Princess Cut Ideal Cut

[Judah Gutwein]

Avenger,

It appears based upon your selection that you are leaning towards GIA graded stones and so I figured I'd comment that you are no less vindicated in looking for a beautiful GIA graded princess than if you'd have chosen the route of AGS0 Ideal.

Just to step away from the technical discussion for a moment and to perhaps put things in the proper aesthetic perspective for you, I would point out a prominent visual difference usually found between a beautifully cut GIA graded princess and a beautifully cut AGS0 princess.

AGS0 Ideal princess cuts, typically feature built up crown facets and small (sometimes even "roundish") tables. As a result, these diamonds will often appear smaller than their actual carat weight.

Conversely, traditionally cut princess cut diamonds, will typically feature "spreadier" tables (table facet on top). These diamonds will often look larger than AGS0 princess diamonds of similar carat weight.

While a diamond with too much of a spready table will often appear glassy and lifeless, there are many combinations that will indeed yield beautiful results, even when they do not conform to the AGS0 standard.

In addition, while the AGS may be the only (respected) lab to offer an actual Ideal Cut Grade for Princess diamonds, they most certainly do not maintain exclusive rights to the grading of beautifully cut princess diamonds.

Therefore (in our experience), when consumers are shopping for beautiful princess cut diamonds, the choice between a beautiful AGS0 and a beautiful GIA graded princess cut, will sometimes boild down to the visual difference between the two.

Of course, these are entirely subjective and personal choices and there is no definitive answer when the primary objective is to select a beautiful princess cut diamond.

Best of luck to you!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Judah,

Yesterday, our prime minister produced a load of bullocks in our parliament, so huge that we still cannot understand how a supposedly intelligent person can do this.

Your last post comes very close to that historic achievement.

I am sorry, but it is too late to address this in detail, but I will come back to this tomorrow.

Live long,

 

[diagem]

Date: 12/18/2008 5:10:07 PM
Author: Paul-Antwerp
Judah,

Yesterday, our prime minister produced a load of bullocks in our parliament, so huge that we still cannot understand how a supposedly intelligent person can do this.

Your last post comes very close to that historic achievement.

I am sorry, but it is too late to address this in detail, but I will come back to this tomorrow.

Live long,

Hahahaha....

Cant wait till tomorrow to read..., this is going to be fun

But I must admit Judah..., you just proved one of Pauls statements as absolutely correct

.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 12/18/2008 4:31:01 PM
Author: Judah Gutwein
Avenger,

It appears based upon your selection that you are leaning towards GIA graded stones and so I figured I''d comment that you are no less vindicated in looking for a beautiful GIA graded princess than if you''d have chosen the route of AGS0 Ideal.

Just to step away from the technical discussion for a moment and to perhaps put things in the proper aesthetic perspective for you, I would point out a prominent visual difference usually found between a beautifully cut GIA graded princess and a beautifully cut AGS0 princess.

AGS0 Ideal princess cuts, typically feature built up crown facets and small (sometimes even ''roundish'') tables. As a result, these diamonds will often appear smaller than their actual carat weight.

Conversely, traditionally cut princess cut diamonds, will typically feature ''spreadier'' tables (table facet on top). These diamonds will often look larger than AGS0 princess diamonds of similar carat weight.

While a diamond with too much of a spready table will often appear glassy and lifeless, there are many combinations that will indeed yield beautiful results, even when they do not conform to the AGS0 standard.

In addition, while the AGS may be the only (respected) lab to offer an actual Ideal Cut Grade for Princess diamonds, they most certainly do not maintain exclusive rights to the grading of beautifully cut princess diamonds.

Therefore (in our experience), when consumers are shopping for beautiful princess cut diamonds, the choice between a beautiful AGS0 and a beautiful GIA graded princess cut, will sometimes boild down to the visual difference between the two.

Of course, these are entirely subjective and personal choices and there is no definitive answer when the primary objective is to select a beautiful princess cut diamond.

Best of luck to you!

Regarding your statement highlighted in yellow: You present it as a given that AGS0 princess-cuts feature a built up crown and a small (often roundish) table. This must be based on a limited experience, since our own production does not feature a built up crown, nor a roundish table. Your statement that these diamonds generally look smaller than their weight is absolutely incorrect.

Regarding your statement highlighted in orange: There are absolutely no cut-criteria for princess-cuts sent to GIA. Still, you manage to present a general GIA-look. How can you generalize to a certain look, if any princess-cut sent to GIA will get a GIA-report? Also, you are combining the look of a larger table with the diamond looking larger. That is old-generation diamantaire-nonsense. The ''large'' look of a diamond is connected to the build-up of edge-to-edge light return, not to the size of the table.

Granted, a great majority of princess-cuts (also some AGS-0) will return the most intense light only in the table-area. Since you are offering this as your generalisation, it might indicate that you do not know the exceptions to the rule. As a result, your generalisation is absolutely incorrect.

Live long,

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 12/18/2008 12:49:45 PM
Author: avengerzx9
All,

Great discussion everyone

Can you will please provide me with some comments on the following diamonds? I plan to either a) pick one sometime this weekend b) scrap all of them and start looking again

1.21 EVS2 GIA 17176123 Polish VG Symmetry VG 6.10 x 6.01 x 4.18 Table 77% Depth 69.6%
1.24 EVS2 GIA 17189401 Polish VG Symmetry VG 6.05 x 5.95 x 4.22 Table 68% Depth 70.9%
1.20 FVS1 GIA 17238036 Polish VG Symmetry G 5.95 x 5.66 x 4.15 Table 70% Depth 73.3%
1.14 FVS1 GIA cert Polish EX Symmetry VG 6.06 x 5.82 x 4.17 Table 73% Depth 71.6%

Currently, I have 2 vote for 2, 1 vote for 3 and 4.

T

Sorry Avenger for hijacking this thread,

Unfortunately, it is impossible to say anything about these diamonds, without preferably an ASET-image or at least an Ideal-scope.

You should realise that there are different levels of performance in princess-cuts:

- Let us say that the average quality-level is at 3.
- If you manage to select the best performing ones out of the general selection, you can end up between level 5 and 7. You might be happy being clearly above average.
- If you choose for an AGS-0, I would say that you go up to level 9 (others will probably argue that it is between level 7 ad 9). This might also be your desire.
- And if you compare various AGS-0''s, you might choose for the best-performing among them, which is probably level 12.

What you choose to do, depends upon your comfort-level and your desires. Nobody can make that decision for you. I am biased in the sense that I always go for the very best, but that is highly personal. Therefore, do understand my bias.

But if you choose for something around level 5 to 7 in my analogy, we will still need ASET or idealscope, in order to give some advice.

Live long,

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 12/18/2008 4:31:01 PM
Author: Judah Gutwein
Avenger,

It appears based upon your selection that you are leaning towards GIA graded stones and so I figured I''d comment that you are no less vindicated in looking for a beautiful GIA graded princess than if you''d have chosen the route of AGS0 Ideal.

Judah,

Likewise, good to see you here. Also, thanks for this post, which..in some modest contrast to Paul, recalls a point of view that I used to see more explicit from Excel, as I recall. Today...in going to the Excel site, I can''t find a branded diamond labeled or identified for the life of me. But...only a couple of years ago...yes...I found myself surprised to more explicitly see Superb Cert diamonds selling at a premium to zeros. Zeros are now featured at your site...but with no discussion. Here, I see you haven''t lost your own prejudice. This may or may not be the place to give some background for how you run your shop (as for example, I''d be interested, and you might prefer a separate thread for it). Some of the issues may be that of how one simply decided, organizationally to run a business (I see a separate site exists to SuprebCert, which only now, and for a long time, points to Excel...but, as noted, no Superbcert diamonds can be pulled out I can see once at Excel). Others more prominently on this board, likes James Allen, formerly Dirt Cheap, have shown what may or may not be similar transitions.

Well, don''t let this query throw you off coming on board. I''d be interested in hearing more, but regardless, welcome to Pricescope, and I hope you stick around.

 

[diagem]

Date: 12/18/2008 3:14:46 PM
Author: oldminer
Diagem;

I think you and I see beautiful princess cuts outside the AGS 0 range are because the cutters who have opted to go for the AGS 0 princess style have to make the safest bet possible each time they cut their rough. To make the safest bet means they head for the zone of parameters which make it is most likely for them to hit an AGS 0 cut grade. I gather the AGS 0 grade is a difficult target to hit even within the widest range of target zones. It is my understanding that if the AGS 0 is missed, it is not financilly rewarding to recut to try a second time to hit the target. Failed stones must settle for a lower AGS cut grade and we don''t see many AGS 1 diamonds being marketed with any special degrees of success. While there are cut specs which could give AGS 0 cutters a wider range of cuts these optional zones are even more difficult and narrow targets, or have other financial consequences such as increased weight loss. Missing the target ''0'' grade is a huge problem so we don''t see the variety that is actually possible within AGS 0 standards on a frequent basis.

I think you are right on Dave. I still cant get the info. (from anyone) that shows the allowed range by AGS to achieve the "0" or "Ideal" grade..., I guess there is some lack of transparency on this subject...

With direct assessment tools, I believe one could prove that light performance of some diamonds outside of AGS 0 are equivalent or better than some that are within the ''0'' grade. People with vested interests in promoting the brand image of AGS 0 tend to disagree, but I am not sure at this time exactly where the truth lies myself with 100% confidence. I''d someday like to prove if this is correct or not just because I''d like to know and believe others also would like to know, too.

You mean the eyes..., correct?

 

[strmrdr]

at 64% depth the ags cutting charts give this a potential grade of 3 which is the highest scoring combo I could find.

 

[strmrdr]

I guess some might call it pretty... so while ags0 isn''t possible pretty might be.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/19/2008 6:37:41 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp

Date: 12/18/2008 12:49:45 PM

Author: avengerzx9

All,


Great discussion everyone


Can you will please provide me with some comments on the following diamonds? I plan to either a) pick one sometime this weekend b) scrap all of them and start looking again


1.21 EVS2 GIA 17176123 Polish VG Symmetry VG 6.10 x 6.01 x 4.18 Table 77% Depth 69.6%

1.24 EVS2 GIA 17189401 Polish VG Symmetry VG 6.05 x 5.95 x 4.22 Table 68% Depth 70.9%

1.20 FVS1 GIA 17238036 Polish VG Symmetry G 5.95 x 5.66 x 4.15 Table 70% Depth 73.3%

1.14 FVS1 GIA cert Polish EX Symmetry VG 6.06 x 5.82 x 4.17 Table 73% Depth 71.6%


Currently, I have 2 vote for 2, 1 vote for 3 and 4.


T

Sorry Avenger for hijacking this thread,


Unfortunately, it is impossible to say anything about these diamonds, without preferably an ASET-image or at least an Ideal-scope.


You should realise that there are different levels of performance in princess-cuts:


- Let us say that the average quality-level is at 3.

- If you manage to select the best performing ones out of the general selection, you can end up between level 5 and 7. You might be happy being clearly above average.

- If you choose for an AGS-0, I would say that you go up to level 9 (others will probably argue that it is between level 7 ad 9). This might also be your desire.

- And if you compare various AGS-0''s, you might choose for the best-performing among them, which is probably level 12.


What you choose to do, depends upon your comfort-level and your desires. Nobody can make that decision for you. I am biased in the sense that I always go for the very best, but that is highly personal. Therefore, do understand my bias.


But if you choose for something around level 5 to 7 in my analogy, we will still need ASET or idealscope, in order to give some advice.


Live long,

Paul while in general you are right your bias is showing a little.
There are gia graded princess cuts that easily score ags0 light performance.
But you wont find them selecting diamonds off a list.

 

[diagem]

What are the other numbers and angles on this one? P1, chevrons, C1, C2, CH, table etc...

 

[Rhino]

Date: 12/18/2008 12:45:26 PM
Author: oldminer
Paul doesn''t think he can cut an AGS 0 princess with a 64% depth. You seem to agree that with the current facet designs it can''t be done. I was not asking if an AGS 0 can be cut at 64% however.

What I was asking was could a diamond with reasonably equivalent beauty and relatively equivalent light performance be cut at that 64% depth and not be graded as an AGS 0?

How do you ''know'' that the light performance must necessarily be less at that depth? What range of light performance is given by the system you are using (DiamCalc?) to measure or estimate light performance of the full range of AGS 0 cut princess cuts? Some of these diamonds must be quite high, but some must be lower than the maximum. There has to be a range. Couldn''t a 64% depth princess hit inside the ''range'' of AGS 0 in terms of light performance?

Good question Dave. Personally I have not seen 1 at this depth. I''ve seen high 60''s but generally nothing that approaches this depth. I would imagine if a cutter could he must also weigh the factor of how much waste there will be in the final product and how much more he would have to charge for it to compensate. The cost may not outweigh the benefit ... unless properly marketed of course. Folks would have a tough time paying round prices for a shape that has traditionally been discounted notably more.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/19/2008 10:51:01 AM
Author: DiaGem
What are the other numbers and angles on this one? P1, chevrons, C1, C2, CH, table etc...

Here is the DMC file.

 

[diagem]

Date: 12/19/2008 10:55:02 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 12/19/2008 10:51:01 AM
Author: DiaGem
What are the other numbers and angles on this one? P1, chevrons, C1, C2, CH, table etc...

Here is the DMC file.

My DC is causing me problems....

I can definitely say that I have seen many 65''s+/- Princess Cuts that passed my "eye" test...., I never measured them on tools..., didnt have too!

 

[strmrdr]

angles

 

[strmrdr]

here you go....

 

[diagem]

Date: 12/19/2008 12:05:30 PM
Author: strmrdr
here you go....

I would try to lower the PD while pushing the CH a bit..., could have a crispier look....

 

[Judah Gutwein]

Good morning, Paul;

My advice to Avenger is based on extensive working experience with both AGS-0 Ideal Princess cut diamonds and beautiful Princess Cut diamonds that have been graded by GIA as well as the comments and feedback from our customers who have viewed both types here in our Showroom. Beauty and preference is subjective and personal.

Have a great weekend!

 

[Judah Gutwein]

Ira;

Thanks very much for your kind welcome. Good to be here!

We have changed our business model to showcase diamond inventory databases from various diamond manufacturers and wholesalers, as a supplement to our own inventory. As for why?..the answer has to do with our desire to evolve and adapt with a changing marketplace.

For a time (and as you probably remember) several years ago, we were selling SuperbCert diamonds exclusively on our website. These diamonds were diamonds we owned and part of our inventory. Being a smaller family built business, this inventory was never vast and extensive. Our commitment to the customer was to comprehensively evaluate and showcase these diamonds with the latest available technology. In doing so, we were able to ensure that the brand stood for an expected level of diamond quality and consistency.

However, we were getting many interested customers for our branded diamonds who were not able to find what they were looking for due to the limited selection of size, colors and clarities. Because we were unable to accommodate them, they purchased elsewhere.

We then made the decision to to supplement our SuperbCert inventory by adding databases of ideal cut diamonds offered by manufacturers as most current websites do. The critical and important factor for us, was our commitment to actually call in every one of these diamonds for a complete evaluation and workup on behalf of our customers. We do not drop-ship. Furthermore, we made a commitment to apply our SuperbCert lifetime upgrade policy to these databases so that our previous SuperbCert customers would not lose out on their ability to upgrade etc.

Today, we offer an extensive selection of Ideal Cut Diamonds, which we personally inspect for our customers.

Have a great weekend!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/19/2008 12:20:40 PM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 12/19/2008 12:05:30 PM

Author: strmrdr

here you go....

I would try to lower the PD while pushing the CH a bit..., could have a crispier look....

doesn''t work well you get a nasty dark zone dead center that looks real nasty if you go shallow on the pavilion.

 

[Regular Guy]

Judah,

I think I hear you. And...your not being a drop shipper is pretty loud and clear on your website. Helpfully.

But, SuperbCert had become a known and appreciated brand. To the extent you might like to continue to suggest you have another view of how to cut princesses, this may be on point, as well. Do I understand you to say that, still, for walk-in store shoppers, you continue to make these known, princesses and rounds alike, but otherwise, you''re satisfied to have essentially removed this branding from the awareness of internet shoppers?

 

[Judah Gutwein]

Ira;

Correct. Our own current inventory isn''t large enough to showcase on our website.

 

[avengerzx9]

All,

I am still in the process of finding my diamond. I agree with Paul-Antwerp that it is impossible to find out more about the diamond without an ASET-image or an Ideal-scope. However, most of the vendors I go to in LA Jewelery district only has a GIA certificate, which does not show any more information than what I have provided thus far

So the search continues.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/20/2008 2:47:59 AM
Author: avengerzx9
All,


I am still in the process of finding my diamond. I agree with Paul-Antwerp that it is impossible to find out more about the diamond without an ASET-image or an Ideal-scope. However, most of the vendors I go to in LA Jewelery district only has a GIA certificate, which does not show any more information than what I have provided thus far

So the search continues.

If your shopping in person spend the money and get an ASET scope.

http://www.ideal-scope.com/cart_order.asp

 

[oldminer]

I am sold on the idea of using the IS on round diamonds to help select punchy, brilliant round stones. I am not nearly as convinced that the ASET provides the same level of assistance to find punchy, bright and beautiful princess cuts. I find changes in the ASET image for Princess cuts do not always mean visible degradation in the appeaance of a princess cut. Karl is using the DiamCalc ASET image to show that a 64% depth princess can't be a fine looking diamond, but DiaGem and I know that there are princess cuts which work very well outside the AGS 0 cut category and can't be called "Ideal" under AGS terminoloogy. Paul says the AGS 0 princess has many potential cut parameters and isn't all that narrow a target, yet he indicates the target is made of relatively small min-targets which one must either hit well to get AGS 0 or miss. Missing is very costly to people who want to market AGS 0 cuts.

There are many choices when creating a standard. It can be narrow to broad or it might be like AGS 0 with lots of bulls eyes and dead zones around each bulls-eye. The GIA approach to cut grade in rounds may be overly broad and the AGS approach with Princess cuts may have been made needlessly over precise. Grading by comparison to ASET images is not really an acceptable method in the long run. We may have to live with it for now, but I have reservations about interpretatiion of ASET images into more than a tool in our total arsenal of tools used for rough screening. Because of nuances in the cut, clarity and transparency of each diamond, I think the final cut grading should be a direct measure of light return components which meet human testing results. I know this is certainly part of what AGS has done, but I believe there are some holes in the system or improvments to yet be made.

Cut quality grading is a work in progress, not a totally finished deal. Consumers must expect some changes in the future.

 

[strmrdr]

Dave that is not what I said at all.
The highest scoring 64% depth princess I could find the numbers for was an ags3.
Then in the next post I said some would find it pretty.

 

[diagem]

Date: 12/20/2008 10:53:44 AM
Author: strmrdr
Dave that is not what I said at all.
The highest scoring 64% depth princess I could find the numbers for was an ags3.
Then in the next post I said some would find it pretty.

Karl..., I believe what Dave is saying..., and I am starting to believe more and more is....

ASET doesnt give a realistic score in regards to real life observation! (I am talking appearance not performance)...
These tools magnify the different quantity LR of a Diamond vs. actual human observation!

When you gave the example of the 64 % Princess cut..., I must admit it didnt look like a top preforming ASET..., I believe (and know) the 64% Princess can be as beautiful as a AGS-0 Princess IRL..., I am tempting to say even "maybe more"!

I and (many) consumers purchase Diamonds (jewelry) based on the way they look (without any tools)..., I (think as I didnt test it) believe the difference between and AGS-0 and 3 (and less) is almost the same IRL, as far as beauty is concerned I am willing to take the chance and say they would be just about even and maybe more beautiful depending on the taste of the potential purchaser! True..., the "0"''s are more uniformed in appearance..., but that does not do anything to me and I believe it doesnt to most consumers out there!

Again..., I salute the cutters of these top cuts as I realy know how hard a task it is to achieve these scores..., I see these cutters all day long and they sometimes even seem like they need a psychologist sitting next to them because of the frustrations they encounter on the job!

Its a great NICHE!!! But they are not the best Diamonds out there and definitely not for everyone!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 12/20/2008 11:43:54 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 12/20/2008 10:53:44 AM
Author: strmrdr
Dave that is not what I said at all.
The highest scoring 64% depth princess I could find the numbers for was an ags3.
Then in the next post I said some would find it pretty.

Karl..., I believe what Dave is saying..., and I am starting to believe more and more is....

ASET doesnt give a realistic score in regards to real life observation! (I am talking appearance not performance)...
These tools magnify the different quantity LR of a Diamond vs. actual human observation!

When you gave the example of the 64 % Princess cut..., I must admit it didnt look like a top preforming ASET..., I believe (and know) the 64% Princess can be as beautiful as a AGS-0 Princess IRL..., I am tempting to say even ''maybe more''!

http://www.ideal-scope.com/using_reference_chart_ASET.asp
At the above link you can see some work that took Arthur and I a lot of development time.
Unlike the round stone ideal-scope reference chart - we decided to make this one a series of movies.

This is based on my experiance - not something AGS told me (although they do this with both rounds and all cuts - I think it is not required on rounds).

Dave if you test stones that you think are weak - but have great face up ASET appearance - then rock them - I bet you will find the ASET works.

that is my experiance after buying heaps of Princess when they were popular.

 

[diagem]

Date: 12/20/2008 1:54:52 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 12/20/2008 11:43:54 AM
Author: DiaGem

Date: 12/20/2008 10:53:44 AM
Author: strmrdr
Dave that is not what I said at all.
The highest scoring 64% depth princess I could find the numbers for was an ags3.
Then in the next post I said some would find it pretty.

Karl..., I believe what Dave is saying..., and I am starting to believe more and more is....

ASET doesnt give a realistic score in regards to real life observation! (I am talking appearance not performance)...
These tools magnify the different quantity LR of a Diamond vs. actual human observation!

When you gave the example of the 64 % Princess cut..., I must admit it didnt look like a top preforming ASET..., I believe (and know) the 64% Princess can be as beautiful as a AGS-0 Princess IRL..., I am tempting to say even ''maybe more''!

http://www.ideal-scope.com/using_reference_chart_ASET.asp
At the above link you can see some work that took Arthur and I a lot of development time.
Unlike the round stone ideal-scope reference chart - we decided to make this one a series of movies.

This is based on my experiance - not something AGS told me (although they do this with both rounds and all cuts - I think it is not required on rounds).

Dave if you test stones that you think are weak - but have great face up ASET appearance - then rock them - I bet you will find the ASET works.

that is my experiance after buying heaps of Princess when they were popular.

Hi Garry,

That link doesnt work good on my PC and it gets stuck...
Do you have movie comparisons link on real life appearance vs. ASET appearance of the same stone?

That would give a better notion...

 

[oldminer]

Now, I''m not a sole voice of authority, but the AGS 0 comes out more and more as a brand with a certain range of ASET characteristics. Of course, this is an important component of a "brand". It also makes sense that some princess cuts look best when observed tilting and rocking instead of just viewed face up. This is sensible since consumers might well choose to tilt and rock while others might go with a face-up method of choosing or observing beauty. I would contend that a "brand" is not the perfect candidate for the creation of an international grading standard. I am also certain that many very good looking and high performing Princess cuts which would not grade AGS 0 are their equal and potentially superior to some AGS 0 graded ones.

The selection of any individual diamond is based on whatever the consumer believes works for them. It is a hugely complex mix of quality, beauty and financial considerations. A grading standard for cut should be based on a face-up view alone. This allows fully repeatable comparison of apples to apples in a very acceptable, normal, common and consistent manner. Just like we use a standard lighting for color grading with a standard viewing angle, or the 10X limit on what inclusions count in clarity grading the final international standard for cut should be narrow enough to be meaningful yet broad enough to be a continuum over its range. It would make it less difficult for cutters to go for the top grade and lead to more choices for consumers as well as vendors.

Consumers would be unusually unlucky to find a bad AGS 0. They are a safe bet, but you must pay the price for the extra hard work the cutter goes through. A broader bulls eye for the top quality cut would make a lot of sense to me. No doubt, all the AGS 0 stones would make the top cut so no one is going to be hurt in the process.