Hey guys (and girls)... would like some stud input, please.

[Autumn in New England]

Even though you seem settled on prongs, I just wanted to add some thoughts about bezeling vs prong setting and old cut diamond performance, just for the record!

Your diamonds look like fairly precision cut oldies with lower halves that are not too short. They are a little similar to my own diamond in this way, though perhaps erring a little more towards OEC appearance. These characteristics of the cut -- very nice symmetry and not too short lower halves -- is likely why they are so bright and lively and also why your original stone was hard to match! These are a relatively rare breed.

Anyhoo, when bezeled I noticed that my own diamond has much more contrast -- so the darks were darker and the lights lighter -- making for lots of bold flash. Prong setting made my stone look overall brighter with more pastels and a little more subtle pattern scintillation. Both are pretty cool. I think your diamonds could handle either bezel or prong and still be very gorgeous and eye catching. Bezeling might even be a little better because of the emphasis on flash and the greater viewing distance compared to a ring.

A more classic OEC with a less precision cut would probably show a greater different in performance and would likely benefit more from the added light coming into the pavilion because of its more leaky cut -- it would add brightness.

One other thing: Did you ask Adam whether this new diamond had been recut in any way that he knows of? If it matters to you that your old cut is truly old it could be worth asking. If you don't care, it might also just be a fun tidbit to know.

This post is immensely informative and helpful; thank you!! So I know my original stone is in fact a true antique, because it's been in my family since 1942. Adam said the new one has not been recut. But I wonder how we'd know for sure. Perhaps just retracing its lab reports? This guy's probably been certified a half dozen times at least, and I just had it done again (because I wanted it inscribed like my other stone - I'm OCD - lol).

 

[Dreamer_D]

This post is immensely informative and helpful; thank you!! So I know my original stone is in fact a true antique, because it's been in my family since 1942. Adam said the new one has not been recut. But I wonder how we'd know for sure. Perhaps just retracing its lab reports? This guy's probably been certified a half dozen times at least, and I just had it done again (because I wanted it inscribed like my other stone - I'm OCD - lol).

No way to know for sure something hasn’t been recut I guess, and most of these guys don’t have lab reports until they fall into the suppliers hands for resale. So I can’t see tracing those back being much use (though if there are a few it might now up). There are some telltale signs like a bruted girdle, which is more typical of a true old cut whereas if it has been substantially tweaked they would often facet the girdle. I get a little suspicious if the polish and symmetry are too perfect. But I haven’t been keeping track of the Diamond industry the last few years and where things are for old cuts. About 7-10 years ago when old cuts were really taking off in popularity there were a lot of cases where people sent oldies off for a “polish” that was actually a full tweak of the cut, which I always hated. And then I saw an awful lot of really perfectly cut oldies show up that were being presented as true old cuts that frankly seemed too good to be true to my eye.

I know you come from CS where a recut likely doesn’t mean much since other characteristics of the gem establish value. But for me, with old cuts, the value is largely in the antiquity of the cut so I want to see those telltale signs like a bruted girdle, less than ideal polish and symmetry, especially in this flavour of old cut that is being recreated so much these days.

If you can post a very clear macro shot looking directly into the face of the stone I can maybe tell you more about the age and cut style by looking at the facet patterning.

 

[Cerulean]

Even though you seem settled on prongs, I just wanted to add some thoughts about bezeling vs prong setting and old cut diamond performance, just for the record!

Your diamonds look like fairly precision cut oldies with lower halves that are not too short. They are a little similar to my own diamond in this way, though perhaps erring a little more towards OEC appearance. These characteristics of the cut -- very nice symmetry and not too short lower halves -- is likely why they are so bright and lively and also why your original stone was hard to match! These are a relatively rare breed.

Anyhoo, when bezeled I noticed that my own diamond has much more contrast -- so the darks were darker and the lights lighter -- making for lots of bold flash. Prong setting made my stone look overall brighter with more pastels and a little more subtle pattern scintillation. Both are pretty cool. I think your diamonds could handle either bezel or prong and still be very gorgeous and eye catching. Bezeling might even be a little better because of the emphasis on flash and the greater viewing distance compared to a ring.

A more classic OEC with a less precision cut would probably show a greater different in performance and would likely benefit more from the added light coming into the pavilion because of its more leaky cut -- it would add brightness.

One other thing: Did you ask Adam whether this new diamond had been recut in any way that he knows of? If it matters to you that your old cut is truly old it could be worth asking. If you don't care, it might also just be a fun tidbit to know.

This is a great post. Anecdotally I’ve experienced this first hand with both my former OEC and current OMC

I took comparison shots in another thread of my OEC at some point, but can’t find it now — EDIT FOUND!

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/bezel-or-prong-setting-for-old-cuts.265046/post-4942082

in summary I feel like prongs = glowy brightness and bezel = contrasty pattern

I like both for different reasons, so it depends on what you’re after and your stones feel like they’d well suited to either option!

 

[Dreamer_D]

This is a great post. Anecdotally I’ve experienced this first hand with both my former OEC and current OMC

I took comparison shots in another thread of my OEC at some point, but can’t find it now — EDIT FOUND!

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/bezel-or-prong-setting-for-old-cuts.265046/post-4942082

in summary I feel like prongs = glowy brightness and bezel = contrasty pattern

I like both for different reasons, so it depends on what you’re after and your stones feel like they’d well suited to either option!

Those photos are really illustrative of what we have been talking about! Thanks for sharing!

I can’t quite make out the facet pattern on your center stone, but it’s an interesting mix with a slightly larger table but still very deep. The former was more common in newer cuts and the latter in older cuts. Maybe a later OEC but not quite in the transitional era. Post 1900 but maybe pre 1920?? Obviously can’t say for sure. For comparison, my stone also has a table in that range but it is sub-55% depth (don’t know for sure, no report), which places it later in the American/Early ideal cut range.

Also noted on the lab report the Good polish and symmetry and the really uneven girdle with ext thick parts, which are common is true old cuts. What a lovely treasure!!

 

[Autumn in New England]

I know you come from CS where a recut likely doesn’t mean much since other characteristics of the gem establish value. But for me, with old cuts, the value is largely in the antiquity of the cut so I want to see those telltale signs like a bruted girdle, less than ideal polish and symmetry, especially in this flavour of old cut that is being recreated so much these days.

So true... recuts in the CS world are usually welcomed if they're going to improve the stone's performance, even if you lose quite a bit of weight. But it would be a deal-breaker if I knew for certain this stone was recut (for the reasons you mentioned). It does have a bruted girdle, and that's about as far as my diamond knowledge extends. lol A couple of other things... the new one has a smaller culet ("slightly large" compared to "large") and somewhat less chunky facets that my original one. Not sure if that is indicative of anything. I will try to take better shots of them. Thank you again for your input!!

ETA: Both stones have small tables... 48% (old) and 49% (new). Again, not sure if that confirms or excludes anything!

 

[Autumn in New England]

This is a great post. Anecdotally I’ve experienced this first hand with both my former OEC and current OMC

I took comparison shots in another thread of my OEC at some point, but can’t find it now — EDIT FOUND!

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/bezel-or-prong-setting-for-old-cuts.265046/post-4942082

in summary I feel like prongs = glowy brightness and bezel = contrasty pattern

I like both for different reasons, so it depends on what you’re after and your stones feel like they’d well suited to either option!

Those outdoor shots of your bezeled 3-stone ring could definitely sway me... that is a stunner!!

 

[Dreamer_D]

No red flags and you will never find exactly identical old cuts. There were no standards really — I mean there were loose conventions and traditions but every cutter had their own ways. I think the two you have are an excellent match!! And no red flags in what you mention so you can probably be as safe as anyone could be in assuming it’s a true old cut

 

[heididdl]

Very helpful... thank you! Your studs are beautiful!!

Appreciate that

 

[Dreamer_D]

@Autumn in New England did you ever share these finished studs anywhere?? I tried to find pictures and couldn't, even though I am a very seasoned PS stalker

 

[Autumn in New England]

@Autumn in New England did you ever share these finished studs anywhere?? I tried to find pictures and couldn't, even though I am a very seasoned PS stalker

How lovely you remember this project! Yes!! I will have to take pix and update the post.

 

[Dreamer_D]

How lovely you remember this project! Yes!! I will have to take pix and update the post.

Well actually... lol... I didn't remember at all! I am digging through older threads about matching OECs and your thread came up. And then I started reading it thinking "wow what a cool project I wish I had been there when she was posting about it!" and then I saw that I had in fact participated quite a bit in this thread Story of my life these days, my memory is swiss cheese. Anyway, I really want to know how it ended!

 

[Autumn in New England]

Well actually... lol... I didn't remember at all! I am digging through older threads about matching OECs and your thread came up. And then I started reading it thinking "wow what a cool project I wish I had been there when she was posting about it!" and then I saw that I had in fact participated quite a bit in this thread Story of my life these days, my memory is swiss cheese. Anyway, I really want to know how it ended!

It took me long enough to update this project! Here they are... Adam at OWD did a wonderful job. I'd already had one stone, and insisted a different one he had would be its match. I was wrong, of course, and the one he suggested would be an identical twin was in fact. That's what I get for thinking any colored gem knowledge I have could translate into diamond buying. Anyway, they're 2.52ctw. OEC's, H, VS1 set in platinum.

Here's the CAD:



And here they are:

 

[Autumn in New England]

I love the little smiley face in the box.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Gorgeous! Of course we want more pictures. We are a gaping black hole that way!

Curious about what you thought would be a perfect match vs what actually was. Where had your colored gem knowledge led you vs where should diamond knowledge have sent you?

 

[Autumn in New England]

Gorgeous! Of course we want more pictures. We are a gaping black hole that way!

Curious about what you thought would be a perfect match vs what actually was. Where had your colored gem knowledge led you vs where should diamond knowledge have sent you?

Basically, I just think when an expert like Adam tells you something, you should listen. I was sort of going by sight, like you do with CS. But with diamonds, you obviously need to focus on the numbers. And in that respect, I am a novice. So Adam's choice was not only a match on paper, but it ended up being an optical match as well. The only way I can tell them apart is that my original stone has a slightly larger culet (they're also both inscribed). Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Basically, I just think when an expert like Adam tells you something, you should listen. I was sort of going by sight, like you do with CS. But with diamonds, you obviously need to focus on the numbers. And in that respect, I am a novice. So Adam's choice was not only a match on paper, but it ended up being an optical match as well. The only way I can tell them apart is that my original stone has a slightly larger culet (they're also both inscribed). Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share!

I think with more expertise one can learn the "match" diamonds based on just pictures as well, but you do need to know what details to attend to. And having the numbers handy is helpful for honing in on those features.