Recuts - How much size are you willing to lose??

[msop04]

I know this totally depends on the person and what their ultimate goals are... Don't get me wrong, I love my diamond as is, but I have been entertaining the idea of a recut for a little while, and have been considering it even more as of late. Here are my pros/cons:

Pros of Recut:
- ideal cut... duh!
- increase light performance/fire
- ideal cut for significantly less than trying to upgrade with another diamond altogether

Cons of Recut:
- regretting the loss of size
- failure to "see" the difference after all is said and done
- ending up with a lower color and/or inclusion(s) being more apparent
- risk of damage

So my stone is 9.8 x 9.75 right now... I think I'd be okay going down to 9.55-9.6, but not in the 9.4 range. I'm a size ho first, mind you. I just wanted to hear from others who have had this done to get a little more perspective.

Here are the stone's angles:

 

[bludiva]

i guess it depends on the reasons for the recut (is it chipped? etc.) if it's just to optimize light return, how much of a performance boost will you get? will you notice the difference?

i asked a pro about recutting my er stone a while back bc i can see the arrows are wonky and he thought it would not be worth it - not enough performance benefit for the loss/expense.

so long story short i guess the answer for me would be case by case ...i made the mistake recently of overspending on a laptop because i thought i really needed a 4k screen b/c i can see the difference between that and HD, well it turns out yes I can see the difference but it doesn't have much practical impact on my day to day use ...in other words if i spent the time/money/stress to get a recut and it didn't absolutely wow me i'd be super disappointed...

on the other hand, the idea of optimal sparkles is of course appealing are you thinking of recutting yours?

 

[Dancing Fire]

Here's my story, unlike yours mine was a flat top 60/60 stone with a very low crown height..

From a 1.47 ct 60/60 stone to a 1.15 ct after the "recut" by Infinity Diamonds....

Paul of infinity diamonds(through Wink) did the recut he brought a dead diamond back to life now it has a lot of tiny sparkles from edge to edge.the stone is mounted on a (cheap) 14k wg size 4.75, 3 mm,6 prong cathedral style setting. i would sacrafice the weight for a ideal cut H&A any day, but...

www.pricescope.com

 

[msop04]

i guess it depends on the reasons for the recut (is it chipped? etc.) if it's just to optimize light return, how much of a performance boost will you get? will you notice the difference?

i asked a pro about recutting my er stone a while back bc i can see the arrows are wonky and he thought it would not be worth it - not enough performance benefit for the loss/expense.

so long story short i guess the answer for me would be case by case ...i made the mistake recently of overspending on a laptop because i thought i really needed a 4k screen b/c i can see the difference between that and HD, well it turns out yes I can see the difference but it doesn't have much practical impact on my day to day use ...in other words if i spent the time/money/stress to get a recut and it didn't absolutely wow me i'd be super disappointed...

on the other hand, the idea of optimal sparkles is of course appealing are you thinking of recutting yours?

This is exactly what I struggle with... it would be just to optimize light performance... of a stone that already looks great to me. I worry that I'll not see that much difference IRL and regret losing size.

Yes, I have been considering it.

 

[msop04]

Here's my story, unlike yours mine was a flat top 60/60 stone with a very low crown height..

From a 1.47 ct 60/60 stone to a 1.15 ct after the "recut" by Infinity Diamonds....

Paul of infinity diamonds(through Wink) did the recut he brought a dead diamond back to life now it has a lot of tiny sparkles from edge to edge.the stone is mounted on a (cheap) 14k wg size 4.75, 3 mm,6 prong cathedral style setting. i would sacrafice the weight for a ideal cut H&A any day, but...

www.pricescope.com

I was told that it would likely go from 3.33 ct and 9.8 mm to 3.10 ct and 9.5 mm (9.4 at the minimum). I just don't know if the difference in performance would justify the loss of size for me. Dang, these first world problems! LOL

 

[Dancing Fire]

I was told that it would likely go from 3.33 ct and 9.8 mm to 3.10 ct and 9.5 mm (9.4 at the minimum). I just don't know if the difference in performance would justify the loss of size for me. Dang, these first world problems! LOL

Who do you have in mind to do the recut?

 

[yssie]

Your stone is more on the shallow side @msop04 - to make the pavilion steeper diameter would have to go down.

Personally I think your stone is enviably beautiful as-is. IMO it's a textbook example of "beauty comes in proportions beyond 36/24/36" (or, y'know, 56/34.5/40.75)... I do think you'd probably notice a difference in light return post-recut, but I'm not confident your eyes would interpret that difference as better, especially since you enjoy the way your stone behaves right now

 

[msop04]

Who do you have in mind to do the recut?

I've spoken to a PS-loved cutter, but I'd rather not name anyone, as I haven't quite made up my mind if I want to go through with it.

 

[SimoneDi]

I agree with everything that @yssie indicated. I personally wouldn’t touch your stone and I have done 3 diamond recurs myself. There is cost, time and risk involved, which is not always worth it. I honestly think that your diamond is gorgeous as is with great proportions. The proportions are very similar to my 1st e-ring diamond post recut. I didn’t notice any difference going to a branded “super-ideal”(s) afterwards.

ETA: it is also hard to estimate how much weight and how many mm will be actually lost during the recut. With all of my recuts, the end results were a smudge smaller than originally estimated.

 

[msop04]

Your stone is more on the shallow side @msop04 - to make the pavilion steeper diameter would have to go down.

Personally I think your stone is enviably beautiful as-is. IMO it's a textbook example of "beauty comes in proportions beyond 36/24/36" (or, y'know, 56/34.5/40.75)... I do think you'd probably notice a difference in light return post-recut, but I'm not confident your eyes would interpret that difference as better, especially since you enjoy the way your stone behaves right now

Thank you, @yssie... I certainly appreciate your opinion, as you have amazing taste and diamonds!

 

[msop04]

I agree with everything that @yssie indicated. I personally wouldn’t touch your stone and I have done 3 diamond recurs myself. There is cost, time and risk involved, which is not always worth it. I honestly think that your diamond is gorgeous as is with great proportions. The proportions are very similar to my 1st e-ring diamond post recut. I didn’t notice any difference going to a branded “super-ideal”(s) afterwards.

Thanks, @SimoneDi! You guys are making this much easier for me to lean toward "leaving well enough alone."

 

[mission1]

The proportions are just a bit shallow, and it looks really nice in the pic. You might get a bit of "mind" benefit from different proportions but you wont actually know if there will be a difference visible to YOU until you've done it.

Based on my (limited) experience, the cut difference from this to something 'better' will be subtle, particularly as you'll be comparing your memory of previous performance to the re-cut performance, rather than two stones side by side.

Unless there are notable performance or symmetry issues, I'd say if you like it now, don't get it re-cut!

 

[msop04]

The proportions are just a bit shallow, and it looks really nice in the pic. You might get a bit of "mind" benefit from different proportions but you wont actually know if there will be a difference visible to YOU until you've done it.

Based on my (limited) experience, the cut difference from this to something 'better' will be subtle, particularly as you'll be comparing your memory of previous performance to the re-cut performance, rather than two stones side by side.

Unless there are notable performance or symmetry issues, I'd say if you like it now, don't get it re-cut!

I don't really do "mind clean", so "mind proportions" really won't apply to me. If it looks good, I'm happy. Good point about not really being able to compare the stones side by side. Thanks!

 

[Karl_K]

That stone is not a candidate for a recut.
With reasonable optical symmetry and depending on what is in the angles it is a ags0-ags1 candidate.

Edit: recutting for a deeper pavilion would result in a significant size reduction.

 

[Laila619]

Your stone is shallower, and I don't think it's a good candidate for a recut. I always thought that steep deeps were better recut candidates. I would not borrow trouble; enjoy your beautiful rock as is!

 

[msop04]

That stone is not a candidate for a recut.
With reasonable optical symmetry and depending on what is in the angles it is a ags0-ags1 candidate.

Edit: recutting for a deeper pavilion would result in a significant size reduction.

Thanks, Karl!

 

[msop04]

Your stone is shallower, and I don't think it's a good candidate for a recut. I always thought that steep deeps were better recut candidates. I would not borrow trouble; enjoy your beautiful rock as is!

Thank you, @Laila619! I'm happy with it as is, TBH... I was just itching, and this is the tangent I've been on as of late. LOL

 

[OdetteOdile]

If it did end up 9.5 or 9.4mm, would you have to put it in a new setting, or could your current setting be reworked?

 

[kenny]

...

Cons of Recut:
...
- ending up with a lower color
...

I can't see how removing diamond material could lower the color grade.
It is the color in the material itself that tints the light passing through it.

In fact, if a stone's color was very close to the next better color grade removing enough material might even bump it up into the better color grade.
Remember, white diamond color is graded looking into the pavilion while cut (light performance) is graded looking at the top.

 

[kenny]

To answer your main question, "How much size are you willing to lose?"

I'm willing to lose as much as needed to optimize the light performance, period!

I don't care if it drops to 1.99 ct or 0.99 ct. and as they say, "money goes out the window".
For me, a diamond is all about the light show that only a diamond can deliver ... but the light show is optimized only if all the facets are positioned and angled just right.

 

[msop04]

If it did end up 9.5 or 9.4mm, would you have to put it in a new setting, or could your current setting be reworked?

That's a very good question... I feel like I would likely have to get Caysie to make a new setting.

 

[msop04]

To answer your main question, "How much size are you willing to lose?"

I'm willing to lose as much as needed to optimize the light performance, period!

I don't care if it drops to 1.99 ct or 0.99 ct. and as they say, "money goes out the window".
For me, a diamond is all about the light show that only a diamond can deliver ... but the light show is optimized only if all the facets are positioned and angled just right.

If your Octavia had to be recut (for whatever reason... say you chipped it badly, I don't know...) such that it ended up being half the size (not weight), would you still say that??

 

[msop04]

I can't see how removing diamond material could lower the color grade.
It is the color in the material itself that tints the light passing through it.

In fact, if a stone's color was very close to the next better color grade removing enough material might even bump it up into the better color grade.
Remember, white diamond color is graded looking into the pavilion while cut (light performance) is graded looking at the top.

It's a high I, so that's probably not an issue in my case.

 

[headlight]

I am more "pro" recut if one isn't happy with what they have. If you have been questioning in the past, and are questioning now, the odds you are going to question it again in the future seems likely IMO. With regard to what can be done with your stone via recut, and what the wt loss would be, you really need to send it off to a cutter for examination to know for sure. You said you have been in contact with someone but didn't want to say who. I am not sure who that is but I can tell you that BGD just recut 2 large rounds for me. and I also did a recut on a diamond I previously owned that was handed through my local jeweler (don't know who they used). These were all large stones so any wt loss was not of concern to me, I knew I had plenty to "work with". From what you have said that you think the weight loss would be for your stone, it would still be a very large diamond IMO, but I am not you and only you can decide if the added cut quality is worth losing a little weight. I can ASSURE you that NO ONE you know would even notice your ring was smaller. They may take notice of your stone in a way that hadn't previously (i.e. performance upgrade). But the small size loss I HIGHLY doubt anyone would notice, only you. WITH ALL THAT SAID... I think you are being sucked into what I consider to be the downside of PS... if your stone isn't the "model" version of the recommended ranges, one has a case of "proportion envy" lol! Just because it might not fall into what is espoused here to ring shoppers, doesn't mean it isn't a pretty stone. Remember what the GIA taught us (lol!): Many different combinations yield attractive diamonds. But if you are anything like me, you will want to see what your options may be. It is a hassle to have to send your ring off, have the stone unmounted, get insurance to cover recutting (through Jewelers Mutual) which, if you don't have a current appraisal, you will need to get a new one), etc. But no pain, no gain as the saying goes. On that note, I will tell you that when I had my jeweler send in my former 3.29 ct. for recut, I did scramble and get it covered through JM for coverage in the event of recut breakage. When I sent in my 2 inherited stones to BGD that were both approx 2.5 ct. each, my husband said don't bother... let's take the chance! So I went with it and, FORTUNATELY, they were fine. But I do understand we all have our point where we absolutely, positively will NOT go lower in size... for my current that is in my avatar, I would not entertain a recut because it is a 2.01 ct. and I refuse to go below 2 ct. so I get it, I do.

 

[Gussie]

Just a thought, fellow size ho. I looked at a stone at wf that was a higher clarity 9.6mm and I could easily see a difference in my 9.7mm stone. No way, not going down in size. Don't do it!

 

[msop04]

...think you are being sucked into what I consider to be the downside of PS... if your stone isn't the "model" version of the recommended ranges, one has a case of "proportion envy" lol! Just because it might not fall into what is espoused here to ring shoppers, doesn't mean it isn't a pretty stone.

I think you've hit the nail on the head... I'm very happy with my stone, but then there's the thought, "...hmmm, what if I had a super ideal cut stone?? Wouldn't that be cool?!" And then the wheels start a-turnin'! LOL Thanks for the added perspective!

 

[kenny]

If your Octavia had to be recut (for whatever reason... say you chipped it badly, I don't know...) such that it ended up being half the size (not weight), would you still say that??

Same answer.

Light performance is priority 1.

 

[msop04]

Just a thought, fellow size ho. I looked at a stone at wf that was a higher clarity 9.6mm and I could easily see a difference in my 9.7mm stone. No way, not going down in size. Don't do it!

This is my thing too... I don't think I'd truly notice at 9.6-9.7, but 9.5 may hurt my heart. And knowing my luck, it would turn out to be 9.4 and I wouldn't tell a damn bit of difference -- or at least not enough to justify money spent and loss of size, KWIM?? Why must we size whores be this way?? LOL

 

[msop04]

Same answer.

Wow... we are very different folks, Kenny. LOL

 

[sledge]

Personally I think your stone is enviably beautiful as-is. IMO it's a textbook example of "beauty comes in proportions beyond 36/24/36" (or, y'know, 56/34.5/40.75)... I do think you'd probably notice a difference in light return post-recut, but I'm not confident your eyes would interpret that difference as better, especially since you enjoy the way your stone behaves right now

Bwahahaha....ummm, "who is Sir Mix-a-Lot, Baby Got Back for $1 million".

On a more serious note, I am not certain this will be more cost effective than trading in for a different stone. Given the proportions of the existing stone, I think you will lose quite a bit of carat weight which will reduce net worth of the stone, after the re-cut. Not to mention the cost of the re-cut and risk associated with it.

Before I made a decision I would talk with both BGD and CBI and learn about the re-cutting costs, and also what they anticipate the final weight to be. Then I'd go price a XXX in that size range with ideal proportions to see the price. Then use the formula below (with made-up numbers for reference) to tally your total loss:

• ($25k initial purchase - $15k new purchase of smaller stone) = $10k loss + $3k recut = $13k loss total
• $13k loss / $25k initial purchase = 0.52, or 52% loss of initial value

In this example, if you were able to sell your stone for 48% of the initial purchase price, you'd end up at the same spot:

• $25k initial purchase * 0.48 = $12k available to buy a new stone

But if you were patient, and waited for the right buyer, maybe you could yield 75% instead:

• $25k initial purchase * 0.75 = $18.75k

Again, the numbers above are made-up. I don't know what you paid, but you can run the math and figure out where the equilibrium is for making such a decision. I'm sure at some point it makes sense, but I could see you easily creeping to a point where it doesn't make sense.