What''s the difference between Super Ideal & Ideal?

[Regular Guy]

Taking off the cape!

From what I read here, the new AGS system will reduce this to just ideal. Meanwhile, perhaps, there's this discrepancy. When given the choice between two options for purchase, unless we are destined to go with a vendor who seems to know what the difference is...how can we tell the difference?

Neil Denver Appraiser says: buy the diamond, not the paper. How to differentiate?

Once AGS comes out with their system, you can buy a diamond certed by AGS, have a level of confidence you're getting a good diamond with AGS0, take it to your local appraiser trained however they're trained, get a cert matched, and go home.

But that's then, and this is now.

Also, even then, what if it's GIA certed.

Perhaps there are 3 levels of vendors: In one class, you have branded or branded sorts of options. WF and Superbcert craft their own. GOG documents a lot about facet lengths, and things that make my eyes cross, so he seems to know Superideal from Ideal. Even though Niceice seem to poo poo this, they seem to know and observe closely.

At the other end of the spectrum, there's the local guy, who will select off of the Quick search list we have reference to, or his version of that, and may not know more about cut than what's presented there.

Then, perhaps in the middle, there DCD, where I bought my wife's replacement engagement ring recently. He deals in a lot of diamonds, and will review them, at least by request. Does he know what to look for? How can I know. Also, who can I ask to confirm?

Details...Jim at DCD uses OGI. So does Rich Sherwood. So does Nice Ice, right? If purchasing a GIA certed diamond (today especially...maybe fixed with new system)...do I need to find an appraiser that uses Sarin or Helium, if I want to be sure about how well a diamond is cut?

One set of protocols I pulled out of the air, curious what you think...

If certed by the (future) AGS...use your local appraiser of choice.
If other, only choose an appraiser who can assess at least 2 of the 3 methods for checking cut reviewed in the tutorial.

Finally, my appraiser did help me, another set of eyes...separate from looking at the diamond, he did see some problems with the way the stone was set, cuing me to get that fixed, so it's not all about cut.

But, this post is about cut. Right now, if it's not just a black box (meaning your selection of vendors is rather small as to who you can buy from, if you want the best), how are super ideals different than ideals, and who can help us understand the difference?

Many thanks!

 

[strmrdr]

Id tell ya but Garry would call me a dino and yell at me and my boss would yell at me for not working.
More tonight :}

 

[DiamondExpert]

The term "Super-Ideal" is not an offical or established, set of criteria mutually agreed upon by trade members.

The term "Ideal" is also much abused both within and outside the trade, but means to many those criteria established by the AGS grading system to produce AGS0 stones. As we all know these are rather broad ranges, certain combinations of which my not produce the best looking stones.

However, if one carefully defines one's terms, you can probably get a realistic idea of the difference...

Here is my personal take on the situation and the way I define and describe things.

First, these terms are applicable only to round brilliant cuts.

Second, the term Ideal is meant to apply only to those stones whose proportions, angles, polish and symmetry fall within the AGS0-defined ranges.

To me the term Super-Ideal means stones cut within a narrow sub-set of the AGS-defined Ideal porportions and angles, also with Ideal polish and symmetry, usually to produce a somewhat specific light return effect.

Thus, within the current AGS grading system, all Super-Ideal stones would all have to be AGS0's.

 

[Regular Guy]

Gary,

From what I''ve been reading here since November plus or so, and also, from what I read here in the tutorial, where I see Garry''s text saying:

"HCA is not for final "selection" because it does not grade symmetry and minor facets..."

I understood the general meaning of "SuperIdeal" is consistent with the constraints of the HCA, which, like AGS''s system, is today only predictive in nature, guesstimating the probable performance, based on mainly crown & pavilion data. And so, in contrast, I figured "Superideal" to be more corrective to this in nature, and inclusive of considerations of both symmetry and minor facets (and perhaps even not attentive to some possible relative minor actuals Dave Atlas has pointed to, based on the internals of the diamond).

Or is that just wacko. As I read it, that''s where AGS is going in 2005, no?

I''m not the only one reading here, am I?

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

No Ira, you are not the only one reading here.

Your point is that, when AGS introduces its new system, the new AGS-0-ideals will closely match what we now try to distinguish as ''super-ideal''.

Well, you might be right, although the new AGS-0-round will leave a lot of room for personal taste. In this new system, there are possibilities of having a 0 with table sizes ranging from 47 to 61%. Although all will have incredible light performance, there is a matter of taste, that comes into play.

One of these particular tastes might be that for the H&A-pattern. Each new AGS-0-stone will probably show a pleasing contrast-pattern, but this will not always be the H&A-pattern, that we know best now.

Peter Yantzer gave a presentation on Monday in Antwerp on the new systems, and I talked to some other cutters afterwards. Genereal consensus is that cutting a new AGS-0 will clearly be more difficult, and like I said months ago, the total supply of AGS-0 will become less.

For the vendors, now specialising in ''super-ideals'', it will soon become a matter of securing their supply. Although I think that most cutters-suppliers prefer to work with retailers, who know and understand the specifics of their product. I think that the virtual list of consignment-goods with AGS-0-reports will disappear. Demand will be clearly higher than supply, I foresee, and no cutter will see the benefit of keeping goods in stock and on a virtual list.

Here is some other background-info: The first reports for rounds will be issued on June 1st. In the first months, cutters can choose whether they want the old or the new report, but within months, the old report will disappear.

For the princess-cuts, the first reports will be issued on May 1st. Our first princesses are on their way to AGS now, and we should get their result by the end of this week. Exciting times.

Live long,

 

[mdx]

Hi Ira
I think you will find in the final analysis that “Super Ideal Cuts” have nothing to do with AGS,

Its more as Paul suggests a personal preference in a range of dimensions within the Ideal range. Possibly a marketing clause, Like “my Ideal cut is better than yours because these dimensions are known to be good performers based on my years of experience”

But wait look what’s coming, The Super Super Ideal Cut with extra dollop

Just a laugh

Johan

 

[Patty]

When I read this thread title, the smart aleck in me wants to reply, "About 2 grand!"

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/10/2005 3:29:10 PM
Author: mdx

But wait look what’s coming, The Super Super Ideal Cut with extra dollop

uhum thats insulting to the members of the cult of the super-ideal cut diamond.
I demand justice!!

 

[esqknight]

Given that I''m planning purchasing an engagement stone somewhat between June and August, how will the phasing in of the new AGS cutting ratings affect my prospective purchase? I''m looking at the 1 - 1.24 range and cut is my first consideration, followed by color, and then clarity.

Thanks in advance.

Eric

 

[noobie]

Date: 3/10/2005 3:44:13 PM
Author: Patty
When I read this thread title, the smart aleck in me wants to reply, ''About 2 grand!''

Ummm, $1,800, if you subtract the "retail value" of the tool kit

 

[mdx]

Date: 3/10/2005 4:14:16 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 3/10/2005 3:29:10 PM
Author: mdx


But wait look what’s coming, The Super Super Ideal Cut with extra dollop

uhum thats insulting to the members of the cult of the super-ideal cut diamond.
I demand justice!!

Storm I certainly do understand your position and will try to find a way to rectify this indiscretion while at the same time protecting myself from being shouted at by “Uncle Gary” which as I recall was also one of your fears.

Johan

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/10/2005 5:14:54 PM
Author: mdx

Date: 3/10/2005 4:14:16 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 3/10/2005 3:29:10 PM
Author: mdx



But wait look what’s coming, The Super Super Ideal Cut with extra dollop

uhum thats insulting to the members of the cult of the super-ideal cut diamond.
I demand justice!!

Storm I certainly do understand your position and will try to find a way to rectify this indiscretion while at the same time protecting myself from being shouted at by “Uncle Gary” which as I recall was also one of your fears.

Johan

hehehe I was more worried about my boss yelling at me speaking of which id better get back to work.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

I use the term "super ideal" on my appraisals when a round brilliant cut has:

1. An AGS 0 ranking
2. Hearts & Arrows optical symmetry
3. Excellent Idealscope image
4. Excellent DiamCalc numbers

If any one of these ingredients are missing I don''t use the term "super ideal".

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/10/2005 7:44:45 PM
Author: Richard Sherwood
I use the term ''super ideal'' on my appraisals when a round brilliant cut has:


1. An AGS 0 ranking

2. Hearts & Arrows optical symmetry

3. Excellent Idealscope image

4. Excellent DiamCalc numbers


If any one of these ingredients are missing I don''t use the term ''super ideal''.

Yep thats pretty much it.
Id add hca score under 2.0 and excellent physical symmetry (different from optical and meet point symmetry) to the list.

Its a diamond that scores high on all the tests you throw at it.
There are some proven combinations of crown/pavilion angles with the right minor facet angles/lenths that almost always result in high scores in all the tests when combined with exellent optical and physical symmetry.

These are the super ideals.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 3/10/2005 11:48:11 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 3/10/2005 7:44:45 PM
Author: Richard Sherwood
I use the term ''super ideal'' on my appraisals when a round brilliant cut has:


1. An AGS 0 ranking

2. Hearts & Arrows optical symmetry

3. Excellent Idealscope image

4. Excellent DiamCalc numbers


If any one of these ingredients are missing I don''t use the term ''super ideal''.

Yep thats pretty much it.
Id add hca score under 2.0 and excellent physical symmetry (different from optical and meet point symmetry) to the list.

Its a diamond that scores high on all the tests you throw at it.
There are some proven combinations of crown/pavilion angles with the right minor facet angles/lenths that almost always result in high scores in all the tests when combined with exellent optical and physical symmetry.

These are the super ideals.

strmrdr
how about throwing in a set of "tightly" cut specs.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I do not see Super Ideal as a trade defined term - it is really an invention from Pricescope and other web based businesses and forums.

I do not see why AGS has any involvement either - since they have never graded optical symmetry which is one of the key ingredients.
A diamond is a super ideal if it meets all the listed cut criteria that you guys (who invented the idea choose to use to define it) - it need not have any cert to be SI.

GIA already said observers in their study could not tell the difference - AGS say the same thd I agree for what it is worth.

Super ideal is about having all your little ducks lined up

The stone should have great proportions - but again you''all seen to think these need to be Tolkowsky''ish because you all got brainwashed. If tolkowsky did not have his maths rounding errors, and choose a different starting angle, you could all have thought that 33/41.05 or 36/40.45 was theideal crown and pavilion.

Consider this: Super Ideal is a standard of perfection that could never have hapened if it were not for the fear associated with buying diamonds sight unseen via the Internet.

I take my hat off to people like Paul and Brian etc who can supervise their production, and other vendors who have the patience to buy them.
But for me the goal that is more interesting is to improve the average cut quality in the Maul''s - the bulk of diamonds.

However Johan I prefer the Super Dooper Ideal any day

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Its like buying a $1,000 bottle of wine and never drinking it.
The difference between a $100 bottle and the 1k one is not detectable to 99.99% of conesuiers - but if it makes you feel great to know that you have a superbly crafted wine or diamond - then go for it.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 3/11/2005 12:59:59 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Its like buying a $1,000 bottle of wine and never drinking it.
The difference between a $100 bottle and the 1k one is not detectable to 99.99% of conesuiers - but if it makes you feel great to know that you have a superbly crafted wine or diamond - then go for it.

Garry
that''s not true,you can stay dunk much longer since you have 10x the volume to work with.

 

[Regular Guy]

I suppose there are two things going here...

1) The idea and term "superideal" has had some various meaning in the common parlance for some time, and in that way, has the various meanings and non-meanings assigned to it.

2) Alternately, and in light of both:

a) new developments happening in a seemingly enlightened way with both AGS & GIA with respect to cut, and
b) in the interest in bootstrapping with the idea of "superideal," since the suggestion, as I read it on this board, is that best practices in understanding cut altogether are actually being sought, with both GIA and particularly AGS having the "mo" in spearheading this effort...

then particularly, I am leaning on Paul''s comments of a month ago, where he notes: "And for super-ideal-dealers, education started by convincing people that the current way of grading was incorrect...." and more, rich discussion of these sorts of ideas here.

Rich, your comments then and above are encouraging, of course. I would ask what excellent diamcalc number look like, but I think the answer will be over my head...however, I''ve just succeeded in downloading gemadvisor to my computer, so perhaps I can try this utility out in a minor way sometime soon.

Dancing Fire, re your query of Storm... I think he might share something like:

table 55-56%,
total depth 60.8-61%
crown angle 34.2-34.4
pavil angle 40.7-40.8
pavil depth 42.8-43%
girdle thin-med faceted,
gia ex/ex or ags id/id H&A.
HCA score 1.0-1.5
AGA 1A cut

which I picked up from this October post of his on a related topic.

I think this definition is consistent with what you''re describing above, Diamond Expert, and what I think Niceice does as well.

Personally, although I see that discussions of what really does constitute excellence in consideration of diamond''s beauty are continuing among you experts here, my intuition is that it is in some measure beyond those angles that are iterated above (and Garry, as you review the constraints of the HCA, beyond it as well), and further...I am curious if we will be able to nail down cut in such a way that we can talk about it in the same way that we do with color and clarity...that we can acknowledge the superiority of grades like flawless, let alone VVS, while actually recommending that an astute buyer can do well to invest in VS and above, taking advantage of those differences that are clearly enough attended to.

Garry, not sure if this helps give any perspective. I would be smarter to sit back and enjoy, as I frequently do, no doubt...but recently, I see people like Alex/Moolman trying to find his way, being haunted by an unknown quantity that has the threat of being uber-excellent, whereas he has in front of him a diamond that perhaps has all the characteristics of a really excellent diamond, and if he experiences an unwillingness to pull the trigger, in part, because of some still black-box characteristics of the "superideal" diamond...I think it can provide a benefit to ask both...what''s in the black box, and also who....perhaps you and others, Rich, can provide the wherewith-all to study it''s contents.

And so, in part, with the experience of the rubber needing to meet the road, I''ve raised this, in the hope of only helping to catalyze the agenda you''ve already set forth, Garry, where Pricescope ramps up to the next level.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

is there a "next level" ???

I actually feel we went past the discernable level into the "measurable level".

The level above this is the "trust me. I am a diamond polisher (fabricator / designer)"

beautiful to look at, is beautiful to look at

precison crafted is precison crafted

super precison crafted is super precision cut

but what we are doing is taking the ability to measure, beyond the ability of Human comprehension - rather like the twit that is concerned about the chip that can only be seen under 60x power.

If gem microscopes had 5000x power there woud be no satisfied customers?

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Date: 3/11/2005 12:57:28 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Super ideal is about having all your little ducks lined up

The stone should have great proportions - but again you''all seen to think these need to be Tolkowsky''ish because you all got brainwashed. If tolkowsky did not have his maths rounding errors, and choose a different starting angle, you could all have thought that 33/41.05 or 36/40.45 was theideal crown and pavilion.

Consider this: Super Ideal is a standard of perfection that could never have hapened if it were not for the fear associated with buying diamonds sight unseen via the Internet.

Well I hope thats not true for me... i just use your chart... if it falls below 2 - then its a one to consider.

But then im just weird.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/11/2005 3

6:40 AM
Author: Regular Guy

Dancing Fire, re your query of Storm... I think he might share something like:


table 55-56%,

total depth 60.8-61%

crown angle 34.2-34.4

pavil angle 40.7-40.8

pavil depth 42.8-43%

girdle thin-med faceted,

gia ex/ex or ags id/id H&A.

HCA score 1.0-1.5

AGA 1A cut


which I picked up from this October post of his on a related topic.

That is right for one set of personalities of a diamond with the proper minor facet cutting good optical and physical symmetry.
The more I learn the more complicated it gets.
There are other combinations out there that are superideal.
The wider niceice definition is more to my liking when the other stuff is add to it.
But this is the base.

Total Depth between 59 – 61.8% (only effects the diameter of the stone)
Table Diameter between 53 – 57% (least critical factor)
Crown Angle between 34.3 – 34.8 degrees
Pavilion Angle between 40.6 – 40.9 degrees
Girdle: prefer 0.7% thin up to 1.8% medium, faceted
Culet: GIA none or AGS pointed (same thing, different terms)
Polish: GIA Excellent / AGS Ideal (the highest from each lab)
Symmetry: GIA Excellent / AGS Ideal (the highest from each lab)

Brian would go slightly farther out to to 35 ish and 41.2ish with the proper combination of angles.

The problem is that even withing the super-ideal range the diamonds have different personalities based on the minor facet construction.

I coming to the conclusion that maybe the crown/pavilion are a good indicator of high light return but the minor facets are what determines how the light is returned and under what conditions.
The biggest problem is studying this stuff is that there is no one expert that is agreed upon as being right instead you have a lot of different experts saying slightly different things but at the same time saying a lot of the same stuff.

What it boils down to once you get into the super-ideal range the various experts have different points where they think the best of the best is at.
This leads to diamonds with different personalities.
The WF classic aca, Wf newline aca, Paul's venus by infinity, and 8* all awesome diamonds but all have different looks under various lighting conditions different personalities if you will.
Then you have GOG which has 4 or 5 and the number is growing lines of diamond personalities of awesome h&a RB's available at any given time plus several other fancy rounds available.
The question becomes if they are all awesome diamonds does the personality of the diamond matter?
My answer is yes.
The personality of a diamond is what makes a diamond speak to someone more than another would.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/11/2005 6:52:10 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
is there a ''next level'' ???


I actually feel we went past the discernable level into the ''measurable level''.


The level above this is the ''trust me. I am a diamond polisher (fabricator / designer)''


beautiful to look at, is beautiful to look at


precison crafted is precison crafted


super precison crafted is super precision cut


but what we are doing is taking the ability to measure, beyond the ability of Human comprehension - rather like the twit that is concerned about the chip that can only be seen under 60x power.


If gem microscopes had 5000x power there woud be no satisfied customers?

So your saying Garry that a consumer would not be able to see the difference in personality between a venus by infinity diamond and an 8* when handed simular sized diamonds in diamond holders?
I think that is not currect and they would be able too and further that they may prefer one look to the other.

Also calling a PS consumer that has a diamond that 3 jewelers said they wouldnt set a twit is flat out wrong.
60x, 20x, 10x, 5x it doesnt matter if the consumer cant get it set.
What use is it if it cant be set by someone readily available to the person??
Thats the bottom line.

 

[Regular Guy]

Garry, two points:

a) Forgive me, but when you have some gravitas here, as you do, your words get measured. Thus, I was merely recalling that you said:

"Most better manfacturers here in India all have Helium, and since it is now clear to me that most H&A''s diamonds are manufactured here in Surat, often with Janak Mistry''s supervision of processes, it is obvious that the scan should be done in the factory.
In the future I can see that at time of manufacture idealscope and realistic photo''s will be done then. Dealers will buy the stones with the service done here with less expensive labour costs and better equipment than is typically available elsewhere. It is possible that Pricescope may be about to elevate to another level John."

But, I got to be like Charlie Chan, or a more modern day version of same. Maybe you didn''t say that? Or did you?

b) More to the point, where you comment here:

but what we are doing is taking the ability to measure, beyond the ability of Human comprehension - rather like the twit that is concerned about the chip that can only be seen under 60x power.
If gem microscopes had 5000x power there woud be no satisfied customers?

I think that is precisely my point, where I say:

"I am curious if we will be able to nail down cut in such a way that we can talk about it in the same way that we do with color and clarity...that we can acknowledge the superiority of grades like flawless, let alone VVS, while actually recommending that an astute buyer can do well to invest in VS and above, taking advantage of those differences that are clearly enough attended to."

Several of you speak with a big stick here. If the idea is reasonable that cut is most important, but that selecting for cut can be done wisely, in a measured way, and without overkill...that can be a helpful message.

Obviously, this is still a work in progress.

Many thanks for your efforts.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 3/11/2005 9:21

3 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 3/11/2005 6:52:10 AM

Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

is there a 'next level' ???

I actually feel we went past the discernable level into the 'measurable level'.
The level above this is the 'trust me. I am a diamond polisher (fabricator / designer)'
beautiful to look at, is beautiful to look at precison crafted is precison crafted super precison crafted is super precision cut but what we are doing is taking the ability to measure, beyond the ability of Human comprehension - rather like the twit that is concerned about the chip that can only be seen under 60x power.

If gem microscopes had 5000x power there woud be no satisfied customers?

So your saying Garry that a consumer would not be able to see the difference in personality between a venus by infinity diamond and an 8* when handed simular sized diamonds in diamond holders?

I think that is not currect and they would be able too and further that they may prefer one look to the other.

Garry, I think you underestimate human comprehension. Of course there is a distiguishable difference in the character of the different diamonds Strm cited. I saw it for myself back when I was a consumer - before knowing any of the reasons for the differences. Now that I am studying them the character variations are logical and notable...As is improved performance and overall visual balance over a broad range of lighting conditions due to precise patterning and minor facet construction.

Remember the arrows discussion? You underestimated human comprehension there too.

Are you seriously unable to make these distinctions yourself Garry? - Or maybe you just read too much of what you write...

(Now don't go Oz on me - I'm just ribbing you)

I am traveling right now and would love to give this more time eventually.
Strm has made some excellent summations and observations.

 

[Maxine]

Date: 3/11/2005 8:42

6 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 3/11/2005 3

6:40 AM
Author: Regular Guy

Dancing Fire, re your query of Storm... I think he might share something like:


table 55-56%,

total depth 60.8-61%

crown angle 34.2-34.4

pavil angle 40.7-40.8

pavil depth 42.8-43%

girdle thin-med faceted,

gia ex/ex or ags id/id H&A.

HCA score 1.0-1.5

AGA 1A cut


which I picked up from this October post of his on a related topic.

That is right for one set of personalities of a diamond with the proper minor facet cutting good optical and physical symmetry.
The more I learn the more complicated it gets.
There are other combinations out there that are superideal.
The wider niceice definition is more to my liking when the other stuff is add to it.
But this is the base.

Total Depth between 59 – 61.8% (only effects the diameter of the stone)
Table Diameter between 53 – 57% (least critical factor)
Crown Angle between 34.3 – 34.8 degrees
Pavilion Angle between 40.6 – 40.9 degrees
Girdle: prefer 0.7% thin up to 1.8% medium, faceted
Culet: GIA none or AGS pointed (same thing, different terms)
Polish: GIA Excellent / AGS Ideal (the highest from each lab)
Symmetry: GIA Excellent / AGS Ideal (the highest from each lab)

Brian would go slightly farther out to to 35 ish and 41.2ish with the proper combination of angles.

The problem is that even withing the super-ideal range the diamonds have different personalities based on the minor facet construction.

I coming to the conclusion that maybe the crown/pavilion are a good indicator of high light return but the minor facets are what determines how the light is returned and under what conditions.
The biggest problem is studying this stuff is that there is no one expert that is agreed upon as being right instead you have a lot of different experts saying slightly different things but at the same time saying a lot of the same stuff.

What it boils down to once you get into the super-ideal range the various experts have different points where they think the best of the best is at.
This leads to diamonds with different personalities.
The WF classic aca, Wf newline aca, Paul''s venus by infinity, and 8* all awesome diamonds but all have different looks under various lighting conditions different personalities if you will.
Then you have GOG which has 4 or 5 and the number is growing lines of diamond personalities of awesome h&a RB''s available at any given time plus several other fancy rounds available.
The question becomes if they are all awesome diamonds does the personality of the diamond matter?
My answer is yes.
The personality of a diamond is what makes a diamond speak to someone more than another would.

Storm sums it up!!!!!! wow....

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thanks guys, you raised an important point.
It is possible to make a group of diamonds that are all beautiful AND all different.

You would acknowledge that all the brands and styles quoted above by Storm are cut to "super ideal" standards.
But using my long standing idea of BIC and FIC that are more Brilliant and Firey respectively - they too will all look different.

But none of you would currently include those proportions in your Super section. That is wrong.

Re ther stars John - all the diamonds I am talking about have stars. You will not find any symmetrical diamond with an HCA score below 2, or a good ideal-scope image, that does not have a star. And I am unconvinced that I could not survey all of you with some trick stones mixed in with some branded H&A''s and you would not be able to distinguish the difference and may even prefer the non hearts stones. Hold me to it at the Pricescope convention if we ever get to hold one

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 3/11/2005 8:59:58 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

But using my long standing idea of BIC and FIC that are more Brilliant and Firey respectively - they too will all look different.


But none of you would currently include those proportions in your Super section. That is wrong.

Interesting point.
Having ran a bunch of what I consider super-ideals over the years Id say that more of them come out as BICs than any other category.

As for FICs I consider them rightly or wrongly as fancy rounds or specialty rounds if you prefer.
Due to the rarity and that to find one you have to really hunt for it and the specialized performance they are tuned for they dont really fit in the super-ideal class.
The do however fit in the high performance fancy round cut class even if they are a subset of the RB class.

Like everything else in the diamond world the idea of of super-ideals is evolving and it doesnt pay to get too set in any one way of looking at things.
The diamond industry as a whole in all areas is going thru a massive revamping as you are well aware. Some good, some bad and some just different.

That everything in the diamond industry is evolving including what is the best cut and the best tools took a long while to sink in for me but one that more and more im taking too heart.
The best thing I can do is keep an open mind and soak in as much as I can and most of all enjoy the journey because the end of the trip may not be in my life time.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 3/11/2005 6:52:10 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

I actually feel we went past the discernable level into the 'measurable level'.

Yeah ... Now, I do not feel flattered in the very least by the previous allusion to "brain washing"

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Hey Storm - FIC"s are hard to find only for 1 reason - labs slap a warning comment - Crown angle over 35
or over 36 etc.

I have yet to meet a cutter who would not like the option to cut them when the rough screams for it.
The yields on some makeables can be so much higher they more than double their profits - if the stones were not discounted to -48 back (like one on its way to me now)