stone-cold11
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 14,083
Which one sparkles more? Do I trust my eye or HCA?
- Thread starter TripleC
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,900
L
Lula
Guest
Well, thanks, Stone-cold; but I must say, everything I learned about lgf's came from Storm and his research and comments on the PS forum. And I also learned by direct observation, i.e., living with a stone that had a 34.5 crown angle, a 41.0 pavilion angle, and 81% lgf. It was stunning, and there was no light leakage. It had a definite personality and it was very sparkly -- a little lower on contrast and fire than I liked, but very high on scintillation and white sparkle.
Rockdiamond, Triple C, if she's still with us, can certainly see the differences between diamonds with her own eyes, but it is cut science and cut education that will allow her to make an educated decision about these stones. I've learned that crown angle, pavilion angle, table percentage, girdle percentage, and depth percentage are just the start of the story; to really understand how a diamond will "perform," a buyer needs to understand how different combinations of these angles work together (or don't) and how the minor facets affect the personality of a stone. Simply preferring one stone over another visually doesn't negate the fact that cut education is important to help a buyer understand and identify stones he/she may find appealing.
Rockdiamond, you make it sound like it's some sort of "magic" -- a stone and its buyer come together in the cosmos via the gentle coaching of a learned sales associate -- not! Cut education, I believe, assists a buyer in weeding out stones that are statistically likely to be poor performers, and then based on IS, ASET, and photos, as well as visual inspection, the buyer can narrow down the field of well-cut stones based on visual preference, what Storm and others have referred to as, "buying the stone that speaks to you." But I cannot condone a buyer purchasing a stone out of ignorance; if a seller is confident in his/her merchandise, there should be no problem in supplying the buyer with the tools the buyer needs to feel confident about making such a major purchase from that seller. It's not magic; it's science.
ETA: I just read Garry's comment above; and I wanted to add, the stone I referred to above was also slightly painted. So there you go, a little more science. Sometimes I think diamond shopping is like solving a fascinating puzzle -- when all the pieces come together, the whole is greater (more beautiful) than the parts.
re:wouldn't it be safe to say she should go with her eyes in this case?
YES, if she checked all 3 diamonds in same light environments sumultaniasly and all diamonds were clean. For example if diamonds 1 and 2 were not so clean as diamond 3, her observation is misleading . Take two exactly same clean diamonds and touch by fingers one. then any consumer will prefer second ( clean ) diamond. It is very easy trick to sell what you want to sell.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,900
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Messages
- 18,900
Here is a set of images I made some years back to describe what Sergey is discussing - where the leakage is less obvious in a slightly steep deep stone because each eye sees from a different view point. The central images are just overlays - so they are not really accurate - but its an attempt to show the effect.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
Thanks Lorelei, the link was a very interesting read.
As a newbie around here, just as I feel Im understanding something the rug gets pulled!!!! I thought that leakage (or darkness) had some sort of correlation with sparkle. In my mind every time someone mentioned great cut & performance cut I equated that with sparkle. Perhaps that shows my preference in a diamond. I sort of yawn at the h & a (not that I would knock one back) but I go crazy over sparkle (and fire). I like a diamond that looks like it is covered in hologaphic glitter!!!!
So I was surprised to learn that sparkle is not easily measured (or at all) by the numbers.
Fwiw, its interesting to note that pretty much all diamonds look good under spot lighting. That point might be the one thing that everyone can agree on in PS!
Thank you Garry.
My princess does infact have alot of sparkle (however if I could afford a premium cut in a round of the same size I would upgrade in a heart beat). I confess to loving a top cut round and nothing beats it for almost looking magical as you would know from your experience with them! I wasnt aware of the sparkle differences, always assumed that round was more sparkly. Now I can see that the round has bigger and brighter sparkles!
Perhaps Im wrong but Im a believer that the fancies are more forgiving (of a lower quality cut) because there isnt as much preconcieved ideas of what they are meant to look like. But we all know what a round is meant to look like if we have seen a top cut even once!
Moh 10
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2008
- Messages
- 1,004
Many vendors sell poorly-cut diamonds that hold too much weight to have good light performance.
They can make more money selling a steep deep 1 carat than the well-cut 0.8 carat that would have resulted from the same rough.
How can they get away with this?
Because most of the public is ignorant. ("She just wants a 1-carat because her sister got a 3/4 carat.")
Weight is EASY to understand.
Cut is HARD to understand, at least it was before we got the HCA, IS and ASET.
These tools expose this industry scandal of forcing higher-profit and poorly-cut goods onto us.
Customers using these tools and educating their eyes is a threat to the status quo.
This must make these vendors unhappy.
The party's over.
I don't blame them for trying to fight back by saying things like, "Respect diversity of opinions", "Trust a vendor who has worked in the industry for many years", "Ignore this new technology and buy the cuts that the industry insiders have preferred for years", and "Trust your eyes".
Readers here see right through this.
What they are really saying is keep your eyes ignorant because I'm loosing sales.
Educated consumers don't want the diamonds they sell.
It's suspicious how the OP posted, "So what you're saying is, I shouldn't trust my eye? "
That is just TOO short, sweet and perfect if the OP really was a newbie here.
Make no mistake. There is a war going on here and a lot of money is at stake.
They can make more money selling a steep deep 1 carat than the well-cut 0.8 carat that would have resulted from the same rough.
How can they get away with this?
Because most of the public is ignorant. ("She just wants a 1-carat because her sister got a 3/4 carat.")
Weight is EASY to understand.
Cut is HARD to understand, at least it was before we got the HCA, IS and ASET.
These tools expose this industry scandal of forcing higher-profit and poorly-cut goods onto us.
Customers using these tools and educating their eyes is a threat to the status quo.
This must make these vendors unhappy.
The party's over.
I don't blame them for trying to fight back by saying things like, "Respect diversity of opinions", "Trust a vendor who has worked in the industry for many years", "Ignore this new technology and buy the cuts that the industry insiders have preferred for years", and "Trust your eyes".
Readers here see right through this.
What they are really saying is keep your eyes ignorant because I'm loosing sales.
Educated consumers don't want the diamonds they sell.
It's suspicious how the OP posted, "So what you're saying is, I shouldn't trust my eye? "
That is just TOO short, sweet and perfect if the OP really was a newbie here.
Make no mistake. There is a war going on here and a lot of money is at stake.
Regular Guy
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2004
- Messages
- 5,963
Moh, not sure what you're saying exactly...that TripleC's question is not genuine?
Yesterday I had been motivated to create a new thread bringing together many of the cacophonous sounds I'd been hearing recently...but really, they would all be, and are in support of what is the genuine and good question presented here, so I'll just pile on, if you don't mind. Also, while doing so, I'll thank Serg for helping to create what seems to me more lively discussion here than I think I've witnessed in what may be several years...
So, a few thoughts in turn...
a) Not long ago, Serg did clarify a point he'd been making for some time...that there seemed to be a "religion" here about the use of certain tools...like reflectors. He pointedly suggested that if you want fire, such tools cannot help you. I thought this was somewhat radical, and necessitated pause. We see shoppers want fire. Why should others be continuing, without much hesitation, to recommend this with such continued confidence as a buying strategy?
b) Then, more recently, rather than discounting reflector technology, Serg suggested we might well support it, here, saying:
"GIA does cut grade. I do not see principle difference between ASG Gold cut grade system and GIA Ex, AGSL introduced Gold system( parametrical) much later than Platinum( 3D) AGS cut grade system .
2) WhiteFlash sells nice GIA diamonds with ASET images"
c) with respect to: who can you trust...can you trust your eyes...Gary has suggested, and immediately above now Serg, too, point to the fact that, maybe you can, but theorize dirt, and maybe you can't. So, maybe you can't trust your eyes, because of a future situation you might have to impute:
d) in the named thead above, where the question was asked how can you buy GIA cheap, Storm differentiates JA as a vendor, saying: "JA was mentioned they do have highly competitive prices with full service available and in-house diamonds and since they were mentioned it would be unfair to give the impression that I lump them in with typical drop shippers." But, who can you name at JA, and does that matter? They have a GIA trained gemologist on staff to inspect the diamond, but what's their name, what training do they have, and do you care?
e) and with respect to performance, does it matter what your theoretical model is for measuring it. Storm again pays a good deal of attention to what he can see, looking at I1 diamonds. I think in Serg and Garry's mind, light is affected substantively when the inclusions are present. I think for Paul the reference is more narrowly where the inclusion touches the surface of the diamond, where I pointed out that he says, here: "Take the extreme case of an I2, and consider how much of the surface area would be touched by the inclusion. Of course, it is difficult to measure, and it depends upon the stone, but my guess would be maximum 5%."
So, indeed, do you trust your vendor, your eye, the tool?
I continue to say your local bloke, for his localness, provides a significant advantage over others at a distance for the fact of their nearness. Can you and they bring enough to bear with respect to the kind of consumer education Pricescope might hope to afford?
Lots to consider.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
RG, there is a large difference between someone who doesn't know anything about diamonds looking at them in trick lighting and someone who gets some education and looks at them under a variety of lighting.
I have no problem with someone making an informed decision by eye after careful evaluation.
For example when I did my i1 test I used scopes and angles to make sure I was comparing apples to apples.
Then I did a critical evaluation and reached a conclusion.
As far as reflector images go there is a lot of information in them that is well beyond comparing the images to a chart if someone knows what to look at.
Reflector images are just one part of the puzzle.
There is also a huge disconnect in many parts of the trade in how they look at diamonds compared to how consumers look at diamonds once they buy them.
I have no problem with someone making an informed decision by eye after careful evaluation.
For example when I did my i1 test I used scopes and angles to make sure I was comparing apples to apples.
Then I did a critical evaluation and reached a conclusion.
As far as reflector images go there is a lot of information in them that is well beyond comparing the images to a chart if someone knows what to look at.
Reflector images are just one part of the puzzle.
There is also a huge disconnect in many parts of the trade in how they look at diamonds compared to how consumers look at diamonds once they buy them.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
risingsun
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2006
- Messages
- 5,549
I would add to this the use of the IS and the ASET. You need to educate your eyes to know and discriminate among diamonds. This is an invaluable service that PS provides, along with our experts and prosumers. I remember a walk down 47th St. I was like a babe in the woods. I knew nothing
re:Many vendors sell poorly-cut diamonds that hold too much weight to have good light performance.They can make more money selling a steep deep 1 carat than the well-cut 0.8 carat that would have resulted from the same rough.
How did you receive such statement? How did you check it?
if many vendors have big profit from steep deep 1 carat diamond from rough what can gives only 0.8 carat well-cut diamond, we should see a lot of such 0.8 ct diamonds with diameter 6.05-6.01 carat. Such diamonds are VERY RARE! liquidity such diamonds is very low, impossible to do good business based on such diamonds. real yield deviation from "same rough"is much more small, it is few percentages.
Please stop blame Vendors, Cutters and Diamond market at all.
For cutters is most important Liquidity. They are producing diamonds according current market demand .
Moh 10
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2008
- Messages
- 1,004
Serg I just pulled the 0.8 ct number out the the air.
Sorry, I shouldn't do that.
I should have said lower weight, but the main point of my post remains.
Vendors who do not sell well-cut diamonds will work to discredit IS, HCA and ASET tools.
They will encourage customers to "trust their eyes" even if their eyes have not been trained or ever seen a well-cut diamond.
When cut education improves market demand for well-cut diamonds will grow and cutters will cut that way.
PS is all about cut education and pulling us into the future.
But watch out for old-school vendors here trying to keep us in the past.
Sorry, I shouldn't do that.
I should have said lower weight, but the main point of my post remains.
Vendors who do not sell well-cut diamonds will work to discredit IS, HCA and ASET tools.
They will encourage customers to "trust their eyes" even if their eyes have not been trained or ever seen a well-cut diamond.
When cut education improves market demand for well-cut diamonds will grow and cutters will cut that way.
PS is all about cut education and pulling us into the future.
But watch out for old-school vendors here trying to keep us in the past.
elle_chris
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2004
- Messages
- 3,520
I agree that cut is important but in reality, unless the stone is just pure ugly, I'm starting to believe the differences are not as huge as has been preached here in the past.
As storm once said, it's all about the lighting, lightling, lighting and how clean your stone is.
I own H&A's and a regular GIA excellents. I've said this before and I'll say it again, I can not see a difference in performance.
eta: So i'm not too surprised the OP picked the lesser cut. In the end it's all about preference and you can't argue with taste.
As storm once said, it's all about the lighting, lightling, lighting and how clean your stone is.
I own H&A's and a regular GIA excellents. I've said this before and I'll say it again, I can not see a difference in performance.
eta: So i'm not too surprised the OP picked the lesser cut. In the end it's all about preference and you can't argue with taste.
difference for 1 ct diamond between P41.2 and P40.7 is just 1%( other parameters are same)
diameter deviation 30 microns are giving 0.4% yield for 1ct diamond
Many( may be a lot of) " Super Puper Ideal " diamonds have such diameter deviation. sometimes I see even 40 microns for well know Brands( Ideal symmetry Brands) .Such deviation come:
1) Or from weak bruting technology( modern technology could give much more less diameter deviation )
2) Or because vendor want increase yield.
please stop blame P41.2Cr34.5 diamonds without any Proof. difference between P41.2Cr34.5 and P40.7Cr34.5 is issue about Taste . Any scientifically proof what diamond better is absent. Current technology can not Measure difference in Beauty between such diamonds
diameter deviation 30 microns are giving 0.4% yield for 1ct diamond
Many( may be a lot of) " Super Puper Ideal " diamonds have such diameter deviation. sometimes I see even 40 microns for well know Brands( Ideal symmetry Brands) .Such deviation come:
1) Or from weak bruting technology( modern technology could give much more less diameter deviation )
2) Or because vendor want increase yield.
please stop blame P41.2Cr34.5 diamonds without any Proof. difference between P41.2Cr34.5 and P40.7Cr34.5 is issue about Taste . Any scientifically proof what diamond better is absent. Current technology can not Measure difference in Beauty between such diamonds
round Diamond with Strong leakage is not best diamond. Most people can easy see it without any tools.
IS, ASET easy show strong leakage.
Then most researches did simple steps:
Step1: strong Leakage is bad for Diamond Beauty
Step 2: if leakage is less, diamond is better
Step3: Diamond with minimum leakage is best
first step was right.
Other two steps has logical mistake( classical logical mistake well known for students from 1st-2d courses of Mathematical department in any good University .
classical Example such mistake:
1) you can easy find Black cat
2) if you find N Black cats you can find 1 more black cat
3) all cats are black what is corollary from theorem about mathematical induction)
back to diamond.
You need change cut if you want reduce Leakage during such process you are changing a lot of parameters in diamond Appearance. You can not change only Leakage, in same time you will change Fire, Scintillation, Contrast, LR, Brilliancy .
why cut what has best Leakage( even zero) ,in same time has best Fire or Scintillation?? who proof it??
there are examples of very poor diamonds with very low Leakage .
ASET, IS is not grading tools. Its are JUST rejection tools.
Please do not blame Vendors, cutters and researchers who understand Limitations IS and ASET
Yes, gang, still here. Sorry was working for 30 straight hrs and then had to catch up on some sleep...then I had to read and re-read the analysis.
I guess it''s a worthwhile discussion. A few more novice questions:
Garry - how do you know the stone is painted, and even if the HCA score is effectively around 3, shouldn''t it still seem inferior in terms of light return?
Although we typically have been analyzing the stone when sitting on top of a hand, won''t the setting dramatically affect the light entrance and exit as it may enter through the pavilion depending on the basket/prongs?
Oh yeah, and in the words of Austin Powers,
"I''m a man, baby..."
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 10,214
Mohs- all due respect, you''re pulling a lot of stuff out of the air, and making accusations with no basis whatsoever in reality.
If you''d like to let us vendors know how we can make more money selling a steep deep, I''m sure it would be of interest. It''s not an easy business. We all agree some sellers don''t understand cut, and may use deceptive techniques to push merchandise- except none of those people are posting here.
Moh''s you also seem to be accusing the OP of something underhanded.
Remember something, everyone knows who I am. Consumers are anonymous, vendors are not.
However, I have a lot of faith in the management of PS to be able to ferret out false posters.
From the sound of TripleC''s post, his vendor was cooperative and did nothing wrong. The OP apparently looked at stones, and got all the things requested here on PS- namely the ASET/IS. Why should we assume that the seller is trying to hurt the OP?
Serg mentioned dirt on the diamond- I''m sure all the evil vendors Moh''s refer to out there have some magical way of hypnotizing the buyer into not being able to see if a stone is dirty. I mean, without studying the LGF''s and painting who would be able to know a stone is dirty?
If I''m not mistaken, needlessly scaring consumers is not really what is supposed to happen here.
How would you feel if 10 people who had no experience buying pink diamonds started telling you you bought a horrible stone merely because it''s 83% depth?
Sarapj- its not magic, nor does it need to be rocket science.
From the sound of what you wrote, you have lived with one diamond, therefore you''ve made decisions about diamonds in general.
To really learn about the cut of diamonds it''s necessary to physically examine many of them. Any learning done solely in a book, or over the web without hands on experience has limited value.
The person who started this thread asked a question. I would assume they probably wanted guidance.
What if a consumer wanted guidance but does not want to "get educated" in the way that some here do?
Learning about cut does not need to include the minutia of lgf''s and ASET/IS.
If one wants to learn all that stuff, all the power to them, it''s here for the taking.
But does it have to be shoved down everyone''s throat- if they simply want a question answered?
ETA- HI TripleC!
The subject of painting is given far too much emphasis here. There are stones that have facets lightly cut into them, referred to in the trade as "painted stones"
Generally this only occurs when a diamond is right at the size barrier. For example a 2.00ct stone. If the cutter really applies pressure during the last stage of faceting, the stone will drop under 2.00. A 1.95ct is worth so much less than a 2.00 the motivation why this would be done is clear.
However, such painted stones are not all that common- and easily spotted. If you compared such a stone to a well cut stone it would not take an ASET/IS, or extensive training to spot it.
When Painiting is discussed here, it may refer to some of the facets on a given stone. However in this case, there should be NO negative conclusions about the stone based on such comments.
Dreamer_D
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2007
- Messages
- 28,722
I really worry about telling people to trust their eyes when they are only looking at a specific set of diamonds in a specific lighting environment.
For me to feel even remotely comfortable telling TripleC to "trust his eyes" I think he needs to do what previous posters have suggested and look at the diamonds in a normal viewing environment... like a room with everyday lighting or outside on a cloudy day, or in dim indirect light like under a table... and then decide. And also go to a few stores and see more variety! I'd like him to see a well cut E next to the E he likes because what he is calling "sparkle" may be brightness or whiteness from the body color (though it is debatable whether an E and G would be discernably different).
I have found with my own personal diamonds that once a diamond is a little dirty and you are out and about with it in normal everyday cicumstances ,the types of variations in cut that are evident from the IS images and the differences in angles become MUCH more apparent and the less well cut stones can look dull and have more grey areas rather than bright and white.
So NO, I don't think you should "trust your eyes" until you have a better mental comparison against which to compare what you see!
ETA to change TripleC's gender
For me to feel even remotely comfortable telling TripleC to "trust his eyes" I think he needs to do what previous posters have suggested and look at the diamonds in a normal viewing environment... like a room with everyday lighting or outside on a cloudy day, or in dim indirect light like under a table... and then decide. And also go to a few stores and see more variety! I'd like him to see a well cut E next to the E he likes because what he is calling "sparkle" may be brightness or whiteness from the body color (though it is debatable whether an E and G would be discernably different).
I have found with my own personal diamonds that once a diamond is a little dirty and you are out and about with it in normal everyday cicumstances ,the types of variations in cut that are evident from the IS images and the differences in angles become MUCH more apparent and the less well cut stones can look dull and have more grey areas rather than bright and white.
So NO, I don't think you should "trust your eyes" until you have a better mental comparison against which to compare what you see!
ETA to change TripleC's gender
re: Generally this only occurs when a diamond is right at the size barrier. For example a 2.00ct stone. If the cutter really applies pressure during the last stage of faceting, the stone will drop under 2.00. A 1.95ct is worth so much less than a 2.00 the motivation why this would be done is clear.
David ,
Yes sometimes Painting could increase yield
But your statement is misleading( at least for consumers) .
many cutters use painting to improve diamond Appearance and Generally during such painting they lost yield , because they need decrease diameter to receive thicker girdle in Bezel points for same rough.
couple years ago GIA published wrong article in G&G what cutters use painting to increase yield
David ,
Yes sometimes Painting could increase yield
But your statement is misleading( at least for consumers) .
many cutters use painting to improve diamond Appearance and Generally during such painting they lost yield , because they need decrease diameter to receive thicker girdle in Bezel points for same rough.
couple years ago GIA published wrong article in G&G what cutters use painting to increase yield
Dreamer_D
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2007
- Messages
- 28,722
I really feel that this is the big aprt of diamond knowledge that many people do not take into account when they provide the advice to "trust your eyes". Virgin eyes see things differently that eyes that have been around the block and loved a few different diamonds
Date: 7/3/2009 1:45:31 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
I really feel that this is the big aprt of diamond knowledge that many people do not take into account when they provide the advice to ''trust your eyes''. Virgin eyes see things differently that eyes that have been around the block and loved a few different diamondsSo just like you should listen to your friends'' advice about your very first boyfriend, you should listen to the advice of tools and science to help you choose your first diamond.
dreamer_dachsie,
Nobody in this thread gave advise ''trust your eyes''!
Advice is : ''trust your eyes if you want choose between these 3 diamonds had been publishes by TripleC in beginning this thread''
There are huge difference between these two type advices.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 10,214
Thanks Serg! As a cutter, you''re in a far better position to explain some of the subtle meanings of something like a "painted stone"
Serg; For the benefit of those consumers reading this.... Is it safe to say that there should be no concern about paining for TripleC and the stones he''s considering?
Also for Serg: Would you say that the type of painting you describe is not a detriment to a diamond''s cut?
Dreamer- who''s to say triplec didn''t look at the stone in multiple, varied lighting environments?
Although I''ve never encountered any, there are likely buyers who simply throw their money at a seller after looking at stones in bright spotlights, never considering looking at the stone in normal lighting...but how many?
From where I sit TripleC hasn''t shown us that he has zero common sense.
It''s also true that living with a stone will give a person a different perspective. To really be able to judge cut meaningfully, you''d need to live with many diamonds, over a period of time.
I''d love to get some of these diamonds that never look different- even when they are covered in hand lotion........
Or, saying a diamond will look bad once it''s dirty, with absolutely ZERO proof of that is also not exactly giving helpful advice.
As Serg pointed out, no one here is throwing around a broad statement of "trust your eyes" without considering other factors.
How many badly cut GIA EX cut grade stones have you seen, with your own eyes?
I''ve actually seen some that were not my favorite combination of table depth etc...but virtually no responsible diamond appraiser or dealer would call these "poorly cut"
Serg; For the benefit of those consumers reading this.... Is it safe to say that there should be no concern about paining for TripleC and the stones he''s considering?
Also for Serg: Would you say that the type of painting you describe is not a detriment to a diamond''s cut?
Dreamer- who''s to say triplec didn''t look at the stone in multiple, varied lighting environments?
Although I''ve never encountered any, there are likely buyers who simply throw their money at a seller after looking at stones in bright spotlights, never considering looking at the stone in normal lighting...but how many?
From where I sit TripleC hasn''t shown us that he has zero common sense.
It''s also true that living with a stone will give a person a different perspective. To really be able to judge cut meaningfully, you''d need to live with many diamonds, over a period of time.
I''d love to get some of these diamonds that never look different- even when they are covered in hand lotion........
Or, saying a diamond will look bad once it''s dirty, with absolutely ZERO proof of that is also not exactly giving helpful advice.
As Serg pointed out, no one here is throwing around a broad statement of "trust your eyes" without considering other factors.
How many badly cut GIA EX cut grade stones have you seen, with your own eyes?
I''ve actually seen some that were not my favorite combination of table depth etc...but virtually no responsible diamond appraiser or dealer would call these "poorly cut"
- Status
Past, Present, Future: The Meaning of Three-Stone Engagement Rings
Past, Present, Future: The Meaning of Three-Stone Engagement Rings - 04/14
300x240.png)