Jump to content

Do These Proportions Seem Ok?


Gracetrump
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've been sent information and a photo of a good looking stone. It's a bit bigger than I was looking for, but I am told that it is eye clean and looks great. Please let me know if these measurements have potential or if there are any obvious problems:

 

Weight: 3.24

GIA triple EX

Table 55%

TD: 62.8

CA: 36

PA: 40.6

Girdle: medium faceted 3.5%

Width: 9.39x9.47x5.92

No culet

 

This works out to 1.8 on the HCA EX-EX-VG-VG. I am hoping to see it in person  with my ideal scope (it is being sent to a nearby jeweler)  - but if there are any red flags, I will call the vendor and tell her I am no longer interested. 

 

Does this have potential?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Red flags" are relative. Nothing major; if you can see it before committing (including getting it shipped and rejected if it doesn't fit) and the price is right, then I'd go for it.

 

(The girdle is a little thicker than I'd like, especially on a 3+ carat stone, and the crown is a bit steep, but I quite like steep crowns and small tables - however others don't). The devil is largely in the details and these are personal preferences and price...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know the effect of a steep crown on the look of a diamond however I do like smaller tables since it is my understanding that they create more sparkle but less flash. I prefer sparkle and lots of colors over big flashes of white. Would a steeper crown and smaller table be consistent with these traits? My local jeweler brought in a stone that I saw yesterday. It had a 59 table ( kind of a 60/60 stone). When I told him I thought I might prefer table closer to 56 or so he told me that that would never be an 'ideal" cut since 59-60 is now considered best.

The stone I mentioned above is from Ritani and they will send it to a nearby jeweler for me to see.

If it looks good, I can take it to David atlas for an expert's opinion. Does that sound like a reasonable plan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your plan sounds more than reasonable.  As for your jeweler telling you a "table closer to 56 or so" ..." that would never be an 'ideal" cut since 59-60 is now considered best",  I have never heard this. There are plenty of ideal cuts with 56% tables.  When paired with other proportions smaller tables can focus the light and maximize the fire.  That said, no diamond should be selected on one proportion alone (like just the table).  The light return is a product of all the proportions and how they work together to maximize the effect.

Edited by GeorgeDI
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that's a reasonable plan.

 

I haven't a clue what he's talking about with the comment about what is 'now considered the best' but it doesn't really matter either way.  What we're fishing for is what YOU consider the best. I would be curious what definition he's using for 'ideal'.  They don't all agree with each other and that's a whole can-o-worms in itself but that's not one of the common ones in any case.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the feedback. I've been thinking that maybe this stone is too deep to be well cut, despite the following:

1) GIA Excellent Cut Grade (I know that doesn't hold much weight),

2) the 1.8 HCA score, and

3) some tool that I found on the Enchanted Diamonds website gave it a 93.6 (I don't know much about this tool or whether it is considered credible)

 

It's my understanding that the best indicator will be an ideal scope or ASET image - and Ritani, the vendor, doesn't have either of those.  Still - I was thinking this could be promising until I saw this: someone's evaluation of a stone with similar, though not identical, proportions.

 

http://niceice.com/blue-nile-diamond-review-ld03319426/

The author describes this stone as "drek" and calls out the 62.8% TD as too deep to be any good. This makes me a little nervous.

 

 

Ritani works by sending their diamonds to a local jewelry store while placing a hold on the buyer's credit card. If my husband and I like the diamond and if it looks good with my little ideal scope, we can buy it and then take it to David Atlas to evaluate. Obviously, I don't want to bring anything to David unless everything seems to be looking good. I'm happy to pay David to prevent me from making a mistake - but I don't want to end up making lots of trips him, and certainly not with anything that I should have known beforehand was "drek."

I just ran the HCA on the stone in the niceice article and I see that, despite having proportions close to the stone I am interested in, this one scored significantly worse - 3.9. I am amzaed at how such tiny differences in % can change the HCA score.

So, I apologize for overthinking things - but do you think the stone might still be ok with the 62.8% depth? Or should I cancel the order (which I can easily do) and look for something else. This whole proportion thing is so hard to figure out. I wish every diamond came with an idealscope and ASET photo. It would make buying so much easier for laypeople like me.

 

Oh - and about my local jeweler and his comments:: I think he believes that the best cut is always going to be a 60/60 stone. But isn't that the "old" way of thinking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put rather little stake in the HCA for this and even less in the Enchanted Score.  The GIA cut grade is broad but a good place to start.  Following that with a personal inspection is step 2.  

 

The niceice guy is pretty smart but bear in mind that he hasn't seen it and he's not even talking about the same stone.  What he's REALLY doing in that article is slamming Blue Nile's approach to grading and suggesting that you should use HIM as the filter to select goods there.  Take it for what it's worth.  I think he's probably right that the one he's talking about isn't a fabulous cut but 'drek' is a decidedly harsh word for it.  

 

I'm curious.  

 

if you want to choose based on IS and ASET imagery, there's plenty of dealers who are prepared to accommodate you and Dave I'm sure can take those pictures for you if you want.  If your dealer can't or won't give you the data you want, find someone else who will.  This is an extremely competitive business. 

Edited by denverappraiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No! I'm sorry - but you have the wrong idea. It isn't the cost. Like I said, I'm more than happy to pay to avoid making a costly mistake. This is about the time and energy and about dragging my dear husband from work (not to mention taking me from my work) or out on multiple saturdays to examine each stone with David until we find a "good" one. I am trying to make this process as painless as possible by doing as much leg work as I can upfront in hopes that I can narrow the choices.

Unfortunately, unless you want to lay out an awful lot of money to buy mulitple stones at once and then take them all to an expert in one trip, this is a one stone at a time process. The only other alternative is to find a b&m store with lots of stones and then line them up and choose the best one. I'm not finding that possible since most local jewelers don't seem to have lots of inventory. At least, this is my understanding of the process.

 

I asked Ritani for HCA or ASET photos of this stone. They told me that their vendor would not supply them. I will ask if they can send photos to me when the stone reaches them. Maybe this way I can head reject the stone (if it's not good) before the even bother to send it to the store in my area. (Ritani doesn't send stones directly to buyers, but rather to a local jeweler in their network).

 

No - this isn't about paying to have stones looked at. It's about turning what should be fun (buying a diamond ring) into a protracted, time consuming, and painful process. 

 

There are other stones that I think look promising - unfortunately we can only see one at a time since payment, or a hold on a credit card is made up front. I've heard some horror storoes about people who had difficulty returning a stone, even within the return period - so there is no way that I would purchase more than one stone at a time with the expectation that it will be easy to send one back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several of the vendors will agree to ship stones to a well regarded appraiser, like Dave, with only a deposit sufficient to cover return shipping if you don't buy it.  Obviously it requires Dave's cooperation and he probably has a fee to do this (I do) but you might want to ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As always it seems a certain someone is confusing and scaring the diamond buying public.

 

The certain someone hides behind the guise of "not selling something" but in reality he is, his services.

 

Confusing you instead of helping you is how he pushes that agenda. 

 

This person has failed to prove our cut score inaccurate, even though our website contains thousands of diamonds with ASET/IdealScope/Hearts and Arrows images. 

 

Grace,

 

Our cut score has helped hundreds of people like yourself buy diamonds that come back as the highest scores on Sarine Light Reports (attaching a link to a scientific explanation on the Sarine Light Report for your reading pleasure) Ultimate 2 and 3. 

 

An Enchanted Cut Score of 93, will come out to Ultimate 1 or 2. This will be a very very gorgeous/lively diamond, and I have nothing to sell here as you are working with another vendor. Why would we put out the score for the public to use on any diamond, if this was only for our own gain?

 

Why does this certain someone have to put our cut score down with no proof? Well thats for the public to decide. 

 

Happy to get you a Sarine Light Report free of charge whether your diamond comes from my company or not, because I am very happy to put my money where my mouth is. 

 

I couldn't attach the PDF for the explanation on the science behind a Sarine Light Report but here is a link to it: https://odic.box.com/s/pfda5ffnwvaactbv158p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I don't want to hijack this thread, Ill leave it at...

 

How can I prove anything when everyone who is scared of Enchanted Diamonds, whines and cries to the forum mod that I am posting links (to proof which lives on our website) ??

 

You guys are so silly.... Since I cant post anything from our site, go look for yourself as thousands of customers have, find me a scenario where our cut score is wrong. 

 

Ill go take some diamonds out on memo that are in the 80's next week and show you the Sarine Light Report? What "proof" would satisfy your highnesses, Neil and Davide, besides disclosing our algorithm in detail? Because Im sure you and everyone else would love to know how we come up with such an accurate score and are able to grade hundreds of thousands of diamonds so rapidly - but alas, this is our advantage and why customers choose us over the competition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You already did hijack the thread.  What I did was answer a direct question, from the OP, about whether I found the HCA or the ECS scores useful for this shopping process. 

 

The ECS takes unknown data in, evaluates it in a secret way, and produces an unverifiable result.  You pretend that this is a scientific process.    I’ve asked repeatedly for you to clear that up and you refuse on the grounds that it’s a trade secret.   You’re certainly entitled to have trade secrets, and you can like or dislike whatever stones and for whatever reasons you want, secret or not, but no I don’t find it particularly useful.

 

Nowhere have I ever said I don’t sell anything.  I’ve actually argued against that point right here in the forum.   I have nothing to do with the mods, they can run their forum however they wish.   I’m not surprised you’re having trouble with them but that’s their business, not mine.

 

Thanks for the link on Sarine Light.  I haven’t seen that one before.  Did you notice that it says what data they’re using, how they’re evaluating it, and how that leads to their various grades?   In fact, that’s the whole point of the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gee! I was just hoping to get some advice on the proportions of a stone per the instructions on this site that say asking this kind of question is okay. I did not mean to incite any ill will between experts or vendors. I'm just some woman whose kind husband offered to buy her a ring. I don't want to buy something that isn't very, very well cut. Unfortunately, while I am certain there are plenty of reputable vendors, there are many who are unscrupulous, and I wanted help avoiding being sold a sub par stone by the latter.

 

David Atlas can help ensure I won't end up with a dud, but I was hoping to get some help weeding out the obvious bad stones here on this forum. I didn't mean for anyone to get in an argument. Sorry if my question created any discord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to worry, that discord already existed.  'Taint you.  We have a pretty fundamental disagreement on that topic and I apologize that it threatens to take over your thread.  I'm confident we won't come to a resolution here.
 

I think you'll find we actually agree on more than we disagree.  For example, everyone who has posted has agreed that your strategy is valid.   Start with GIA-excellent or AGS-ideal.  Follow that with advice from the selling dealer to pick a particular stone.  Follow that with a personal inspection and with consultation with whoever YOU think is valuable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 The niceice guy is pretty smart but bear in mind that he hasn't seen it and he's not even talking about the same stone.  What he's REALLY doing in that article is slamming Blue Nile's approach to grading and suggesting that you should use HIM as the filter to select goods there.  Take it for what it's worth.  I think he's probably right that the one he's talking about isn't a fabulous cut but 'drek' is decidedly harsh word for it.

 

Why thank you Neil, I think that you're a pretty smart guy yourself  ;)

 

Let's start with the concept that diamonds are produced in a variety of proportions, in part because different people have different preferences for the type of sparkle exhibited by diamonds, but also because one of the primary jobs of a diamond cutter is to produce a reasonably good looking diamond, which provides the diamond cutting house with the largest yield.

 

Whereas my job as a diamond buyer is to sift through all of the options available and help people choose the diamond which is going to provide them with the highest volume of light return and the type of sparkle that meets their expectations... and since my specialty has always been within the realm of ideal and super ideal cut diamonds, my preference is always going to be for the tighter zero ideal cut diamonds... and I don't exactly make it a secret that my preference lies within the very limited center range of the proportions designated by the AGSL for the zero ideal cut proportions rating, and that's because it represents the virtual sweet spot in terms of producing the highest volume of light return and a balance of brilliance and dispersion that I personally find appealing. People who want to follow me down that path of enlightenment are perfectly willing to do so, and people who prefer a different look in a diamond are welcome to follow their own path, or that which is being blazed by any other person who they think might be able to help them find the diamond of their dreams... I'm not twisting anyone's arm to take my advice, neither are you, but we both want people to take our advice, that's how we stay in business.

 

So by my standards, my personal standards, my personal preferences, and based upon my experience of what proportions result in the highest volume of light return and the balance of brilliance and dispersion that I'm personally looking for in a diamond, that Blue Nile diamond which I reviewed was "DREK" and I feel that it was cut with the retention of carat weight in mind... And I provided the client with several other options from Blue Nile which I feel provide a higher volume of light return and a better balance of brilliance and dispersion, because that's what he asked me to do.

 

And the tutorial which I wrote serves as a basis for people to learn about how the proportions of a diamond affect the volume of light return and the sparkle factor, but we both know that it's only one chapter in a really long, long book that they'll have to read to fully understand the journey, but that's why people like you and I are around to help guide them and answer any questions that they might have... I'd be happy to look over the full specs for this diamond, it is unfortunate that Ritani is not able or willing to provide ASET Scope, Ideal Scope, nor Hearts and Arrows images for the diamonds in their inventory; as one of their affiliates (full disclosure) I have urged them to provide that type of detail on their diamond details pages.

 

I'm also an affiliate of Enchanted Diamonds (additional disclosure) and I happen to think that there is some validity to their cut grade system, but like the HCA, it should be used as more of a diamond elimination tool, rather than a diamond selection tool, because it is merely the first piece of the puzzle, and there is so much more information to be gleaned from the reflector scope images which are necessary to judge the optical symmetry of the diamond, and to determine the extent of light leakage, etc.

 

But what purpose does all of this information truly provide the average consumer, if they do not possess the knowledge to interpret the data? Not much... other than perhaps the false sense of security that might be derived from the assumption that a diamond "must be good" if the vendor is willing to provide such detailed information about it; which is where people like you, me, David Atlas, and so many others come into the picture, because we're able to look over the information and ascertain whether the diamond presents the best choice of the available options, or whether another diamond might be a better choice.

 

With that in mind, the information provided about his diamond is too limited to make an accurate assessment, I'd like to see the full proportions, a copy of the GIA diamond grading report, and the listing on Ritani or Enchanted Diamonds if possible; because it is important to take the crown height measurement into consideration, along with the crown angle; and the pavilion depth measurement into consideration, along with the pavilion angle; as well as the star and lower girdle facet length, and so on... if anybody is going to be able to get a really good idea of the potential of this stone, or any other for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I don't want to hijack this thread, Ill leave it at...

 

How can I prove anything when everyone who is scared of Enchanted Diamonds, whines and cries to the forum mod that I am posting links (to proof which lives on our website) ??

 

You guys are so silly.... Since I cant post anything from our site, go look for yourself as thousands of customers have, find me a scenario where our cut score is wrong. 

 

Ill go take some diamonds out on memo that are in the 80's next week and show you the Sarine Light Report? What "proof" would satisfy your highnesses, Neil and Davide, besides disclosing our algorithm in detail? Because Im sure you and everyone else would love to know how we come up with such an accurate score and are able to grade hundreds of thousands of diamonds so rapidly - but alas, this is our advantage and why customers choose us over the competition.

You see, Joshua, you are the one that claims accuracy - I simply say that I do not know. You have provided no proof of accuracy or even of what your score is measuring, just your word. For that matter, even though the Sarine document you have linked above provides more detail, it still provides no proof - or enough detail. It shows that their score correlates (more or less) with some other variables; it does not show (in sufficient detail) what their score measures, never mind what your score measures or how it correlates to theirs.

 

Proof comes either through a serious statistical study - not just showing that "some stones" that score in the '80s look "worse" (based on which criteria? your opinion?) than "some other" stones that score in the '90s - or through disclosure. Until either of those things is forthcoming, my position will simply be that your claims are marketing, not objective measurement - nothing wrong with that, but asking for blind endorsement of someone's marketing is a bit excessive, don't you think?

 

Incidentally, it's absolutely not true that you cannot post anything from your site - what the rules say is that you cannot pester people by offering them 3 alternative diamonds every time that a poster asks a question about a diamond from someone else.

 

Gracetrump - apologies for continuing the threadjack. This will be my last post on this thread unless you have further direct questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When looking for the best cut stones, I personally limit my search to depths of 62.5% or lower (for rounds) as a basic general sorting tool, to start, in an effort to weed out stones that don't maximize both size and brilliance by my own standards.  That's not to say that a stone of 62.8% depth can't be beautiful when paired with other proportions that work for the stone, it is just not a depth I would consider for a stone with outstanding cut.

 

I think Neil's idea of working with a vendor that will provide detailed images of multiple stones for comparison and/or potentially send a few candidates to David Atlas for pre-purchase appraisal sounds like a reasonable course of action for the concern you have over cut specifications and the money you are spending.

Edited by 10X
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it will help, the GIA Cert Number is 1189024186

http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=1189024186&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

 

If it is clear from the report that the cut is unlikely to hold much promise, please let me know since I have some other options I would like to pursue.

 

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only repeat what said above: cut-wise I would probably like it; others may think that the crown is a bit steep. Diameter does not seem to suffer from either the tall crown or the girdle being a smidgen too thick (average of 50 random "Excellent" cut = 9.50 mm; this stone = 9.43 mm or about the thickness of a typical human hair).

 

Clarity on an SI2 is always a question mark; the fact that the most important inclusion is a twinning wisp is not a bad sign, but some wisps are less wispy (and thus more visible) than others. On the other hand, you'll be able to see the stone before you commit, and assessing eye-cleanness is a bit easier than assessing cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

davidlevi, perhaps you didn't see the earlier post where one responder suggested that it would be helpful if I posted additional information from the GIA report. I was merely doing so. No need for you to repeat. I understand that no matter what, I will still need to see the stone. As for the clarity, I was told by ritani that the stone is eye clean. Again, I know that seeing is believing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I don't understand your comment. You have provided more data; the data hasn't changed my opinion - either that wasn't valuable in the first place, but then why trouble asking, or the confirmation that the added information does not change the result should be valuable.

 

I have added some data too, about the impact of some cut choices on diameter and the likelihood that the stone actually is eye clean. Again, this may or may not be valuable, but it is new... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Davidlevi, please see below. This is a copy of a portion of the post from niceice. He suggested that I post the full GIA report::

 

"With that in mind, the information provided about his diamond is too limited to make an accurate assessment, I'd like to see the full proportions, a copy of the GIA diamond grading report, and the listing on Ritani or Enchanted Diamonds if possible; because it is important to take the crown height measurement into consideration, along with the crown angle; and the pavilion depth measurement into consideration, along with the pavilion angle; as well as the star and lower girdle facet length, and so on... if anybody is going to be able to get a really good idea of the potential of this stone, or any other for that matter."

 

Soooo - I posted the GIA report. I did not post it because I expected YOU to change your opinion. I posted it because niceice said this could help HIM tell me what he thought of the stone.

 

In summary, I was asked to post the GIA report and I did. End of story. :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...