GIA "excellent" -- why doesn''t it "add up?"

[Capitol Bill]

It almost goes without saying (again) that I'm disappointed with GIA's liberal use of rounding and the resulting cut grade system that is far inferior to what GIA is capable of (and has plenty of resources to do right). But flawed as it may be, we have to work with what has been handed down from on high, and we should expect that some glitches would appear (as mentioned in this thread). I'm sure GIA will soon address these early bugs, and I hold out hope that perhaps GIA will recognize the more serious weaknesses in its system and make necessary corrections in the coming months and years.

Now onto the reason for my post -- recently I've been encountering a somewhat different phenomenon with stones accompanied by the new GIA reports -- liberal grading of Polish & Symmetry. Specifically, I've been seeing GIA Ex/Ex's that have "meet points" all over the place and facet finishes that aren't exactly what I've come to expect as meeting GIA's "Excellent" standard. I've mentioned this in passing to a couple of other industry folks and they confirm that they've encountered some of the same things. I would love to hear from other vendors if they've noticed this. The first time it happened I chalked it up to a "lucky cert." But I've been seeing enough of these lately for this to be more than just an isolated anomaly. Perhaps tomorrow if I have the time, I'll post a recent example with photos. By the way, this is not some veiled attempt at GIA-bashing (heaven knows there's been more than enough of that to go around lately). I simply think this is an issue worth raising and I'm prepared to present evidence to support my claim.

Respectfully,
Bill Scherlag

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/18/2006 8:06:21 PM
Author: Mara
GIA has my stone specs listed at 56% table, 60.6% depth, 35 angle and 40.8 angle.

WF Sarin is 56%, 60.6%, 34.8 and 40.8.

So I guess it''s GIA EX? How odd that their website lists it at VG.

Your stone could be downgrade for having a girdle that is too thin, or it may be a ACA New Line that has been downgraded because GIA does that with diamonds like that.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/19/2006 11:38:30 AM
Author: Virginia

UPDATE:

This is an email I just recieved from GIA. Comments?

Dear Elizabeth,

Thank you for your inquiry concerning GIA Laboratory Diamond Grading Report # 14850411. Your email was forwarded to me for response.

I have reviewed our records and the “Excellent” Cut Grade shown on this report is incorrect. The error was the result of an incorrect calculation due to a programming issue when the report was re-issued. The error has since been corrected and the “Very Good” cut grade shown on GIA’s Report Check is the correct grade.

The diamond in question was originally graded in ‘05 and a new report with a GIA Cut Grade was re-issued in January ‘06. You may not be aware that GIA did not start issuing cut grades until January of ‘06. We have made every attempt however to accommodate our clients with reports issued prior to ’06 and early on in our re-issuing service did experience a small number of calculation issues related to measurement precision captured in ‘05. We are making every effort to identify these items in a timely manner and contact the original client when the final cut grade has been affected.

I apologize for any inconvenience this has caused you, if you will return your original report to my attention; I will send you a corrected report. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me directly.

Sincerely,

Michael Clary

And what if you choose not to return the stone and keep the better report and try to sell the stone?

And what if you took the stone back and asked for your money back? Would GIA compensate the dealer etc?

My my my.

 

[vegasjon]

After reading the reply Victoria received, I have sent an inquiry to Michael at GIA to (hopefully) determine whether I, too, have a mis-marked certificate... or whether GIA will confirm the "excellent" cut grade. I''ll post if/when I hear back.

 

[togal]

I have a question.....

If GIA didn''t issue cut grades until January ''06, then where did the "Excellent" cut grade come from? Pardon my ignorance on this one, but I''m not understanding that part.

Also, wouldn''t one have paid a premium to the vendor of a diamond graded as "Excellent" cut vs. a "Very Good Cut"? Should the vendor be contacted in such a case?

One more question....I read so many conflicting theories....some say the terms "Excellent", "Ideal", "Very Good", etc. are subjective terms.......what is "ideal" to someone, may not be "ideal" to someone else, yet at the same time, there is a lot of weight put on these ratings. Is there much visusal difference between one "Excellent" cut stone to another "Excellent" cut stone, or an "Excellent" cut stone compared to a "Very Good" cut in terms of brilliance, scintillation, sparkle or is it marginal and not worth getting hung-up on (aside from the price issue for misgraded stones)? Just trying to understand it all....

 

[Rod]

Date: 4/19/2006 4:19:56 PM
Author: Virginia

Date: 4/19/2006 3:57:01 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 4/19/2006 11:38:30 AM
Author: Virginia



UPDATE:

This is an email I just recieved from GIA. Comments?

Dear Elizabeth,

Thank you for your inquiry concerning GIA Laboratory Diamond Grading Report # 14850411. Your email was forwarded to me for response.

I have reviewed our records and the “Excellent” Cut Grade shown on this report is incorrect. The error was the result of an incorrect calculation due to a programming issue when the report was re-issued. The error has since been corrected and the “Very Good” cut grade shown on GIA’s Report Check is the correct grade.

The diamond in question was originally graded in ‘05 and a new report with a GIA Cut Grade was re-issued in January ‘06. You may not be aware that GIA did not start issuing cut grades until January of ‘06. We have made every attempt however to accommodate our clients with reports issued prior to ’06 and early on in our re-issuing service did experience a small number of calculation issues related to measurement precision captured in ‘05. We are making every effort to identify these items in a timely manner and contact the original client when the final cut grade has been affected.

I apologize for any inconvenience this has caused you, if you will return your original report to my attention; I will send you a corrected report. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me directly.

Sincerely,

Michael Clary

And what if you choose not to return the stone and keep the better report and try to sell the stone?

And what if you took the stone back and asked for your money back? Would GIA compensate the dealer etc?

My my my.

I know, what a tangled web we weave...... (GIA, that is). I dont know that I will be buying GIA again......

Thankfully I have spoken to the vendor who sold me the stone and am MORE than satisfied at what we were able to work out. (((THANK YOU JIM!))) I just have to say Jim over at James Allen is the nicest and most honest vendor I have ever worked with. He really went out of his way for me and I dont forget that kind of thing.

So, I am keeping the stone (which I love) and am not going to worry about the paper grade anymore. I do not plan to upgrade ever and will not do anything unethical with the incorrect report that I have.

I am just going to hope that GIA gets their act together and that anyone else considering a stone goes the extra step to make sure that GIA has the grade listed both on paper and in the system as the same cut grade...this was NOT the vendors fault or even the supplier. This is GIA''s fault.

*rant finished*

Good for you Virginia.......You have a FABULOUS stone and I''m glad this experience didn''t sour your love affair with it. May your pet rock bring you a lifetime of oohhs and ahhhs from people fortunate enough to get to see something so rare and beautiful!!

 

[Rod]

Date: 4/19/2006 4:20:41 PM
Author: togal
I have a question.....

If GIA didn''t issue cut grades until January ''06, then where did the ''Excellent'' cut grade come from? Pardon my ignorance on this one, but I''m not understanding that part.

Also, wouldn''t one have paid a premium to the vendor of a diamond graded as ''Excellent'' cut vs. a ''Very Good Cut''? Should the vendor be contacted in such a case?

One more question....I read so many conflicting theories....some say the terms ''Excellent'', ''Ideal'', ''Very Good'', etc. are subjective terms.......what is ''ideal'' to someone, may not be ''ideal'' to someone else, yet at the same time, there is a lot of weight put on these ratings. Is there much visusal difference between one ''Excellent'' cut stone to another ''Excellent'' cut stone, or an ''Excellent'' cut stone compared to a ''Very Good'' cut in terms of brilliance, scintillation, sparkle or is it marginal and not worth getting hung-up on (aside from the price issue for misgraded stones)? Just trying to understand it all....

All great questions and one''s that could cause one''s brain to explode. Much like the vastness of the universe make''s my pea sized brain hurt.

JMHO, but I think we''re all a little too hung up on the "perfect" dimensions and the Ideal/Excellent name on a grading report. GIA has complicated this considerably, by, unfortunately, relaxing their standards by rounding numbers. Shame on them. But the stones they grade are still great stones and whether the paper says its excellent of just very good, just doesn''t amount to a hill of beans to me.

My stone says Very Good. It''s stunning. I was in Starbucks today and a lady with a huge beautiful diamond said her ring came from Tifanny''s. It was a beautifully cut stone. But guess what, my Very Good GIA Graded diamond with a larger table outsparkled her Tifanny stone.

I simply refuse to get too caught up in the Excellent vs. Very Good debate.

 

[KristyDarling]

I just entered the dimensions on my friend''s GIA-certed "Excellent" symmetry stone and it came up on HCA as a 5.3!!! It''s a 1.5 RB, with 61% depth, 59% table, 35.5 crown ang, and 41.4 pav ang. (.4% culet) Cert date is May 19, 2005. How in tarnation did this stone receive GIA''s excellent grade??

 

[stermag]

Virginia,

Good for you. I thought your stone was marvelous... in truth, I really wish I could have found such an incredible I1 for a jump in size to 1.71ct

As far as the cut grade... just out of curiosity, does your stone fall within AGS ideal parameters? I tried to look up the AGS ideal # range, but I''m not sure if I''m looking at the new or old grading standards (I understand AGS changed a few things recently as well, no?)

If it does fall within AGS0, you could always have it sent to them, no? If something like that was really important to you... although I''m definitely not saying that it should be (important, that is).

The most important thing, as many have said, is that you love the diamond... and trust me, should your love for it ever waiver, send it over to me... I''ll give it a good home

 

[togal]

Thanks Rod and Virginia for addressing my questions. I also have a stone rated "Very Good", which I''m hopelessly in love with.

In the real word...away from this wonderful message board, it just doesn''t make any difference to me. I get great enjoyment out of my stone and think I chose a good one! I can''t get too hung up on the numbers and percentages.....especially since I don''t really understand them

(I was never good at math!)

 

[Mara]

Date: 4/19/2006 4:37:41 PM
Author: KristyDarling
I just entered the dimensions on my friend''s GIA-certed ''Excellent'' symmetry stone and it came up on HCA as a 5.3!!! It''s a 1.5 RB, with 61% depth, 59% table, 35.5 crown ang, and 41.4 pav ang. (.4% culet) Cert date is May 19, 2005. How in tarnation did this stone receive GIA''s excellent grade??

Yikes, that stone has nowhere near the numbers I''d want to buy...and it''s just even more nutty that GIA gave it an EX. Grain of salt!

 

[belle]

Date: 4/19/2006 4:46:42 PM
Author: Virginia
Buy the diamond, not the paper!

exactly. obviously gia's new system is calling some of the most beautiful diamonds in the world "very good" and calling some others 'excellent' when they are steep/deep and look smaller than they should or even leak light.

the first post in this thread helps explain some of the wonkiness that is going on:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/gia-ex-let-the-buyer-beware.41371/

 

[KristyDarling]

Ugh, this thread is leaving a bad taste in my mouth about GIA in general.

But you''re all right about the bottom line: it''s all about the stone and whether your eyes think it''s beautiful!

 

[Diam100]

Oh boy, just getting back to this thread & just read GIA''s reply. To tell you the truth, I am not surprised in the least. It reminds me of the infamous X-Files saying "Trust No One."

Maybe it''s my trained "legal eagle" eyes but whenever a consumer see''s the disclaimer (now I''m paraphrasing) on AGS or GIA - "This is not a guarantee, warranty yada yada" get to your nearest qualified appraiser. My biggest question I wanted answered - does it''s "Excellent" cut grade from GIA match the "Ideal" parameters for AGS0 cuts. Anotherwards, forget the report cut grading listed - rip into it & tell me the truth.

Unfortunately, the world of covering thy rear exists for the big boys (AGS & GIA) if it didn''t they would surely not have the legal disclaimer listed.

Virginia - I''m glad in your case the vendor worked with you but sadly that will not be the case with many consumers out there. Now maybe I''m just tired but I''m not sure if you asked for your stone to be compared to AGS Ideal standards as well as GIA. Surely, your appraiser could have told you if it overlapped with AGS cut grades or what the differences were if it didn''t. At that point you could have decided whether you loved the stone enough to go with it, discuss with the vendor before purchase on pricing concerns or pass on it altogether. All this could have been addressed before the purchase.

Vegasjon - I''m hoping you have your concerns addressed soon.

 

[Rhino]

Glad to see you got your response Virginia. Sorry if it wasn''t what you were looking for but bottom line is that you are happy and just as you exclaimed ... buy the stone, not the paper.

At first when I saw what GIA was doingwith the rounding I was concerned as well. I am a stickler for detail and to me, the more exacting the better. Once I began to communicate with the research gemologists at GIA I understood their reasoning for the rounding and when I considered real life circumstances with non contact scanning devices like the Sarin/OGI/Helium it actually makes sense. Here is why I say this.

You see ... we Sarin (and Helium when possible) every stone that comes into our lab. Being that we are aware of how certain proportion combinations react on various optical technologies we can tell if or when our own machines need a recalibration plus we also compare our results with labs that report proportion combinations like AGS and now GIA. Not only this but we send diamonds out all over the country to reputable appraisers who perform Sarin/OGI analysis and rarely are all the measurements *exactly* alike from one appraiser to the next. Modern technologies, as good as they are, are not this exacting that everyone of them on the planet is goind to report the same information when you get down to tenths of a degree. I can point to specific examples wherein I''ve found labs in error however the degree of rounding GIA has incorporated is by no means unreasonable. One Sarin may report 34.8 crown angles, one 34.76, one 34.9. Bottom line when you take a diamond with each of these crown angles taken from various scanners and round them up to 35 degrees, quite frankly there is no optical visible difference.

I realize the need to want exacting information and I am certainly for everyone purchasing a Helium scanner, but on a practical level it just does not exist on a global scale and GIA is trying to make their system and software as accessible to the trade as they possibly can. Just trying to offer a different perspective on the issue.

Regarding the steep/deep combos making GIA Ex grades ... I was perhaps one of the most skeptical people on this issue (and there are still more proportion combo''s I have not yet seen to make a call on). I don''t make judgement calls on any stone until its in my hands and in the very limited cases wherein I had a GIA steep/deep Excellent, I can tell you from experience that it was extremely bright and fiery and the leakage that existed in the stone (even under the table) was not discernable to the human eyes. It had an HCA of 3.6. The only drawback to the stone was it''s depth (62.8%) however its optics were up there and were just fine. We showed this stone to many consumers in a survey to garner their input as well and over 95% agreed to our surprise.

Kind regards,

 

[Rhino]

Hi Diam100,

I don''t think either of their proportion combos make the AGS Ideal grade. The 40.6 angle is a critical angle in both systems. Anything underneath that really has to be coupled with the proper crown angle combos which many stones are not cut to.

Peace,

 

[Rhino]

Date: 4/19/2006 4:20:41 PM
Author: togal
I have a question.....

If GIA didn''t issue cut grades until January ''06, then where did the ''Excellent'' cut grade come from? Pardon my ignorance on this one, but I''m not understanding that part.

Also, wouldn''t one have paid a premium to the vendor of a diamond graded as ''Excellent'' cut vs. a ''Very Good Cut''? Should the vendor be contacted in such a case?

One more question....I read so many conflicting theories....some say the terms ''Excellent'', ''Ideal'', ''Very Good'', etc. are subjective terms.......what is ''ideal'' to someone, may not be ''ideal'' to someone else, yet at the same time, there is a lot of weight put on these ratings. Is there much visusal difference between one ''Excellent'' cut stone to another ''Excellent'' cut stone, or an ''Excellent'' cut stone compared to a ''Very Good'' cut in terms of brilliance, scintillation, sparkle or is it marginal and not worth getting hung-up on (aside from the price issue for misgraded stones)? Just trying to understand it all....

Hi togal,

Actually in both GIA and AGS systems the top grade encompasses a variety of appearances which can vary quite notably. Brightness, Fire & Scintillation can also take on varying characteristics from an emphasis on broad flash to an emphasis on pin flash and those in between the 2.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 4/19/2006 8:56:42 PM
Author: Rhino


At first when I saw what GIA was doingwith the rounding I was concerned as well. I am a stickler for detail and to me, the more exacting the better. Once I began to communicate with the research gemologists at GIA I understood their reasoning for the rounding and when I considered real life circumstances with non contact scanning devices like the Sarin/OGI/Helium it actually makes sense. Here is why I say this.

...... I can point to specific examples wherein I''ve found labs in error however the degree of rounding GIA has incorporated is by no means unreasonable. One Sarin may report 34.8 crown angles, one 34.76, one 34.9. Bottom line when you take a diamond with each of these crown angles taken from various scanners and round them up to 35 degrees, quite frankly there is no optical visible difference.

Rhino there is no optical difference between 59% table, 40.4 pavilion 34 crown and 58% table, 40.6 pavilion and 34.5 crown?

Regarding the steep/deep combos making GIA Ex grades ... I was perhaps one of the most skeptical people on this issue Glad you said "one of" (and there are still more proportion combo''s I have not yet seen to make a call on). I don''t make judgement calls on any stone until its in my hands and in the very limited cases wherein I had a GIA steep/deep Excellent, I can tell you from experience that it was extremely bright and fiery and the leakage that existed in the stone (even under the table) was not discernable to the human eyes. It had an HCA of 3.6. The only drawback to the stone was it''s depth (62.8%) however its optics were up there and were just fine. We showed this stone to many consumers in a survey to garner their input as well and over 95% agreed to our surprise. We have still not seen your consumer survey Jonathon? You said you made video''s of it - it would be good to show it here on Pricescope

Kind regards,

 

[togal]

Rhino, thank you for the information....

It''s so great to have accessibility to experts like yourself to answer these types of questions. I learn so much everyday from this website.

 

[XChick03]

I have a somewhat related question...I have an AGS0 but when I put the numbers into the PS cut advisor, it gets "very good." So just out of curiosity, why is that?

 

[pricescope]

Date: 4/20/2006 10:48:12 AM
Author: XChick03
I have a somewhat related question...I have an AGS0 but when I put the numbers into the PS cut advisor, it gets ''very good.'' So just out of curiosity, why is that?

XChick03, there should be a reason

please post the numbers you''re entering. Is it a new AGS0 or an old one?

 

[KristyDarling]

XChick -- I also have an AGS0 (cert date summer 2004, I think) and when I plug the numbers into HCA, it gets all Very Goods and only one Excellent. I think my HCA score is around 3.2. In my case, I think it''s because my crown angle is on the large side (35.4, if memory serves) but all other numbers fall within ideal range. I believe the AGS0 ideal ranges were different back when my stone was graded. It''s all just numbers though....it sparkles like mad and that''s all I care about.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 4/19/2006 11:38:30 AM
Author: Virginia

Dear Elizabeth,

Thank you for your inquiry concerning GIA Laboratory Diamond Grading Report # 14850411. Your email was forwarded to me for response.

I have reviewed our records and the “Excellent” Cut Grade shown on this report is incorrect. The error was the result of an incorrect calculation due to a programming issue when the report was re-issued. The error has since been corrected and the “Very Good” cut grade shown on GIA’s Report Check is the correct grade.

Well, I honestly find this reply from GIA very disturbing.

Does it mean she should love the stone any less? Of course not....that's ridiculous. It still looks exactly the same as it did when she bought it.

EDITED TO CLARIFY:

HOWEVER, it does raise two issues that Virginia has satisfied but many other unsuspecting consumers may not:

1) Stones with an "excellent" grade come with a premium. In Virginia's case, she was very fortunate that she knew enough to bring this back to her vendor, and that her vendor was willing to make a price adjustment based on her fact-finding. What about all the other buyers of GIA stones who won't know better? and what if they purchase those stones from vendors who aren't as focused on doing the right thing?

2) Even though Virginia doesn't ever anticipate selling her stone, what would happen if she did wish to? It's potentially not as marketable as it was when it was an "excellent" stone. While I agree with "buy the stone, not the paper", there are those people who want "mind-perfection"...no different from "mind-clean". Those folks would bypass a VG stone, thus shrinking the potential pool of buyers.

While the very sincere apology from GIA is nice, it doesn't make people whole. That's really a concern.

 

[XChick03]

Date: 4/20/2006 1:17:15 PM
Author: Pricescope

Date: 4/20/2006 10:48:12 AM

Author: XChick03

I have a somewhat related question...I have an AGS0 but when I put the numbers into the PS cut advisor, it gets ''very good.'' So just out of curiosity, why is that?

XChick03, there should be a reason

please post the numbers you''re entering. Is it a new AGS0 or an old one?

It''s new, dated January 10, 2006.

Depth: 61.6
Table: 56.5
Crown angle: 34.9
Pavilion angle: 41.2

And in the cut advisor it gets:
Light Return: Very Good
Fire: Good
Scintillation: Good
Spread
or diameter for weight: Very Good
Total Visual Performance: 3.5 - Very Good - Worth buying if the price is right

 

[belle]

Date: 4/20/2006 1:58:05 PM
Author: XChick03

Date: 4/20/2006 1:17:15 PM
Author: Pricescope

Date: 4/20/2006 10:48:12 AM

Author: XChick03

I have a somewhat related question...I have an AGS0 but when I put the numbers into the PS cut advisor, it gets ''very good.'' So just out of curiosity, why is that?

XChick03, there should be a reason

please post the numbers you''re entering. Is it a new AGS0 or an old one?

It''s new, dated January 10, 2006.

Depth: 61.6
Table: 56.5
Crown angle: 34.9
Pavilion angle: 41.2

And in the cut advisor it gets:
Light Return: Very Good
Fire: Good
Scintillation: Good
Spread
or diameter for weight: Very Good
Total Visual Performance: 3.5 - Very Good - Worth buying if the price is right

those angles don''t make the new ags0 grade. it must have been graded using an old report.

 

[pricescope]

HCA and AGS0 are not exactly the same. HCA penalizes diamonds for the light leakage and the numbers for your stone suggest that is has some. (see Surveying Diamonds in New York - Video)

What kind of setting do you have? If it is not a bezel setting, try to block the light entering pavilion from the sides and underneath and see whether you can detect some darkness under the table...

 

[XChick03]

Not really, but I'm not exactly sure what I should be looking for either. It just looks bright and sparkly like it always does.

ETA looking closer, there is kind of a dark spot near the center. Does this mean its not an AGS0?

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 4/20/2006 2:16:11 PM
Author: Virginia

Hi Alj

While I am not happy about the way GIA is dealing with the situation there is not too much I can do about that. I am not sure if you read the entire thread but the vendor that I bought my stone from (James Allen) made me ''whole'' again financially and compensated my FF the difference (the best he could estimate) of the cost of an ''excellent'' to ''very good''. I am really very satisfied and Jim went above and beyond what I would have expected him to do. This was not an ideal situation, but it has been resolved in my mind.

Of course, I would have loved for GIA to give me a better explanation....in fact I responded to that email wanting more answers but have not recieved a reply and am not really expecting one!

Hi, Virginia:

Yes, I did read the rest of the thread - had missed your resolution when I posted my comments. I had gone back to edit them, but you beat my edit, it appears.

Yes, you got a satisfactory resolution, and I''m thrilled that you were astute enough to bring it back to JA, and that he was fair enough to make adjustments for you.

My edited comments better define my larger concern: that there will be folks who won''t know enough about it, and who will pay the premium unknowingly. Further, should they ever go to sell their stones subsequently, not only will those stones perhaps be less marketable, but their very integrity could be called into question if the online GIA results (VG) don''t match the certificate they were provided at sale (EX).

For people who don''t know the backstory about the GIA software calculation problem, all they will know is "hey, this guy is trying to pull a fast one", and it might discourage the sale of the stone. All through something that''s no fault of the original buyer.

 

[diamondlil]

I total agree, Aljdewey. All of this is very interesting. It seems to me GIA has a VERY big problem brewing here. There could potentially be a lot of diamonds out there with incorrect paper reports.

 

[Rhino]

Date: 4/20/2006 3:04:13 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 4/19/2006 8:56:42 PM
Author: Rhino


At first when I saw what GIA was doingwith the rounding I was concerned as well. I am a stickler for detail and to me, the more exacting the better. Once I began to communicate with the research gemologists at GIA I understood their reasoning for the rounding and when I considered real life circumstances with non contact scanning devices like the Sarin/OGI/Helium it actually makes sense. Here is why I say this.

...... I can point to specific examples wherein I''ve found labs in error however the degree of rounding GIA has incorporated is by no means unreasonable. One Sarin may report 34.8 crown angles, one 34.76, one 34.9. Bottom line when you take a diamond with each of these crown angles taken from various scanners and round them up to 35 degrees, quite frankly there is no optical visible difference.

Rhino there is no optical difference between 59% table, 40.4 pavilion 34 crown and 58% table, 40.6 pavilion and 34.5 crown?

Sorry if I was not clear mate. I meant to point out that if all measurements on a diamond is equal and the only differences are those minutae in the crown angles there will be no visible difference.

In the descriptions you''re giving though there would be a difference between a 59/40.4/34 and a 58/40.6/34.5.

Date: 4/20/2006 3:04:13 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

We have still not seen your consumer survey Jonathon? You said you made video''s of it - it would be good to show it here on Pricescope

Kind regards,

I have video content on the Princess cut survey I conducted last year of the low/medium/low Bscope stone next to the triple VH when I was demonstrating the inconsistency of the Bscope for AGS Ideal princess cuts in that instance (also caused me to make some changes in our Bscope tutorial). You''ll recall a lash out by the other forum which induced me to seek out such a stone for observation testing by common folk to see if they could see any differences.

The content I took of the most recent survey we forgot to turn the mic on so we didn''t have sound.

I since had to return that GIA Ex Steep/Deep but I still have a few painted stones in the inventory ready for another survey and one or two that will always be here on demand for comparisons as well as an ideal stone yet dug out. I am in the process of having a moderate steep/deep cut like around 35.4/41.2 and another around the 36/41.4 (the utter outskirts of GIA Ex grade) so I can physically see where the line is drawn with regards to face up appearance. I almost know what to expect with regards to the 35/41.2 stone but not quite sure what to expect with the 36/41.4. Gut instinct tell me pooper but I don''t want to make a judgment call until it''s physically in my hands and I am able to see it for myself. I would be happy to video any observation testing we make including the stones themselves. In fact I plan on it.

Kind regards,