Dreamer's Old Cut Guide

[Dreamer_D]

OK, some people have said they would like me to make a thread with my thoughts on buying old cuts.

I was hikacking someone else's thread in the interest of trying to explain something to TGal, and instead of doing that I thought I would start this thread.

I am by NO means trying to suggest I am any type of real expert on old cuts. I am not trying to suggest I know anything more than any of the other old cut lovers here on PS. I simply want to share some of my own observations and things I have learned buying old cut diamonds on ebay.

I will likely just copy some of my posts from other threads here, or update this from time to time. I am not really interested in approaching this systematically. That seems too much like work And frankly, I post on PS to avoid work.

So, in no particular order, here are some thoughts. Feel free to ask questions if you like, or add your own two cents, but perhaps if someone wants to open debate about a particular issue they can start another thread so that this one is easy to read for those people who specifically were interested in my ideas. However off base they may be

 

[Dreamer_D]

In another thread someone was asking about a stone on ebay, and I was giving my opinion about it based on how I would approach buying a stone on ebay. A side discussion sort of came up where I was trying to explain how you can get a sense of how a stone might perform in person just from photos.

Here is part of the discussion copied from the other thread.

[snip]

I approach cut in oldies differently than a lot of others do -- you may or may not care about how I think about cut in these old guys. Many would disagree with my approach. But you asked So here is how I would assess and think about this diamond if I were considering buying it for myself.

Though I do think it looks vaguely similar to my stone in that one head on shot of the three stone, I don't think they look very alike all told. [snip]

It shows stark contrast patterning under the table which is more common in an older OEC than it is in a stone like mine or Dem's which don't have any stark contrasts under the table. As the attached image shows, the little triangles in between the "arrows" are quite dark and may be leaky/hazy areas that are not very active. So the arrows will light up within the center on top of a darker table area. Old cut lovers call this a "maltese cross effect". And I think this effect is why all the pics in the loose stones listing are at an angle You don't see the maltese cross effect at a tilt angle, only head on, and that's because the proportios of the stone don't reflect back stright up, they reflect back at an angle. Anyways, some like this look. I have seen a few OECs that do this and it bugged me, but others like it. I can't tell for sure the stone shows this, but I am suspicious. My measurements put the table at 58%, which is bigger than I like to see in an old cut unless the LGF are very long, much longer than they are in this diamond. It could work depending on all the other parameters and depending on your esthetic preferences.

But oldies are unique and the numbers only are suggestions, not definitive, you need to see it in person to know for sure. Worth seeing, but as I said, I am not personally jumping out of my chair just based on the hints in the pics that its a type of old cut I am not personally a wild fan of.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Maybe this will make clearer what I am saying, comparing this photo of the ebay stone to my and Demelza's diamonds to illustrate the difference, and my 7mm, which I think has a similar table performance, but a smaller table which is I think better.

So, image one is the diamond the OP was asking about. In the image the shot is face on and the light is coming from behind. notice the contrast between the 'arrows (though I doubt this stone shows true arrows in person, it is likely more flowery) and the triangular areas I identified in red in my previous post.

Images 2 and 4 show Dems and my diamonds with the light coming from behind. It is not a perfect comparison because our hands are there, but you can see how there is not a stark contrast between arrows and the areas between arrows. The whole under table area is patterned on-off-on-off and looks bright. Our stones do not show a maltests cross type effect at all. In image 4 I included my 7mm stone which is a classic OEC. The 7mm does show a bit of the malteses cross effect -- or under table leakage if you prefer -- in the areas between the "arrows" or "flower petals. I think if you look at the image you can see that, the bright petals and the slightly more hazy areas behind/between the petals.

For interest sake, images 3 and 5 are head on shots of Dems and my stones from ebay that made me stop and a) e-mail Dem and tell her to buy her stone immediately and b) make an offer on my diamond. Notice there are no over dark areas in either (ignore the obstruction on arrows in my stone, those are not dark in real life as we know), and in particular the areas *between* the arrows are bright. The contrast pattern is uniform accross the whole face, rather than one contast pattern on the outer perimeter and another under the table. I prefer the contrast pattern to be uniform accross the whole face. Other like the older look where there is a bisier pattern around the perimeter and a more blocky maltese cross like pattern under the table. I think the ebay stone may be more like the latter, but its larger table worries me. My 7mm has a 45% (ish) table.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Continuing that discussion I wanted to illustrate more about what I mean when I said there are some old cuts where the faceting pattern or type seems to be more uniform accross the while face, whereas some others have a contract between the nature of the faceting under the table and the nature of the faceting around the periphery.

I gave my diamond and Demelzas as examples of one type of diamond where you see similar faceting accross the whole face -- meaning that the facets are similar size under the table and around the periphery (excepting the arrows) and the light play is nice and even accross the face. This type of appearance seems common in stones that are leter OECs or early ideal cuts, with tables in the 50% range and lgfs in the 50%+ range and crowns and pavilions more similar to modern RBs.

You can also have these features -- even facet light play and similar sizes of facets under the table and in the periphery -- in older style of cuts too! I call these "bubbly" types because the under table area looks like bubbles. InnaR also used this terminology interestingly, though I don't think she and I have ever talked about it. She owns a lovely bubbly OEC, on the top left of the image below. Some other examples in the collage are my own, a random stone from ebay, and TGals cneter stone is a bubbly type of old cut to my eye, pictured bottom right. The comonality of these types of OECs to my own eye are the very very small tables -- think 40 to 45% -- and the very high crowns. These dudes tent to have depths in the range of 65%, and the have LGFs that are very very short, perhaps 30%, certaintly way under 50%. Although thee bubbly types look very different face up, in profile, and tend to fire over white light return compared to the other type I mentions previously, they still have those features I personally really like in an OEC: Nice even facet activation accross the while face of the stone, and similar size facets under the table and in the periphery. This latter charcteristic is I think largely because the tables are so small.

Next I will try to post some examples of stones that have a more maltests cross type of appearance, where to my eye the central under table facets behave very differently than the periphery facets, which is a distinct look optically, and in my personal opinion, tends to fall prey to "mush" , leakage, and obstruction.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Oh, and to be clear: When I say that the under table areas are similar to the peripheral areas in terms of faceting I don't mean they look identical. I mean the contrast in facet size and is not as stark as it can be in some other types of cuts. And the pattern on on-off scintillation seems to work in concert accross the face of the stone rather than the periphery doing one thing and the center doing another.

 

[TravelingGal]

Thanks for putting in the time Dreamer, very interesting read!

And that ring on the white cloth holder has been one I've adored for a long long time and probably the first one I found on ebay that I liked. I heard the seller wouldn't budge on the price for anyone and wonder if it's still for sale!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Here is a good thread about the problems you can see in a stone that is too deep, it is one I evaluated that I found on ebay:

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/old-european-cut-obstruction-and-recut-information-advice.177197/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/old-european-cut-obstruction-and-recut-information-advice.177197/[/URL]

I think the diamond in that thread shows obstruction/nail head well. In person, what I saw was a disconnect between the light play on the periphery of the stone and the light play in the center. The central facets were much much larger than the peripheral facets. And the peripheral facets shows faster scintillation than the under table facets. The central facets also tended to trun on-and-off in blocks, so only two or three of the main central facets were bright and the rest dark. My preference even in this type of old cut where the LGF are really really short and the table is approaching 50%, is for the table facets to light on and off more independently so you don;t get an overdark appearance. That diamond could be described as a really extreme example of a "maltese cross" because of how the facets light up, but it is over deep leading to the nail head/obstruction. I photographed it purposely to show the darkness. When worn it is much more like a maltese cross.

As a note, this stone was an example of where I did not listen to my gut, and it is the only ebay diamond I have had to return because the cut was poor. Attached is the ebay listing photo that made me cautious. As you can see in the image, there is a stark contrast betwen the size of the central facets and the outer facets. That's ok (though not my preferred cut type). But the under table area looks pretty dark with only thin slivers of virtual facets lit up and the pavilion mains all dark at the same time. This type of head on shot is really good for helping evaluate cut in an old cut I think, because it reveals a lot abut the diamond. I think if even two or three of the pavilion mains had been lit up in this shot it would have suggested a better looking stone, but when they are almost all dark like this it is a red flag.

Notice as well that in my photos in the thread I linked the under table area look bright and nice from an angle. That is common in some old cuts, the leakage or poorly aligned facets or maltese cross or whatever you want to call it is only evident head on.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Thanks for putting in the time Dreamer, very interesting read!

And that ring on the white cloth holder has been one I've adored for a long long time and probably the first one I found on ebay that I liked. I heard the seller wouldn't budge on the price for anyone and wonder if it's still for sale!

It is for sale and I was considering it! He was willing to take offers. There was a discrepancy he could not resolve for me though. The appraisal estimated the center stone at 1.45ct, but when I asked about the measurements he said 7.9mm. I talked to him a lot about this, and tried to tell him one of those measurements is wrong because the former would imply a spread more like 7mm but the latter a carat weight mote like 2ct, but no matter how I asked about it he did not understand what I meant He even went so far at my request as getting the stone and measuring it again with calipers (supposedly) and he insists the millimeter measure is right. But the appraiser is the best in the biz. So I thought it was too unsure to bother, especially since it was frustrating trying to communicate about my concern when he did not understand what I was patiently and clearly explaining -- he said stones are deep and that explains it, not knowing a deep stone only makes the discrepancy between the appraisers carat estimate and the millimeter spread LARGER. Anyways. It is really well cut.

 

[TravelingGal]

Thanks for putting in the time Dreamer, very interesting read!

And that ring on the white cloth holder has been one I've adored for a long long time and probably the first one I found on ebay that I liked. I heard the seller wouldn't budge on the price for anyone and wonder if it's still for sale!

It is for sale and I was considering it! He was willing to take offers. There was a discrepancy he could not resolve for me though. The appraisal estimated the center stone at 1.45ct, but when I asked about the measurements he said 7.9mm. I talked to him a lot about this, and tried to tell him one of those measurements is wrong because the former would imply a spread more like 7mm but the latter a carat weight mote like 2ct, but no matter how I asked about it he did not understand what I meant He even went so far at my request as getting the stone and measuring it again with calipers (supposedly) and he insists the millimeter measure is right. But the appraiser is the best in the biz. So I thought it was too unsure to bother, especially since it was frustrating trying to communicate about my concern when he did not understand what I was patiently and clearly explaining -- he said stones are deep and that explains it, not knowing a deep stone only makes the discrepancy between the appraisers carat estimate and the millimeter spread LARGER. Anyways. It is really well cut.

Not to mention with the setting, it would have been massive finger coverage. It was seriously the first ebay ring I ever "watched" and bookmarked. It's been awhile since I've looked to see if it was still listed!

 

[Dreamer_D]

From another thread, a post I wrote about how to buy on ebay based only on photos.

How to judge by photos... there are certain things I look for even in crappy photography. Small table. High crown. Active/bright facets accross the whole face of the stone. Some evidence of a pattern in the facets. Below are vendor photos for four of the OECs I have bought. All very terrible, each stone very well cut in reality. If you look carefully I think you can see how the table is very small, and the kite facets are large, some angles allow you to get a sense of the crown height because of the volume in the crown area, and there is evidence of brightness and light return accross most of the face in each picture (e.g., light being returned from areas accross the whole face). This is what I look for as clues and it has not steered me wrong yet in six OEC purchases like this It is perhaps more art and hunch than science.

Anyways, I avoid pancake stones, ones that look dull or dark, ones that seem to have no real differentiation of facets evident in the images. I may miss some good ones this way. It could be worth asking for more pictures on stones that don't show any of these hints. I just personally try to increase the odds because I don't like to ship back and forth. You can try instructing a vendor on how to take better photos too.

Oh, and I don't usually buy from jewelers/dealers/ I try to stick with private sellers or small antique dealers who do not specialize in diamonds. Better prices that way.

As to color, K/L is pretty high for a stone that large. Most big less tinted stones were recut it seems. You cannot trust the sellers labels. If there is an appraisal document you can have a better idea of color in my experience, but clarity is a crap shoot if the appraisal is recent. All the stones I have bought have been FILTHY, and a jeweler cannot judge clarity of a filthy stone.

If you want to get a deal, look for private seller, bad photos, and NO information about the stone beyond broad strokes ("My jeweler told me its a...").

I want to add that all of this applies when you are looking for a stone under 1.5ct. I have found over the 1.5ct mark are really hard to find, and espcially from private sellers. For larger old cuts I have bought from dealers, but estate dealers or pawn shops with an internet presence, who don;t specialize in old cuts.

 

[Laila619]

Dreamer, can you share some ebay tips on how you've found all your treasures? Like how do you search, and how do you know which will be worth pursuing vs which ones are a waste of time? Thanks!

 

[armywife13]

Dreamer, can you share some ebay tips on how you've found all your treasures? Like how do you search, and how do you know which will be worth pursuing vs which ones are a waste of time? Thanks!

I second this request. Pretty, pretty please? I have tried surching on eBay and never find any good deals.

 

[Laila619]

Dreamer, can you share some ebay tips on how you've found all your treasures? Like how do you search, and how do you know which will be worth pursuing vs which ones are a waste of time? Thanks!

I second this request. Pretty, pretty please? I have tried surching on eBay and never find any good deals.

Yes, "Dreamer's guide to hunting down deals on eBay for novices" would be perfect!

 

[TravelingGal]

Dreamer, can you share some ebay tips on how you've found all your treasures? Like how do you search, and how do you know which will be worth pursuing vs which ones are a waste of time? Thanks!

I've found that people don't seem to share the *nuances* of what they search, but share general terms like OEC (varations) old cut, euro cut, european cut, vintage, antique, etc. Periods like deco are also searched.

Some of the best finds are by less "targeted" searches that PSers would do, but slogging through listings. That takes time though.

I tend to stick "platinum" in front of a lot of my searches since that helps narrow things down. Save sellers who you find have interesting items. But it just takes diligence because the many great deals simply come from private sellers who don't post every day.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Yeaaaahhhh... If I told you how I find the goodies I would be thoroughly hated by any and all ebay hunters. Sorry, some things you gotta learn on your own I will say it takes a lot of time and creativity.

I will share some tips about how to evaluate a ring or diamond you have found in terms of pricing, and also how to negotiate pricing on non-auction buys, if you are interested?

 

[jeweln]

hey dreamer ,you should do a PhD in old cuts ! thanks for the info

 

[yssie]

Nothing useful to add except it's about time you posted this Dreamer

Some interesting observations - esp. re size & type of faceting throughout the stone. I actually think I know *exactly* what you mean with a couple of them but I'd never have thought to classify it like that! The "bubblies" are my favourites

 

[Dreamer_D]

... how do you know which will be worth pursuing vs which ones are a waste of time? Thanks!

First off, I am not a high volume ebayer nor have I been doing it very long. There are other people who are much better at it than me too, I just post a lot on PS. But it seems to me that everyone has their OWN method of evaluating the images and the listing and what catches their eye. I might like something different than ForteKitty likes, for example, and we would have different methods of searching and evaluating and even buying. For example, I know that some people get all their deals on ebay at auctions, whereas almost all of my buys have been Make Offers or BINs.

Once it catches you eye I usually get more information from the seller. I do that because I want to get a feel for them and how responsive they are. Long response delays, terse responses, not answering questions... its not someone I want to deal with if I have to return something or need some sort of post-purchase contact. I always ask for more information like measurements in millimeters (though you can't trust those; you can't trust carat weight either. You can't really trust much ). Sometimes I ask for more photos and sometimes coach them on how to take them, if its a larger purchase (over $1500 say). You have to be careful, if you ask too much you can tip them off and they will go to a jeweler and decide they want more money sometimes But for me, for larger purchases I can say I exchange many many e-mails with the seller about all sorts of things. Again, everyone differs in how they approach a seller, and you would have to develop your own style of negotiation. In my opinion, negotiation starts at first contact.

Ok, enough, maybe will post more later.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Nothing useful to add except it's about time you posted this Dreamer

Some interesting observations - esp. re size & type of faceting throughout the stone. I actually think I know *exactly* what you mean with a couple of them but I'd never have thought to classify it like that! The "bubblies" are my favourites

I only came up with that way of thinking of it when I was trying to explain to TGal what I meant, though apparently it is still clear as mud

I know with old cuts the party line is: "They are fancies and every one must be seen with your eyes and evaluated individually". That's true. But its not very usefuly advice for buying online, unless you choose to have a vendor act as your eyes. You can't see in person every single stone you ever come accross, somehow there needs to be a pre-viewing filter, unless you want wackadoo shipping costs and time and hassel. So those are the pre-viewing filters I use. They are not the same ones others would use, and likely they exclude many many beautiful diamonds. But I like Type I errors (the null is "gorgeous diamond").

I love the bubblies too, but frankly finding a really great example of either "type" that I talked about is super hard over 1ct on ebay, even harder in the 8mm size range. That's why I jumped on mine, since well cut (by my own definition) was my number one priority, even over the specific flavour.

 

[Dreamer_D]

One more old post I found:

- What tools are needed? to make an educated purchase?

If you are talking about the primary market and you are buying with the help of a trusted vendor, then all you really need are your eyes And, if it is a substantial purchase of a stone with no lab report or an EGL report (most likely) then the help of an appraiser is also warranted in my opinion, to help you determine fair market value. Appraisers are not all created equal in this area, though. I know of a few people who have been very disappointed with some appraisers with good reps on PS, when assessing old stones. My anecdotal impression is that cut quality and rarity of a certain type of cut is not always taken into account when the appraiser sets the stone's value, but it does get taken into account with askig price. Food for thought.

If you are buying on the secondary market and looking for steals, like ebay or a local estate shop... well I don't really recommend it if you are new to old cuts or new to diamonds! But if you wanted to take a stab at it, these are the tools I use:
- a 10x loupe
- digital calipers
- some diamonds of your own that are graded by a lab like GIA (preferrably something in the G-H range and something in the J-K range)
- well trained eyes for what constitutes a well cut diamonds (regardless of cut, there are some universals about a well cut stone)
- a good relationship with a local jeweler who can check out stones for you for free (test them, confirm your own impressions)
- a local appraiser who can see you and your diamond in a short time frame

As you can see, successful use of these tools really requires a level of familiarity with diamonds and cut quality, color and clarity grading, etc. You need to be somewhat of an expert I think to successfully buy on the secondary market for a good price, since success depends a lot on your own ability to evaluate a diamond. You can buy on the secondary market when you are more of a neophyte if you make sure you have a good long return period and can ship the diamond off to a reliable appraiser (see caveats in my first response though).

I really think this deserves some emphasis: Finding diamond deals on a source like ebay is risky. It requires significant expertise about diamonds and old cuts in particular. And cojones. It is not random that the people who have the most success and post about it on PS are also people who are extremely knowledgeable about diamonds. Or they are ebayers who have been buying and hunting for *years and years* and have learned how to shop on ebay with some modecum of safety. I know that the posts of "finds" makes everyone want one. It made me want one. But it takes a serious commitment of time and energy. I doubt its worth it in terms of the cost of your own labor. You need to enjoy the investment and chase as much as the end point.

 

[yssie]

Nothing useful to add except it's about time you posted this Dreamer

Some interesting observations - esp. re size & type of faceting throughout the stone. I actually think I know *exactly* what you mean with a couple of them but I'd never have thought to classify it like that! The "bubblies" are my favourites

I only came up with that way of thinking of it when I was trying to explain to TGal what I meant, though apparently it is still clear as mud

I know with old cuts the party line is: "They are fancies and every one must be seen with your eyes and evaluated individually". That's true. But its not very usefuly advice for buying online, unless you choose to have a vendor act as your eyes. You can't see in person every single stone you ever come accross, somehow there needs to be a pre-viewing filter, unless you want wackadoo shipping costs and time and hassel. So those are the pre-viewing filters I use. They are not the same ones others would use, and likely they exclude many many beautiful diamonds. But I like Type I errors (the null is "gorgeous diamond").

I love the bubblies too, but frankly finding a really great example of either "type" that I talked about is super hard over 1ct on ebay, even harder in the 8mm size range. That's why I jumped on mine, since well cut (by my own definition) was my number one priority, even over the specific flavour.

I think few would argue with you. Realistically buying new and secondhand are such different experiences...

I went through quite a few returns to get my studs. I found one I loved and wasn't as picky in looking for its mate as I could've been, and I wound up failing to reject a number of your false nulls at the end of the day none of the ones I "took a chance on despite misgivings" was a stone I'd have wanted to keep for any reason. Not one. In looking for stones for my mum's ring I didn't bother taking chances. There were still some fails - wrong colour, wrong size, not great faceting match IRL, that sort of thing - but no flat out flops. Lesson learnt!

ETA: I wouldn't sacrifice precision of cut (by my definition) for flavour either, but it sounds like you hit jackpot with yours - cut *and* type you prefer!

 

[TravelingGal]

I really think this deserves some emphasis: Finding diamond deals on a source like ebay is risky. It requires significant expertise about diamonds and old cuts in particular. And cojones. It is not random that the people who have the most success and post about it on PS are also people who are extremely knowledgeable about diamonds. Or they are ebayers who have been buying and hunting for *years and years* and have learned how to shop on ebay with some modecum of safety. I know that the posts of "finds" makes everyone want one. It made me want one. But it takes a serious commitment of time and energy. I doubt its worth it in terms of the cost of your own labor. You need to enjoy the investment and chase as much as the end point.

And luck Dreamer, don't forget about luck.

 

[TravelingGal]

Speaking of luck, Dreamer did you see the ring that Mara posted on the other thread? Since people are asking how to find a great stone like yours, I thought I'd post it. Thoughts on whether is would perform similar to yours? The vendor pics (since it's the same vendor) of both rings look similar, or am I missing something again that would show this stone as a subpar performer?

It's a 1.35, so since these cuts are harder to find in sizes over a carat, I think someone should go for it. The setting is lovely too, although it looks to be a repro since it's "antique style."

 

[TravelingGal]

You can also have these features -- even facet light play and similar sizes of facets under the table and in the periphery -- in older style of cuts too! I call these "bubbly" types because the under table area looks like bubbles. InnaR also used this terminology interestingly, though I don't think she and I have ever talked about it. She owns a lovely bubbly OEC, on the top left of the image below. Some other examples in the collage are my own, a random stone from ebay, and TGals cneter stone is a bubbly type of old cut to my eye, pictured bottom right. The comonality of these types of OECs to my own eye are the very very small tables -- think 40 to 45% -- and the very high crowns. These dudes tent to have depths in the range of 65%, and the have LGFs that are very very short, perhaps 30%, certaintly way under 50%. Although thee bubbly types look very different face up, in profile, and tend to fire over white light return compared to the other type I mentions previously, they still have those features I personally really like in an OEC: Nice even facet activation accross the while face of the stone, and similar size facets under the table and in the periphery. This latter charcteristic is I think largely because the tables are so small.

btw, I really agree with your assessment here about the small tables. If mine were bigger, the central facets would be appear longer, maybe creating that windmill look? Because the table is so small, and facets all over in general are chunky, it just has a disco ball effect. Just glitter sprinkles (the old school flat squarish ones that rumored to cut your eyeballs if they got in your eye )

 

[GemFever]

I hope you don't mind if I link this to the Antique Diamond Guide that Madelise started a little while back.

 

[yennyfire]

Dreamer, you mentioned coaching some sellers you work with on taking good photos of these types of stones. Would you mind posting what you tell them? I know that *some* of us ( ) still struggle to get good photos of our older stones. If you can coach a seller to take decent photos, surely you can teach a motivated PSer!! And, for anyone who is evaluating a stone, being able to post good photos here would certainly help the experts in their assessment. Thanks!

 

[yennyfire]

For educations sake, how would you evaluate these?

 

[hippi_pixi]

bump

i was reading though this and and would love dreamers opinions on the last 3 stones cut just to test whether I'm understanding.

my uneducated guess is that the 1.35 has too many 'off' facets under the table in that photo and doesn't have the even spread of light return? the last 2 stones posted look to have more even light return how would you rate them?

also if you were looking at these stones in person would you be looking for the same things? would you be looking for more? I'm gong to be looking at a lot of large OEC's starting in a week and so far I will eye ball them and weed out the overly shallow and overly deep. look for too much darkness under the table or peripheral facets, an even on/off display of light from the facets. what else would you look for in person?

 

[ClassyRocks]

I am so glad this thread was bumped! This is a great resource, and the pictures are yummy!

 

[missy]

Ooh, great thread Dreamer! I missed this the first time. It should be stickied so everyone can find it!

Yenny, I love the ring you posted fwiw.