based on screening 3441 diamonds in the Affinity line). So, neither of these are super ideal.

Read posts 14-20 here where @Texas Leaguer and @Karl_K provide good descriptions,
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...actually-better-than-vs2.232674/#post-4203120

 

[Dancing Fire]

A diamond could have everything a super-ideal has but without proof it is not super-ideal.

My wife's GOG H&A stone is a "super duper ideal cut"... Notice all the specs deviations b/t the min and the max. This is a very tightly cut stone.

 

[Karl_K]

My wife's GOG H&A stone is a "super duper ideal cut"... Notice all the specs deviations b/t the min and the max. This is a very tightly cut stone.

yep, very similar to the stone I got for my wifey, just much bigger than hers.

 

[LLJsmom]

My wife's GOG H&A stone is a "super duper ideal cut"... Notice all the specs deviations b/t the min and the max. This is a very tightly cut stone.

THAnks @Dancing Fire This quantifies it and gives concrete explanations for what many notice. I don’t argue with numbers.

 

[Karl_K]

What is interesting is that super-ideal level cutting once took a fine make line but with advances in process and tools the lower end of super ideal is with in reach of many standard production lines.
The highest end still requires a fine make line to consistently produce them.
A fine make line however should be more consistent than a standard production line.

A diamond that meets the highest levels coming off a standard production line is more common than it once would have been. There are no guarantees that one will however.

A while back I was having a discussion with a diamond buyer and he stated that he was seeing a lot of stones from different producers that were very finely cut from a craftsmanship standpoint but were all steep/deep gia EX.

It is interesting times in the diamond world.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

My wife's GOG H&A stone is a "super duper ideal cut"... Notice all the specs deviations b/t the min and the max. This is a very tightly cut stone.

Ahhh, the days of the old helium scans where OCD people could really have fun!

Just to reiterate..the superideals are most certainly not just a marketing gimmick...there's proof of the tight cutting. My very first H&A stone after joining PS was a GOG superideal cut which was GIA XXX graded, because the cutter preferred GIA. The stone had some of the best and tightest helium scan numbers that I have seen. It was NOT a lucky GIA XXX, it was precision cut by an excellent cutter on purpose. Jon was good at picking stones. I kind of wish I had kept that one.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Ahhh, the days of the old helium scans where OCD people could really have fun!

Just to reiterate..the superideals are most certainly not just a marketing gimmick...there's proof of the tight cutting. My very first H&A stone after joining PS was a GOG superideal cut which was GIA XXX graded, because the cutter preferred GIA. The stone had some of the best and tightest helium scan numbers that I have seen. It was NOT a lucky GIA XXX, it was precision cut by an excellent cutter on purpose.

Exactly!..My wife's stone was graded XX by GIA (2004 report) before cut grade was assigned on GIA stones. I have no doubt this stone will grade XXX if it was send in for a new GIA lab report today.

 

[HDer]

Just to be clear, I'm not arguing that stones with better performance than an average AGS 0 don't exist. Many PSers have bought them and I'll take their word that they do in fact exist and are noticeably different from the average AGS 0. I'm only saying that currently "super ideal" is a marketing term because there's no consistent definition among different vendors as to what does and what doesn't constitute as a super-ideal diamond. In some respects this is also true for the term "ideal", as what James Allen and Blue Nile call an ideal stone is different from what BGD and Whiteflash call ideal.

That said, I think it would be a good idea if the industry did come together and define what would be considered a super ideal diamond, and I think what @Karl_K has suggested is a good starting point.

Also I think what Karl said about the quality of craftsmanship, at least when it comes to precision, increasing across the board to be very good news. I remember seeing similar things written by Serg and Garry, and hopefully that means we'll see more and cheaper diamonds cut to the super ideal standards Karl has listed.

And yes, if that starts to happen, I'm sure the very best cutters will start marketing their diamonds as "super duper ideal."