Would you spend extra on a super ideal?

[MissGotRocks]

@MissGotRocks thanks for sharing. Although the stone on the left is beautiful I do think with some patience you can get ideals far closer to superideal without the obstruction that you see. This is a problem you could have foreseen before you bought, from a single well taken photo.

Now if I was buying a non superideal, I would avoid ones with such contrast patterns. Many none superideals are out there wouldn't suffer the same dark areas that bothered you, without the price tag, if you were stringent and patient in your selection.

That stone was purchased 12 years ago from a brick and mortar store. Those photos were not available then and from the idealscope image that I later had, was not particularly visible. Buying on the internet today with images is far easier than it was then but your typical B&M store still does not offer those images.

 

[Phoenix]

Sometimes ignorance is truly bliss, not to mention a savior for one's wallet.

Since finding PriceScope, I find myself with these strange urges to buy jewelry that never troubled me before.

Lol, same thing has happened to me! Prior to PS and especially the Show Me your Branded Bling thread, I was never temped by Van Cleef. Sure, I'd known about them before but never stepped inside one of their boutiques prior to seeing pics and posts by @Boom (yes, particularly Boom), @yssie and @diamondseeker2006 etc...So yeah, I totally blame these ladies for my new obsession!

 

[flyingpig]

I would buy a superideal if:
1) I could lower clarity, stay eye clean and achieve the same carat for similar price Vs another ideal
2) For certain carat weights such as 1.7/1.8 onwards, where fantastically cut ideals are of limited supply, sometimes it can be the same price to buy a superideal with your desired specs (such as if you wanted a smaller table etc)
3) in need for upgrade policy.

I agree with all these points.

A case study 2.0c H VS2
1. well cut James Allen GIA 2c H VS2 at 21k WWW
2. well cut WF Premium Select GIA 2c H VS2 at 22k WWW
3. WF ACA H 2.1 H SI at 22k WWW
4. WF ACA H 2.1 H VS2 at 24k WWW
Here, it is a no brainer, #1 JA GIA is out. 3k more (14%), my choice is probably ACA H 2.1 H VS2 at 24k.

But for 0.9 E VS2
1. well cut James Allen GIA 0.9 E VS2 at 5.3k WWW
2. WF ACA 0.92 E VS2 at 7.5k WWW
Here, my choice is JA GIA 0.9 E VS2 at 5.3k for 2.2k less.
JA's 2x upgrade policy is not that restrictive in this price range. The next upgrade will be 10k+ anyways.

Now 1.0 I VS1
1. well cut Jame Allen Gia 1.0 I VS1 at 5.6k WWW
2 WF ACA 1.0 I VS1 at 6.5k WWW
For me, there is no clear winner here.

It really depends.

 

[Phoenix]

Why don't you just have Paul Slegers cut you a 6ct G-VS1 to order? Although a lot smaller than that, I have a Cut to Order CBI.

That's def an option, @cflutist , thank you. I'm currently talking to various vendors and see which one can offer me the highest trade-in value for Holly, that'd be my biggest determinant. Then, I'd have to make sure i have all the funds necessary in order first, before I reach out to anyone for a custom cut/ a new stone. You'd **shudder** at the top-up amount! On the latter subject, I wonder if if it mightn't be a better idea for me to get another diamond, say a 5-6ct emerald cut. My plans are certainly not set in stone, at least not at this stage. I guess it's a question of whether I'd have "one ring to rule them all", and whether the mind-cleaness is important enough for me, hence we go back to @LLJsmom's Q!

 

[gm89uk]

That stone was purchased 12 years ago from a brick and mortar store. Those photos were not available then and from the idealscope image that I later had, was not particularly visible. Buying on the internet today with images is far easier than it was then but your typical B&M store still does not offer those images.

Yeah I was just making a point that hopefully today, consumers are empowered to buy ideal cuts without compromise compared to superideals.

 

[Snowdrop13]

As someone who is buying from overseas and can't see the diamonds in person, the extra $$ is worth it for the certainty of getting a beautiful stone.

I have some knowledge now but am absolutely no expert. I'm pretty sure that in my locality there is nowhere else I could buy stones of this quality, or even close to it.

 

[WinkHPD]

@Wink, from one scotch aficionado to another, if you like Oban, you would most likely like Dalwhinnie, Old Pulteney and Highland Park. Those are grand drams.

I have not tried the first two, but did enjoy some Highland Park when visiting my daughter's family in LA.

Should you ever come to Boise we shall have to share a drink or two over dinner. I will Traeger us up a roast chicken, tri tip or ribeye to be enjoyed after drinks.

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

Several

But I will definitely NOT compromise on cut, going for super-ideal this time but this might mean another 6 yrs or so of waiting for this HG.

You have set a great goal and you have the patience to wait until you can achieve it. I seems to me as if there is a LOT of power in that combination.

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

Wink, thank you for the explanation. You write so beautifully. I thought it was just me who couldn't see the difference in the youtube videos.

While many people can, there are many who cannot. Yet often, when I am able to sit with people from both camps in real life, it is quickly apparent to me that in real life the differences are much more easily discerned. To be honest, it is even much more easily visible to me, even when I am the one making the video. I can make a video, think it is pretty good, then look at it in the morning and wonder, What the Heck, why is this such a weak comparison? That is why I rarely even attempt to make comparison videos, I can not capture what I see in real life.

My husband only got the HOF because his friend used to work for a jewelry store and recommended it (we bought in August of 2001 so I don't know if PriceScope existed then).

I joined Pricescope in May of 2001, so it was here then, although pretty sleepy and inactive by today's standards.

I am curious. What is the diameter of your 0.7 HoF versus the 0.8 good cut? Does the 0.7 look as big as the 0.8?

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

For certain carat weights such as 1.7/1.8 onwards, where fantastically cut ideals are of limited supply

There is a reason for this. If a cutter can make a super ideal 1.7 ct diamond, he can almost always also make a 2.00 ct steep deep lifeless lump of carbon that will sell for more than the super ideal cut 1.7 ct.

John Pollard wrote an excellent article about this some time ago. In it he showed how a stone was cut to be a 3.01 ct D-IF that had the same crystal been used to craft a Crafted by Infinity diamond, the weight would have been a 2.72 ct D-IF. That 3.01ct D-IF sold for $119,416 more than the 2.72 ct would have sold for. With that great a price differential the cutter willing to do the "extra fat" cut can pay much more than the cutter who is wanting to cut the more beautiful cut.

John documented three such stones in his article, and there are archived screen shots of the diamonds on the sites where they were all eventually sold.

It is only when some "defect" in the starting crystal prevents cutting a diamond over a price break point that a cutter willing to do the "right thing" with the crystal can win the bidding war for that crystal.

Ironically, that super ideal cut diamond selling for $119,416 less would have brought cries of "Super Ideal cuts sell for too high a price," when in fact it would have been a much greater value.

Wink

 

[GreenPapaya]

The HoF looks a smidgen smaller than the good cut. I had to dig out the certificate and found out I was mistaken on some of the specs. I thought it was a .7, H, VS2, it's actually a .7, F, VS1. Luckily I didn't throw out the certificates like I usually do with other things. I threw out my certificates for my wedding band. I'm not sure which number is the diameter - it's listed as 5.75 x 5.78 x 3.51 and the AGS # is AGS0001050008. Perhaps the diamond is too small to see differences in good cut vs super ideal? Or ideal vs good cut? I don't know if mine is considered a super ideal.

The good cut didn't come with any certificates. It was from a local jeweler in Philadelphia, she told me it was a good cut and .8, it looked a little bigger than my ering and I didn't see any visible inclusions and that was that.

Another thing I've just realized. Perhaps my HoF is "dulled" from years of nonstop wearing? I never take it off. I was in the Army for 4.5 years and never took it off for exercises, training (except one time when I had to do live chemical agent training). I wore it to clean, pool, beach, etc... It's cleaned every year though...by a local jeweler in Chinatown (NYC).

Now I'm curious to see a super ideal cut. But at the size I can afford, would I have to use a magnifying glass each time to see that it performs better than other diamonds?

 

[ratatat]

If you've never cleaned it that would make a huge difference. Soak it in warm water and dish washing soap and clean it with a soft toothbrush. I've read about then drying it off with a hairdryer but I think this is optional haha. Cleaning the diamond makes such a difference

 

[WinkHPD]

Another thing I've just realized. Perhaps my HoF is "dulled" from years of nonstop wearing?

Since you are cleaning it regularly, this is most unlikely. When you take it in to be professionally cleaned, I am going to make, perhaps erroneously, the assumption that the jeweler would tell you if there was a coating that needed a more intense cleaning.

And yes, while it is said to be more difficult to see in smaller sizes, it is obvious to those with a well developed visual palate.

Wink

 

[valeria101]

Interesting question ...

I would have to rephrase into 'if you would consider any RBC, would you spend extra on a super-ideal'.

To this revised question, the answer is Yes. The reason is not necesarily visible: I'd want to know I have paid for the process of its making, one that can play art one day & achieve perfection in the most classical thing every other day - the extra zing to perfection that screens off price charts away from me.

I'd squint for the minutia of the cut, of course ! Even if they need explaining.

These being said, I know that my next serious piece of jewelry will be one of those diamonds comming out of the art side of things.

 

[whitewave]

The HoF looks a smidgen smaller than the good cut. I had to dig out the certificate and found out I was mistaken on some of the specs. I thought it was a .7, H, VS2, it's actually a .7, F, VS1. Luckily I didn't throw out the certificates like I usually do with other things. I threw out my certificates for my wedding band. I'm not sure which number is the diameter - it's listed as 5.75 x 5.78 x 3.51 and the AGS # is AGS0001050008. Perhaps the diamond is too small to see differences in good cut vs super ideal? Or ideal vs good cut? I don't know if mine is considered a super ideal.

The good cut didn't come with any certificates. It was from a local jeweler in Philadelphia, she told me it was a good cut and .8, it looked a little bigger than my ering and I didn't see any visible inclusions and that was that.

Another thing I've just realized. Perhaps my HoF is "dulled" from years of nonstop wearing? I never take it off. I was in the Army for 4.5 years and never took it off for exercises, training (except one time when I had to do live chemical agent training). I wore it to clean, pool, beach, etc... It's cleaned every year though...by a local jeweler in Chinatown (NYC).

Now I'm curious to see a super ideal cut. But at the size I can afford, would I have to use a magnifying glass each time to see that it performs better than other diamonds?

I clean my diamonds at least once a day. Get an ultrasonic cleaner on amazon

 

[MollyMalone]

I do see, and admire, the thought & attention that's reflected in the super ideal brilliant rounds under discussion & certainly understand why others set their sights on them. But I have never coveted one... think that's because round brilliants don't matter much to me; colored gems & other shapes-cuts of diamonds delight-intrigue me more. So I don't foresee myself ever paying the premium for a super ideal RB.

 

[cflutist]

There is a reason for this. If a cutter can make a super ideal 1.7 ct diamond, he can almost always also make a 2.00 ct steep deep lifeless lump of carbon that will sell for more than the super ideal cut 1.7 ct.

John Pollard wrote an excellent article about this some time ago. In it he showed how a stone was cut to be a 3.01 ct D-IF that had the same crystal been used to craft a Crafted by Infinity diamond, the weight would have been a 2.72 ct D-IF. That 3.01ct D-IF sold for $119,416 more than the 2.72 ct would have sold for. With that great a price differential the cutter willing to do the "extra fat" cut can pay much more than the cutter who is wanting to cut the more beautiful cut.

John documented three such stones in his article, and there are archived screen shots of the diamonds on the sites where they were all eventually sold.

It is only when some "defect" in the starting crystal prevents cutting a diamond over a price break point that a cutter willing to do the "right thing" with the crystal can win the bidding war for that crystal.

Ironically, that super ideal cut diamond selling for $119,416 less would have brought cries of "Super Ideal cuts sell for too high a price," when in fact it would have been a much greater value.

Wink

And that's why I am so excited to find my 2.79 F-VS1 CBI. I ran the diamond DB tool and there is only a 6% difference in surface area between 9.06 mm and 9.30 mm, but a big jump in price at the 3.00 mark. I already have a 3.01 pear so this new CBI is perfect for me.

 

[canuk-gal]

I do see, and admire, the thought & attention that's reflected in the super ideal brilliant rounds under discussion & certainly understand why others set their sights on them. But I have never coveted one... think that's because round brilliants don't matter much to me; colored gems & other shapes-cuts of diamonds delight-intrigue me more. So I don't foresee myself ever paying the premium for a super ideal RB.

Interesting perspective. I've owned ACA's and CBI stones--and loved them. I admire my sisters CBI diamonds in her ears. While I no longer own any diamonds of consequence--if I were to purchase only one (more) it would be a "super ideal". Cuz if I'm gonna have one (or small pair in earrings) it might as well be the best representation of "excellence".

cheers--Sharon

 

[HDer]

A case study 2.0c H VS2
1. well cut James Allen GIA 2c H VS2 at 21k WWW
2. well cut WF Premium Select GIA 2c H VS2 at 22k WWW
3. WF ACA H 2.1 H SI at 22k WWW
4. WF ACA H 2.1 H VS2 at 24k WWW
Here, it is a no brainer, #1 JA GIA is out. 3k more (14%), my choice is probably ACA H 2.1 H VS2 at 24k.

What I would really like is for someone to do some light analysis research to give me the difference in percentage terms.

To take your 2 carat example, here's a non H&A stone that retails for 17K. https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...h-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3148534 How much worse is it compared to the WF ACA at 24K? How much worse is it compared to the JA H&A at 21K?
How much worse is it compared to the 26.7K CBI: https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8902

Without knowing the degree of difference, it's hard for a consumer to tell whether the premiums are worth paying for, and whether it's 3K or 10K, that's real money to people.

There's gotta be a materials science PhD student out there looking for a research topic right? I'm sure if someone were to do the research, we could probably crowdsource enough diamonds on PriceScope that people would be willing to lend in order to figure this out.

 

[marcy]

I can tell the difference and definitely willing to pay the premium price for a super ideal cut. My first deal cut diamond was an AGS0 diamond and when I picked it out I had no idea what that meant. We compared about 10 diamonds and that one definitely stood out from the others. When I upgraded that diamond I went with a GIA XXX. After having being used to the AGSO performance I saw some flat or lifeless spots in the GIA diamond and traded it in within 4 months. I bought another AGS0 diamond and was very happy with its performance. PS of course got me intrigued enough abiut a super ideal diamond that when I decided to buy something I planned to keep forever I went with an ACA. I was not disappointed with my decision.

 

[Phoenix]

Several

You have set a great goal and you have the patience to wait until you can achieve it. I seems to me as if there is a LOT of power in that combination.

Wink

Hehe, if once I have all my finances in order and I come across something suitable, I'd totally pull the trigger straightaway. No need to wait 6 more years!

 

[OoohShiny]

What I would really like is for someone to do some light analysis research to give me the difference in percentage terms.

To take your 2 carat example, here's a non H&A stone that retails for 17K. https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...h-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3148534 How much worse is it compared to the WF ACA at 24K? How much worse is it compared to the JA H&A at 21K?
How much worse is it compared to the 26.7K CBI: https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8902

Without knowing the degree of difference, it's hard for a consumer to tell whether the premiums are worth paying for, and whether it's 3K or 10K, that's real money to people.

There's gotta be a materials science PhD student out there looking for a research topic right? I'm sure if someone were to do the research, we could probably crowdsource enough diamonds on PriceScope that people would be willing to lend in order to figure this out.

Are you talking about measuring brightness accurately, to discern differences between SuperIdeal and other cuts?

Is this something that's been covered in @Serg's thread the other week?
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/brilliancy-vs-brightness.233268/

That thread made my head hurt lol

 

[HDer]

Are you talking about measuring brightness accurately, to discern differences between SuperIdeal and other cuts?

Is this something that's been covered in @Serg's thread the other week?
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/brilliancy-vs-brightness.233268/

That thread made my head hurt lol

Yes! This would be a good start. Brightness is relatively easy (just count the photons). Brilliance like Serg is trying to do is a bit harder, but doable with some heuristics. Now, let's talk about fire and the other characteristics too. The AGSL has done some work on this, but frankly I think it can be updated and with the huge advances in computer vision and AI there should be some ways to get some pretty significant advances in the "objective" measures.

 

[WinkHPD]

What I would really like is for someone to do some light analysis research to give me the difference in percentage terms.

To take your 2 carat example, here's a non H&A stone that retails for 17K. https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...h-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3148534 How much worse is it compared to the WF ACA at 24K? How much worse is it compared to the JA H&A at 21K?
How much worse is it compared to the 26.7K CBI: https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8902

Without knowing the degree of difference, it's hard for a consumer to tell whether the premiums are worth paying for, and whether it's 3K or 10K, that's real money to people.

There's gotta be a materials science PhD student out there looking for a research topic right? I'm sure if someone were to do the research, we could probably crowdsource enough diamonds on PriceScope that people would be willing to lend in order to figure this out.

I think you may be trying too hard to quantify percentages of light return when this involves the quality of that light return.

When the precision of a diamond’s cut comes together properly, the viewer will be rewarded with larger flashes of both white and colored light. Those flashes, or sparkles, are usually associated with motion. Even imperceptible movements, such as the beating of your heart, may cause some of the facets to turn off while others turn on. These events will also happen if your orientation or the light sources move. It is the precision of the cutting, beyond the mere average numbers given on a report, that enables larger virtual mirrors within the diamond, thus rewarding the viewer with those larger flashes of both white and colored light.

I do not know the percentage return from a diamond such as the one suggested, with 57 table, 40.8 pavilion and the steep 36.6 crown angle, but I know it’s only measuring 8.01mm average spread. That is more like a well-cut diamond of 1.88-1.90 carats, but they added weight in the crown so that it would finish at the magic 2.00 carat weight. I can say with absolute certainty that its light return will be compromised by that weight, and fall several steps reduced from more optimally crafted diamonds. On its face the numbers will put it somewhere between AGS 3 to AGS 6 in light performance, depending on what falls behind the given averages, which are also rounded by the way.

So that’s enough, already, that I would not recommend nor sell it myself. Your mileage may vary, and that is fine. But, more relevant to the subject and questions in this thread, commercially produced diamonds are cut to hit average numbers and target weights. They are not crafted with a deliberate focus to increase the size of the internal virtual mirrors, which produces the quality of larger flashed of both white and colored light I first mentioned.

Please understand, I am not being critical of you, I am critical of the purposeful cutting of diamonds for average measurements that land them at a target weight, but reduce what was possible from a brightness standpoint, before we can even discuss nuances such as virtual mirrors.

Wink

 

[HDer]

Great response @Wink. It would still be nice to be able to quantify the difference: i.e. you're paying x% more for y% more or higher quality light return.

 

[WinkHPD]

(Sung to the tune of gimme that old time religion.)

Gimme that higher quality light return...

 

[824jagdds]

I want to echo the point from HDer above. Although I like learning about this stuff I'm not sure how perfect on cut I need to go to be satisfied. I'm starting to read ASET, find flaws in H&A views, etc, but I'm not sure if it matters to me in real life.

I do appreciate a nice scotch, @Wink, and I can tell the difference in the 12 year and the 18 year Macallan. But the difference between $70 and $280 a bottle isn't enough to justify it on a regular basis for me.

I wish there were a better way to compare Super Ideals to other sub top 1% diamonds in real life conditions. Since BM stores dont' carry super ideals it's difficult, unless you want to fly to Houston.

For ex, this one has got some green at the edge... Could I just put a prong over it?
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3826697.htm

There is a Jann Paul Video that really confused me... I thought I wanted super ideal until I saw this and thought... the "poor performer isn't that bad to me.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I will certainly say that ignorance is bliss, but only if one stays ignorant forever! My greatest mistakes in jewelry in the past was not buying the best quality. So for me, the superideals I have bring me pleasure and never any regrets. Time passes and the amount I pay doesn't really matter any more. Even my antique style round is beautifully cut, and I just appreciate the artistry and talent involved in making beautifully cut stones. I recently had a yellow sapphire cut by Jeff White for the same reason. I do also have a well cut antique diamond, so the actual age is irrelevant to me!

@LLJsmom You mentioned something about wishing you could see a large superideal cut. I had the pleasure of visiting Whiteflash last year and I had the pleasure of trying on a 5.59 ct ACA which grateful4life was inquiring about at the time and bought shortly after! Talk about amazing!!!

 

[Dancing Fire]

I want to echo the point from HDer above. Although I like learning about this stuff I'm not sure how perfect on cut I need to go to be satisfied. I'm starting to read ASET, find flaws in H&A views, etc, but I'm not sure if it matters to me in real life.

You thought USDA choice prime beef was good till you try Kobe beef...

 

[mochiko42]

You thought USDA choice prime beef was good till you try Kobe beef...

Speaking of beef...I actually prefer the aged Rubia Gallega Iberian beef for steaks. It has so much more character and flavor than Kobe (I had a Japanese friend who is a rep for Matsusaka beef in Tokyo; I've tried some of his beef at restaurants there, it's very good but I think it's better as sashimi or only lightly seared 'aburi' style, rather than cooked through). Have you tried Hanwoo beef from Korea? It's pretty good too.