Where to find the best emerald cuts?

[Matthews1127]

based on my observations and personal experience ...

modern emeralds, typically, do not have culets. antique emeralds, typically, have culets or keel, which runs the length of the base

from what i have observed, generally, antique emeralds do have a more pronounced or broader corners. although, seldomly, i have seen them in modern emeralds

generally, crowns are more pronounced and higher in antique emeralds

Agreed.

 

[Matthews1127]

All of the info posted is extremely helpful, and spot-on.
Preferences play an enormous part in choosing an EC, or step cut, in general.
It seems you already know what you prefer, and what your eyes dislike.
That’s a great start.
Having some info as far as dimensions, l x w ratio, size of facets that you find appealing and corner length preferences will help
you to evaluate EC’s in person.
That is by far the best way to examine step cuts.
You have to observe how it moves and performs to know if it speaks to you.
I’m excited about your journey! I cannot wait to see what you choose!!

 

[Karl_K]

If it has a pointed or square open culet it is an asscher type cut.
Even if its square shape and it has a keel even a small one its correctly an emerald cut. The trade often does not use it correctly.

There are 3 basic groups of emerald cuts once you exclude square emerald and asschers.

The size of the corners does not determine type as all the different types are cut with different corner sizes.

You have the antique style with small usualy open keel culets and smallish tables and high crowns. They were cut to use a large amount of the rough. They often had extreme l/w ratios either squarish or very long. Of the groups arguably they had the widest l/w range.

Then you have the classic style which can be bright but is more sedate and some feel classy looking compared to the flash of the other styles.
These have shallow crowns and large tables in the 70%+ range.
They have a closed keel culet. They are often around 1.4 l/w but were cut in many l/w combinations.

Then you have the more modern designs which moved back to smaller tables in the 60% range, higher crowns and closed keel culets.

There are some that are between or just dont fit into any one category but it fits most of them.

 

[Karl_K]

Example of a small keel emerald cut.
The l/w ratio is also to high to be an asscher type.

 

[Karl_K]

btw the Asscher 1902 patent covered a square or pointed culet and a square stone.
What was a good way to get around the patent?
Slightly rectangular and a small keel for a similar look and no patent infringement.

 

[Tonks]

If it has a pointed or square open culet it is an asscher type cut.
Even if its square shape and it has a keel even a small one its correctly an emerald cut. The trade often does not use it correctly.

There are 3 basic groups of emerald cuts once you exclude square emerald and asschers.

The size of the corners does not determine type as all the different types are cut with different corner sizes.

You have the antique style with small usualy open keel culets and smallish tables and high crowns. They were cut to use a large amount of the rough. They often had extreme l/w ratios either squarish or very long. Of the groups arguably they had the widest l/w range.

Then you have the classic style which can be bright but is more sedate and some feel classy looking compared to the flash of the other styles.
These have shallow crowns and large tables in the 70%+ range.
They have a closed keel culet. They are often around 1.4 l/w but were cut in many l/w combinations.

Then you have the more modern designs which moved back to smaller tables in the 60% range, higher crowns and closed keel culets.

There are some that are between or just dont fit into any one category but it fits most of them.

Forgive me if I get some of the vocab wrong here b/c I am still learning about step cuts....

I find it beautiful when you have an elongated stone where the windmills meet in the center, as in the example @diamondseeker2006 posted of the Cartier stone. What causes that to happen and what type of step cut should you look for to find that? Are those all antique stones or would you ever see this in a modern cut?

 

[Karl_K]

I find it beautiful when you have an elongated stone where the windmills meet in the center, as in the example @diamondseeker2006 posted of the Cartier stone. What causes that to happen and what type of step cut should you look for to find that? Are those all antique stones or would you ever see this in a modern cut?

The Cartier stone has a keel and is an emerald cut.
The windmills do not meet in the middle it has a keel.
Once you get past a squarish l/w you would have to twist the windmills to make them meet.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

btw the Asscher 1902 patent covered a square or pointed culet and a square stone.
What was a good way to get around the patent?
Slightly rectangular and a small keel for a similar look and no patent infringement.

Super interesting! I posted the Cartier as an antique emerald cut. That's an extremely rare and fabulous stone. ( @Tonks It would be like trying to find a needle in a huge haystack to find one like that!) But now I am looking at mine and thinking it must be one of the antique asschers that you speak of above that was similar to the branded asscher but cut purposely different to avoid patent infringement?

 

[Karl_K]

Super interesting! I posted the Cartier as an antique emerald cut. That's an extremely rare and fabulous stone. ( @Tonks It would be like trying to find a needle in a huge haystack to find one like that!) But now I am looking at mine and thinking it must be one of the antique asschers that you speak of above that was similar to the branded asscher but cut purposely different to avoid patent infringement?

Hard to tell at that angle is the culet square or noticeably rectangular face up?
If it's noticeably rectangular then its possible it was cut to get by the patent.
If its square then they just didn't care and infringed or it was cut after the patent was expired or there is a slight chance its an original if its old but there is no way of proving it without knowing the history of the stone.
Patent infringement was huge back in those days.
Post a pic face up with something bright colored behind it if you still have it unset.

 

[Karl_K]

This would be fairly typical to evade the patent 1.07 l/w and a rectangular open keel culet

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Hard to tell at that angle is the culet square or noticeably rectangular face up?
If it's noticeably rectangular then its possible it was cut to get by the patent.
If its square then they just didn't care and infringed or it was cut after the patent was expired or there is a slight chance its an original if its old but there is no way of proving it without knowing the history of the stone.
Patent infringement was huge back in those days.
Post a pic face up with something bright colored behind it if you still have it unset.

I do believe it is an antique stone. It was found in a virtual inventory with no mark up which a newly cut specialty cut stone usually has. It has a ratio of 1.085. It has been set for quite awhile, but here is another shot of the face of the stone.

 

[Karl_K]

I do believe it is an antique stone. It was found in a virtual inventory with no mark up which a newly cut specialty cut stone usually has. It has a ratio of 1.085. It has been set for quite awhile, but here is another shot of the face of the stone.

interesting stone the l/w is in the emerald range not asscher like and the culet looks rectangularish to me and its open.
So it could have been one cut to bypass the patent.
That is total speculation however.

I will just call it kicken! :}

 

[diamondseeker2006]

interesting stone the l/w is in the emerald range not asscher like and the culet looks rectangularish to me and its open.
So it could have been one cut to bypass the patent.
That is total speculation however.

I will just call it kicken! :}

Thanks, Karl! That's a nice compliment coming from you! I was very fortunate to get this stone.

 

[ALH]

@SandyK @diamondsR4eVR here you go! I still haven’t quite mastered how to take good pics of step cuts :/

 

[diamondhoarder]

btw the Asscher 1902 patent covered a square or pointed culet and a square stone.
What was a good way to get around the patent?
Slightly rectangular and a small keel for a similar look and no patent infringement.

Could this also be an example of what you described here @Karl_K ? This one has a very small open culet per GIA, but the culet slightly rectangular and the ratio for the diamond is 1.03.

 

[Karl_K]

Could this also be an example of what you described here @Karl_K ? This one has a very small open culet per GIA, but the culet slightly rectangular and the ratio for the diamond is 1.03.

To square to avoid the patent probably. I think.
Unless the history is known its impossible to know could have been 20s+ after the patent expired also.

 

[LLJsmom]

@SandyK @diamondsR4eVR here you go! I still haven’t quite mastered how to take good pics of step cuts :/

so pretty!!!!

 

[diamondhoarder]

To square to avoid the patent probably. I think.
Unless the history is known its impossible to know could have been 20s+ after the patent expired also.

Interesting. Its definitely not a standard modern asscher, it has a smaller table and steep crown. But I guess I will never know if its a vintage stone or an outlier amongst modern cut asschers......

 

[diamondhoarder]

@SandyK @diamondsR4eVR here you go! I still haven’t quite mastered how to take good pics of step cuts :/

That is lovely!

 

[Karl_K]

Interesting. Its definitely not a standard modern asscher, it has a smaller table and steep crown. But I guess I will never know if its a vintage stone or an outlier amongst modern cut asschers......

There is no way to tell for sure, they have through out history been cut in many many different combos and the groups overlap a lot.
There has never been a near standard EC cut like the near tolk mrb of today for rounds.

 

[diamondsR4eVR]

Beautiful.

@SandyK @diamondsR4eVR here you go! I still haven’t quite mastered how to take good pics of step cuts :/

 

[SandyK]

@ALH STUNNING, well done!! -- And now you must also make your own thread in SMTB!! Your ring looks simply phenomenal.

 

[ALH]

@ALH STUNNING, well done!! -- And now you must also make your own thread in SMTB!! Your ring looks simply phenomenal.

Thank you so much! I really appreciate it I definitely will do a SMTB!!

 

[SandyK]

Gorgeous diamond @SandyK ! I love the proportions of it. Do you know what the L/W ratio is? To my eye those corners are perfectly sized too.

This is a super late reply (and this project may have been bumped down your priority list given your stud upgrade project), but I finally picked my GIA certificate up from my office and the L/W ratio is just about 1:39 (9.94 x 7.16 x 4.7mm).

 

[SparklieBug]

The Cartier stone has a keel and is an emerald cut.
The windmills do not meet in the middle it has a keel.
Once you get past a squarish l/w you would have to twist the windmills to make them meet.

This is an excellent thread for those learning more about ECs, thanks, everyone!

What do you think the l/w ratio is on the stone, above? I *love* the balance of this one, and the corners, too.

 

[FL_runner]

This is an excellent thread for those learning more about ECs, thanks, everyone!

What do you think the l/w ratio is on the stone, above? I *love* the balance of this one, and the corners, too.

Eyeballing it it looks less elongated maybe 1:1.2? Sounds a little silly but I’d probably get out a ruler and measure the picture. Maybe someone has a similar stone and can share specs? Agree it’s gorgeous.

 

[Karl_K]

Sounds a little silly but I’d probably get out a ruler and measure the picture.

rofl........ I was going to do that but missplaced my ruler.

 

[diamondsR4eVR]

I love this thread!