What makes a diamond ideal/ super ideal?

[Karl_K]

Hder, yes the term is marketing in some respects.
On the other hand there is a difference, so its not all marketing BS.
There is some debate on how big that difference is but less so that it exists.
Then there is a bigger debate that it is all personal preference.
Which also has some truth but its also science and craftsmanship even art.
There is debate that once you get to the top how small of differences actual make a visual difference and which are craftsmanship.

By my definition of super-ideal requiring proof there is no real way to sell them other than marketing material showing the proof.
Which is ironic as I'm not a fan of marketing at all.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

Thanks everyone for the input!

With that being said, we can't say a diamond is super ideal cut just because it is from a very top line of the brand (ACA, True Hearts, CBI, and so on). We will need proof for that. Looking at the specs DF posted, it limits a lot of diamonds as not a lot of them fall within the max and min range. Can IS/ ASET/ H&A pictures be a proof (in order words, can the specs of the diamond not fall within the range but perform like a super ideal diamond)? If yes, does anyone have ASET of an ideal cut and super ideal cut so we can see the differences?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thanks everyone for the input!

With that being said, we can't say a diamond is super ideal cut just because it is from a very top line of the brand (ACA, True Hearts, CBI, and so on). We will need proof for that. Looking at the specs DF posted, it limits a lot of diamonds as not a lot of them fall within the max and min range. Can IS/ ASET/ H&A pictures be a proof (in order words, can the specs of the diamond not fall within the range but perform like a super ideal diamond)? If yes, does anyone have ASET of an ideal cut and super ideal cut so we can see the differences?

Yes, you CAN say that all CBI and WF ACAs are superideal cut. There is proof in the ASET images and hearts images. That's partly why we no longer worry about helium scans, etc. Just go to WF and HPD sites and look at the ASET images and hearts images and you'll see what superideal cut images look like.

 

[rockysalamander]

I agree with @diamondseeker2006 100%. The question you really want to know is can something not branded by a company with documentation of performance turn out to be a super-ideal.

Sure, as @Karl_K and other have shown, if the vendor has sufficient information about the stone to check all the fine details of symmetry and meet-points and geometry and polish & provided documentation of peformance...it may turn out to be within the specs and performance of a super-ideal. Those stones are likely the pink sparkly unicorns of the diamond world, and take incredible time and patience to find, but they are out there. Going to accepted super-ideal line is just a short-cut to this process.

If such a diamond is found, its IS and ASET will look exactly like those from superideal vendors.

 

[whitewave]

Put it this way: CBI is so precise that they can't put their polishing and symmetry facility near airports or roads because vibrations from outside sources will interfere with the precision.

I think this is why superideals won't be cheaper (it costs extra money to make super ideals) and why another cutting house can't really accidentally make one.

It is just too easy to go to a super ideal brand and choose one from there.

Also, super ideals are accessible to all: you may have to start smaller like I did and work your way up...

 

[ChristineRose]

The term ideal goes back to Tolkowsky and refers to a set of proportions. There have been many variations of the proportions since, and many of the grading labs use the term ideal. Nonetheless, it's pretty much what Tolkowsky came up with in 1919.

A superideal uses technology that did not exist in 1919 to create near-perfect symmetry. That's H&A. No major lab defines H&A, but there are definitions, and anyone can judge from the H&A viewer.

Even paste that, some designers have used computerized light models to adjust the minor facets to get even more light performance.

Ideal: best major facet proportions for light return.
H&A/First level of superideal: All facets so perfectly symmetric that they form an H&A pattern. Often branded.
Truly superideal: Minor facets optimized for light performance as well as the perfect symmetry. Always branded.

That's my definition only.

 

[Karl_K]

Truly superideal: Minor facets optimized for light performance as well as the perfect symmetry. Always branded.

Not always but its a lot easier to find those that are branded than select them from a bunch of stones.

 

[Karl_K]

Not always but its a lot easier to find those that are branded than select them from a bunch of stones.

For example the cutter that cut DF's diamond from above, the cutter did not brand them but more than one PS vendor bought them and sold them as house brand super ideals.
At one point gog was buying 80% of their fine make production and another PS dealer most of the other 20%.
I think enough time has passed they wont want to kick my fanny for saying so.
The cutter has been out of business for a long time.

 

[Dancing Fire]

For example the cutter that cut DF's diamond from above, the cutter did not brand them but more than one PS vendor bought them and sold them as house brand super ideals.
At one point gog was buying 80% of their fine make production and another PS dealer most of the other 20%.
I think enough time has passed they wont want to kick my fanny for saying so.
The cutter has been out of business for a long time.

Stormy
What happened to the cutter?. Too perfect?...

 

[LLJsmom]

Dear OP
Do what is right for you. I think you will be very happy with whatever you choose, as many who have chosen to buy the super ideals. I mean hat most sincerely. However just because you do or do not decide to buy one does not mean it does not exist.

 

[Karl_K]

Stormy
What happened to the cutter?. Too perfect?...

DeBeers supplier of choice program cut off their rough.

 

[newjourney]

While ideal proportions and qualitative imaging are essential to judging a super-ideal, I would suggest to also study video clips of an SI, particularly under diffused or spot lighting if available. I've watched clips on many Whiteflash and Brian Gavin SI's and have noticed some variations in scintillation and fire performance within a brand. Some were more striking than others. These are close-up live imaging, of course (and you cannot compare one vendor to the next due to each having a unique video set up), but they are good predictors for what you can expect since many branded SI's look quite similar on paper and with similar IS/ASET/H&A images. My wife's stone performs just as it was depicted in the vendor's video clips.

 

[HDer]

DeBeers supplier of choice program cut off their rough.

The more I learn about De Beers the less I like them.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

" 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.

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

Rocky,
Thank you for referencing the discussion in the other thread. Much of what I would say here is stated there, so anyone interested can check out those posts.
As has been pointed out, super ideals don't just happen. They are intentional and they are demanding in terms of time and skill (and extra rough). But aside from care and craftsmanship, there are tangible benefits associated with this level of precision that are experienced by the owner every day for a lifetime.
It's not generally proper for a vendor to link to his own site, but we have another article that speaks to this. Anyone interested can access it by typing "benefits of hearts and arrows diamonds" into the search box on our site. There is some interesting video there too.

 

[whitewave]

My 18 year old daughter and I just got back from
Home Depot with my .56 and she told me to knock it off gasping and throwing my hand around-- she said that is probably how Kim K got robbed in Paris lol....

On the way to wal Mart now lol.

 

[cflutist]

Whiteweave, do you have any LED lighting in the house? That works really well for sparkles too

 

[Texas Leaguer]

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.

JP,
I just have one small bone to pick and it's probably just semantics. But AGSL light performance grading does measure dispersion and it is real and relevant. Because fire is not exhibited in all lighting conditions, it is accurate to say that the measurement represents 'potential' for fire, which is probably the same your term 'postulated". But dispersion is based on the physics of light and can be measured mathematically, so a given diamond's ability to produce fire can be calculated and compared against other diamond's. And it can be demonstrated in real life viewings (under fire friendly lighting conditions) and also in video. We recently posted an article on 'diamond fire' to our website that contains a pretty cool video comparison between a spready Triple Ex and one of our super ideals.
I agree that scintillation is an area that is trickier and seems to want to dwell in the realm of personal taste. But it too can be quantified and was an important part of the foundational research in the development of the AGS LP grading system. I think we will be hearing more about scintillation metrics in the years to come.

 

[whitewave]

Whiteweave, do you have any LED lighting in the house? That works really well for sparkles too

My iPhone 7 camera can't handle super ideals

 

[Texas Leaguer]

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."

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.

HDer,
I generally agree with the gist of your take, but here are just a few minor points. First, AGS uses a sophisticated ray tracing system (not exactly a machine) to measure light performance. It takes the input from an accurate 3D scan of the diamond and calculates the contribution of every facet measuring brightness, leakage, contrast and dispersion. GIA also uses a scan and software approach, but they average and round the measurements and their facetware software pegs those averages to a pre-determined grades on a table. The GIA system is therefore less accurate and more forgiving than the AGS system. Both labs grade the finish factors by eye with trained human graders.
Also, the AGSL's use of the term Ideal predated the GIA cut grade system and the establishment of their Excellent grade by about 10 years.

With regards to relegating the category of super ideal to 'marketing', again I get your point. Since there is no universally accepted definition, it is really up to the brand to define their criteria for using the term. Some do it a lot better than others. Done right, it is much more than just marketing spin. It is an obligation to very specific quality parameters that the customer can depend on and hold the merchant accountable for. In that sense it is somewhat like a warranty.

One last related point I would make about super ideals, there is a real question about reliability of such a claims if the diamonds are not in-stock and fully vetted.

 

[HDer]

Thanks for those corrections. I definitely don't want to give the wrong impression that it's just all marketing spin. Marketing is not a dirty word in my mind, but spin implies a trick or misrepresentation, which is not what I'm trying to imply.

In my mind, companies like Whiteflash, BGD, CBI, and GOG, to give a few names, have had a long enough track record and enough buyer testimonials to justify their claims of selling a top end product when it comes to round brilliant diamonds.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Whiteweave, do you have any LED lighting in the house? That works really well for sparkles too

Yes, but it is best when they are small and not diffused. The LED bulbs that look like the old incandescent light bulbs with a translucent glass will diffuse the light too much for best sparkle. They are still good for assessing overall brightness though. And the ones with a color temp of about 5000 are good for accurate color rendition.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

Thank you everyone, there is a lot of information I need to digest!

I studied some ASET of the SI diamonds and compare them with the ASET of the diamond I am interested in. I am pretty confident to say it is an ideal cut diamond if not super ideal. However, I still want to know if it is a super ideal. Just like @rockysalamander said, "Those stones are likely the pink sparkly unicorns of the diamond world, and take incredible time and patience to find, but they are out there.", I believe so too. Due to the limited budget, I decided to try looking for one without going for the branded ones. Here is the diamond I am interested in, I want to know if I have found my pink sparkly unicorn!

Could you all please give me some comments on this diamond and if it's excellent/ideal/superideal? Thank you!

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-k-color-si1-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3359532

 

[blingblingdiamond]

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.

It is absolutely STUNNING!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I recommend halogen light bulbs for your bathroom. Those are absolutely fantastic for diamonds!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

@blingblingdiamond Your diamond looks really nice..probably close to superideal, but not quite. Since vendors have been named now, none of the pros are going to be able to comment, and they could tell you better than me for sure!

What I will add is that most of us could not just look at that stone in real life viewing and tell it apart from a superideal cut.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Maybe you had another thread and the color topic has already been covered, but have seen K color and are you (and/or the recipient) okay with the stone having some tint? I always recommend sticking with J or higher unless you have an unconditional upgrade policy that's not double the cost.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

I preferred at least J as well... but I found myself not stick with my budget and going from 7K to 8K and to 9K... which is beyond what we can afford right now. I will reach out to the vendor to see what is the upgrade policy. Knowing I could upgrade later in the future was one of reasons why I am interested in this diamond, i know when I am financially ready, I can get a bigger and higher colored diamond.

I looked at some PS thread and they said if a diamond is ideal cut, it will face up whiter than normal diamond in the same color range. To be honest, I was a bit worried as i know AGS graded color softer than GIA.

@diamondseeker2006, what do you think about the diamond I am interested in?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I really think it's a great cut stone, but were there not any good J stones? Yes, any color performs well as far as light performance goes (in the right lighting), but for an engagement ring, I wouldn't go below J. In fact, I start seeing tint in J and prefer G-H-I in a modern round brilliant. But J is at least still in the near colorless range. I can see tint from my tinted car windows in my I color stone and it really bugs me, so some lighting environments are going to be worse than others. I can handle lower colors better in larger faceted, antique cut stones, though.

I just checked and there are plenty of "true hearts" J SI1-VS2 stones in the 1.3-1.5 range. I honestly would rather go smaller and have the better color. That K looks very tinted to me in the video.

 

[HDer]

Assuming you're looking at 1.5 cts + I agree it's going to be hard to find a J colored stone for around that price.

Here are a couple that look decent, but neither one is going to be as well cut as the one you selected:

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...j-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3391438

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3071055

 

[HDer]

A couple more that look OK:

http://s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/hkfauna/Vision360.html?d=170525-349&sd=50&z=1&v=2&sv=0
http://s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/hkfauna/Vision360.html?d=170499-177&sd=50&z=1&v=2&sv=0
https://narolagems.com/MovieDetail.aspx?StoneId=2914-9 (brown tint)

But if you can live with K (I got an L full disclosure) I would personally go with the one you picked. A single letter difference in color can be hard to spot in most conditions, and certain people are more color sensitive than others.