Photographic Proof, AGS NOT EQUAL to H&A

[WinkHPD]

I have been taking pictues and putting them on my sight all day. Here is a beautiful AGS 0/0/0 cut grade stone that does NOT quite make it as a Hearts and Arrows cut, it comes so close, yet is so far.

CA34.2
PA 41.3
T 54%
D 61.8

Bright and beautiful, and many would call it H&A, but I think most here would not...

Wink

 

[JohnQuixote]

Not to be greedy... But do you have the pavilion image through H&A viewer?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Wink about 1/2 the H&A''s I see get rejected for leakage with the ideal-scope.

 

[JohnQuixote]

You need a better supplier, Garry

 

[JohnQuixote]

On a serious note I wish we could agree on a standardized grading system for diamonds people are calling "H&A." As Garry alluded, the label "H&A" does not necessarily guarantee best quality... There are examples of shoddy patterning as well as stones that leak light which are sold as "H&A"

In a scutinizing world a TRUE "H&A" grade would be reserved for diamonds with a combination of true patterning and proven major (and minor) facet proportions that assure highest performance all-around.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 2/20/2005 9:48

4 PM
Author: JohnQuixote
Not to be greedy... But do you have the pavilion image through H&A viewer?

No. I have never been able to figure out how to get those to come out well.

Sorry.

Wink

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

You should check out our rapid photo system Wink - it will not do H&A''s yet because that is not our priority, but it will in time.

John I see plenty of very nice patterened H&A''s that leak - usually around +35 and +41 pavilion.
Typically 35.4 and 41.1-41.2 with tables in the 55-56% range

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 2/20/2005 10

1:57 PM
Author: JohnQuixote
On a serious note... I wish we could agree on a standardized grading system for true patterning within proven proportions for H&A that would assure people of the highest caliber of cut when using that term.

John,

I fear that will never happen. Just as it has taken the trade MANY years to agree on what is "ideal" cut, now you have a plethora of people calling stones worse than what I just presented as H&A. Heck, AGS is ready to announce their new princess cutting grade system, and many in the trade are trying to stop them from doing it since things are "just fine" the way they are.

I still have to return stones to vendors that I have quizzed two to three times, "ARE you SURE that this is H&A?"

"Of course, it is AGS tripple 0 cut. "

"I understand, but is it also H&A?"

"What, are you deaf, I just said it was AGS tripple 0 cut."

"Okay, but if it is NOT H&A, I am not paying your postage and I will send it postage COD collect back to you".

"Listen, the stone is AGS0, it is H&A."

Eight times out of ten it is NOT H&A. And these are people in the trade. Now you want standards? HA!

I would love to see them though!

Here is another almost H&A, this one is an AGS2, very good polish is the deal breaker, then "only" excellent symmetry with Ideal proportions. It was sold to me as an H&A, but it was priced well enough that I kept it anyway...

Wink

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 2/20/2005 10:16:36 PM
Author: Wink

I fear that will never happen. Just as it has taken the trade MANY years to agree on what is ''ideal'' cut, now you have a plethora of people calling stones worse than what I just presented as H&A. Heck, AGS is ready to announce their new princess cutting grade system, and many in the trade are trying to stop them from doing it since things are ''just fine'' the way they are.

I still have to return stones to vendors that I have quizzed two to three times, ''ARE you SURE that this is H&A?''
''Of course, it is AGS tripple 0 cut. ''
''I understand, but is it also H&A?''
''What, are you deaf, I just said it was AGS tripple 0 cut.''
''Okay, but if it is NOT H&A, I am not paying your postage and I will send it postage COD collect back to you''.
''Listen, the stone is AGS0, it is H&A.''
Eight times out of ten it is NOT H&A. And these are people in the trade. Now you want standards? HA!

I would love to see them though!

Here is another almost H&A, this one is an AGS2, very good polish is the deal breaker, then ''only'' excellent symmetry with Ideal proportions. It was sold to me as an H&A, but it was priced well enough that I kept it anyway...

Wink

Dreamers can dream, Wink.

Actually the fact that we can discuss this publicly – the very presence of a place like Pricescope - helps define standards for consumers and vendors who are going to the "nth" degree to investigate what levels of standards actually exist. Take yourself for example... It would be much easier for you to knuckle under and just sell "H&A" to the public as a scheme rather than committing yourself to high standards of cut precision and light return.

Also, I submit that the appraisers who frequent PS may have a different idea of what true H&A patterning is than their peers who do not thanks to discussions here (and live interaction with cutters like Brian and Paul).

This is why jewelers like you and others who don’t bend to diluted standards are so valuable. In time I hope the standards we all promote will be promulgated and spread. Of course, we may not catch up to the amount of misinformation that is going out for some time – but I have faith in this community’s continued growth and in our collective ability to promote “TRUE” patterning and great cut - of all types, not just H&A - with more authority and confidence as we move into the future.

As an example… Do you think anyone coming to PriceScope who is considering a poorly cut asscher will ever receive a blessing with Strmrdr around?

The results of our constant education on the different levels of quality in cut will be years in the making. Just think – several years ago most people did not know what an IdealScope image was. In several years perhaps regulars here will be able to instantly assess true, near-true or non-true patterning with the confidence they do an IS image (many already can).

Obviously, the H&A club is a niche group – but it should not stop us from recognizing their voices and collective desire to learn more about the particulars.

As for the standards you would love to see - Stay tuned.

 

[WinkHPD]

Thank you, I feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I mean that, I know it looks flippant in print, but that was a very nice commentary and I greatly appreciate your comments.

One thing we must not forget in the commentary that these stones are not quite H&A is that they are still incredibly beautiful, much more than the average diamond, it is just that they can not claim membership in the H&A club. I will be very proud to have sold both of them, and their new owners will be ecstatic with their beauty. What makes me cranky is that some will try to pass them off as better than they are, even though they are incredible just as they are.

Gary, I have looked at your system, but I can not justify the investment in it at this time.

I am ready and willing to listen to either of you tell me how to get the hearts picture, I have had the devil''s own time trying to take those...

Wink

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 2/20/2005 10:13:46 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
You should check out our rapid photo system Wink - it will not do H&A''s yet because that is not our priority, but it will in time.

John I see plenty of very nice patterened H&A''s that leak - usually around +35 and +41 pavilion.

Typically 35.4 and 41.1-41.2 with tables in the 55-56% range

Garry - Agree. Getting near the outer limits of current "ideal" cut is dangerous for any round... Well illustrated in your NGZ comments.

Haven''t you observed that some non-ideal H&A are "saved" a bit with good patterning? (I personally still would not consider them best quality unless falling into a proven range, limited leakage etc).

I hate the promotion of these kinds of stones under the same "label" as the best performing H&As. Honestly, if you''re going to the trouble of truly pristine patterning, why not go the distance and lock in proven sets of proportions, even at the expense of a bit of weight?

Don''t bother - I know the answer.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 2/20/2005 10:54

0 PM
Author: Wink
Thank you, I feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I mean that, I know it looks flippant in print, but that was a very nice commentary and I greatly appreciate your comments.

Thanks, Wink. Coming from you - truly one of the good guys in the bid'ness - I appreciate it.

Honestly, I think we need more of the esprit de corps which promotes those kind of feelings. I'm not sitting here at 10PM with my laptop motivated by a desire to put my nose to the grindstone... I'm here much more from a sense of promotion of something I believe in. I could soapbox long and hard here, but I'll just chalk the broad outlines of "I believe very strongly in our potential to educate and help others on this complex subject" and leave it at that for tonight.

One thing we must not forget in the commentary that these stones are not quite H&A is that they are still incredibly beautiful, much more than the average diamond, it is just that they can not claim membership in the H&A club. I will be very proud to have sold both of them, and their new owners will be ecstatic with their beauty. What makes me cranky is that some will try to pass them off as better than they are, even though they are incredible just as they are.

True, and this is why I do not enter non-H&A threads to suggest that someone investigate H&A. It is a personal choice, just as eye-clean versus VS or VVS is. That said, Wink, you should come to tea with Brian/me and Rhino some time and get involved in discussions of minor facet construction within true patterning at proven proportions - and the nuances we're observing in character of beauty as a result of an exacting level of precision in cut. Josh Rioux is bringing the crumpets next time I think. Strm brings the fine china

 

[strmrdr]

lol will dixie cups do?

Interesting thread.

"Do you think anyone coming to PriceScope who is considering a poorly cut asscher will ever receive a blessing with Strmrdr around?"
Not if I can help it.
I look forward to the day when it will be easy to find a well cut S.E./asscher and not have to weed thru a bunch of garbage.


I think the message is getting across about true h&a patterning.
Today pricescope tomorrow the world.

 

[niceice]

We stopped labeling diamonds as "H&A" quite some time ago because we refuse to participate in the bandwagon marketing approach that so many dealers are participating in... So many dealers have no idea what constitutes a true Hearts & Arrows diamond but they all seem to have them... The public has been duped into thinking that any sort of pattern of hearts and arrows means that the diamond is "Hearts & Arrows" when those patterns are merely reflections of the bezel and pavilion main facets. People ask us all the time why we don''t market our diamonds as "H&A" on our listing in the cut column of our inventory lists... This is because we haven''t seen what we consider to be Hearts & Arrows for quite some time and this is not to say that we haven''t seen the production of other dealers recently, we have... It''s a difference of opinion and we''re going to leave it at that... We buy and sell diamonds based upon their optical beauty and internal characteristics, we realize that the presence of a pattern is attractive to some consumers however we do not consider it to be a defining factor during our selection process because our focus is on light return, not the pattern seen through a Gems Fantasy Scope. Of course, most of our diamonds exhibit decent patterns simply because as we stated previously, it is a natural result of the facet structure of a round brilliant cut diamond.

 

[Mara]

The first stone you posted is beautiful Wink, but my question is this...

Smaller table, slightly deep depth in correlation. What is the diameter average of this stone and is it less than say a H&A superideal with great angles and a table of 56% and a depth of 60.8%?

My big pet peeve with stones like this is that they may be lovely, H&A or whatever you will call them, that's not really important to me...what is really important to me is how the stone faces up and does it look the size it should. It would be hard for me to pay for the carat weight if the diameter was not corresponding if I could get another stone for the same price that faced up bigger. I am all about cut and size that is! If the stone WAS priced accordingly as you note and visibly cheaper than the superideal stone, then that would be taken into consideration.

Decent arrows are nice too.

On a similar topic, my WF ES stone looks like a H&A to my untrained eye but obviously it was not good enough for Brian to label it one. However, that definitely doesn't diminish any of the pleasure I get when I see that seemingly-perfect arrow shot in the right lighting. So whether it's labeled or not...to me the stone is pretty much my version of a nice H&A...in fact on par with what I have seen other vendors peddle from time to time--if that is *truly* H&A. Semantics!

 

[valeria101]

Garry & All,

there are some examples of "leaky" rounds with persuasive arrows pattern on top (no harts)... and quite a few hints that H&A NOT= "top brilliance" after all.

In theory, what range of proportions does yield the H&A pattern after all ?

If this is not determined already, it may be allot to ask for. Say, one GA example really out of the beaten H&A track (but still possible) would do.

 

[diamondlil]

Date: 2/20/2005 10:16:36 PM
Author: Wink


John,

I fear that will never happen. Just as it has taken the trade MANY years to agree on what is ''ideal'' cut, now you have a plethora of people calling stones worse than what I just presented as H&A. Heck, AGS is ready to announce their new princess cutting grade system, and many in the trade are trying to stop them from doing it since things are ''just fine'' the way they are.

I still have to return stones to vendors that I have quizzed two to three times, ''ARE you SURE that this is H&A?''

''Of course, it is AGS tripple 0 cut. ''

''I understand, but is it also H&A?''

''What, are you deaf, I just said it was AGS tripple 0 cut.''

''Okay, but if it is NOT H&A, I am not paying your postage and I will send it postage COD collect back to you''.

''Listen, the stone is AGS0, it is H&A.''

Eight times out of ten it is NOT H&A. And these are people in the trade. Now you want standards? HA!

I would love to see them though!

Here is another almost H&A, this one is an AGS2, very good polish is the deal breaker, then ''only'' excellent symmetry with Ideal proportions. It was sold to me as an H&A, but it was priced well enough that I kept it anyway...

Wink

Wink,
I had to laugh at this dialogue above. I spent a day at a gem show this past Friday and literally had the same conversation with multiple diamond dealers. It will never cease to amaze me what these vendors are telling their customer. I''ve come to realize that they truly don''t know any better.

Gary,
As usual, I took my handy-dandy IS with me. The reactions I would get a year ago when I used it were a bit stand-off-ish, but I think things are coming around. It''s the first time any of them agreed it was an useful tool. But since the majority of the stones being sold at these shows are far from AGS0 or H&A, I still get some annoyed looks when a bystander asks, "hey, can I borrow that?"

DiamondLil

 

[WinkHPD]

RE: True, and this is why I do not enter non-H&A threads to suggest that someone investigate H&A. It is a personal choice, just as eye-clean versus VS or VVS is. That said, Wink, you should come to tea with Brian/me and Rhino some time and get involved in discussions of minor facet construction within true patterning at proven proportions - and the nuances we''re observing in character of beauty as a result of an exacting level of precision in cut. Josh Rioux is bringing the crumpets next time I think. Strm brings the fine china
------------------------------------------------
When and where? From your comments about 10PM I assume you are on the East Coast somewhere as it was about 8 or nine as I wrote my post. I know Jonathon is in New York. It would be a long way to come for tea, but if you and Jon would teach me how to take better pictures it could be worth it.

I finally got to leave the office at a little after 9 last night, Resa (my lovely wife) was coming home at 9:50 and I needed to run home and get a bite before I went to pick her up. (Wow, I just realized how small Boise is, I can go accross town, get food, then get to the airport, all in forty minutes.) Fortunately I checked in with a flight tracking website and found out her plane was delayed until 10:40 so I got the house cleaned up a little before I left and put some bread in the machine for breakfast.

I would love to meet both Josh and Storm Rider too. I have actually talked with both of them at one time or another, at least I think I have talked with Josh, and I know I have with Storm as I was totally shocked when he called me one day. I know he likes only to email, so I was doubly pleased to hear from him...

As for the subject, crafting of the minor facets, it will be WAY over my head, but not by the time that I leave. Education is the key to so many things, and this is an area where nearly all of us fall short. Now if I could get Paul Antwerp in the room with you while I sat on the wall and listened, then I could really learn from listening to people who knew what they were talking about have a discussion. Heck, as long as I am dreaming, let''s get Gary Holloway there too.

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

RE: Smaller table, slightly deep depth in correlation. What is the diameter average of this stone and is it less than say a H&A superideal with great angles and a table of 56% and a depth of 60.8%?
------------------------
I am not at the office yet and don''t know the answer to your question as to the average girdle diameter, but I would bet that although it might be a tiny bit smaller (my poor deductive logic would suggest that it is, but you know how much trouble deductive logic can get you into) I don''t know that you would be able to see the difference size wise between this and another ideal cut of the same weight with only a 1% difference in total depth. I think SIDE BY SIDE that you would see a fair bit of difference in the light return, especially at close range as the stronger on off pattern of the more contrasting H&A pattern would make the true H&A dance more than this near H&A. If you really wanted to see a difference you could put an EightStar next to it.

The problem I have with both of these stones that I have shown, and they are both VERY beautiful, is that they don''t have the strong contrast to give you the pop pop pop of a truly magnificent cut. As Garry Holloway has so correctly pointed out so often, it is the contrast that makes the magic. A true H&A has more contrast than either of the two stones shown above. So while the stones above can sing in the chior, they will never be gifted soloists.

Wink

 

[JohnQuixote]

Wink – No worries! Our tea and crumpet sessions are metaphoric… Meetings are as-you-can and done via threads here, on yahoo, through email and PMs. Join on in (do you yahoo?). Strm and Josh and Jon are, I am sure you know, not only smart but a lot of fun. As for pictures, PM and we can discuss. I will go ahead and put my endorsement of Garry’s tray system up-front here, but would enjoy a discussion of different strategies.

Minor facets: We are all working to explore and evolve - this is where people like Paul and Brian (in the trenches) are key in crafting beauty in physical terms, while people like Sergey and Garry work with technology to assess and virtually duplicate real world conditions. Combined efforts by dedicated cutters and scientists will result in evolution of new cuts and better predicting/modeling of existing cuts. The exciting part is that it’s all still very open to exploration.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Leonid and I have discussed a pricescope convention.
Anyone interested?

John the minor facet indexing / painting / digging etc experimentation in India is mind blowing.
Almost every stone they make has a painted or dug out girdle done for the right reasons.

John they are experimenting on thousands of stones a day, and I am pleased to be a part of it since some of my conversations last year led to these new developments.
Yes Lil and Wink - the crusade is gathering pace.

Unlike Brian, Paul and others, my goal is to bring more sparkle to the regular little John buying a 1/3rd ct engagement ring in the Maul, because that is where there is more to be gained. I am pleased to say it is really happening. I am seeing 1/3rd's TLB's (trade for orrible brownish off white) that sell for a few hundred dollars a carat cut to exceptional approaching 8* standards.

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Can i sit gooseberry on that Tea convo John

Thought it was agreed a while ago.. that

It can be AGS000 without being prefect H&A...
It can be a H&A without it having perfect light return.
a None H&A can be very sparkly...
a AGS000 H&A can ALSO be very sparkly.
H&A perfection can mean something to certain ppl after the presision in the cut.

and i could go on... but...

So long as we get Joey in the street to recognise the importance of cut (as in the proportions of the stone - rather than just ''i want round/square/pear/oval/etc.'') then things will start to improve.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

John the minor facet indexing / painting / digging etc experimentation in India is mind blowing.
We are going to try to get some of these guys to put their B2B sites up inside Pricescope for vendors to be able to buy direct instead of getting the goods second hand from Antwerp as russian cut stones (sorry Paul, but you know how many cutters there are in Belguim, and how many diamond labelled ''Belgian'').

Garry, sometimes I cannot help thinking that you are living on another planet, not on another continent.

I luckily know your personal goals and your way of thinking, and in that sense, I understand what you are saying in this over-generalised reaction. Unfortunately, I also know that I am one of the very few that understand this, and even I cannot follow the connection to the rest of this thread.

Live long,

 

[pricescope]

Date: 2/21/2005 1:10:59 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Leonid and I have discussed a pricescope convention.
Anyone interested?

Translation: Garry''s in India where about 80% of the world diamonds are cut. Some of them are as good as the top cut diamonds in the world. He''s checking whether it has a merit to let those diamonds to be accessible directly.

Another thing we''re brainstorming whether it can be interesting to organize an internet diamond conference, which unlike usual trade conference should be opened to consumers.

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Tell you what... hold it in the UK... preferably in Manchester... better still - Bacup

 

[canuk-gal]

Date: 2/21/2005 3:24:36 PM
Author: Pricescope

Date: 2/21/2005 1:10:59 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Leonid and I have discussed a pricescope convention.
Anyone interested?

Another thing we''re brainstorming whether it can be interesting to organize an internet diamond conference, which unlike usual trade conference should be opened to consumers.

HI:

Virtual or F2F (face to face) convention?

cheers--Sharon

 

[Rhino]

I can sympathize with your pains Wink. We''ve called in many stones listed on the wholesale search engines as H&A''s only to be sorely disappointed as well.

Excellent thread btw. Good to see all the regs comin out.

Sir John,

Yes ... there should absolutely be H&A standards however I would certainly not limit the minor facets to any one standard. I have not shared this in a bit but my personal tastes have evolved over time regardingh what standards I like in H&A''s.

1. Firstly the diamond has to fall within very cherry dimensions on the main facets.
2. In direct light conditions I prefer H&A''s of the longer star/lower girdle type (not too long mind you). Plainly, they give off more fire and scintillation. Lower girdles in the 77-80% length range combined with stars in the upper 50''s mid 60''s. Upper girdle angles anywhere between 36-39 degrees for light return or 40-43 degrees for contrast.
3. In diffuse light conditions I prefer H&A''s of the shorter star/lower girdle combo. 75-76% lower girdle length with shorter stars. Again ... as long as the upper girdles don''t exceed 43 or 44 degrees. This produces a slightly bolder arrow which stands out more in those light conditions providing points of contrast.

Regarding minor facets & H&A''s. There is only one minor facet metric that can disrupt the H&A phenomena and those are the lower girdles. Pull them too long (greater than 80% length) and the clefts in the hearts become too noticeable. If they fall shorter than 75% the seperation between the Hearts and the cleft beneath them is not discernible (making for one big white pointed blotch on the bottom). While those are factors that can disrupt the H&A pattern, you can still maintain *perfect* optical symmetry but just not with a pattern that is recognizable by most. In our lab we have H&A''s that cover just about the entire spectrum. There are people who do like very long lower girdles (very skinny arrows) as they are generally very scintillating stones with many smaller flashes while the opposite end of the spectrum results in less scintillation but broader flashes of light. The best balances generally fall in between of course.

 

[WinkHPD]

Mara, to continue my answer from this morning.

RE: The first stone you posted is beautiful Wink, but my question is this...
Smaller table, slightly deep depth in correlation. What is the diameter average of this stone and is it less than say a H&A superideal with great angles and a table of 56% and a depth of 60.8%?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don''t have anything with the exact specifications that you list, but here are the two stones on either side of the ,71 that I listed. Both of these stones are indeed H&A ideal cuts, one with GIA papers and the other two with AGS 0/0/0 cut grades.

RB 0.70 G SI2 GIA 61.8 56 Medium, Faceted None Excellent Excellent Negligible 5.71 - 5.75 x 3.54
RB 0.71 D SI1 AGS 61.8 54 0/0/0 0.7 to 1.5% None Excellent Ideal Ideal 5.74 - 5.80 x 3.57
RB 0.73 I SI1 AGS 62.1 56 0/0/0 Thin to Medium, Faceted None Ideal Ideal 5.76 - 5.80 x 3.59

As you can see the .71 ideal cut but not H&A is just where you would expect it to be diameter wise. I would not have expected there to be a big descrepancy dealing with one ideal cut to another.

Wink

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Date: 2/21/2005 4:54:10 PM
Author: Rhino
Yes ... there should absolutely be H&A standards however I would certainly not limit the minor facets to any one standard. I have not shared this in a bit but my personal tastes have evolved over time regardingh what standards I like in H&A''s.


1. Firstly the diamond has to fall within very cherry dimensions on the main facets.

2. In direct light conditions I prefer H&A''s of the longer star/lower girdle type (not too long mind you). Plainly, they give off more fire and scintillation. Lower girdles in the 77-80% length range combined with stars in the upper 50''s mid 60''s. Upper girdle angles anywhere between 36-39 degrees for light return or 40-43 degrees for contrast.

3. In diffuse light conditions I prefer H&A''s of the shorter star/lower girdle combo. 75-76% lower girdle length with shorter stars. Again ... as long as the upper girdles don''t exceed 43 or 44 degrees. This produces a slightly bolder arrow which stands out more in those light conditions providing points of contrast.

Just what i love about these things... so many ways to achive beauty.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 2/21/2005 1:32:17 PM
Author: Lord Summerisle

M'Lord - you in Black and me in Blue.

Thought it was agreed a while ago.. that
It can be AGS000 without being prefect H&A...

Yes.

It can be a H&A without it having perfect light return.

Indeed.

a None H&A can be very sparkly...

True.

a AGS000 H&A can ALSO be very sparkly.

Absolutely.

H&A perfection can mean something to certain ppl after the presision in the cut.

And THAT is where the passion for different types of cut precision comes in. I think it’s important to note that acquisition of true patterning is immensely helpful as a litmus test by which you may base other decisions on many particulars such as Rhino mentioned above. After all, when you have true patterning all ‘round and witness unison differences of character (for instance between lower girdle lengths >80% as opposed to
So long as we get Joey in the street to recognise the importance of cut (as in the proportions of the stone - rather than just 'i want round/square/pear/oval/etc.') then things will start to improve.

Exactly. And that’s why we’re all here, isn’t it?

Can i sit gooseberry on that Tea convo John

I would like to answer yes, but I am unfamiliar with that colloqialism and just a bit frightened.