Headlight's BGD recut part two

[kenny]

Congratulations on the beautiful recut.

Low weight loss is of course a reflection of the cutter's skill, but it's also a function of where the original girdle was located in the side view.
For ideal cut the girdle needs to be positioned just right, not too high or too low in the side view.
Crown and pavilion angles are related to girdle position, which is all key to sending light rays in the right directions for the best light performance.

If ideal cut dictates the original girdle needs to move a lot up or down (in the side view) you'll loose more weight - which is not the cutter's fault.
If the girdle happens to be at, or near, the ideal location in the side view you'll loose less weight

Your diamond's diameter being reduced by only 1.9% (from 8.77mm to 8.60) means the girdle happened to already be close to the ideal position in the side view.
While I love and respect Brian Gavin's work, no cutter gets credit for the part of the low weight loss that resulted from this particular happy coincidence.
I am certainly NOT poopooing Brian.
If one of my white diamonds ever needs a recut it'll likely go to Brian Gavin or Yoram at GemConcepts.
15+ years of reading PS results in my trust and admiration of these two diamond cutters.

 

[headlight]

Yes, Brian is amazing!

I have posted the correct “after” images on the other thread for that stone. Thanks for catching that and bringing to my attention.

 

[headlight]

@headlight congratulations! Impressive recut and win win for sure. Nicely done.

Thank you!

 

[headlight]

Congratulations on the beautiful recut.

If I ever need a recut it'll be Brian Gavin or Yoram at GemConcepts.

Low weight loss is of course a function of cutter's skill, but also a function of where the original girdle was located, in the side view.
For ideal cut the girdle needs to be positioned just right, not too high or too low in the side view.

If the girdle needs to move up or down a lot you'll loose more weight.
If the girdle happens to be at, or near, the ideal location you'll loose less weight.
Your diameter being reduced by only 1.9% (from 8.77mm to 8.60) means the girdle happened to already be near the ideal position.

Wow, that’s interesting- thanks for that!

 

[sledge]

Thank you for the additional details @headlight. It's always cool to hear about the journey to the final destination. Also, I appreciate you educating us on the process based on your experience.

Again, I really can't say how impressed I am with the difference. I think you did fantastic! Not only do I think it will bring you much personal joy from the pure beauty, but the emotional sentiment of completely maximizing the beauty & re-purposing a treasured family heirloom shows nothing but love, honor & respect for those lost family members. I'm sure your soul will smile each time you look at these gorgeous stones. Again, my sincerest congratulations.

Here are the before & after HCA scores.

In the spirit of disclosure, since I didn't have complete dimensions I just assumed L & W were identical (which they probably aren't, but the difference won't be significant) and I simply calculated the average of the L & W by the depth % to arrive at a depth mm. This applies to both the original cut & the re-cut. Also, on the original cut I just assumed it was "excellent" symmetry.

Original Cut:


After the Re-Cut:

 

[Sunstorm]

Your stones are truly wow, wow, wow!!! So glad you did not sell them and cannot wait to see what jewelry you design for them!

Actually the weight loss is so small and you stayed well above 2 carats, these are incredibly valuable stones to own in your personal collection. Huge congrats!

 

[headlight]

Thank you for the additional details @headlight. It's always cool to hear about the journey to the final destination. Also, I appreciate you educating us on the process based on your experience.

Again, I really can't say how impressed I am with the difference. I think you did fantastic! Not only do I think it will bring you much personal joy from the pure beauty, but the emotional sentiment of completely maximizing the beauty & re-purposing a treasured family heirloom shows nothing but love, honor & respect for those lost family members. I'm sure your soul will smile each time you look at these gorgeous stones. Again, my sincerest congratulations.

Here are the before & after HCA scores.

In the spirit of disclosure, since I didn't have complete dimensions I just assumed L & W were identical (which they probably aren't, but the difference won't be significant) and I simply calculated the average of the L & W by the depth % to arrive at a depth mm. This applies to both the original cut & the re-cut. Also, on the original cut I just assumed it was "excellent" symmetry.

Original Cut:


After the Re-Cut:

Ahh, I yielded same for final as you and did similar estimation. Please see my comments on the other thread from you post with the HCA results as I have a question on low scores and usage. Crazy to see the before HCAs! But, as I mentioned in the other thread in my most recent reply, they did sparkle just with poor visual pattern. And my former round that I traded in for my current in the avatar (which I had coincidentally also did a recut but through my jeweler, not BGD) had a much better score than these stones do on the original stats, yet did not perform anywhere near as nicely as these stones did (however my data was from an EGL Israel report that doesn’t present it as thoroughly).
Thanks for your kind words... I shared the before and after images with my mom and she had the same sentiment

 

[headlight]

Your stones are truly wow, wow, wow!!! So glad you did not sell them and cannot wait to see what jewelry you design for them!

Actually the weight loss is so small and you stayed well above 2 carats, these are incredibly valuable stones to own in your personal collection. Huge congrats!

Thank you so much! I’m going to be a bit boring as I’m going to do both as solitaires. I have a pendant with a beautiful emerald cut in a custom Beverley K halo mounting so I already have a non-soli diamond pendant and like the idea of a classic, timeless diamond solitaire pendant. For the ring, I’ve had so many setting changes over the years with the various stones I’ve traded for and I feel like I’ve been through many looks and I’m tired of throwing money into elaborate mountings. I’m loving having a high quality stone in a solitaire to make the stone the sole focus. So I guess given I already have my avatar solitaire, I will now have “big and little sister” solitaires lol!

 

[Sunstorm]

I often feel the same way and enjoy a cleaner design. After a lot of pave it can feel refreshing. Don’t ever mistake a beautiful soli for boring. For big stones I find the right solitaire or sometimes perhaps a three stone is what I enjoy the most. But for a stone like this I too would vote solitaire.

 

[headlight]

I often feel the same way and enjoy a cleaner design. After a lot of pave it can feel refreshing. Don’t ever mistake a beautiful soli for boring. For big stones I find the right solitaire or sometimes perhaps a three stone is what I enjoy the most. But for a stone like this I too would vote solitaire.

Thanks for the viewpoint!

 

[AV_]

... my 2.01 E SI2 3X with the 63% depth!!! Yes, this is very interesting, and I am curious to see how that compares with the recut stones.

I have one more reason to be intrigued: such depths allow the Transitional facet pattern to work & its slightly broader facets make me happy.

 

[headlight]

I have one more reason to be intrigued: such depths allow the Transitional facet pattern to work & its slightly broader facets make me happy.

I'll post as soon as I get them! Will still be a number of weeks... they need to go out for grading and then mounting. The pendant mounting has already been purchased but the ring mounting has yet to be ordered. I would imagine that will be handled soon so that when the stones are back from the lab they will be ready to be set.

 

[xxxxxx]

@headlight what a beautiful result. Did you have your stones insured during the recut process?

 

[headlight]

@headlight what a beautiful result. Did you have your stones insured during the recut process?

Thank you! Brian Gavin and team are owed all the credit. My stones were insured for everything but the actual cutting through the rider I had them on with my homeowners policy. We just took a leap of faith. The stones were of very high clarity so we weren’t so worried about a nasty inclusion causing a problem. All the transport of the stones were covered doubly via the carrier, i.e., FedEx. After the recuts and the mounting in their new homes (a ring and a pendant) we moved them over to jewelers mutual for the insurance coverage.
I did have a recut done a long time ago on another stone which I no longer own through a local jeweler and that stone had many inclusions which limited its recut potential - for that one I did secure insurance through jewelers mutual prior to the recut as they are the only ones who will provide that type of coverage.
I am very happy I sent my stones to Brian Gavin for these recuts vs the local jeweler I had gone through previously. I would not hesitate for even a minute to entrust Brian with my stones - they were fabulous to work with and their product is phenomenal.

 

[xxxxxx]

Thank you for elaborating on the whole process!
I always read that it isn’t possible to insure the actual recutting process. So it’s interesting to hear that it is possible with JM.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Original Cut:


After the Re-Cut:

Thanks Sledge - the result is the diamond now appears larger to the eye than it was before because the peripheral leakage has been reduced.
BTW my new Looks Like patent hard copy came in the mail on Friday