WHY do people want whiter diamonds?

[Karl_K]

I don't want this to be a dob in the vendors either because I think all three that I mentioned unlike many less scrupulous ones out there are not intentionally trying to mislead their customers.

I don't think they are either.
It is an easy way to try and explain a complex subject, it just happens to be potentially misleading because of the way diamonds are graded.

 

[TC1987]

To answer the OP, I prefer icy colours - D or E.

I have quite strong opinions on diamond colour in terms of what I like and don't like, because I wear a colour I didn't choose, every day. My enagagement ring is a fab cut - Hearts on Fire - but it's an I colour. It was a gift long ago, I had no input, there's no trade-in programme and my husband doesn't believe in upgrades or buying any kind of jewellery, so I'm quite stuck with it. Actually, I really like the stone for its wonderful cut. It's very fiery indeed, and it has a lot of sentimental value.

However, to critique the stone purely on its colour: Despite the optimal cut, it can look dark. In daylight, it faces up very white....but it isn't white. Once you take it out of daylight, it starts to look darker. When I hold my D diamonds next to it, it looks distinctly lemon.

Many posters talk about warmth, which sounds lovely. If the stone was warm but light, I'd like it. However, in my experience with my engagement ring, the tint does not only bring warmth, it brings darkness. The stone is actually darker than my well-cut Ds, not just warmer.

To be honest though, my stone always looked perfectly white to me until I started buying diamonds (it started about four years ago when I decided to get a pair of studs from Blue Nile). After I got educated and bought higher-coloured diamonds and started comparing, I could really see the difference. But before, when I knew nothing about diamonds, it looked fine.

But there's no going back. Once you know and see the difference, you can't un-see it, at least I couldn't. What happened next is that I got my sticky paws on a nice fat AGS triple 0 D-colour diamond, and that was it. Lurve. I had no idea a diamond could look so cold, so icy, so yummy. Like an Arctic lake.

I have since bought I diamonds in finished jewellery pieces, as melee. They look fine. I just wouldn't choose a larger diamond in that colour. I think I'd rather have a smaller diamond to get an icier colour.

I really notice the difference between my D/E colours and my engagement ring in dimmer environments, like in restaurants. When a given restaurant has had mirrors, I have looked at my reflection from about four feet away, and held up my hand to compare. The D studs and pendant remained quite visible as pinpricks of white ice in the dimness, whereas the darker I colour ring pretty much disappeared. That, for me, sums up the difference - and the value - between the icier colours and warmer ones.

Having said that, I am waiting for the arrival of a G pendant from BGD. I am sure it will be quite white enough - it was the right price and time for the purchase, and I am very happy with a G for this piece. I wouldn't have bought an I, though. Just my preference.

That reminds me of those old DeBeers ads. '80s maybe, that had the entire picture dark/dim, except for that one very white diamond. There used to be a test that one of the PS trade people mentioned: Take the stone under the desk, wrap one's fingers so that no light comes in through the pavillion, and see how bright of dim it looks. One could probably do that with two diamonds to compare colors. I think that some of the HoF are not the best of the superideal cuts. I looked at I colors stones up to about 1.5ct in jewelry stores when I was buying and none of them looked dim. I wore a colorless cz ring to have something to compare to.

But back when I was buying, GOG was using that Gemex Brilliance Scope and posting a live report for each RB. I looked at a lot of those reports for stones ranging E down to I or J, and I did see some "dim" stones in high colors that were simply not as good at reflecting, but they had good numbers on paper. The body tint showed as darker around the rim of the stone, like not as much light passed through it or something.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

This is a great thread with a lot of excellent observations and opinions that I think represent a tremendous resource for shoppers looking to get a handle on color and determine where their own preferences might best be met.

I take particular interest in that my own preference has gradually shifted over the years! So, I am certain of two things: All other factors being equal, color in diamonds is more a matter of taste (and budget). And, it is possible to acquire taste for different colors if you look at a lot of diamonds. Smith1942 alluded to this phenomenon.

I remember in the early years in the business I was fond of saying that I did not understand why anyone would buy anything other than near colorless, considering the fact that you get a lot “less diamond” by stepping up to colorless. Later in my career, I became aware that I was no longer saying that! Today, I really do have a thing for colorless diamonds. Maybe it is sort of like drinking cognac.

I really liked Dreamer’s analogy to light bulbs. I first got interested in full spectrum lighting many years ago through a discussion of the health benefits of spending time under more natural light - like what we get from the sun and what human beings have evolved under for millions of years. And over the years I have gradually replaced almost all of my lighting both in the office and at home with various versions of higher color temperature “natural” light. I like the way it looks and feels to me. But I also hear what Tourmaline said and I have seen people in my office and my own family say they DO NOT like it! Which is another indication that it is all in the realm of personal preference.

Thanks to everyone for their contributions to this discussion. It’s very informative.

 

[c-k]

Even a K color looks white to me in most cases...I tend to like H or I most bang for the buck...a ring on your finger looks way different than studying color under perfect light etc. You have skins tones, colors from surrounding clothing, lighting, walls, furniture etc etc..Sure stone side by side look at a E next to a H most will see the whiter diamond, put both in a setting and on a finger, now it gets really hard to tell.

I think a middle of the road color in the middle of the road clarity with an Ideal cut stone is a perfect way to go...I love my (I color/VS2 Ideal cut) diamond.

 

[WinkHPD]

I don't want this to be a dob in the vendors either because I think all three that I mentioned unlike many less scrupulous ones out there are not intentionally trying to mislead their customers.

I don't think they are either.
It is an easy way to try and explain a complex subject, it just happens to be potentially misleading because of the way diamonds are graded.

Wow, so much in this thread to respond to that I don't know where to begin.

I was in fact wondering where to start when I saw the excellent exchange between Karl and Arkieb.

Some years ago Tom Tashey proposed that diamonds be graded with two color grades, a grade from the side as it is done now and a grade from the top since so many stones do in fact look whiter from the top than they do from the side.

Two days ago I took a beautiful picture of a light yellow stone whose name shall not be mentioned here that showed this beautifully. The stone was laying on a mirror and looked near colorless from the top with beautiful dispersion and clearly yellow in the reflected image of the side of the stone.

When placing a poorly cut stone in a middle color such as I, J, K next to an incredibly well cut diamond of the same colors, almost without exception the better cut stones will look much whiter than the poorly cut stones.

Thus, I do not agree that saying a stone faces whiter than I would expect it to from the paper grade is at all misleading. I do, however, agree that it could be used in an unethical manner if one is not very careful to make sure that the concept is properly explained.

I am also going to go out on the ledge a little, and try to answer part of the original question, "Why Do People Want Whiter Diamonds?" I think, that a big part of why people want whiter diamonds is that they are buying paper.

Think about it. Joe Smitten decides that he wants to get engaged. He knows that he is hopelessly in love and wants only the best for the object of his love. He goes looking on the Internet, sees thousands of claims both factual and erroneous and gets a massive headache.

Somewhere along the line he gets the idea that he needs a certificate for the diamond that he chooses to buy. While we on Pricescope all hope he was lucky enough to learn that he needs an AGS or GIA grading paper we all know that sadly this may or may not be the case.

Since he knows he needs a diamond grading report he now knows that he only wants the best or at least the closest to the best that he can afford. He is buying paper because he doesn't know enough to buy the diamond. Many of our Joe's hope that this will be the one and only diamond that they ever need to buy in their life, so they are not going to spend any more time than they have to in selecting it.

When I am lucky enough to meet in person with a client rather than only on the Internet, I love to show 3 to 5 diamonds on a slotted tray for my clients to choose from. I tell them nothing about the stones and ask them to choose either the one they like the best or the one they like the least. Usually, people will start taking the one they like the least and we will continue the process until only one or two are left.

This way they are actually buying the diamond not the paper. Often, people will have chosen a diamond well below the color range they have asked me to show them. One lady even got very mad at me for "tricking her" into liking a lower colored diamond. More often, my clients are relieved at having chosen the diamond they truly liked best, regardless of what the paper says. For what it is worth, more of my clients choose G, H, I colors than D, E, F colors.

While there are still a significant portion of my clients who choose the higher colors. It is the fact that so many choose the slightly lower colors when not influenced by the diamond grading reports that leads me to believe that many people want whiter diamonds because they trust the paper more than they trust their own vision. When they know what they are looking at, they will talk themselves into liking the higher color because they know they are supposed to.

By the way, I always love it when those who genuinely love the higher colors choose the higher color. Once they learn they have chosen the higher color it validates their opinion about what they like.

I think that is enough of my rambling for one post. I want to thank Karl and Arkieb for their excellent discussion as it brought so many of my own thoughts into focus.

Wink

 

[ericad]

I haven't read through this whole thread yet, but since we were mentioned specifically, I want to make these points:

Old cuts vary greatly in how they face up versus their lab grading. Some lower colored stones show more warmth from face up than others, when comparing stones of the same GIA color grade.

As we know, diamonds are graded based on body color, not face up color. So how does a vendor convey the variations in face up color between stones of similar body color when they CLEARLY show variance in the face up position?

At the end of the day, we try to paint the clearest picture we can of a lively object using static photos and written descriptions. Not all K's face up the same. Not all P's face up the same. This is a fact. Why would it be unscrupulous to state that a particular diamond that is, for example, a GIA N color, faces up like a K if this is in fact the best way to verbally describe that a specific diamond faces up more like a K than a "typical" N? We're not misrepresenting the stone - it's still a GIA N - we're just trying to provide as much information to our buyers as possible because we have the stone in our hands and want to convey its true appearance as best we can. Some diamonds just plain face up whiter than others of the same color grade.

Some diamonds have a brown hue versus a yellow hue (and even sometimes gray), neither of which is apparent from the lab report. Isn't it helpful for us to include our perception of how the diamond looks in real life? Are we being unscrupulous if we say that a particular diamond has brown tones to its body color, or that it faces up with a slightly peachy hue? We see it as information to help buyers with their decisions. We never represent it as anything more than our opinion.

Some diamonds have "flowery" facets - we describe facet pattern too. Some stones show more contrast, while others are more brilliant. Some diamonds photograph dark, but aren't dark in person, or maybe they photograph warmer than they actually look in real life. I've called some diamonds "quirky" and others "sophisticated". I even recently described a selection of stones to a buyer using high school stereotypes, lol. That's just how we roll over here at JbEG - unconventional all the way.

Maybe we're wrong, but we've always thought that we were being helpful by including our impressions in our descriptions. Conversely, we always try to describe body color as well. And color perception is subjective - if a buyer asks about color I'm always very quick to make this clear.

And, at the end of the day, there's a return period in the event that a buyer isn't in agreement with the additional information we provide about a stone, or if they just plain don't like it for whatever reason.

We'll never be the type of jeweler who simply lists pieces with pics and reports and nothing else - it's important to us to try and describe the unique personality of each old cut. We enjoy adding this color (pun intended) to the pieces we sell.

 

[yssie]

Me, I've always gone for the darker-hued stones. When I got engaged, I had a choice between a D and a J ... and I went with the J, and never looked back. In "blind taste tests" since then, I've been pretty consistent in that regard: inevitably, my sweet spot is somewhere in the near-colorless to faint-yellow range ... I'd say J to N, not having seen too many lower than that that weren't sufficiently tinged so as to be distinct in their demonstration of their body color. (For that matter, so was the N, but since it was a 4 carat AVC, I most certainly did not mind.) I guess my preference is for off-white ... doesn't so much matter what the underlying tone is, so long as it's neither stark nor noticeably yellow or champagne.

Circe, I genuinely prefer lower-coloured stones too - the darker, mellower, NotQuite"White"ButNotYetYellow J/K/L/M range is my favourite. It seems that range in particular is either adored or despised with little in-between! I have a beautifully cut 0.8ct E that I honestly just dislike, it's too bright icy white for me... Reading Smith's post was eye-opening - a good number of her reasons for loving her Ds and Es are exactly the things I object to Guess people vary after all

Written by arkieb1 » 11 Dec 2013 04:32:
So is that why something like an Octavia, a Solesfera and some well cut OECs which are all very different styles of cut hide or mask body colour better than RBs?

That's interesting arkie, because I haven't noticed that those shapes consistently look "whiter" than MRBs face-up - but I've only played with one Solasfera, my OECs which are bright edge-edge but certainly not precision-cut superideals, and three Octavias during a brief visit to GOG a couple of months ago, so my sample size is limited..! I definitely agree that some shapes can face-up surprisingly white for the body colour you see in profile, depending on cut and faceting. I think there's a pedestrian explanation though - as soon as a light ray crosses the air/diamond bound into the stone it disperses into its components, and stones that excel at white light return are designed so that a given ray's path through the stone is of minimal distance and requires as few internal reflections as possible before exiting back out the top to your eyes. The longer the path through a tinted stone the more energy from those component wavelengths is absorbed, and the more internal reflections there are the more internal dispersion there is... and there's also the fact that total internal reflection and energy conservation isn't actually going to be *total* given that the diamonds aren't likely to be spotlessly clean and the polish might not be perfect which changes the normal... if our eyes interpret "brighter" as "whiter", and "bigger & bolder and higher-energy" as "brighter" then whatever type of faceting yields the least-dispersed, highest-energy primary refraction out of the stone should hide body colour the best face-up! And by that explanation Karl's explanation of proportions that cause colour entrapment also makes sense. http://www.octonus.com/oct/projects/fancycolor-3.phtml
It really would be very misleading to state that a stone faces up like another specific higher colour though, I dislike seeing that statement

This comparison was posted a couple of years ago in another thread - the first is an AVC designed/precision-cut by GOG and DiaGem, the second is a DBL Signature designed/precision-cut by DBL and DiaGem. Both the same colour per GIA, but differently faceted to achieve different goals and unsurprisingly they look different face-up. I don't think anyone can objectively state that one is "better" than the other - they each better suit different purposes..
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/precision-cut-what-does-this-mean.164265/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/precision-cut-what-does-this-mean.164265/[/URL]

Here is a related question: Does diamond tint interact with cut to predict the level of contrast patterning that we see? In other words, will a more tinted diamonds display more contrast patterning -- holding cut constant -- than a less tinted stone? Does less brightness make it easier to perceive contrast patterning

ETA: by contrast patterning, I mean the patterns of lights and darks that scintillates and plays accross a diamond's face as it is moved. My avatar shows contrast patterning clearly, in static mode.

Yes and no less not more contrast.
Diamond color has an effect on contrast brightness but in my opinion colorless to near colorless in well cut stones the difference in very minor in an RB. stronger in a step cut but down to J still relatively minor if well cut.
Some cuts do a better job than others in returning light so you see the body color much less often.
Which is a trick I built into Octavia. It was to my knowledge the only design that took secondary and third order light sources into account in the design. Kenny describes it as always returning light.

Karl, I would guess in your experience there's some difference between actual change in luminescence and how our eyes interpret the difference as contrast? Just because physiology never does follow the book!
I'm thinking of the Mach band illusion in particular - that our eyes tend to exaggerate borders between two colours. I definitely agree that more blocky constrast makes a stone more arresting overall, holding body colour constant - maybe that's why so many people on her like the look of thick chunky arrows in RB photos and and chessboard-esque old cuts pics...




Then again... A quick paintjob and I really hope PS doesn't compress this too much because to my eyes in the original in MS paint (with my monitor calibrated to 50% grey) it's the off-white/black combo on the right that has the "highest contrast" and stands out the most, not the white/black in the middle, and I don't know WHAT to make of that!!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I concur with Wink and Erica. Describing the face-up color of a particular diamond and how it may differ from the norm of a diamond with the same lab graded color can be a very appropriate way to communicate useful information to a customer.

The perception of any given lab graded color can differ based on a number of factors. Cutting is most certainly the biggest one. It is seen both in fancy colors where certain facet arrangements and proportions can intensify face up color. And it is also true with regard to diamonds in the normal range that are cut for outstanding light performance- by most accounts they face up whiter face up than ordinary cuts of equivalent lab color.

Customers, especially buying remotely, are very keen to know various aspects of the color in a real world sense. It can influence a number of other decisions the customer is making including how best to set the stone.

Of course there are always sellers out there who are going to be tempted to embellish the value of the diamond by making self serving claims. But is that new?

That is why you should choose your jeweler as carefully as you choose your diamond! You should be able to trust a professional to give you an honest and accurate assessment.

 

[yssie]

At the end of the day, we try to paint the clearest picture we can of a lively object using static photos and written descriptions. Not all K's face up the same. Not all P's face up the same. This is a fact. Why would it be unscrupulous to state that a particular diamond that is, for example, a GIA N color, faces up like a K if this is in fact the best way to verbally describe that a specific diamond faces up more like a K than a "typical" N? We're not misrepresenting the stone - it's still a GIA N - we're just trying to provide as much information to our buyers as possible because we have the stone in our hands and want to convey its true appearance as best we can. Some diamonds just plain face up whiter than others of the same color grade.

I can't speak for any one else of course, but I personally dislike that sort of explicit colour-grade comparison not because I don't trust the vendor but because it can slide around so much... not all O/Ps face up the same, definitely! But not all Ms do either, so to me saying that an O/P faces up like an "M" can be confusing because then my first question is "what sort of M"? High, low - what's the M that's being compared? Or if you say that do you mean that this O/P faces up like the body colour of an M, disregarding face-up colour of that M? I just thought of that second explanation when typing this and that makes a lot of sense to me!

 

[Karl_K]

Yssie,
The same intensity white light will appear brighter than tinted light because more cells in the eye are excited.
Put this next to black and you get the most possible contrast for someone with normal vision.
Your graphic will not be an accurate representation because a monitor is not capable of showing yellow and white at the same intensity.
The eye is also less sensitive to some colors than others.
The eye/brain else tends to average things out and black next to white averages out to a higher level than yellow next to black.
It gets extremely complicated when you go too deep.

 

[Smith1942]

Here is my D-colour GIA ideal-cut stud on the left and my I-colour HoF on the right. All pix are taken in fading afternoon natural daylight, no flash.

In the first pic, the shot is taken with the two diamonds face up. They don't look so different, do they?

However, look at the next two shots with my I colour ring from a slight side angle. Suddenly the I colour piece looks a lot more tinted.

Then, see the two diamonds next to each other in the fourth and fifth shots that I'll post in a second. Again,with a slight side angle, you can see the difference.

The final two shots that I am just about to post are with the two diamonds face-up again from a slight distance. Again, the colour difference is somewhat less obvious.

This what I meant when I said that just because my stone faces up quite white, that doesn't mean it's white - it's still lemony, as the side view pics of the ring alone show, below.

 

[Smith1942]

The colour difference between D and I is more obvious when the camera is at a slight side angle.

 

[Smith1942]

Colour difference less obvious with face-up angle.

 

[ericad]

At the end of the day, we try to paint the clearest picture we can of a lively object using static photos and written descriptions. Not all K's face up the same. Not all P's face up the same. This is a fact. Why would it be unscrupulous to state that a particular diamond that is, for example, a GIA N color, faces up like a K if this is in fact the best way to verbally describe that a specific diamond faces up more like a K than a "typical" N? We're not misrepresenting the stone - it's still a GIA N - we're just trying to provide as much information to our buyers as possible because we have the stone in our hands and want to convey its true appearance as best we can. Some diamonds just plain face up whiter than others of the same color grade.

I can't speak for any one else of course, but I personally dislike that sort of explicit colour-grade comparison not because I don't trust the vendor but because it can slide around so much... not all O/Ps face up the same, definitely! But not all Ms do either, so to me saying that an O/P faces up like an "M" can be confusing because then my first question is "what sort of M"? High, low - what's the M that's being compared? Or if you say that do you mean that this O/P faces up like the body colour of an M, disregarding face-up colour of that M? I just thought of that second explanation when typing this and that makes a lot of sense to me!

Generally what we mean is that the stone faces up 2+ grades whiter than one would expect of a "typical" O/P. It's not to be taken as a literal comparison to any specific M colored stone. It faces up like a "typical" M, which would be whiter than a "typical" O/P, broadly and subjectively speaking. GIA doesn't differentiate between high and low ranges within the same color grade, and we don't expect our descriptions to be held to that level of detail either. The diamond is still an O/P and is priced like an O/P.

Color preference is personal and subjective - using a vendor you trust, describing to them what you love and what your objective is, and then allowing them to be your eyes is really the best path to finding a diamond you love. And even then, especially with old cuts, it might take a few tries before you have a love connection!

 

[Rhino]

Here is a related question: Does diamond tint interact with cut to predict the level of contrast patterning that we see? In other words, will a more tinted diamonds display more contrast patterning -- holding cut constant -- than a less tinted stone? Does less brightness make it easier to perceive contrast patterning?

ETA: by contrast patterning, I mean the patterns of lights and darks that scintillates and plays accross a diamond's face as it is moved. My avatar shows contrast patterning clearly, in static mode.

Yes and no less not more contrast.
Diamond color has an effect on contrast brightness but in my opinion colorless to near colorless in well cut stones the difference in very minor in an RB. stronger in a step cut but down to J still relatively minor if well cut.
Some cuts do a better job than others in returning light so you see the body color much less often.
Which is a trick I built into Octavia. It was to my knowledge the only design that took secondary and third order light sources into account in the design. Kenny describes it as always returning light.

Just a different take on this question pertaining to contrast.

Since contrast is the actual observation of bright vs dark reflections observed in diffuse lighting, contrast will always be sharper and most observable in white vs dark observations. The more color you add to the mix the more you might take away from the contrast but that would really require some notably darker colors and not the normal tints you commonly see discussed on the forums. For example a flat white piece of paper has no contrast just as a black diamond would also offer no contrast as well. The more you offset the brightness of the lighter reflections the more you will decrease perception of contrast patterns.

Bear in mind however that diamonds with tones of color even down to Y/Z will still clearly show contrast patterns so they've really gotta be dark.

With respect to light performance color really doesn't have any bearing either except for the tones of light that are reflected to the eye as your eyes will observe both phenomena of tonal body color as well as intensity of light return. The refractive index (ie. measuring the speed of light as it travels through a diamond) does not change to any notable degree between white and warm diamonds so transmission of light is neither slowed down nor obscured. The only things I can think of off the cuff that can impact transmission of light from within diamond can be too many inclusions, irregular crystal growth, or condensed/saturated clouds.

Good thread.

Kind regards,
Rhino

 

[Rhino]

That is interesting because I have lost count of vendors who frequently say our J faces like an I or our L looks several colour grades higher, including some very well respected ones on here.....

If it was in the last couple of years and one of the major PS vendors, I would like to know who so I can yell at em.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Smith all those photos and all those diamonds look the same to me. Also, the diamond in the window is reflecting environmental color fairly clearly to my eyes at least... I am not sure what you are intending to show with those images? Of course an I and a D have different body tints after all.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Here is a related question: Does diamond tint interact with cut to predict the level of contrast patterning that we see? In other words, will a more tinted diamonds display more contrast patterning -- holding cut constant -- than a less tinted stone? Does less brightness make it easier to perceive contrast patterning?

ETA: by contrast patterning, I mean the patterns of lights and darks that scintillates and plays accross a diamond's face as it is moved. My avatar shows contrast patterning clearly, in static mode.

Yes and no less not more contrast.
Diamond color has an effect on contrast brightness but in my opinion colorless to near colorless in well cut stones the difference in very minor in an RB. stronger in a step cut but down to J still relatively minor if well cut.
Some cuts do a better job than others in returning light so you see the body color much less often.
Which is a trick I built into Octavia. It was to my knowledge the only design that took secondary and third order light sources into account in the design. Kenny describes it as always returning light.

Just a different take on this question pertaining to contrast.

Since contrast is the actual observation of bright vs dark reflections observed in diffuse lighting, contrast will always be sharper and most observable in white vs dark observations. The more color you add to the mix the more you might take away from the contrast but that would really require some notably darker colors and not the normal tints you commonly see discussed on the forums. For example a flat white piece of paper has no contrast just as a black diamond would also offer no contrast as well. The more you offset the brightness of the lighter reflections the more you will decrease perception of contrast patterns.

Bear in mind however that diamonds with tones of color even down to Y/Z will still clearly show contrast patterns so they've really gotta be dark.

With respect to light performance color really doesn't have any bearing either except for the tones of light that are reflected to the eye as your eyes will observe both phenomena of tonal body color as well as intensity of light return. The refractive index (ie. measuring the speed of light as it travels through a diamond) does not change to any notable degree between white and warm diamonds so transmission of light is neither slowed down nor obscured. The only things I can think of off the cuff that can impact transmission of light from within diamond can be too many inclusions, irregular crystal growth, or condensed/saturated clouds.

Good thread.

Kind regards,
Rhino

Thank you both. I have had the good fortune of comparing my own K color chunky cut to one of your AVR's, Rhino, in a G color.Both gorgeous. My stone obviously more tinted. But I also felt that my diamond shows the faceting more clearly because the contrast was greater. The less tinted stone made it harder to discern the specific facets individually on close viewing (my favourite way to view diamonds.) I have had similar observations with other more and less tinted diamonds. The less tinted seem harder to see the facet patterning because its lost in a wash of light/white. Am I imagining this? Is it explained by faceting differences rather than tint per se?

 

[Rhino]

I remember in the early years in the business I was fond of saying that I did not understand why anyone would buy anything other than near colorless, considering the fact that you get a lot “less diamond” by stepping up to colorless. Later in my career, I became aware that I was no longer saying that! Today, I really do have a thing for colorless diamonds. Maybe it is sort of like drinking cognac.

LOL Brian ... I felt the same and said the same thing with regards to warmer colors. At this moment I have an N color on my finger AND LOVE IT!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Me, I've always gone for the darker-hued stones. When I got engaged, I had a choice between a D and a J ... and I went with the J, and never looked back. In "blind taste tests" since then, I've been pretty consistent in that regard: inevitably, my sweet spot is somewhere in the near-colorless to faint-yellow range ... I'd say J to N, not having seen too many lower than that that weren't sufficiently tinged so as to be distinct in their demonstration of their body color. (For that matter, so was the N, but since it was a 4 carat AVC, I most certainly did not mind.) I guess my preference is for off-white ... doesn't so much matter what the underlying tone is, so long as it's neither stark nor noticeably yellow or champagne.

Circe, I genuinely prefer lower-coloured stones too - the darker, mellower, NotQuite"White"ButNotYetYellow J/K/L/M range is my favourite. It seems that range in particular is either adored or despised with little in-between! I have a beautifully cut 0.8ct E that I honestly just dislike, it's too bright icy white for me... Reading Smith's post was eye-opening - a good number of her reasons for loving her Ds and Es are exactly the things I object to Guess people vary after all

I also like this color range in part because I feel like they really show of the patterning. We use the term "personality" all the time to describe these colors and their chameleon appearance and the way that environmental colors really dramatically change this range of tints much more than colorless diamonds, which seem to stay white always. I want to get a handle on what this term "personality" means. Clearly, the color shifts. But I feel like it also has something to do with how the cut of the stone in perceived. Any thoughts ladies?

 

[Karl_K]

The colour difference between D and I is more obvious when the camera is at a slight side angle.

Nice try and good thinking but there is too much variation in the environment that the diamonds are picking up to show what you want to show.
You would need to carefully isolate the diamonds in a white environment to get an accurate comparison.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I remember in the early years in the business I was fond of saying that I did not understand why anyone would buy anything other than near colorless, considering the fact that you get a lot “less diamond” by stepping up to colorless. Later in my career, I became aware that I was no longer saying that! Today, I really do have a thing for colorless diamonds. Maybe it is sort of like drinking cognac.

LOL Brian ... I felt the same and said the same thing with regards to warmer colors. At this moment I have an N color on my finger AND LOVE IT!

I was going to call you out on that Rhino!

If we need more proof that color is a subjective component of diamond beauty, there it is.

 

[Rhino]

Here is a related question: Does diamond tint interact with cut to predict the level of contrast patterning that we see? In other words, will a more tinted diamonds display more contrast patterning -- holding cut constant -- than a less tinted stone? Does less brightness make it easier to perceive contrast patterning?

ETA: by contrast patterning, I mean the patterns of lights and darks that scintillates and plays accross a diamond's face as it is moved. My avatar shows contrast patterning clearly, in static mode.

Yes and no less not more contrast.
Diamond color has an effect on contrast brightness but in my opinion colorless to near colorless in well cut stones the difference in very minor in an RB. stronger in a step cut but down to J still relatively minor if well cut.
Some cuts do a better job than others in returning light so you see the body color much less often.
Which is a trick I built into Octavia. It was to my knowledge the only design that took secondary and third order light sources into account in the design. Kenny describes it as always returning light.

Just a different take on this question pertaining to contrast.

Since contrast is the actual observation of bright vs dark reflections observed in diffuse lighting, contrast will always be sharper and most observable in white vs dark observations. The more color you add to the mix the more you might take away from the contrast but that would really require some notably darker colors and not the normal tints you commonly see discussed on the forums. For example a flat white piece of paper has no contrast just as a black diamond would also offer no contrast as well. The more you offset the brightness of the lighter reflections the more you will decrease perception of contrast patterns.

Bear in mind however that diamonds with tones of color even down to Y/Z will still clearly show contrast patterns so they've really gotta be dark.

With respect to light performance color really doesn't have any bearing either except for the tones of light that are reflected to the eye as your eyes will observe both phenomena of tonal body color as well as intensity of light return. The refractive index (ie. measuring the speed of light as it travels through a diamond) does not change to any notable degree between white and warm diamonds so transmission of light is neither slowed down nor obscured. The only things I can think of off the cuff that can impact transmission of light from within diamond can be too many inclusions, irregular crystal growth, or condensed/saturated clouds.

Good thread.

Kind regards,
Rhino

Thank you both. I have had the good fortune of comparing my own K color chunky cut to one of your AVR's, Rhino, in a G color.Both gorgeous. My stone obviously more tinted. But I also felt that my diamond shows the faceting more clearly because the contrast was greater. The less tinted stone made it harder to discern the specific facets individually on close viewing (my favourite way to view diamonds.) I have had similar observations with other more and less tinted diamonds. The less tinted seem harder to see the facet patterning because its lost in a wash of light/white. Am I imagining this? Is it explained by faceting differences rather than tint per se?

Hi Dreamer,

Yep. In OEC's there are quite a number of factors that can impact contrast that go beyond basic proportion sets. Even the orientation of facets at the east/west angles (aka azimuth angles as opposed to north/south orientation in slope angles) can and will affect contrast patterns in OEC's with nice proportion sets where tinted OEC's can and will show either stronger or different contrast patterns depending on the overall construction of the facets. AVR's have taken a little evolution since my initial creating of them so I'm curious as to what you saw exactly.

Kind regards,
Rhino

 

[ericad]

Me, I've always gone for the darker-hued stones. When I got engaged, I had a choice between a D and a J ... and I went with the J, and never looked back. In "blind taste tests" since then, I've been pretty consistent in that regard: inevitably, my sweet spot is somewhere in the near-colorless to faint-yellow range ... I'd say J to N, not having seen too many lower than that that weren't sufficiently tinged so as to be distinct in their demonstration of their body color. (For that matter, so was the N, but since it was a 4 carat AVC, I most certainly did not mind.) I guess my preference is for off-white ... doesn't so much matter what the underlying tone is, so long as it's neither stark nor noticeably yellow or champagne.

Circe, I genuinely prefer lower-coloured stones too - the darker, mellower, NotQuite"White"ButNotYetYellow J/K/L/M range is my favourite. It seems that range in particular is either adored or despised with little in-between! I have a beautifully cut 0.8ct E that I honestly just dislike, it's too bright icy white for me... Reading Smith's post was eye-opening - a good number of her reasons for loving her Ds and Es are exactly the things I object to Guess people vary after all

I also like this color range in part because I feel like they really show of the patterning. We use the term "personality" all the time to describe these colors and their chameleon appearance and the way that environmental colors really dramatically change this range of tints much more than colorless diamonds, which seem to stay white always. I want to get a handle on what this term "personality" means. Clearly, the color shifts. But I feel like it also has something to do with how the cut of the stone in perceived. Any thoughts ladies?

I think of personality as being each stone's unique and individual charm, which is comprised of many qualities: faceting style, color, symmetry, age, etc. Perhaps this is why "personality" is most often used to describe old cuts - because you see a lot more variation from stone to stone. No two antique OEC's will ever look alike in the same way that precision cut stones look alike. Hence each stone has its own unique "personality" or combination of attributes that makes it unique.

To borrow a quote from one of my favorite movies, I would say that this applies to diamonds too:

“Wine is like people. The wine takes all the influences in life all around it, it absorbs them and it gets its personality."
French Kiss (1995) – Luc (Kevin Kline)

 

[Laila619]

Smith, I must really not be color sensitive, because I honestly don't see much tint in your I color engagement ring. Pretty stone!

 

[Rhino]

I remember in the early years in the business I was fond of saying that I did not understand why anyone would buy anything other than near colorless, considering the fact that you get a lot “less diamond” by stepping up to colorless. Later in my career, I became aware that I was no longer saying that! Today, I really do have a thing for colorless diamonds. Maybe it is sort of like drinking cognac.

LOL Brian ... I felt the same and said the same thing with regards to warmer colors. At this moment I have an N color on my finger AND LOVE IT!

I was going to call you out on that Rhino!

If we need more proof that color is a subjective component of diamond beauty, there it is.

And my wife wears an N as well! Both are mounted in platinum too!

Earlier the thought was sacrilege but I get it now. The 1.74ct O IF brought up earlier in this thread is a good demonstration too. After it being here for years it was gone in about 2 weeks after recutting. I don't recommend warmer colors for everyone but when the cut is there ... I'm a believer.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I remember in the early years in the business I was fond of saying that I did not understand why anyone would buy anything other than near colorless, considering the fact that you get a lot “less diamond” by stepping up to colorless. Later in my career, I became aware that I was no longer saying that! Today, I really do have a thing for colorless diamonds. Maybe it is sort of like drinking cognac.

LOL Brian ... I felt the same and said the same thing with regards to warmer colors. At this moment I have an N color on my finger AND LOVE IT!

You keep sliding that way Rhino and eventually you will be hitting the cognac!

 

[Karl_K]

Thank you both. I have had the good fortune of comparing my own K color chunky cut to one of your AVR's, Rhino, in a G color.Both gorgeous. My stone obviously more tinted. But I also felt that my diamond shows the faceting more clearly because the contrast was greater. The less tinted stone made it harder to discern the specific facets individually on close viewing (my favourite way to view diamonds.) I have had similar observations with other more and less tinted diamonds. The less tinted seem harder to see the facet patterning because its lost in a wash of light/white. Am I imagining this? Is it explained by faceting differences rather than tint per se?

The easiest way to see facet pattern rather than light return is over obstruct the diamond.
Some diamonds you can't because by the time you get enough obstruction they are fuzzy or you just cant provide enough obstruction.
My guess the major part of the difference you saw is how they react to obstruction.

My favorite is playing a single light source across the stone lighting up different virtual facets as you go.
This works much better with the larger virtual facets and is pretty much impossible with a radiant or princess cut.
To me the virtual facets are much more interesting than the physical facets.

 

[Rhino]

Me, I've always gone for the darker-hued stones. When I got engaged, I had a choice between a D and a J ... and I went with the J, and never looked back. In "blind taste tests" since then, I've been pretty consistent in that regard: inevitably, my sweet spot is somewhere in the near-colorless to faint-yellow range ... I'd say J to N, not having seen too many lower than that that weren't sufficiently tinged so as to be distinct in their demonstration of their body color. (For that matter, so was the N, but since it was a 4 carat AVC, I most certainly did not mind.) I guess my preference is for off-white ... doesn't so much matter what the underlying tone is, so long as it's neither stark nor noticeably yellow or champagne.

Circe, I genuinely prefer lower-coloured stones too - the darker, mellower, NotQuite"White"ButNotYetYellow J/K/L/M range is my favourite. It seems that range in particular is either adored or despised with little in-between! I have a beautifully cut 0.8ct E that I honestly just dislike, it's too bright icy white for me... Reading Smith's post was eye-opening - a good number of her reasons for loving her Ds and Es are exactly the things I object to Guess people vary after all

I also like this color range in part because I feel like they really show of the patterning. We use the term "personality" all the time to describe these colors and their chameleon appearance and the way that environmental colors really dramatically change this range of tints much more than colorless diamonds, which seem to stay white always. I want to get a handle on what this term "personality" means. Clearly, the color shifts. But I feel like it also has something to do with how the cut of the stone in perceived. Any thoughts ladies?

I think of personality as being each stone's unique and individual charm, which is comprised of many qualities: faceting style, color, symmetry, age, etc. Perhaps this is why "personality" is most often used to describe old cuts - because you see a lot more variation from stone to stone. No two antique OEC's will ever look alike in the same way that precision cut stones look alike. Hence each stone has its own unique "personality" or combination of attributes that makes it unique.

To borrow a quote from one of my favorite movies, I would say that this applies to diamonds too:

“Wine is like people. The wine takes all the influences in life all around it, it absorbs them and it gets its personality."
French Kiss (1995) – Luc (Kevin Kline)

Hi Erica,

I get what you're saying but here in NY and around the country I commonly see vendors romancing diamonds that are sloppily cut and with horrendous optics which aren't what I'd say "take in the influences in life all around it" but more a matter of "this is the largest diamond I could get from the rough". It's true there are absolutely beautiful OEC's but IMHO they are rare exceptions. There's a lot of crap out there being marketed as great that simply isn't. My .02c

Hope this finds you well.

Kind regards,
Jonathan

 

[Rhino]

I remember in the early years in the business I was fond of saying that I did not understand why anyone would buy anything other than near colorless, considering the fact that you get a lot “less diamond” by stepping up to colorless. Later in my career, I became aware that I was no longer saying that! Today, I really do have a thing for colorless diamonds. Maybe it is sort of like drinking cognac.

LOL Brian ... I felt the same and said the same thing with regards to warmer colors. At this moment I have an N color on my finger AND LOVE IT!

You keep sliding that way Rhino and eventually you will be hitting the cognac!

As long as it has pinkish undertones Brian!