Brilliance/Contrast/Sparkle Conundrum

[Carmel]

If a stone rates higher in “brilliance” (whiteness?), does that mean that one will notice more chunky “mirror-like” qualities with lots of “dark” contrast? I’m looking for a stone with less chunky flashes and more pinpoint type sparkle (not necessarily colored sparkle – or is that the same thing?) So, what the heck am I looking for?

 

[researcher]

I have no clue to be honest. What shape stone are you considering? If it's a round, just choose an ideal cut stone and you'll have the best balance of brilliance, fire, and scintillation.

 

[Carmel]

Yes, I should have stated I'm looking for a Round. I'm trying to break down the differences between a BIC, TIC, and FIC - which I have read a lot about, but I'm just looking for a simplified answer. Basically, I don't want to see a lot of chunky dark mirror-like contrast (I can’t figure out any other vocabulary to describe it), but I do want to see lots of flickering sparkle - so what ranges do I look in? I also don't want to see a prominent arrow pattern when looking straight down at the stone. Can I even have my cake and eat it, too - or am I gobbledygooking this thing up?

 

[moremoremore]

hmmm, if you want more flickering sparkle and less large chunky light return, you want....a princess!

sorry I don't know the answer, but at least I'm bumping you up!

 

[Magnum]

Unfortunately it's tough to give a simplified answer, since there are so many things that go into the cut of a diamond. But, since you asked, i'll try my best as a non-expert. You're probably looking for more of a "BIC." When you say you don't like "chunky dark mirror-like contrast," is that from looking at stones with well defined arrows, or because of the way it sounds. The arrows and darker parts of the contrast in diamonds tend to be the ones that give the strongest flashes of both white and colored light, but like you said, also make parts of the diamond look a little darker in certain lighting, which provides contrast that a lot of people find appealing, but if you don't then that's fair. Everyone has their own tastes. As moremoremore pointed out, a princess stones actually displays a lot of the characteristics you're talking about. If you like rounds, though, I think you can still achieve the same effect, but you'll need to look around a little. You probably want a stone that doesn't have H&A optical symmetry, but more of a random optical symmetry, so that there aren't well defined arrows. I think Mara even used to have a stone that was a BIC that while it did actually have well-defined arrows, they were so thin, that the stone didn't have a lot of big darks spots. It was also lacking in fire according to her, but that may be a trade-off your willing to take. In general a BIC will display more brilliance, with the whole stone looking white most of the time, but lacking the big flashes of fire.

 

[Rhino]

----------------
On 7/9/2004 4:30:15 PM Carmel wrote:

If a stone rates higher in “brilliance” (whiteness?), does that mean that one will notice more chunky “mirror-like” qualities with lots of “dark” contrast? I’m looking for a stone with less chunky flashes and more pinpoint type sparkle (not necessarily colored sparkle – or is that the same thing?) So, what the heck am I looking for?----------------

I know exactly what you are looking for. You're looking for a stone with cherry proportions (34-34.5 crown/40.7-40.9 pavilion) but this is most important...) WITH A COMBINATION of lower girdle facet length no less than 77-78% (longer wouldn't hurt either), stars in the upper 50's or 60's% (even better) and upper girdles around 40-42 degrees. That's if you get a 57 facet H&A round. I would strongly recommend taking a look at the Eighternity as well as their primary feature is exactly what you're looking for as well.

 

[Carmel]

Yes, moremoremore, a Princess cut perhaps does exhibit the qualities I’m looking for – although I’d like those translated into a Round stone (for various reasons that I won’t bother detailing right now). Thanks for nudging me up!

Unfortunately, I’m trying to construct the image of what I want in a diamond through my mind’s eye. I only own two mediocre diamonds to look at (both Rounds, and quite smallish) – one from my mother’s wedding ring from 1948 (specs unknown), and one from my original wedding band (.38 G SI1, and probably not at all even close to an ideal cut). Then, when I’ve gone out to browse at various stones, I fall short in finding out all the specs – so looking at live versions hasn’t been particularly constructive. When I try to apply my understanding to real life, all I can picture is what is shown on these websites (this is where they look chunky black/gray to me – although some look that way in real life to me, too). Yes, Magnum, I basically don’t want the stone to look dark in certain light – unless that’s just inherent and there is no way to get around it. And the same with the defined “arrows,” – don’t want them unless they are just inherent in quality cut stones.

I’ll check into your suggestion, Rhino – sounds like a call to you will be imminent. It’s so typical of me to want something that doesn’t exist, so I am glad to know that someone gets me!

Maybe I’m getting somewhere now. At the very least, thanks for listening.

 

[Carmel]

I just ran a Google search for Eighternity, and apparently their official website is under construction, although I was able to find out, of course, that there are no dealers in my area where I can see this marvel in person. I also found a link to GOG (www.goodoldgold.com/surprise!.htm) and that turned up some info, but no picture. Guess I’ll be pursuing this a bit further via the telly!

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 7/10/2004 12:01:44 AM Carmel wrote:



Unfortunately, I’m trying to construct the image of what I want in a diamond through my mind’s eye.

----------------

Tought call... would it work to go for a bit of shopping? You may not find exactly the proportions that Jonathan mentioned, but it is always worth seeing what different cuts look like in person before building a "mental model".

In theory, more facets would provide the look it seems to me you describe (less contrast brilliance, good light return, good dispersion). But this is not a must - the "look" also depends on the size of the stone you are after (obviously the size of the facets dictate what that "flash" woudl look like when they catch light just so in motion), for example.

Well, and many other details could be brought up, but nothing really helps as much as seeing a few diamonds - even some you do not end up liking - for refference.

What did your shopping impressions were ?