************************************************************************* E N G A G E M E N T D I A M O N D F. A. Q. ************************************************************************* (1 December 95 version, 3010 lines) by Peter Mlynek, mlynek@chem.wisc.edu ABSTRACT: Diamonds have been considered an important item in an engagement ring. This post should provide you with information about diamonds (the 4 C's), where to shop for diamonds, what the approximate prices are, and most importantly some straight talk that you wont hear from people selling these stones. Although this post is aimed at couples looking at buying engagement rings, it could also be useful for people wanting to know about diamonds in general. ======================================================================== TABLE OF CONTENTS: ----------------- 1. ABOUT THIS F. A. Q. (320 lines) (a) Technical Details of This FAQ 1. Posting Sites of this FAQ 2. Caveat about myself 3. Opinions vs. facts 4. Fonts/spacing for this FAQ 5. This FAQ is not yet finished 6. Length of the FAQ (b) Use and copying of the FAQ 1. Personnal use 2. Business use (c) Why I do this, where am I coming from (d) Your help is needed 2. STRAIGHT TALK ABOUT DIAMONDS (142 lines) (a) think about the purchase logically! (b) gem alternatives to a diamond (c) alternatives to a diamond engagement ring 3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION (249 lines) (a) diamond properties (b) getting the rough diamonds (c) DeBeers (d) cutters (e) diamond dealers and wholesalers (f) retailers 4. BUYING DIAMONDS (198 lines) (a) Learning more about diamonds 1. Library 2. Bookstore 3. Jewelry Stores 4. Video Guides for Consumers 5. Conclusion: (b) Retailer options (c) Wholesaler/dealers (d) Private parties (e) What salestalk to be prepared for 1. Closings -- Minor Close -- Conviction Close -- Alternate Choice Close -- Reduction Close -- Service Close -- Instruction Close -- Assumption close -- Testimonial Close 2. When you are willing to buy 5. VALUE/QUALITY OF DIAMONDS ( 87 lines) (a) Overview of the 4 C (b) How important are these 4 C's to you 6. CARAT ( 70 lines) 7. COLOR (437 lines) (a) Introduction (b) GIA Color scale (c) judging color of a diamond (d) diamond color data (e) non-GIA color grading system (f) colorimetric reading vs GIA and AGS scales (g) Fancy color - intro - judging the value - source of color (nat. vs treated) - color overview (Champagne, blue, green,...) 8. CLARITY (160 lines) (a) general info (b) clarity enhancement 9. CUT (1136 lines) (a) Introduction (b) Grading Cuts - to be or not to be (c) Round Brilliant - overview (d) Depth (or height) of a Diamond - Description (e) Depth of a Diamond - Optics behind it (f) Depth of a Diamond - Judging it (g) Table of a Diamond - Description (h) Table of a Diamond - Judging it (i) Crown of a Diamond - Description (j) Crown of a Diamond - Judging it (k) Girdle of a Diamond - Description (l) Girdle of a Diamond - Judging it (m) Symmetry Grades (n) Polish Grades (o) Effects of Proportioning on the Value (p) Lazare Diamonds (q) Shapes of Diamonds - Most Common Fancies - intro - Marquis - Oval - Pear - Emerald Cut (r) Shapes of Diamonds - Old Cuts - intro - Table Cut - Rose Cut - Senaille Cut - Pichere - Peruzzi Cut - Old Mine Cut - Cushion Cut - Single Cut - Swiss Cut - Native Cut (s) Shapes of Diamonds - Some rare / patented ones - intro - Trillian - Trilliant (R) - Trielle or contemporary Trilliant - Trillion (TM) - Asscher's Trilliant - Troidia - Trillium (R) - Quadbrilliant (TM) - Barion square - Radiant Cut - Starburst (TM) - Princess cut - Quadrillion (R) - DeBeer's Flower Cuts -- Marigold Cut -- Dahlia Cut -- Zinnia Cut -- Sunflower Cut -- Fire Rose - Dream Cuts (TM) -- Marquise Dream Cut -- Pear Dream Cut -- Oval Dream Cut - Royal Cuts (TM) -- Baroness Royal Cut -- Dutchess Royal Cut -- Empress Royal Cut - Star Cut - Queen Cut - Flanders Brilliant 10. PRICES (166 lines) (a) General info (b) Price table for Round Brilliants (c) Price table for Pears (d) Prices of other fancy cuts ======================================================================== I. ABOUT THIS F.A.Q. --------------------- I(A) TECHNICAL DETAILS OF THIS F.A.Q. POSTING 1. Posting Sites of this FAQ: I'll try to post this every so often on the soc.couples.wedding and alt.wedding groups. Every time I post this, I spend several hours updating and rewriting parts of it. It is still not finished, and there are still some important things that I'd like to include in this F.A.Q., but do not for lack of time on my part. 2. Caveat about myself: It is important to realize that I am NOT in the diamond business. I am just a person who has gone through the ordeal of buying a nice diamond engagement ring for my girlfriend. Hence I am not an expert. Most of what I write I believe is correct, but it is likely that make some mistakes, so feel to comment on it directly to me, or to others on the net. I'll take your corrections and incorporate them into the next post. 3. Opinions vs. facts: Furthermore, on some issues we might not agree; some things are really a matter of personal opinion, so take what I write with a grain of salt. Don't sue me if I've lead you astray (well, I guess you can recover all the money that you've paid me to write this :-)). 4. Fonts/spacing for this FAQ: Please use a constant spacing font; there is a small ASCII drawing of a diamond and a price tables later on. There are 71 columns across for the entire FAQ, which should work for pretty much 5. This FAQ is not yet finished: Also, please note that I am not yet really finished with this. The issues that I'd like to address in the updated version of this document are: what to look for in rubies, sapphires, etc.; the SI3 grade; newer price list; gold, settings, customs; fakes; treatment; DeBeers marketing campaigns, slogans; appraisals; certification; etc. These issues, along with enhancement of what I've written so far should about double the length of this FAQ :-( 6. Length of the FAQ Although the title of this F.A.Q. has been Engagement Diamond FAQ, from the feedback that I get from various sources, it seems that there are always issues that I have not addressed that seems to be important to people wanting to buy diamonds. Of course, to some people those issues are irrelevant. So what I am trying to do is to answer as many questions by this FAQ, rather than omitting these issues. The drawback is, that this FAQ is WAY to long; I'd rather put too much info for you to sift through, rather than not enough, which is probably better or the two bad options. With this in mind, this article is NOT designed to be in the entirety, but rather be used as a resource to be counsulted when you need to understand a certain issue when buying an engagement diamond. Hence: DO NOT READ THE ENTIRE F.A.Q., UNLESS YOU ARE REALLY BORED. :) I(B) USE AND COPYING OF THIS F. A. Q. 1. Personnal use: If you are a person looking for information on diamonds as a consumer, please feel free to take this FAQ in parts or as a whole and do with it what you will. Feel free to print it out, give it to your friends, send it electronically, etc. Please leave my name (Peter Mlynek, mlynek@chem.wisc.edu) attached to it, if you can. If you add these files onto your Web page, please let me know of the location, since sometimes I get requests about that. 2. Business use: If you are a professional in the jewelry business, please do not copy these files for any reason. Though I am a pretty reasonable fellow, I've devoted way too much time to this so that someone else can make money off my work, but more importantly, I wouldn't want to be held liable if information in this F. A. Q. is misused. Feel free to e-mail me, and we can talk about business use of this F.A.Q.; some firms already have my permission to use it. (N.B.: No, I don't think that this FAQ is good enough to be used for professional reasons to begin with, anyway :) I(C) WHY I DO THIS About two years ago, when I was in the market for an engagement ring, I was not able to find any information about engagement rings, and diamonds in particular. The only apparent source of information was the sales folks in jewelry stores. Although most of these people are trustworthy, it is hard to separate the salestalk from facts. Especially when it comes to stuff that you are told that you need to get, but spending loads of money on half an ounce of minerals and metal, does not make good sense. There really is not much information when it comes to jewelry. When I buy a car, I look through Car and Driver or a similar magazine, people who buy stereo component read up on them in an audiophile magazines, for real estate I reach for MLS, for photo gear I look through Popular Photography, for toaster I check out Consumer Reports. For diamonds...nothing! Anything that you do find are just advertisements. This is strange, considering that jewelers expect engaged couples to shell out loads of money for something that most folks are in the dark about. A consumer guide for diamond buyers is hence much more needed than for other items. BTW, please do not ask me to recommend a jeweler, or a diamond dealer. Though I know several good ones, my recommendations would be colored too much by my personal taste (which is undoubtedly different from yours), and my experience is too anecdotal. 1(e) YOUR HELP IS NEEDED There are several things you, as a consumer, can do to help me. First of all, if you find a mistake, an error, or an omission, please get in touch with me. I really don't want to lead people astray in this terribly confusing business. Second, it would be too expensive for me to get the up to date prices on regular basis. If you've found my F. A. Q. helpful, please copy the price table in the price section, update it and send it to me. After all, I've spend dozens of hours on this...can you spare a few bucks, and a couple of minutes helping me and others? Third, I am finishing my thesis and looking for a permanent position. If you know of a small to medium firm that could you a person with a PhD in inorganic chemistry (minor in analytical chem), and with an MBA in finance (some operations research), please send me a note; I'd be eternally grateful. :-) ========== end of section 1 =============== 2. STRAIGHT TALK ABOUT DIAMONDS -------------------------------- 2(a) THINK ABOUT THE PURCHASE LOGICALLY! First things first. Get this through your head: * _You_Don't_Need_An_Engagement_Diamond_! You don't need any diamonds. A diamond is a luxury. You need clothing, shelter, food, love,... . You don't need a diamond. You may want it, but you don't need it. Owning a diamond is, I'd say, up around the 4th level of Mazlow's pyramid model of Theory of Needs, not on the 2nd as most jewelers would lead you to believe. Diamond is not an indication of love. The only thing you sorta need is an engagement and a wedding ring, to show others that the man/woman is no longer available; but there is no rule that says that the rings need to contain any diamonds. And of course, there is no correlation between the cost of the diamond, and how much a couple loves each other, or how good the marriage will be. And as a luxury good, diamonds really suck. Consider other luxury goods: fur coats, luxury cars, fancy TVs, etc. Well, you need clothing, so as long you need a coat to keep warm during the cold winters, why not buy an expensive fur coat. As long as you want to spend time watching the tube, why not on a large 52-inch Sony. As long as you need to drive from one place to another, why not in an S-series Mercedes. But diamond in your ring just sits there. Its only purpose is to be esthetically pleasing. But as you know, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.... Diamond also sucks as a luxury good from another angle. A lot of luxury goods are sold so that others might admire them, and thus reflecting well on their owners (consciously or not!). But with diamonds others have no idea. First of all, there are tremendous value differences between diamonds that look alike. Second of all, no one can tell the difference between a real diamond and a fake just by casual observation. And third of all, very few people can tell the difference between a good diamond and a poor one, even if you tell them the specifications thereof. Hence the satisfaction of owning a diamond comes from the warm feeling of you knowing that it is a real and good diamond, and not from wanting to be admired or to keep up with the Joneses'. You are buying the diamond for your happiness, not what anyone else thinks. * Bottom line: don't buy a diamond to impress others; buy it to satisfy * yourself/your fiancee. * So, look for a diamond only when you really want it and realize that * you are basically splurging on yourself/your fiancee. * And buy a diamond that you are happy with and that you will be happy * with for the rest of your life. This is extremely important!! Decide * what diamond you want, what you are going to be happy with, and then find such a diamond. Realize that you/your wife will be looking at that diamond for rest of the life (If you don't think it will be for rest of your/her life, you have bigger problems than what engagement ring to buy!). Do not buy the _almost_ right diamond. If you do that, 5, 10 or 30 yrs down the road, you'll regret that you've wanted to save yourself a few hundred dollars instead of getting what you want. And there will be nothing you could do; substituting a better diamond for the one originally offered to the woman is sacrilegious. You can buy an _almost_ perfect car, or a computer, because in 7 yrs or so you'll just buy a another one, but baby, this particular diamond is very special. (If you are buying diamonds for earrings, bracelet, etc., buying the almost perfect diamonds is no big deal, you can always upgrade or buy a whole new piece later.) It is necessary to approach the engagement buying experience from a rational viewpoint. Leave your emotions at home. Think with your head, not with your heart. Think with your head, not with your loins. Don't let hormones guide your buying decisions. I realize that this is very difficult for people in love, and with the excitement of getting married, and all, but do not make this an emotional purchase. Don't fall for any 'mystique' of diamonds, or 'isn't this pretty' arguments from your jeweler. The purchase needs to be approached with the same attitude (if not more serious) as hiring the band or a caterer for the wedding (except this diamond will be around long after the guests recall how wonderful the cake tasted or the music sounded). If you are offended by this section, I apologize. I certainly don't wish to patronize anybody, it's just that some people think that a diamond is needed for an engagement, and need to be whacked on the head to realize that this is not so, hence the strong language. :-) 2(b) GEM ALTERNATIVES TO A DIAMOND Alternatives to diamonds are numerous: if you like a certain color, buy a precious stone in that color. There are suitable stones for any color you would ever want. Is there a color that holds a special meaning to you as a couple? If you/your wife are going to be wearing a ring with a gemstone everyday, like is the tradition with engagement and wedding rings, make sure that the stones are both tough and hard enough to handle the hundreds of thousands of hours of wear. Yes, you can get an emerald or an opal, but you really need to be careful...can you maintain the vigilance for the next 50-odd years day in and day out? There really is only one gemstone that is tough and hard enough for everyday wear: corundum (aluminum oxide). If corundum is red, it is named a ruby, and if it is blue or any other color besides red, it is called a sapphire. 2(c) ALTERNATIVES TO A DIAMOND ENGAGEMENT RING Another approach you might consider instead of one large stone, is lots of small precious stones in the engagement ring. They can be diamonds, but you can use colored stones as well. You can even design it yourself in any shape/style you want, if a jeweler doesn't carry it, or can't get it. A lots of small diamonds will also be much cheaper then one large one. Another option is to be minimalist. If the fiancee is a practical person, a gaudy ring might not be the way to go. A simple gold band might not be too obtrusive, and not get in the way. When skin diving, kneading dough, performing surgery, fixing copying machine, shooting hoops, wearing thin gloves, etc., a ring with a diamond, precious stones, or actually anything protruding, such as prongs, will need to be removed for the fear of damage either to or by the ring, stones. A simple gold band also wont portray you as a rich person (falsely or not), in public, and wont draw attention to itself in the wrong neighborhood. And again you do have many options. Sure, it could be a simple gold band, but it also can be gold band with a special design that is meaningful to you as a couple. It could be gold of various colors as well. Actually, it does not even have to be gold; consider silver, platinum, ... ===== end of section 2 ======= 3. BACKGROUND INFO ON DIAMONDS: -------------------------------- (I've been told that this section is pretty much the most boring of all sections of this FAQ, but it may give you some helpful info on how this business operates, hence I've kept it here) 3 (a) PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF DIAMONDS 1. Chemistry of diamonds Chemically speaking, diamond is pure carbon in a regular crystal form. It is actually surprising how pure diamonds are, especially gem quality diamonds. Virtually all impurities present in an average stone are present only in trace amounts; only nitrogen, which can easily substitute in place of a carbon into the lattice, commonly reaches levels of dozens or hundreds of ppm. CAVEAT: though you would think of a diamond as being inert, please do remember that it is not immune to oxidation. If you throw a diamond into a fire, or heat it to over 650 C, it will burn to produce CO2. Of course, the fact that the engagement ring will melt before this will happen, and the fact that one'd expose it needlessly to fire, makes this an almost an academic issue. 2. Density The mean density of a diamond is 3.52 g/cm3 (this is about 3.52 times that of water), but this does vary slightly. It can be as low as 3.506 and as high as 3.524. The higher the density, the purer the diamond: certain Australian diamond have been measured at 3.56 ["Diamonds, Myth, Magic and Reality" as quoted by YUJS81A@prodigy.com] A relatively easy way of verifying the authenticity of diamonds is by determining its density. Of the most common simulants, diamond is actually _least_ dense, in other words, simulants are just too heavy. Here are some other examples: Gadolinium Gallium Garnet (GGG): 7.02 Cubic Zirconium (CZ): 5.67 - 5.90 Yttrium Aluminum Garnet (YAG): 4.55 Two different methods are used to determine the density, one of which is simply putting the gem into a series of jars containing progressively denser liquids, until you find one in which the gemstone floats; for diamonds the corresponding solution is diluted Clerici's solution. The second way of determining density is the Archimedian method of simply comparing the weight of the stone in water vs in the air. [Simon&Schuster: "Gems and Precious Stones"] 3. Hardness As you already know, diamond is the hardest known substance on Earth (so far). On the scale of 1 to 10, known as the Moh's scale, it is a 10. The semi-quantitative scale is: talc 1 gypsum 2 calcite 3 fluorite 4 apatite 5 orthoclase 6 quartz 7 topaz 8 corundum 9 (i.e. sapphire or ruby) diamond 10 What this scale tells you is that a stone of a higher Mohs scale hardness can scratch only a stone of a lesser Mohs number. It is this hardness that makes diamonds very much needed in many industrial applications. Henry Ford has found that expensive diamond containing sandpaper would actually be cheaper in the long run due to its longevity for his automobile manufacturing. Diamonds are often found in drilling tool, everything from mining drill bits, to FDA approved artery cleaner for patients who aren't angioplasty candidates, as well as cutting tools such as saw blades for cutting concrete runways or granite from quarries. Hence, the hardness test is another easy way of determining if a diamond is genuine. But be careful; if you find a stone that looks like a diamond, and take it to a jeweler, and are asked if they can perform the harness test, say no. What some jewelers might simply do would be to run a corundum tipped tool over the table; if it is not genuine, it will leave a scratch mark, thereby defacing it. There is no need to destroy a good looking stone, even if a simulant, like that. Of course, most jewelers would perform such a test on a smaller facet, so a scratch mark is not easily visible when mounted. Just make sure that the jeweler does this test on a non-obvious facet or the girdle. CAVEAT: hardness does not equal toughness. Just because something is hard, does not mean that it cannot shatter. Think of it as a comparing the properties of wood vs a brick: though you can easily scratch a piece of wood but not a brick, if you through them from a roof of your house onto a sidewalk, generally the brick will shatter but the 2-by-4 will be whole. Diamond is very hard, and is also pretty tough, but not extremely. It can shatter if you hit it just right. No need to baby it like you would an emerald, but don't abuse your diamond(s). BTW, a commonly asked question, if a diamond is absolutely the hardest substance in existence, can be answered with "probably not". Computer calculations have suggested that carbon nitride of the formula C3N4 in a diamond lattice would be actually a little harder; though this has been synthesized later, we still don't know conclusively one way or another [for readable articles, see for example NYT 25 Aug 89, New Scientist 20 Mar 93, Science 1993 261,334.] Recently though, I can across a paper that has said that fcc fullerene at high pressures (above 18GPa) did actually scratch a diamond anvil cell [New J. Chem. 1995, 19, 253]; whether this is true remains to be seen. 4. Other Properties of Diamonds Diamonds are excellent conductors of heat; about five times better than copper metal. Perfectly grown diamonds, or very good natural stones, can be used in electronic devices as thermistors, or heat sinks. Thermal expansion of diamond is exceptionally low, about 0.8 ppm/C at rt. Compressibility of diamonds is also extremely low. The electronic properties of diamond are easily deduced from looking at the periodic table: diamonds are insulators (1E+16ohms/cm) if pure, but are n-type or P-type semiconductors when doped with N or B resp (see further bellow for more on this). The process of getting finished diamonds is seemingly a simple one: mine -> DeBeers -> cutter -> dealers -> retailer -> groom -> bride 3(b) MINES By pure chance, most diamond deposits have traditionally been located in environmentally and/or politically challenging regions of Earth. Majority of diamonds have been mined in Republic of South Africa, other sub-Saharan countries, and Siberia. There are also smaller diamond deposits in other parts of the world like northern South America, Arkansas, etc. Recently, a large deposit of brown diamonds have been found in Australia. Within a last year or two, millions of acres between the Great Slave Lake and the Arctic Ocean in Canada's NWT have been claimed by companies prospecting for diamonds (so far the news is not too optimistic). 3(c) DE BEERS DeBeers is an international company that buys rough diamonds directly from the diamond mine owners, and then resell them to the cutters or institutional investors. Maintaining a worldwide monopoly and monopsony is has been very profitable for DeBeers, however, it also has been very expensive for them. DeBeers expense comes not only from the traditional monopoly/monopsony expense of having to satisfy both the vendors and the clients to avoid disintermediation, but also in risk costs such as large capitalization. DeBeers does take a very long term view of this business: we are talking horizons of decades, not of the next fiscal quarter. Overall, it is a very successful business. Although DeBeers has been traditionally headquartered in RSA, due to potential civil unrest (or a civil war) towards the end of the Apartheid RSA, they've moved to London; the reason given by the firm was to give the company a more international location, a more central location. DeBeers is extremely good in securing the rough; they've written contracts with right wing dictatorships, Marxist- Leninist African dictators, USSR (who at the same time was trying to overthrow RSA and destroy capitalism, including DeBeers), democratic governments, private enterprises, etc. Because they are a monopoly, they are not permitted to operate in the US due to the anti-trust legislation, so for most of the century they have been represented in the US by Ayer's, a marketing firm. 3(d) CUTTERS Cutting firms from all over the world buy rough diamonds from DeBeers in sessions called the "sights" several times a year. These are by invitations only, and besides cutters also other large institutional investors are brought in. A representative of a buyer along with his expert is brought a box full of diamonds; then they have some time to look it over and decide whether to purchase or not. The price is set, no negotiating, no substituting allowed, no partial sales, no nothing. And if the buyers fail to buy what's offered, they are in danger of not being invited back in the future. Cutting of diamonds is done all over the world. Traditionally it has been done in Antwerp, but with low cost of labor elsewhere, other cutting businesses have sprung up. A large portion of diamonds is cut in India; usually the very small stones are cut there, 10 points or less. United States also has a cutting industry, but it is limited only to the largest roughs, 3-4 carats min, due to large labor costs. The best cut diamonds have traditionally come from USSR; the workers there were taught what is the proper cut, and the diamonds were cut precisely to those dimensions, regardless of how much rough diamond they had to waste. On the other hand, diamonds that have been cut in Israel are cut to bring in the most money; and since diamonds are sold by weight, their cutters try to cut off the least amount of the rough that they can get away with and still make a decent diamond. 3(e) DIAMOND DEALERS Diamond dealers from all over the world then buy these cut stones from the cutters. One of the largest communities of diamond dealers is found on 47th Street in New York. Most of the businesses are family owned, and family run for generations (the idea is that if an employee rips you off, at least it stays in the family :-) ). The ethics standards are extremely high; hundreds of thousands of dollars are exchanged with a handshake, and even the smallest infractions may make a dealer a persona non-grata for life. Other metropolitan areas have similar concentrations of diamond dealers, usually called "the diamond district" or "the diamond house", etc. 3(f) RETAILERS Jewelers from the rest of the country then buys the diamonds from these dealers, and then sell it to the public. There are several ways of doing this: for most pieces, the jeweler puts in an order of a variety of gems from various wholesalers, including diamonds, from one or several diamond dealers. Usually a jeweler works with several diamond dealers, not only to shop around for the best price, but some dealers specialize in certain types of diamonds. But, since diamonds are expensive to keep in inventory, and if you are looking for a stone in certain grade, it is likely that the retailer will probably not have it. In this case the jeweler can order it on a memo. This service does not cost you anything, and does not oblige you to buy the stone, but does oblige you to visit the store again when the parcel of several diamonds similar to what you've requested arrives, and consider buying one. ==== end of section 3 ======= 4. BUYING DIAMONDS ------------------------- 4 (a) LEARNING MORE ABOUT DIAMONDS 1. Library: To learn more about diamonds, and jewelry in general, hit your local library. Larger public libraries should have lots of info on geology, minerals, etc. (real useful huh, ;( ), but they may also have trade periodicals. There are a number of trade publications on jewelry, precious stones, diamonds, etc. 2. Bookstore: You can also hit the book stores; there are a number of up to date books that might be useful. You really should check out books beyond the 3 page section on engagement rings in wedding guides. 3. Jewelry Stores: And most importantly, go to a large number of stores, talk to store owners. Do talk to the store owners, managers, the big cheeses. Find out their names before walking in and ask for them by name when you visit their store. The average salesperson is hopelessly and blissfully ignorant of anything beyond the pedestrian knowledge of precious stones (yes, I know, there are exceptions); after all, they are there to _sell_ the diamonds, and not to know about them. AND look at several dozen stones, even those that you are not interested, so that you understand the differences between the them. 4. Video Guides for Consumers: Lately, a few firms have understood the kind of frustration that grooms to be experience that I've felt when realizing that there is very little information on something on which we are suppose to pay a lot of money for. One such firm, Cross Productions, has made a 30 minute "Video Guide to Buying Diamond." IMHO, it is professionally made, explains the 4C's in a straight, step-by-step fashion, is chockful of information and is just the right length. Though most of this information is readily available from other sources, the most valuable features are probably that it shoots straight (no conflict of interest, afteral), and that it tells you how to select a jeweler. However, I do feel that the prices cited throughout the show are a bit on the high side. To order this tape for US$ 24.95, contact Michael Solomon at +212-677-8392, or e-mail him at zmounla@undp.org. 5. Conclusion: And most importantly, don't think that by reading this FAQ (or even by writing one) you will become any type of an expert on diamonds. 4 (b) RETAILER OPTIONS By retailers I mean jewelers that deal with the end customer. Most people interested in buying jewelry use this venue, and these businesses are set up to serve them. There are big differences between jewelers, each of which has some sort of an advantage over another. Which type of a jeweler is right for you depends.... Though it is hard to categorize, and generalize, since there are always exceptions, please take these descriptions with a grain of salt. In any case, let me try to describe the different type of jewelers: Mall jewelry stores located in large shopping centers are great for buying jewelry for Christmas presents, Bday presents, spur of the moment purchases, etc. The mall jewelry store lives off the large volume of average shoppers who stream by the storefront. Hundreds of shoppers a day stop by, most of whom do not know much about jewelry, and this reflects on the sales personnel. The salespersons behind the counter are probably the most uninformed people in the business...they may be selling toasters one year, jewelry the next. They may know how to sell, but their knowledge about diamonds may be pretty negligible. There also is another problem that a buyer should be aware of when shopping for a diamond: since most people who shop for diamonds shop around, and the mall jewelers realize this, they in a dilemma-- it is difficult to compete on price, since the mall jewelers overhead is very high compared to other jewelry shops. If a mall jeweler wants to capture this market, the store either has to give more to the customer (e.g. better service, financing, credit, etc.) or sell cheaper (i.e. poorer quality) goods. Diamond shoppers will try to compare the goods from one store to the next, usually writing down the price, and the characteristics of the stone, specifically the weight, color, and clarity. Unfortunately for the buyer, there is no easy scalar value of cut, and since it is the most difficult of the 4 C's to understand, the mall jeweler may buy poorly cut, cheaper stones, in order to compete with the other jewelers. Overall, though there are great reasons to shop the mall jeweler, and there are wonderful products you may purchase there, when shopping for an expensive item such as an engagement diamond, I wouldn't put the mall jeweler at the top of my list. A downtown jewelry store is another option for a diamond buyer. This type of a store is located on a busy street that has a sizable pedestrian traffic, usually around the center of a city. The sales here are not as frequent as in a mall store, but the sales are usually bigger. The staff is usually more knowledgeable, and the store may have a long history and a good reputation. Since most of these stores have a workshop, it should not be a problem to get a custom made or a unique engagement ring. People who patronize these establishments are usually looking for high levels of service and quality. The prices may likewise be high as well. However, if the store is locally owned, negotiating a better price is a possibility. Strip mall jewelers probably offer the best of the two options describe above. (Strip malls are a dozen shops with a parking lot in front of them, united by some sort of a covered sidewalk and some color/design scheme; strip malls are found in every suburban community in America) Some strip mall jewelers may be a family business, others a part of a national chain. Some stores may have a workshop. Usually reasonable prices for reasonable products, and most items are very negotiable. Another option is discount superstores like Wal-Mart. Though it may seem less then tactful to most people to propose with a ring bought along with a toothpaste and a pair of sneakers, if you are a practical person and just want a small, low priced diamond, this might be your option. Look into these superstores if you want an engagement ring that costs less than $1000. 4(c) WHOLESALERS/DEALERS The diamond dealers and jewelry wholesalers are usually found in an area of downtown of larger cities, either in a single building or in a several block area, termed something like "the jewelry center" or "the diamond district" etc. Though their customers are usually retail jewelers, they do sometimes deal with the end user. There is only one reason to deal with the wholesaler: best prices. If you want to deal with a wholesaler, you should know your stuff. Do not expect the wholesaler to spend time explaining to you what the 4 C's are. Usually, you just call the dealer up, tell them what diamond you wish to purchase, set up an appointment well in advance so that they can obtain several stones close to what you want. You certainly can just go into the store without an appointment, but it is unlikely that they'll just happen to have the stone that you are looking for. Expect the dealing to be professional, unemotional, none of the 'diamond is for ever', 'diamonds signify love', etc. stuff. You will not be able to get the real wholesale price, more likely you'll just split the difference between the wholesale price and the retail price. Be prepared to negotiate, but of course, you need to be knowledgeable about the prices, so you can support you bargaining position. Also, no checks excepted. Credit cards excepted rarely, and only if you are willing to pay for the bank charge, which of course you can negotiate as well. Overall, dealing in cash is the best; hundred dollar bills welcome. 4(d) PRIVATE PARTIES Just like it is possible to get a good value on a used car through the ads in the paper, so it is possible to buy a diamond. The people who advertise in papers usually are trying to sell gems that were inherited, or people who go to estate sales and who picked up some gems cheaply. Also, some diamond dealers advertise in large city newspapers. Of course, one needs to be very careful when buying through the private parties. Are you willing to give a stranger a large sum of money for a piece of a sparkling rock that may turn out to be a fake, or misrepresented? Caveat Emptor. 4(e) WHAT SALES TALK TO BE PREPARED FOR In order for the retailer to get money out of you for a piece of jewelry, like in any other field of selling, there are many different strategies to do this. The ones listed below are gathered from back issues of Jeweler's Circular Keystone (a trade magazine for the jewelry retail industry) most of which should sound quite familiar from other sales folks such as a car dealers, or a real estate agents. CLOSINGS [JCK Feb 89, with my comments] (i) Minor Close: the seller will mention a minor point to the buyer, such as "...and the ring comes in this beautiful box." Of course, the price of the box is a few pennies, and since you'll wear your diamond engagement ring for rest of your life you might not ever put the ring in the box again. (ii) Conviction Close: the seller looks into the buyers eye and asks: "Have you ever gotten her something this nice before?" (iii) Alternate Choice Close: "do you like, or would you prefer to buy this other one?" This is just like selling life insurance: "I'll be in your neighborhood on Wednesday, can't I drop by?...or will Thursday be better for you?" Basically, what the seller will do, is to take the question from yes-vs-no to this-or-that. (iv) Reduction Close: "yeah, it is a lot of money, but look how inexpensive it turns out to be, if you consider that she'll wear it for rest of her life!" The buyer should be prepared for this one, especially when buying the once in the lifetime engagement ring. (v) Service Close: "we'll gift wrap it for you" what this basically does is to get rid of one more problem for the groom..."heck, I can give it to her tonight, instead of looking around for a gift wrap, wrapping it up, which may take a day or two; I'd rather just get it over with ASAP." (vi) Instruction Close: demonstrating how it works wont really work for engagement diamonds, but in a way, the explanations of the 4 C's, and "notice how brilliant this stone is" are instruction closes. (vii) Assumption close: the seller will start to write up the sale on the 'assumption' that the buyer wants to buy. The buyer doesn't want to appear foolish, or doesn't want to sadden the seller, so the buyer, who is on a verge of buying it anyway, will say "aww, alright" I've also seen this kind of close in marketing literature called the "Fait Accompli Close", and unfortunately I fell for it many times regularly with other purchases. (viii) Testimonial Close: the seller will testify how much they personally like it. This might seem ridiculous in some industries, but the jeweler may say: "now personally, I really like this one; I know you probably can't afford it, but I think it is beautiful. Let me just show this to you, so that you have an idea of you would want your diamond to look like, and let's see if we can get at least part way with a cheaper stone". If the buyer doesn't know anything about diamonds, the buyer will trust the sellers word. Moreover, the buyer may try to get their ego into it, and 'prove' to the seller that the buyer is good enough to get this really good stone, and pat himself on his back that he was able to persuade the seller to sell it to him (this "wow, I was able to convince the seller into letting me buy the best, most expensive diamond that they were showing me" attitude is just what warms the retailer's hearts). WHEN THE CUSTOMER INDICATES WILLINGNESS TO BUY: (i) The seller will not enter any new info (ii) The seller will complete the order (iii) The seller will suggest an add-on sale (iv) The seller will thank the customer (v) The seller will praise the customer's taste (vi) The seller will congratulate the customer (vii) The seller will invite the customer back for free checkup (viii) The seller will get the customer out of the store. 5. VALUE/QUALITY OF DIAMONDS ---------------------------- 5(a) OVERVIEW OF THE FOUR C.s Value of diamonds is determined by four input variables commonly referred to as "The four C's", which is the first thing that a sales clerk will tell you. The price of diamonds are driven by this value, as well as market forces (supply and demand). More on price later, let me concentrate on the four C's. These four C's are: cut (the styling of the diamond as well as the workmanship), clarity (the number/size/types of faults inherent of the diamond), color (how much off-white the diamond is), and carat (how much it weighs). You must know ALL of these in order to determine the value of each stone. Asking "is $4000 for 1 carat stone right?" is akin to asking "is $100,000 for 3 bedroom house right?"; for a house you must consider location, area of property, age, and dozen other things. $4000 might be ten times too expensive, or ten times too cheap. I've listed the 4 C's in section 5 through 9. They are in order of ease of understanding, not by importance. 5(b) HOW IMPORTANT ARE THESE 4 C.S TO YOU So the value of diamonds is determined by the 4 C's: Value = F(cut, clarity, color, carats) Obviously you want to get the best of all of the 4 C's, but getting a diamond with the best clarity, best color, and best cut is a great way to rocket yourself into a poorhouse. Most folks would put the 4 C's in this order: carats (long pause), color, cut, clarity. My list is: the cut first, then color, weight and finally clarity. But this is personal preference. There is no right or wrong way of doing this. But let's see if I can come up with a recommendation of weighing the 4 C's against each other. This is my recommendation on deciding which diamond is this: decide which lowest grade of color you would except in your diamond. Also decide which lowest grade of clarity you cold live with. Yes, I realize that you want the highest grades possible, but now just consider the lowest grades. OK, it is likely that you would buy a diamond of these grades, but you would also probably consider buying a diamond 2, 3, or even 4 grades better in either clarity or color, but not much higher than that, since you'd be wasting money on better color and clarity, which you could be devoting in getting a better cut or carat weight. Now consider how important the cut is to you. The cut is not graded, (and is the most difficult of the 4 C's to judge), because the cut is a personal preference. Maybe you will like a stones that are less expensive better than those that the experts say are well-cut stones. Decide on the shape, range of proportions, finish, symmetry, etc. that you would accept (this is the most difficult step of your decision). Now, decide on how much money you'd like to devote to this diamond. Again, make it a range, not a single number. Now, having those 3 C, as well, as the range of your budget, look for the biggest diamond, i.e. diamond of the greatest carats, that you've budgeted for (i.e. maximize value of the diamond only wrt carats). Now armed with the knowledge of what range of each of the 4 C's you are looking for, you'll be able to ask the jeweler for them. Since diamonds are not manufactured but mined and cut, tell the jeweler a range of what you'll except, not the specific grades. Then, when later the jeweler shows you several diamonds, then you'll have to juggle the 4 Cs along with the cost. Then it's going to be: well, diamond A is really nicely cut, but diamond B has a slightly better but a lot worse clarity, and diamond C has the best clarity and color of all but is much smaller then the rest, and diamond D is larger and has a great clarity but costs more then others, but on the other hand the diamonds E, F, G, from another jeweler have... ad infinitum. Basically, you'll have to try tweaking your choices within the parameters you've established, until you find and buy the diamond that you are happy with. But you can weigh the 4 C's along with your budget in any way you want... The above is only a suggestion. Most importantly, though, be sure to get a stone that you are absolutely happy with. ==== end of section 5 ===== 6. CARAT -------- Carat weight refers to the weight of the diamond, not the size. By definition 1 carat is exactly 200 milligrams, although in past centuries this has varied. Since carats are measured by a balance, not a ruler, a diamond with 6 mm diameter (all precious stones are measured in mm, not in inches; nobody outside of the US uses inches) will weigh 8 times more then a 3 mm stone of similar cut (8 comes from 2^3). Note the spelling of carat. Don't confuse this with karat, which is a unit of purity of gold. 1 karat is 1/24th gold, hence 14kt gold is 14/24 pure. Purity of gold for jewelry varies from 9kt to 18kt, depending on the style, usage and country standards. Also, since other precious stones are measured in carats, and the density between the minerals varies, a 1 carat diamond will look a different size then a 1 carat topaz. Since most cut diamonds weigh less then a carat, and merchants would not be too found of saying, 'isn't this a nice diamond weighing a fraction of a carat,' the carat is subdivided into points. There are 100 point in a carat, just like there are 100 cents in a dollar. However, on your appraisal, receipt, and any other documentation, the weight will be specified in carats, and not points, as required by the Federal Trade Commission. Most diamonds sold are under 50 points, which go into tennis bracelets, pendants, earrings, side stones, etc. Diamonds reserved for engagement rings are usually of higher weight. Engagement diamonds go any where from 25 points to over a carat, with the average at 64 points (as of 92, dropping a point or two per year). One thing to note: please do not buy a diamond based only on its size. Selecting a diamond based on its size is akin to buying a house solely based on its square footage, a computer solely on its hard drive capacity, or a car on the engine size. Or, to put it in another way: "Selecting a diamond based on its size is the same as selecting a man on his" Yes, the carat weight is important, but it is just one of many other variables. Unfortunately, if you looking for a higher weighed stone, the value of diamonds increases with weight. Not only does the price increase for a higher carat diamond, but the price/carat increases as well. Not only that, but this increase increases (i.e. positive d^2 $ / d ct^2) Yes, this is on top of the cube root relationship between the diameter and the weight. Usually prices of diamonds are quoted in $/ct, not in $, so if you want to speak as an insider, do so as well (not that it is a good idea though). Since most potential grooms walk into a store with a round number in his head of how big a diamond he wants to purchase (50 points, 75 points, 1 carat), the merchant will sell him what he wants, and charge him accordingly. If he leans towards a slightly small stone, the argument presented is "well, you don't want the wife telling her friends that it is _almost_ a carat, do you?". Hence the price rapidly increases above these round figures, especially for the 1 carat hurdle, or another way of looking at it is that the increase of $/ct is slowed just before (or 5-10 points before) each round weight (i.e. negative d^3 $ / d ct^3 ?) If you can live with this _almost_ effect, then this is a good place to find _relatively_ cheaper prices, than a continuous $ vs ct.wt. graph would suggest. ==== end of section 6 ======== 7. COLOR -------- [note: sections 7(a) through 7(c) are most helpful; 7(d) - 7(g) are more background material that you'll find not really relevant but might be of interest] 7(a) INTRODUCTION TO COLOR Color of diamonds refers to how much yellow shows up in the diamond. The less yellow there is, higher the value. The most valuable diamonds are totally clear. Actually, there are diamonds that have various colors (such as brown, red, blue, green, etc.), and I have described them in section (g), but for when one says "color" when dealing with diamonds they are refering to how clear to yellow the diamond is. 7(b) THE G.I.A. COLOR SCALE The most common grading system that you'll run across when shopping for diamonds is the one used by the the Gemological Institute of America (GIA), which grades the color from D alphabetically to Z. D is totally colorless, and Z is slightly yellow. There are more yellowish diamonds available which look really nice in cocktail rings, but are usually considered inappropriate for engagement rings. Grade Description D \ E \ Traces of color, if present F / as visible only to the trained eye G / H \ I \ "Near colorless": slight traces of color wont J / be apparent in mounted stones to other then a K / trained eye L \ M \ N \ Diamonds show increasing yellow color O / even to an untrained eye P / Q / R \ Stones appear yellow S-Z / even to untrained eye The GIA considers the D, E, and F to be colorless, G to J is "near colorless", K - M faint yellow, M - R very light yellow, and S - Z light yellow. However, this D to Z scale is continuous, and what they consider "very light yellow" may mean different thing that you'd call it. Unfortunately, I don't know of anyone who would put a numerical value on each grade; I've talked to dozens of jewelers, but nobody can associate an absorption coefficient with a particular grade. Besides the traditional method of judging color of stones (see below), there are colorimeters that a jeweler can buy, which will determine the grade within a 1/3 of a grade. 7(c) JUDGING COLOR OF A DIAMOND There are several associations/organizations/institutes that have various scales of measuring the color of diamonds, but the way that each of them grade the stones is by comparing the stone in question to a standard set of stones. Your jeweler may have a similar standards, which is very expensive, of course. To save money, some jewelers use artificial standards, which is OK for most purposes, but sometimes the material from which they are made is effected by UV light over periods of years, and may shift the grades slightly. And, it is also important that the size of the graded diamond is similar to the standards. When buying a diamond, it is important to see it unmounted, especially for the reason of judging the color. Since diamonds are designed to reflect all ambient light in all sorts of colors of the rainbow, you can not just look at it from the top. There are two ways of looking at a diamond, either by placing it on a level surface, or by putting it into a small plastic trough. On a level surface, make that _white_ level surface, place the diamond with table down, and look at it from the pavilion to the table; or from one side of the pavilion to the other side, i. e. in the girdle plane; or place the diamond with pavillion onto the surface, and with the culet pointing towards you, look through the girdle plane. If the jeweler doesn't provide a grading trough, just use a businesscard or a 3x5 card folded four time length-wise like a harmonica and make a dove-tail on the ends so that the diamond does roll off. Again, look at the diamond from the three angles described previously. It is very difficult to judge the color; you need to see two stones of adjacent color grades right next to each other in order to notice the difference with some difficulty. When showing it casually to your friends, the diamond will seem yellowish at about the K or L or lower grade. Although the apparent color of diamond depends on the setting, your complexion, etc., if you want your diamond to looks, don't buy a stone much bellow J. The average color for engagement rings in the US today is G to H. As far as the price goes, each grade is about 7 to 15% more expensive than the lower color grade, everything else being held the same. 7(d) DIAMOND COLOR DATA Unit sales of all diamonds by color (JKC June 1991) GIA color All Earrings Loose Other grade rings Diamonds Jewelry D, E, F 15 9 10 9 G, H, I 68 61 65 70 J, K, L 16 24 23 17 M, N, O 1 6 2 4 Unit sales of _engagement_ diamonds by color (JKC June 1991) GIA color grade 1976 1978 1981 1984 1986 1988 1990 D, E, F 30 16 10 7 13 18 11 G, H, I 58 62 64 72 61 61 61 J, K, L 11 18 23 21 23 20 26 M, N, O 1 4 3 0 3 1 2 Median color G H H H H H H 7(e) NON-G.I.A. COLOR GRADING SYSTEMS (You probably can skip this section, since everyone uses the GIA scale, but I've included it here just for the sake of being complete) Besides that GIA there are several different organizations that grade diamonds including the Belgian Diamond High Council (Hoge Raad voor Diamant, HDR), International Confederation of Jewelry, Silverware, Diamonds, Pearls and Stones (Confederation Internationale de la Bijouterie, Joaillerie, Orfevrerie, des diamants, perles et pierres precieuses, CIBJO), Scandinavian Diamond Nomenclature (Scan D. N.), the American Gem Society (AGS). Also, rarely, you can run across United Kingdom nomenclature, and others. GIA AGS Scan D.N. Scan D.N. HRD Old UK CIBJO <0.50ct 0.50ct+ Names --- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Except'l Blue Except'l D white Jager white white 0 + ----- ----- + --- River ----- ----- Excep- Excep- E --- tional Finest tional white River white white --- ----- ----- ----- 1 Rare Rare F White white ----- ----- white --- Top + + --- Wesselton ----- Top ----- Rare Wesselton Fine Rare G 2 white white white --- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- H 3 Wesselton White Wesselton White White --- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Top Top Comme- Slightly I 4 crystal crystal rcial tinted Slightly Slightly white white(I) --- --- tinted ----- tinted ----- ----- ----- white white Top Slightly J Crystal Crystal silver tinted 5 Cape white(J) --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Tinted K --- Silver white Cape (K) --- Tinted Top Tinted Top ----- ----- 6 white cape white cape Tinted L Light white Cape (L) --- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- M Cape Tinted --- 7 Cape ----- Cape color Low 1 N Cape --- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- O --- Very slightly P 8 yellow Light Tinted --- yellow color 2 Q Tinted Tinted --- --- color color R --- ----- Dark ----- Cape S --- 9 T Tinted --- Yellow color 3 U --- --- Fancy yellow V-Z 10 --- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 7(f) COLORIMETRIC READINGS VS G.I.A. AND A.G.S. SCALES The GIA scale seems linear with the color compared to a colorimetric scale, but the AGS scale does not. The border between the _lowest_ named color (i.e. if a stone has a reading of 1.01 on colorimeter, it is F, whereas 0.99 is E) and a colorimetric reading: GIA Colorimetric AGS Colorimetric scale reading scale reading E 1.00 0 0.75 G 2.00 1 1.35 I 3.00 2 2.00 K 4.00 3 2.50 M 5.00 4 3.00 O 6.00 5 3.75 Q 7.00 6 4.50 S 8.00 7 5.50 U 9.00 8 7.00 W 10.00 9 8.50 10 10.00 (Source: The Jeweler's Dictionary) 7(g) FANCY COLORS 7(g) (1) FANCY COLORS: INTRO Once again folks, this entire section deals only with FANCY colored diamonds, i.e. a specialty, that you'll rarely run across, and are not marketed as diamonds that one would put into an engagement ring. Fancy colored diamonds are those diamonds that have colors beyond the white to yellow color, as is indicated above. One may obtain virtually any color diamond desired, if one can afford it. You should remember, that aside from the champaign diamonds, fancy colored diamonds are exceedingly rare, and with a pricetag to match. 7(g) (2) FANCY COLORS: JUDGING THE VALUE Color is the most important C in a fancy color diamond--color comprimises about 60% of its value. A cert should list the color of the diamond, the secondary color, and whether the color is natural or due to a treament. The price of a particularly colored diamond however varies widely; a stone that is slightly differently colored may be valued at ten times a similar stone. A cut of a fancy colored diamond is also important: since the regular brilliant cut of a fancy color gives a too pale a stone, so a thicker cut is needed. Neither weight, nor clarity is very important (about 3 grades: IF, VVS/VS, and SI) in these types of diamonds (JCK Oct 91). 7(g) (3) FANCY COLORS: SOURCES OF COLOR "Depending on the impurities present in the diamond and on the technique used, irradiation sometimes followed by heating can produce yellow, brown, greenn blue, or, very rarely, pink colors. These are not necessarily all color centers and are to be distinguished from the boron-containing blue nitrogen-containing yellow and green diamonds. ..." --Kurt Nassau, The Physics and Chemistry of Color: The fifteen causes of Color, Wiley-Interscience, 1983. Color in naturally colored diamonds comes from the substitution of different main group elements for carbon. For example, nitrogen substitution will lead to yellowing or greening of a diamond. Naturaly blue diamonds contain small amounts of boron. There are two ways that a diamond can have fancy color, one is natural color, and the other is by irradiation of common diamonds. Irradiation of diamonds is contraversial treatment, because of fear of residual radioactivity that the diamond may have might be dangerous to the wearer. I guess steady dose of radiation may not be deemed too romantic. However, the method that gave residual radiation (by using radium salts) is not used today, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission sets the standards for radiation levels of diamonds. (JCK, May 93) I don't know what the level is in the US, but in Germany it is 0.07 bequerels. It appears that the GIA screens diamonds for radioactivity as a part of their testing. (JCK, Aug 92) No diamonds sold in the US are radioactive. The types of irradiation treatment used today include nuclear reactors, gamma ray facilities, and most often linear accelarators. It seems to me, that you just need a high energy source to knock out the carbon atoms out of the regular lattice into intersticial positions, hence creating F-centers. Dunno, according to the literature (e.g. JCK May 93), this type of treament is stable, but I'd suspect that if the diamond is annealed that this color may disappear--hence, I'd tell your jeweler to be careful when mounting an irradiated stone. Hydrogen rich diamonds have recently been discovered in the Argyle mines in Autralia, and in Jweneng mine in Botswana. The presence of H is detected by IR, and though the literature is silent on this, I suspect that it is intersticial defect, rather then substitutional one. Most common colors are grey, brown and yellowish, but blue (non-electric conductive) and violet (never seen before) are also present. (JCK Jun 91) Fancy color has also been generated by using backings. A backing is when the reflective colorless metal behind the diamond in the setting is painted. Because it is easily detectable, this method is rarely used today. However, some older pieces of jewelery may have this, so if you buy an old ring with a colored stone (even if it is not claimed to be a diamond, but some other precious stone) always make sure to have the stone taken out and see that there is no backing. (JCK May 93) Another source of color in fancy colored diamonds which you might run into (though rarely used) may be coating. The pavillion of a diamond is coated by some sort of a dye (food, fabric, ink, etc.), usually resulting in a desirable hue. You can identify a coated diamond if you look under the microscope at a pavillion side; coated diamond may exhibit an irregular or unnatural surface, and the dye may concentrate at some junctions, or may be chipped away. Personally, I'd just dip it into acetone, or nitric acid, either one should take care of pretty much any dye. Of course, as with any other treatment, the seller is under obligation to inform the buyer of the coating. (JCK May 93). As an aside, those of you who are physical chemists, it is possible to coat a diamond by chemical vapor deposition (2 micron layer), as has been done in the GIA research labs to generate blue diamonds. (CVD, or OCVD, of course, has been used in academic, and research settings for decades). Standard electrical coductivity tests of so treated diamonds can't be used, since the coating itself is conductive. Thermal conductivity tests, which test a bulk property, need to be used instead (JCK, Aug 91). 7(g) (3) FANCY COLORS: COLOR OVERVIEW a. Champagne (or brown) diamonds In the late 70's diamonds were discovered in the outback of Australia. Today, about a third of diamonds (by weight) mined come from this part of the world. Only one problem: they are not white, but brown. Though most of them are used for industrial use, some are of good enough quality to sell as gems (6% by volume, 50% by value). It is difficult to sell these brown stones, since everyone is used to the "the whiter, the better" rule DeBeer's has been pounding into their heads for decades. Argyle Diamond Sales, the organization both mining and marketing these stones, has been pushing them in marketing campaigns as "champagne" diamonds independent of DeBeer's campaigns pushing colorless diamonds, spending about 3% of their $300M annual revenues. It seems that the end consumer is someone who likes diamonds, has several of them already, and wants something unusual, more high-end fashion jewelery type diamond. Hence, it is NOT designed as an engagement diamond, which Argyle freely admits. Color grades of browns which are beyond the D-Z GIA scale, is C1 (very light brown) to C7 (dark cognac color). BTW, I'll give you one guess--who is the sole buyer of all of Argyle's production?.... that's right, the CSO. (JCK Jan 91) b. Blue diamonds There are some instances of blue diamonds, such as the Blue Hope displayed in the Smithsonian. A diamond is a semiconductor. A naturally blue diamond is doped with boron, thus holes, hence is a p-type semiconductor; increase in conductivity is a reliable way of differentiating the naturally color blue diamond from an irradiated one. Hence the rule in industry is: conductive = natural and nonconductive = irradiated (unless you come across a hydrogen rich blue diamond (a natural, nonconductive blue), or CVD blue (a treated, conductive blue), which would give you a false negative and false positive results respectively). And no, I don't know why they have a problem with a doing this with a nat. green, which is N doped, hence an n-type semiconductor. c. Green diamonds Green diamond pose a problems in treatment detection. There is no reliable way of determining if the color is produced naturally (like the famous Dresden Green), or if it is produced by irradiation. (JCK, Sept 89) d. Pink diamonds This is probably the most expensive (excluding the one-of-the-kind diamonds) colors for a diamond to have. They are minded, along with other colored, less exciting diamonds, in the Australia's Argyle mine When a couple of dozens are extracted after months of intense mining work, they are flown on a world-wide tour. The very best are sold at Christie's auctions, the rest are sold through offices in Perth, and Antwerp. Some description of pink diamonds recently mined: 1 purple-pink 3.14 ct, $1.15M Apr 89 (JCK Nov 89) 13 pinks, total $551K Apr 89 (JCK Nov 89) 67 pinks 0.4 - 2.7 ct, total 64.13 ct, $6.9M total, Nov 89 (Jan 90) 36 pinks, total 40.93 cts, over $2M total, (about $80K/ct for diamonds < 1.5 cts and about $100K/ct for 1.5+ cts) (JCK Dec 90) e. Red There are more fingers on your hand then there are known naturally colored red diamonds. If you are buying one, congratulations! ===== end of section 7 ======= 8. CLARITY ---------- (a) GENERAL INFO Clarity is a measure of how much and how many flaws there are in the diamond. Every diamond that you will see has some sort of a flaw in it. Flaws are natural; again remember that diamonds are mined and not manufactured, as opposed to the vast majority of items that we in modern times buy, which we expect to be totally without blemishes of any kind. Never the less, fewer the flaws, more valuable the diamond. And again, as for color, there are several grading systems developed, of which you'll encounter most likely only the GIA's. From the least amount of flaws (or inclusions), the scale goes from Flawless (FL), Very, very slight inclusions (VVS), Very slight inclusions (VS), Slightly imperfect (SI), and imperfect (I). These grades are further subdivided into classes with a subscript 1 or 2, thus the overall scale looks like: FL - IF - VVS1 - VVS2 - VS1 - VS2 - SI1 - SI2 - I1 - I2 - I3 The I diamonds have inclusions which, by definition, can be seen by a naked eye. You need to take a look at a few of them before you will start seeing them if you are not used to looking at diamonds. Rest of the grading is done under a 10x microscope. You need to practice looking through a microscope, and most of jewelers have them. I wouldn't bother going to jeweler who doesn't have one, or who'll hand you a loupe; loupes are difficult to handle compared to a microscope. If you can see inclusions within, let's say, about 5 seconds, then it is a SI diamond. If it takes you a long time to find any inclusion on your own, assuming you are comfy with microscope, then it is a VS stone. VVS2 means that it is difficult for an expert to find an inclusion from the top of the stone, and VVS1 from the bottom of the stone only. IF, internally flawless diamonds have no observable internal inclusions, only some on the surface that could be gotten rid off by polishing the diamond some more at the expense of weight. FL diamonds are again extremely rare, there are only about four hundred 1 ct. FL diamonds produced per year worldwide. There are a number of types of flaws, or inclusions, that you'll see when you'll look at a variety of diamonds. As stated previously, the number, size, and location of flaws will determine the clarity grade. Most common are white specks, called pinpoints. These are found in almost all diamonds. Sometimes you'll find dark spots, or "carbons" (yes, they are just called that because it reminded the early mineralogist of coal). Common faults, that usually pull the grade of the diamond the most are feathers. They are small cracks that look like feathers, which are usually not a problem. They due become a problem if they are large, and if they break the surface of the stone. I'd recommend NOT to buy a diamonds where the feather break through to the surface, but internal feathers are harmless. And of course, exposing them to thermal shocks, or ultrasound, as with any other crystalline material, might enlarge a serious feather. Another fault that you might run across is a clear crystal growth. Although it is penalized just like any other inclusion, I find some pretty neat looking, and they give the diamond a sort of a unique character ("look at that baby crystal inside the diamond!"). 8(b) CLARITY ENHANCEMENT Please note: I would not recommend getting a clarity enhanced diamond as an engagement diamond, but am presenting it here for the sake of completion. Clarity enhancement is a process in which a stone with poor clarity (let's say I1 or worse), but otherwise a nice stone, is treated to fill in the cracks. The exact identity of the material is kept a secret, but it is most likely some sort of a leaded glass. Obviously, it has to match the refractive index of diamond very closely. The durability of it is still in question... There is no problem with it what so ever in everyday wear; it is stable in boiling water, to shocks, etc. Filled diamonds (i.e. clarity enhanced diamonds) don't stand up to boiling HNO3, to direct heat (the jeweler must be careful when setting the stone), or to short UV (though it is estimated that it will take about 60 yrs of direct sunlight before it becomes noticeable; "diamonds are for ever"? maybe, but not clarity filled ones, though it should last a several human lifetimes if worn normally). Grading of filled diamonds must be done before the process. GIA wont grade filled diamonds; they insist on removing of the filling. Hence the clarity is assigned as I1 or I2, but the stone looks like VS, and thus nice-looking stones can be had cheap. But do not be mislead to think that enhancement is something special, that only the best diamonds, are enhanced, or that you have to pay extra for enhanced diamonds. Just the opposite. The idea is, again, nice looking stones cheap. There has been a lot of discussion on whether or not filled diamonds should be sold along with other diamonds, or whether they should be viewed in the same light as "lab grown" or "created" precious stones, though nobody would consider them as "fake" as let's say cubic zirconium. Everyone agrees though, that it is really important to reveal to customers (both the consumers as well as retailers) that a diamond has undergone the filling treatment. The worst fear of the jewelry industry is that the consumers will feel cheated, deceived,... and will stay away from diamonds. As stated previously, members of the jewelry industry absolutely must be meticulously honest; after all, nobody needs diamonds to survive, it is a luxury item. The policy on whether or not to stock filled diamonds varies from store to store. Some "don't want any of that crap in my store" others see it as a way sell customers what they want: nice stones cheap. If you look at a filled diamond closely, rotate it under light, you should be able to notice a bluish or an orangeish flash. Actually, there are new fillings that wouldn't make these flashes, but the manufactures worry that unscrupulous sellers would pass these as higher quality stones. Obviously, they also worry about the possibility of lawsuits. There are currently two firms who manufacture and distribute filled stones, Yehuda, the originator of this process, and Koss. Both firms offer top notch guarantees that if the filling is ever damaged (through a clumsy jeweler, for example) they'll refill it free. So it looks like a customer wont get stuck with a damaged diamond, ever. The question of durability, stability never enters into the buyer's consideration, and is thankfull shifted to the manufacturer. However, few people think that clarity enhanced diamonds will be sold for engagement rings. In part it may be because an engagement diamond is a "special" stone, only the "best" will do (and a diamond that needs to be filled can't be considered the best, can it?). I am not sure, but it seems that clarity enhanced stones are used more for purchases later in life for pendants, bracelets,... . Later in woman's life, when she has more disposable income, she is more likely to buy a diamond for herself than get it as a present (this is not my guess, that is what surveys show); it's OK to buy a nice filled diamond for herself, but may not like receiving it as a gift. But, cynically, I also suspect, that in part why they are not pushed as engagement diamonds is due to the fact that "it is a rule that bride-to-be must get a diamond engagement ring", thus the retailers can tell the groom that "real, unfilled" diamonds are the only way to go, and hit the groom for all he's worth. When the question is "filled or unfilled," the jeweler will of course push the unenhanced, and more expensive, stones. For a woman who wants to splurge after getting a big pay raise, the question wont be filled or unfilled, it will be "a diamond or a vacation or new furniture or ...", hence a jeweler will need to convince her that she should buy diamond jewelry, and if it is clarity enhanced, so be it. So, should you buy a clarity enhanced diamond? If you want a nice looking, inexpensive, real diamond, and don't care that the report says it should look worse, then buy it. But if you think that somehow you are cheating, and if this will bother you in the future, then pass. The choice is obviously yours. The bottom line is: if you are going to be happy with the diamond, then buy it. ====== end of section 8 ========= 9. CUT ------- 9(a) INTRODUCTION * Cut is the most important C, as far as the esthetics go, but the * least understood C by customers. There are two different aspects of * "cut", one is the shape of the stone, and another is how well the * diamond is cut into that shape. * I'll first describe a round brilliant diamond, talk about what to * look in a diamond for, etc. Sections 9(b) to 9(o). Then I'll talk * about different shapes in sections 9(p)-9(r). I would like to thank Stephen Intille (intille@media.mit.edu), and Ken Nishimura (nishimur@opus.hpl.hp.com) for a lot of help on this section! When diamonds are polished, the final product has many flat surfaces. These are called "facets". All facets have names, which I'll go into later on. When facet come together, they form "facet junctions". Unfortunately, the nomenclature of diamonds is fairly limited; according to dozens of GIA graduates that I've talked to, there are no formal names of facet junctions. Worse yet, "facet junction" refers to both a line (formed by 2 facets) and a point where more than 2 facets come together. When describing facet junction, I'll use terms from elementary solid geometry: I'll call the former an edge, and the latter a vertex. Sometimes people consider the table a "facet", and sometimes they do not, hence a brilliant diamond can have either 57 facet or 56 facet + the table; though some diamond experts are in the latter group, since the table does obey the definition of a "facet" I'll consider the table a facet when describing a cut (similar to: how many fingers do you have on one hand: five or four and a thumb? I'm answering 5). 9(b) GRADING CUTS - TO BE OR NOT TO BE One problem with this "C" is that there is not a single value that describes a stone well. The GIA has been playing with the idea of grading cuts, but since empirical evidence shows that the preference for cuts varies over time and geographical locations due to the varying esthetic tastes, grades are not assigned. On the other hand, the American Gem Society, is grading cuts on a scale 0 to 10, with lower number being better. Some people in the industry want GIA to grade cuts, while others do not want such grades(JCK April 93). The arguments against grade cuts can be summarized to these points: there are hundreds of optimal cuts; cut is a subjective call, or a matter of taste (as in brilliance vs fire); new shapes may be developed that are better than the old ones; there can't be an 'official' set of proportions; different colored stones call for slightly different proportions; fancies. The arguments for grading cuts (majority of people in the business) can be summarized to this: consumers are not able to understand what the dimensions, and angles, etc. listed on a cert mean, but would be able to understand a scale such as is used for color or clarity. Quoting Mr Ehrenwald, the president of IGI who was against grading: "If you take away from a jeweler the ability to explain the characteristics to the clients, you'll simply commoditize diamonds and put another nail in the coffin of jewelers' diamond business. Diamonds should be in the hands of professional jewelers, not Wall Street types." IMHO, this pathetic protectionistic statement just shows you that some people don't want to deal with the realities of the market, and would rather "preserve the life" of someone in the trade, no matter how antiquated, than do what's best for the customer. (Interestingly enough, within 6 months Mr Ehrenwald has changed his tune when the IGI started to issue grades: "Consumers usually do not understand most of the technical information on grading reports, so we started grading a diamond's make to help simplify that for them", JCK Nov. 93). Also to quote Mr Underwood, a retailer and a past president of AGS: "Buying diamonds will be demystified if they can be sold in packets like shaving cream; jewelers are an important part of the 'event' of buying a diamond. We add the mystique, the symbolism." ...and bullsh_t; this type of "mystique" adding to an already confusing subject is something that make me gag. (Again, AGS has started to issue cut grades since this quote). Yes, grading a cut would commoditize diamonds, which would mean lower prices for you and I, since we could buy it over the internet from someone in the back of a NY warehouse, instead of going to jeweler who'll need to charge high prices to offset the fancy storefront. It would certainly help the customers stay away from unscrupulous retailers who push poorly cut stones onto customers who don't understand what the proportions should be (hopefully not the readers of this FAQ), and screwing over both the customers and the competitors who sell the better cut stones. 9(c) ROUND BRILLIANT CUT - OVERVIEW By far the most common cut that you'll run across today is the round cut. It goes by several names, such as the round cut, brilliant cut, modern brilliant, American Ideal, and others. Though some purists say that these cuts aren't necessarily interchangeable, there is much confusion about them. I'll use the round cut for convenience. Back at the turn of the century, when cutters were looking to cut the stones into the best shape, Marcel Tolkowsky, a member of a large and powerful diamond family, did the calculations on this subject, considering all variables, such as index of refraction, covalent bond angles, etc., as a part of this PhD thesis in Mathematics in 1919. He specified exactly what the dimensions of a round cut should be to get the very best cut, in his opinion. There are several other "perfect" cuts as well, namely the Eppler Cut, and the Scandinavian Diamond Nomenclature Cut, which vary slightly from Tolkowsky's Cut. * Please remember that a diamond is cut from a natural, imperfectly * shaped material, hence there are going to be variations from any of * these cuts, to take advantage of the shape of the rough. Hence * you'll need to look hard to find a stone that is just like the * Tolkowsky, or Eppler, but some might be pretty close. Unfortunately, * a lot of diamonds are not kinda close to these dimensions, but are * rather poorly cut. Although it is best to get yourself a picture of a diamond, let me try to draw it here in ASCII as viewed from the side: ------- <-- Table --- / \ <-- Crown / Crown height =============== <-- Girdle --- \ / / \ / <-- Pavilion / pavilion depth \ / / V <-- Culet --- In order to judge the dimensions of the stone, the graders use the diameter of the stone as the standard to compare all the other lengths to. Hence "a 15% crown" means that the crown height to the diameter of the stone is 15:100. And, of course, angles are just measured in degrees. Some of the dimensions of cuts: Dimensions Tolk. Eppler Scand.D.N. Lazare diameter 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% height 59.3 57.7 57.7 57.9 - 59. crown height 16.2 14.4 14.6 14.8 - 16.0 pavilion depth 43.1 43.2 43.1 43.1 table 53 56 57.5 53 - 57 crown angle 34deg30min 33deg10min 34deg30min ca 34deg30min pavilion ang. 40 45 40 50 40 45 40 45 culet angle 98 30 98 20 98 30 98 30 As you can see, there are very small differences between these. Now, the problem is that you will have a hard time finding anything that comes close to any of these cuts. As stated earlier, the GIA does grade cuts, but does not put it onto their certs :( These are the GIA classes of cut for round stones: Class I II III IV Table (%) 53-60 61-64 65-70 < 70 Crown (deg) 34-35 32-34 30-32 >30 Girdle medium/ s. thin/ v. thin/ knife/ s. thick thick v. thick ex thick Pavilion (%) 43+-.5 42-44 41-46 (-41/w+46%) Culet none-med s. large large v. large Finish v. good- good fair poor excellent (s. = slight, v. = very, ex = extremely, / = or) Notes: Class III also includes stones with 51 or 52% tables or 37% crown angles. Class IV also includes stones with tables less than 51%, crown angles more than 37 degrees, or major symmetry variations. Table size for Class I goes up to 61 or 62% in stones under .50 ct. (This chart summarizes the proportions and finish quailities typical of round brilliants in four general cutting classes that can be identified in today's diamond market. The greatest variation determines the stone's cut class. Borderlines between classes are somewhat flexible.) Most jewelry stores have Class II stones, mostly due to large tables or improper pavillion depth. One has to hunt around for Class I stones. You really should try to get the best cut stone you can find. To measure the angles some jewelers have an instrument called a proportionscope. When you are buying a diamond, you should should be convinced that the angles are correct. If they are not, but you still like the stone, you should be able to negotiate an appropriate discount 9(d) DEPTH (OR HEIGHT) OF A DIAMOND - DESCRIPTION Now, Tolkowsky's cut's height is 59% that of the diameter of the diamond, which breaks down to about 43% for the pavilion, and 16% for * the height of the crown. This 59% is probably the most crucial * dimension of the stone. You might find diamonds that are both too * shallow (i.e. the height is significantly smaller than 59%), and sometimes you'll see stones that are too chunky ( significantly over 59%). Since this dimension is the most important one to the brilliance, don't buy any stones that deviate too much from this value. You will sometimes see other standards like the Eppler Cut, and the Scandinavian Cut, that look just like the Tolkowsky Cut, but the height is at 58%. I should note, however, that you still can get a stone that has 58% to 60% depth but still be poorly proportioned. This is because it is possible to have thick crown and shallow pavillion, or thin crown and deep pavillion, compare to a well cut stone. For a diamond to have good reflection, what is needed is the correct pavillion depth (see the next section for more info on this). 9(e) DEPTH OF A DIAMOND - OPTICS BEHIND IT [skip this; this is a pretty boring section] Again, the depth is the most important single dimension of a diamond, (and is luckily the easiest to measure). The optics behind why a diamond sparkles simple: light enters the diamond from the top, goes through the stone; bounces off a pavilion facet; goes directly across the diamond to the other side of the pavilion where it bounces off another facet and up to the top. Another way of looking at it is: imagine yourself in a bathroom with two mirrored adjacent walls, so that they make a 90 degree angle at the corner; now stand anywhere in the room and shine a flashlight towards this corner, and you'll notice that no matter where you are, the light will always bounce towards you. Now here is the rub: the pavilion facets are not mirrors, but just interphases between the diamond and air. Sometimes they act as mirrors, sometimes they just let the light pass through; at sharp (low) angles the light will bounce off this interphase, at high angles, the light goes through. This is similar to throwing a stone into a lake: if you toss it in at a high angle, it'll just sink; but if you throw it at a low angle, you can make it skip. Or if you are a diver or a snorkler, you'll notice that when you look straight up while under water, you'll see right through it, but looking at a calm surface about 40% away from you, you'll notice that the surface reflects. Diamond has an index of refraction of 2.4175 (589 nm Na line). This means that the critical angle is somewhere around 24.43 degrees. If the ray of light has an angle of incidence greater than 24.43 degrees, total internal reflection occurs. Now, according to DeBeer's and some jewelers this is the problem if the diamond is too shallow or too deep: 1. If a diamond is cut too shallow, here is the problem: the light enters the stone from the top, but when it encounters the facets, it hits the facet at a high angle, so it does not bounce off, and just keeps going. Technically, it does refract a bit, changing its path, but does not bounce back into the stone effectively. Hence the light leaves the diamond through the bottom, and does not bounce back up through the crown. 2. If the stone is cut too deep, here is the problem: the light enters the stone from the top, encounters the first facet, it does so at a lower angle then in ideal cut stone, an angle that is unnecessarily too sharp. Yes, it does bounce off, but the problem is, that the light is not headed across the diamond enough, but a bit towards the bottom. Now, when this reflected light encounters the facet on the other side, it hits it at a greater angle then is the needed minimum for reflection, and goes through it. Again, the light is lost through the bottom of the diamond. According to Ken Nishimura, this marketing picture for the cut is WRONG: "What happens in real life is that the path taken by the light is skewed when the pavillion angles are wrong. A shallow stone will take the light entering vertically from the table and send it out the opposite crown at a shallow angle -- looked from above, the stone looks washed out. You also get the fisheye effect you describe if the girdle's reflection is seen. It doesn't take very much deviation of the angle to cause the stone to be a poor cut -- much less deviation than is required for the angle of incidence to fall below the critical angle. The optics are way too complicated for the average person so the marketing literature has been massaged to give the "right" end result (for the wrong reason)." 9(f) DEPTH OF A DIAMOND - JUDGING IT Obviously, the easiest way to do this is to measure it. But, here is what happens if the depth is not right. If the stone is too shallow, you'll notice a gray, dull ring in the diamond. If the stone is too chunky, you'll see a dark spot at the center. In both cases you'll notice a loss of brilliance. And once again, I'd like to thank Ken Nishimura for this not very commonly known tip that determines the depth as well as the quality of symmetry of the diamond. This test only works with well cut stones as it is very sensitive and a poorly cut stone won't register: A proper pavillion depth will reflect the light entering the table back out through the table such that the image size is reduced by 3x. This means that in an ideal cut diamond, there should be a reflection of the table visible in the pavillion which is 1/3 the table diameter. The shallower the stone, the fainter and smaller the reflection will be. The deeper the stone, the darker and bigger the reflection, until you get a nailhead stone. Bonus: Since the table is an octagon, so should the reflection IF the stone is perfectly symmetrical in the pavillion cut. ANY deviation will show up as an irregular reflection. It is almost impossible to find a perfect reflection, as that would imply an ideal placement of the pavillions. Many good stones will show 7/8 of an octagon, with the last 1/8th showing up with a very slight tilt of the stone. The deBeers "Quality and Value" slick pamphlet has a set of pictures that shows this effect. 9(g) TABLE OF A DIAMOND - DESCRIPTION * Probably the most noticeable proportion on a Brilliant Cut diamond is * the size of the table. The size of the table is important, because it * determines the look of the stone: bigger the table, greater the * brilliance (the sparkle) and less the fire (the variety and intensity * of the color reflected); smaller the table, greater the fire and * smaller the brilliance. It is more wasteful to cut the rough diamonds * to have smaller tables, thus diamonds with smaller tables are rarer. Tolkowsky has found the table to be ideal at 53% (again, of the diameter of the stone), but the Eppler Cut and the Scandinavian Cut have tables at 56% and 57.5% respectively. The appraising guidelines penalize diamonds with tables above 64% pretty severely, but when you go shopping, you'll see tables all the way into 70's. Ugh! Personally, I like the table to be at upper fifties. ("Fire" as described above, is technically known as "scintillation". But since I have a hard time pronouncing, let alone spelling, this, I'll just use "fire") 9(h) TABLE OF A DIAMOND - JUDGING IT If you look at the crown and ignore the kite and upper girdle facets, you'll notice the star facets and the table to make a design that looks like two staggered squares (mentally, take two same-sized squares of paper; put them on top of each other; rotate one by 45 degrees around the center point; now you have two staggered squares; the octagonal area where these two pieces of paper lay atop of each other is the table, and the four corners from each of the papers that form the triangles are the star facets. Make sure that it indeed does look like squares with straight lines, or better yet, it looks 'bowed in'. If these squares look like they are bowed out, then you have a large table. Actually, Tolkowsky Cut has them bowed in. Thus buy a diamond that does not have the table bowed out. However, be careful that this considers the vertex described above is indeed halfway between the table and the girdle; some stones are cut so that these vertices are closer to the girdle, thus achieving a bowed in look even with a large table. 9(i) CROWN OF A DIAMOND - DESCRIPTION (This is difficult to explain without pictures, skip it) The table is octagonal. Each edge of the octagon has a triangular facet adjacent to it, called a star facet. Two sides of neighboring star facets make two edges of a four-sided facet called a kite facet. One vertex of a kite facet is also a vertex of the table, and the opposite vertex is on the girdle. Now, the triangular area of the crown between the bottom edge of one kite facet, bottom edge of the neighboring kite facet, and the girdle, is divided radially into two entiomeric triangular facets called upper girdle facets. Hence, we have one table, eight star facets, eight kite facets, and 16 entiomeric upper girdle facets, for the total of 33 facets. The kite facet is also known as the bezel facet; I don't know which is more right, but I remember the former name easier as it does remind me of its shape, hence that's the one I use. (SAT vocabulary word: "entiomeric". Means handedness. Thus a right a handed screw or your right hand is entiomeric to a left handed screw or your left hand. To see an entiomer of any object, just look at its reflection in a mirror) 9(j) CROWN OF A DIAMOND - JUDGING IT * A quick assessment whether the crown height is the correct height, * take a look at the stone from its side; the crown height to pavilion * depth should be about 1:3. In other words, about a quarter (linearly * of course, not volumetrically) of the diamond should appear above the * girdle, and about three quarters bellow the girdle. As with the depth of the diamond, the height of the crown should not be too high or too low. If the crown angle is just right, from the top of the diamond, you should see a "spear effect", which means the pavilion facets appear narrower when looking at them through the table, then when looking at them through the crown. For a high crown angle, on the other hand, the facets in the pavilions are reflected in the crown. For a low crown angle, the pavilion facets will appear like straight lines from the girdle to the center of the table when looking from the top. And again, both too high of a crown angle and too low of a crown angle will result in a loss of brilliance and fire. Most people shopping for diamonds know that the table should be small. However, unfortunately, there is a way of making the table smaller, and still have a poorly cut stone. A well cut stone has about a 15% crown height and a mid to high 50's table. Now, picture this diamond if you were to shave part it off the top. The crown height would decrease, and table would increase. The problem is both the increased table size and decreased crown height, but most people recognize only the large table is the problem. However, if you were to make the crown angles sharper, for a given height crown, you would make the table smaller. Hence, you'd have a stone with desired small table, but with undesired low crown. This is known as a "swindled" diamond. Besides the esthetic problem, there is also a structural problem: swindled diamonds have sharper edge on the girdle, too acute, where it may be chipped easier than a well-cut diamonds. Schematically (not to scale): -------- / \ -------- / \ / \ / \ / \ ================== ================== Table: 53% 53% ... the same! Crown: Correct Swindled Crown angle: 34deg <34 (bad!) Also, it is important that the edges of the facets come to nice, pointed vertices. Having another vertices by pentagonal kite facets and quadrilateral star or UGF is really undesirable. And of course, having extra tiny facets is a no-no as well. Extra facets, imprecise vertex junctions, etc. often try to hide poor proportioning, but it is also possible that the cutter just wasn't too skillful. Also a smaller point to consider when judging the crown, is where the vertex where a star facet, two KF and two UGFs (the only vertex on the crown which is neither on the table nor on the girdle) come together, is located. It is suppose to be half way between the table edge and the girdle. 9(k) GIRDLE OF A DIAMOND - DESCRIPTION Girdle is the widest part of the stone. Traditionally it has been left in rough, so it looks like a ground glass. However, in the past few years, a lot of stones coming out of Israel have faceted girdles, 32 facets all the way around. You might also, rarely, see polished girdle. Some people though stay way from diamonds having polished girdles, since the majority of fakes tend to have polished girdles. Whether the girdle is faceted or rough, does not have any relationship on the value of the diamond. Again, it is just a personal preference. Now, a jeweler might tell you that a diamond with faceted girdle is more pretty, which may be true, but the price should not be effected. 9(L) GIRDLE OF A DIAMOND - JUDGING IT The girdle should not be too thick or too thin. Obviously, the more uniform around it is the better. Numerically, I'd say that the girdle thickness measures between 1 and 3%, but numbers are generally not used. On GIA certifications, you'll only get qualitative 'thin, 'medium', etc. or a range, such as 'very thin to thin'. If you take a look at the girdle edge on, it does not have smooth, straight edges; in fact it is wavy, or more correctly scalloped, on both sides. Scallop is a geometric type of period repeating pattern like you'd see on bread knives. Just think of a girdle like a double edged bread knife with the scallop tips being the vertices of a kite facet and two UGFs on the crown, or the vertices of a pavilion facet and two LGFs. The two sets of vertices on both sides of the girdle should match up, hence obviously this is the widest part of the girdle; the narrowest part is tangentially between these. The narrowest part of the girdle should be about _half_ the widest part. This would be considered a medium thickness girdle. If the narrowest parts actually goes to zero, as in the UGFs and LGFs actually touch, called a knife edge girdle, this would be extremely thin girdle. If there is very little of difference between the narrowest and widest part, then this is an indication of a very thick girdle. * Stay away from diamonds having a sharp, knife-edge girdle; this might * present a problem during mounting or wearing, and the diamond might * chip. A thick girdle is a place where a lot of weight might be * hiding; I've calculated that for each percentage point of extra * girdle, the weight of the diamond increases by about 4%, if the other * parameters are held constant. Hence two stones that look alike size- * wise, but weigh slightly differently (ruling out fakes, of course), * size of the girdle is the first place you might want to look at. 9(m) SYMMETRY GRADES Besides the dimensions, or proportioning of a diamond, other indications of the quality of cut are the polish and symmetry of the stone. "Symmetry" includes both the facet features and the proportioning. Luckily, the GIA grades both of these qualities, and condenses the polish and symmetry into just two scalar values. The GIA certifications do carry both grades towards the bottom of the proportions. These grades were formally defined a few years back in order to get rid off the ambiguous "fair-to-good" grades that were very common. These are the five defined symmetry grades (JCK, Sep. 89): Excellent -- Facet features: Very slight (minute) misalignment or misshapen facets. Proportion features: None Very Good -- Facet features: Slight (minor) misalignment, pointing, misshapen facets or non-octagonal table. Proportion features: None Good -- Facet features: Noticeable misalignment, pointing, misshapen or extra facets or non-octagonal table. Proportion features: slightly (minor) off-center culet or table; out of round, uneven outline, or wavy girdle. Fair -- Facet features: Obvious misalignment, pointing, misshapen, extra, or missing facets. Many obvious random extra facets. Proportion features: noticeable off center culet, table, out-of-round, uneven outline or wavy girdle. Poor -- Facet features: Prominent faceting distortion Proportion features: obvious off-center culet, table, out-of-round, uneven outline or wavy girdle. IMHO, it would behoove you to stay away from fair or poor grades. "Fair" stones sell at about 30-40% below better goods. 9(n) POLISH GRADES Most people talk about "polish" and "symmetry" grades in the same breath, so much of what I've covered in the Symmetry Grades section also applies to the polish. The five grades for polish (ibid.) Excellent -- No polish features to a few minute features Very Good -- A few minor polish features Good -- Noticeable polish features including a few lightly burned facets. The luster of the diamond is not impaired. Fair -- Obvious heavy polish features that are readily seen. The luster of the diamond is affected. Poor -- Prominent heavy features affecting the "life" of the diamond. 9(o) EFFECTS OF PROPORTIONS ON THE VALUE Although I've alluded to the value dependence throughout this section, here are some rough numerical value guidelines in order of importance (from "Jewelry & Gems", A. L. Matlin, A. C. Bonano, an good guide I recommend you buy): Stone too shallow: -15 to -30% Stone too thick: -10 to -30% Slightly thin crown: -5 to -20% Slightly thick crown: -5 to -15% Girdle too thick: -5 to -20% Symmetry of crown facets off: -5 to -15% for rounds, less for fancies Misaligned culet: -5 to -25% Table not reasonably octagonal: -2 to -15 % Asymmetrical culet: -2 to -5% 9(p) LAZARE DIAMONDS These are diamonds that are cut to the above specifications by a firm Lazare Diamonds. Hence Lazare Diamonds is a tradename. The claim to fame is the fact that they are cut to the specifications listed in the above table. In the world where vast majority of diamonds are cut to poor dimensions, this firm has filled the need of people who are looking for well cut diamonds. Not too many stones are cut as closely to the ideal as Lazare. However, well-cut stones are available, but you just have to look a little harder; it is not true that Lazare diamonds are any better then any other run of the mill well cut stone. Another item that the firm would like to make you aware of is that each of their diamonds has a unique serial number laser etched on its frosted girdle. This process is patented, hence only Lazare diamonds are legally allowed to have anything written on their girdle. Beside the cut and the serial number on the girdle, there is nothing special about them; they do not have any better clarity, nor color, nor higher weight. Also, realize that Lazare diamonds are relatively rare, hence if you want it in a certain color, clarity, and weight, you may need to wait much longer then for non-Lazare stones. IMHO, the 20-30% premium of Lazare diamonds is not worth it, if you are willing to look at diamonds a bit carefully. 9(q) SHAPES OF DIAMONDS - MOST COMMON FANCIES * So far in the sections 9(a) through 9(p) I talked about round * brilliant. Now for sections 9(q) to 9(s), let me talk about the * different cuts. All other shapes besides round are called "fancy cuts", or just "fancies". Though about 90% of GIA graded stones are round (JCK, Apr 93), in the past 15 years, fancies have gone from about 15% market share to about half currently for stones above 20 pts. The reasons for this increase are many (JCK, Oct 91): more challenging jewelry designs, smaller availability of rough suitable to cut rounds, new technology (such as laser cutting), and especially more experimentation to get new shapes to cut down on the waste of the rough. For the marquis, oval, and pear, the location and number of facets is the same as in the round cut; it's just that these facets are stretched over a different geometry, hence they have different dimensions. (The emerald cut has totally different cut then any of these.) This presents a problem when looking at any of these three shapes: whereas in the round cut every kite facet should be the same, for the marquise and the oval you have 3 different kinds of kite facets (both oval and marquise have the C2v symmetry, hence 2 identical kite facets on the points, or on the ends of the major axis, two identical kite facets on the minor axis, and 2 more pairs of entiomeric kite facets at the 45 degrees between the major and minor axes), and for a pear there are 5 different kinds of kite facets (one each at the ends of the major axis, and 3 more entiomeric * pairs in-between them). Hence, since it is difficult to see the * problems with misshapen facets in fancies, this exact shaping of * facets is not as crucial for fancies as it is for the rounds. * But proportioning is still important. The most common shapes of fancies are: Marquis: which looks like a football from the top. After the round, this is the most common shape of a diamond for engagement rings. Oval which has an elliptical shape when viewed from the top. For both the marq, and oval, the ratio of the major axis to the minor axis should be about 2:1. If it is much greater then that, when looking from the top, you will see a dark areas in form of a wedge hugging the minor axis from each side. This is called a bow-tie, and is undesirable. If the ratio is less then 1.5 : 1, then it will look like a misshapen round brilliant,...maybe something between a round brilliant and oval/marq. It just is not pleasing to the eye. Pear shape is also a popular cut. It looks like a tear drop. It is not too easy to judge a well cut pear. Let me arbitrarily say that the pointed end of the pear cut points to the south (not "bottom" or "top", which I consider the culet or the table). Hence the ends of the minor axis (the longest line perpendicular to the north-south major axis) are the west and eastern points. What you want is a pear that looks just like round from the east to north to west; if you cover everything from the minor axis south you really shouldn't be able to see if it is a round cut or a pear. Don't buy a stone which is too narrow or too broad, which are the worst shaping mistakes of a pear cut. One way of judging how well the pear is cut, is by location of the culet: the culet should appear to be directly under the point where the major and minor axes intersect; a stone where the culet is too much to the north or where the culet is too much to the south, then the diamond has a culet that is too high or two low respectively. Emerald cut, which looks like a box from the top, with truncated corners. It could either be a rectangle, in various ratios, or it can be a square. This truncated rectangle then has two longer sides, two shorter sides, and four sides due to the corner truncation, for a total of eight sides. The table is the same shape, but about 50-70% (linearly) the size of the diamond. Between each edge of the table and straight side, there are three ever more slopping, and smaller trapezoidal facets. For the square emerald the culet is a point, but for the usually encountered rectangular emerald cut, the culet is not a point, but a line, parallel to the longer side of the diamond. The pavilion has a similar arrangement of facets as the crown. Hence this diamond cut has 1 + 3x8 + 3x8 = 49 facets. 9(r) SHAPE OF DIAMONDS - OLD CUTS [Note: This section you can skip; here only for completion purposes] Sometimes you will run across diamonds that have been cut in a different style then is commonly seen today. Adopted from an JCK May 89 article: Table Cut: It is a rather simple cut: an octahedron with one vertex truncated to expose a square face, or a table. Introduced in the early 15th C until mid 17th C, though it was found in Indian and other native jewelry. This is probably the simplest cut, which is not too surprising in the view that diamonds are pretty much impossible to cut and polish with tools available at that time period. Rose Cut: AKA the Crowned Rose cut, Full Holland cut, or the Dutch cut. Looks like a hemisphere, with a flat base. It has polished flat facets in a regular pattern symmetric about the axis. It could be as few as 3 facets, as many as 24. Senaille Cut: Irregularly faceted and shaped Rose cut. Pichere: Irregularly shaped chips of diamond. Peruzzi Cut: The first cut that has recognizable facets. Named after Vincenzio Peruzzi, who was credit for inventing this cut around 1700. The 56 facets are arranged in a very similar manner as the modern round cut, but stretched over a differently shaped stone. It is square, or almost square (instead of round), the table is small, the culet is large, and has higher crown and deeper pavilion. Looks like halfway between a table cut and round cut. Old Mine Cut: You may actually run across this in old jewelry. It is similar like Peruzzi, but the corners are rounded. Again it has high crown, deep pavilion, small table compared to the round cut. Looks like an intermediate between Peruzzi and brilliant. Cushion Cut: same as the Old Mine Cut, except that is used for colored stones as opposed to diamonds. Single Cut: AKA the Eight Cut. Used for stones that too small (< 5 pts) to be cut into a stone with more facets. It is approximately the same shape as the brilliant, ignoring the facets: it is round, has similar crown height, pavilion depth, table size, small (or no) culet. But the crown is composed of eight trapezoidal facets, one side of which forms an edge with the table, the opposite edge is on the girdle, and the two remaining opposite sides of the equal length form edges with adjacent identical crown facets. The pavilion facets are just acute isosceles triangles, with bases on the girdle, and the opposite vertices on the culet. This makes the total of 16 facets plus a table. Swiss Cut: Used for smaller stones as well. It is halfway between the brilliant cut and the single cut. Again, similar dimensions to the modern cut. The crown has 8 isosceles triangular facets which have bases on the girdle and apices that form the octagon of the table, and has another 8 isosceles triangles which have bases on the table to form edges of the table's octagon and apices on the girdle. On the other side of the girdle are eight isosceles triangular facets, which pretty much share the base with the former crown triangular facets. The rest of the pavilion is taken up by eight rhomboidal facets, whose two adjacent sides form an edge with the neighboring identical facets and with the corners between these two edges forming the culet; the other adjacent sides form an edge with neighboring aforementioned triangular facets, with the corner between the two sides on the girdle. That makes it 32 facets, a culet, and a table. Native Cut: a nice way of saying an irregularly cut brilliant cut. 9(s) SHAPES OF DIAMONDS - SOME RARE / PATENTED ONES [Note: This section you can skip; here only for completion purposes] There are many, many cuts that are available for you. Most of them are patented. Some are new cuts to form into square or triangular shapes, while others are just variations of the ones listed above. The reasons for the new triangular and square shapes is that jewelers want to use diamonds to tile jewelry pieces by small stones. Traditionally this has been done with baguettes or by emerald cut diamonds, but this was not found to be of sufficient brilliance, hence new cuts had to be developed. (JCK, Apr 90) Here are some examples (from JKC Jan 90, Oct 91) : Trillian: an unregistered triangular cut used by Gemfactor Fancies Inc. Trilliant (R): another triangular cut, by H Meyer Diamond Co. Trielle, or contemporary Trilliant: a new name for Trilliant who's trademark has lapsed. Description of the cut: picture a C6v-symmetry round instead of the C8v, which is the regular Schoeflies point group symmetry of the round brilliant; and now just force it into a triangle. Trielle has a seemingly large triangular table on a triangular stone; a small kite facet between each corner of the girdle and the table; a large kite touching each side of the table in the midpoint, girdle midpoint and two smaller kite facets; two differently sized sets of triplets of entiomeric pairs of UGFs, as well as a triplet of a pair of entiomeric pairs of star facets predictably complete the crown. The pavilion has two differently sized sets of triplets of pairs of entiomeric triangular facets. That's 1 + 3 + 3 + 12 + 12 = 31 facets. Trillion (TM): yet another triangular cut; one of the oldest terms, by L. F. Industries. Asscher's Trilliant: used since the 70's by the Asscher Diamond Co of Amstredam, which produced a triangle diamonds with curved sides instead of straight ones. The table is somewhat smaller the then of Trielle, but otherwise the crown is the same. The pavilion is the same as that of a squashed-into-a-triangle C6v round brilliant: two sets triplets of quadrillangular pavilion facets (each pavilion facet from one set has a vertex on the corner of the girdle, and each pavilion facet of the other set has a vertex on the midpoint of the girdle edge), and two sets of triplets of entiomeric pairs of LGFs. Troidia: another unpatented triangular cut. It has a C3v-symmetry nontagonal (I guess that's what I would call a nine-sided polygon) table, of which every third vertex points to the corners of the triangle. It has a triplet of entiomeric pairs of kite facets, a triplet of entiomeric pairs of smaller star facets near the corners, and another triplet of larger star facets in the midpoint. Two sets of different triplets of entiomeric pairs of UGFs complete the crown. Trillium (R): one more triangular cut. By B.A.Bahtriarian Inc. Quadbrilliant (TM): a square cut, used to describe colored stones. By J Breski & Co. Barion square: a successful attempt at making a square emerald cut more sparkling. This cut was invented by Basil Watermeyer of South Africa in 1971. The Barion name is not trademarked and the patent has already expired. The crown looks just like the square emerald, but it has a more complex pavilion. The pavilion has two kinds of quartets of lower girdle facets (triangular facets from the truncated corners, and pentagonal facets from the edges), a quartet of adjacent quadrilateral facets that come to a single vertex -- the culet, and 2 sets of quartet of entiomeric pairs of triangular facets. Thus there are 1 + 2x3x4 + 2x4 + 4 + 2x4x2 = 53 facets. Radiant Cut: emerald shape, but more complex. Invented by Henry Grossbard in 1976, patented and trademarked. The table is a slightly bowed out rectangle with untruncated corners. Instead of three steps of facets from the girdle to the table, there are only two. The upper facet between the corner of the table and the facet that lies on the truncated corner of the outline of the diamond, is not trapezoidal like in the emerald cut, but is triangular. Furthermore, the upper step facet adjacent to the edge of the table, are really three triangular facets, one very obtuse triangle, and a pair of entiomeric very acute triangles; the vertex where all three triangular facets come together lies midway of the edge of the table. The pavilion is similar to the Barion cut; the facets have a little bit different geometry, and the lower girdle triangular facet adjacent to the truncated corner is actually split into 3 triangular facet, which come together in the center of the parent triangle. An interesting note on the cut is that on the pavilion there are 4 points, at each where 8 facets (or 8 edges) come to form one vertex; I believe that is the highest ordered vertex aside from a culet of any common cut. Thus there are 1 + 4x2 + 4 + 4x3 = 25 crown facets and 4 + 4x3 + 4 + 2x4x2 = 36 pavilion facets for the total of 61 facets. Starburst: again another, even more complicated emerald shaped cut. Sold through I. Stark Co. of Chicago; it is trademarked, but not patented. The crown is similar to that of the radiant cut, except that both quartets of the upper girdle facets are split into 4 triangular facets, two of which are entiomeric; these four triangles come together to form a vertex at the geometric center of the parent trapezoid. The pavilion is completely different, though. There are two pairs of trapezoidal lower girdle facet lying on each edge of the stone, a quartet of triangular lower girdle facets adjacent to the truncated corners. Four entiomeric pairs of triangular facets adjacent to both the trapezoidal and triangular facets complete the first pavilion step. By extending the two entiomeric pavilion edges of each of the trapezoidal lower girdle facets until they come together to a vertex (which is about three quarters of a way to the culet from the edge of the diamond), will generate a large triangle; subtracting the surface of the trapezoidal lower girdle facet from this large triangle will generate a smaller triangle, which is subdivided into three triangular facets (an obtuse triangle and a pair of entiomeric triangular facets having a common edge with the original extension of the trapezoidal lower girdle facet), which have a common vertex at the geometric center of the smaller triangle. The areas remaining to describe the pavilion can be subdivided along the minor and major axes to generate a quartet of irregularly-shaped (Cs symmetry) adjacent hexagons. Each hexagon is subdivided into a three quadrilateral facets having a common vertex at the center of the hexagon; two of these facets are an entiomeric pair that share a vertex with the identical other 3 pairs to generate a culet, and the other quadrilateral facet shares an edge with the two triangular facets that complete the first pavilion step. Thus there are 1 + 2x4x4 + 4x1 + 4x3 = 49 crown facets and 2x4 +4x2 +4x3 + 4x3 = 40 pavilion facets, for the total of 89 facets. Princess cut: This is a square cut. It is a generic name, neither patented nor trademarked, with no standard set of distribution of facets. The shape is square, with a square table. There are four large isosceles obtuse triangles on the crown, each of which has an edge common with the side of the diamond, and the apex at the midpoint of the side of the table; this triangle is split into a triangular facet and a trapezoidal upper girdle facet by an edge parallel to the diamond edge about halfway between the diamond edge and table. The rest of the crown is composed of four concave quadrilaterals, defined by the corner of the diamond, the vertex of the table, and the aforementioned apex of the large triangle; this area is split into a pair of entiomeric triangular facets, having common edges with the table, and a quadrilateral facet, which has one corner at the corner of the diamond, and the opposite corner at the vertex of the table. The pavilion has four very large triangular isosceles lower girdle facets. The rest of the pavilion is shaped like a four pointed star, of which each point is subdivided into a central quadrilateral facet, flanked on either side by two very skinny triangular facets. Hence this princess cut has 1 + 4x2 + 4x3 = 21 crown facets and 4 + 4x5 = 24 pavilion facets for the total of 45 facets. Quadrillion (R): another square cut. Patented and trademarked by Ambar Diamonds of Los Angeles in 1981. The crown is just like that of the princess cut described above, except that the table is much bigger. The pavilion is also the same as the princess, but the large triangular lower girdle facets are not as large -- the apex is somewhat less then halfway from the edge of the diamond to the culet, thus giving more pavilion surface area to the other pavilion facets. Although literature calls it a 49-faceted stone, I counted only 45 facets, so I dunno. Yes, it may be a more brilliant cut then the run of the mill Princess cut, but I don't know how they've gotten a defensible patent on it. Marigold Cut: Developed by DeBeers, as a part of their "flower cut" series. None of the developed cuts in these flower series is neither patented nor trademarked, so that this firm can promote the use of diamonds. You can think of this as a square emerald cut, whose corners as truncated so much that the truncation is the same length as the edge. The perimeter of the diamond is a octagonal, with octagonal table. Unlike the 3 steps of facets between the girdle and the table, this cut has four, not evenly spaced, sets of facets. The pavilion is the same as the distorted emerald cut: each eighth of the pavilion is subdivided parallel-wise to four, not evenly spaced facets. This makes 1 + 8x4 + 8x4 = 65 facets. Dahlia Cut: Another of the Flower series. Oval in shape, or actually a dodecagonal shape closely resembling an oval. It has the same shape but smaller sized table. Each of the 12 edges of the table has a triangular star facet, with the apex about 2/3 of the way for the table to the girdle. All the upper girdle facets are trapezoidal and share common edge with the neighboring upper girdle facet. Twelve triangular facets complete the crown. The pavilion looks like very poorly made eight cut. The two lower girdle facets along the major axis are pentagonal, reaching about 2/3 to the culet. The adjacent lower girdle facets to these are triangular, reaching about halfway to the culet. The triangular area from the edge of the diamond along the minor axis that reaches all the way to the culet is subdivided parallel to the edge very close to the culet to form a large trapezoidal lower girdle facet and a tiny triangular facet. The four remaining totally asymmetric hexagonal facets reach from the edge of the diamond adjacent to the edge on the minor axis, and forms an edge every single kind of pavilion facet described up to now, plus two adjacent hexagonal facets. Thus there are 1 + 12 + 12 +12 = 37 crown facets and 2 + 4 + 2x2 + 4 = 14 pavilion facets for the total of 51 facets. Zinnia Cut: Another of the Flower series. It is round, and the arrangement of the crown pavilion is similar to that of Dahlia, except that it has a C8v symmetry instead of the C12v symmetry expected of rounded Dahlia. The table is octagonal with star facets, very much similar to that of the round brilliant cut. The rest of the crown is composed of 8 trapezoidal adjacent upper girdle facets and 8 triangular facets. However, the pavilion is more complicated. Each of the 45 degree slices of pavilion (from the girdle to the culet) has a large adjacent lower girdle facet with 4 straight edges and a small concave quadrilateral area with a vertex on the culet. This area is subdivided into a central quadrilateral facet, flanked on each side by two skinny triangular facets. Hence there are 1 + 8 + 8 + 8 = 25 facets on the crown, and 8 x (1 + 1 + 2x2) = 48 pavilion facet, for the total of 73 facets. Sunflower Cut: Another Flower Series cut. It has a square emerald cut shape. The crown is the same as that of a square Radiant, for the total of 25 facet. Each of the four pairs of the lower girdle facets is triangular to the first degree of approximation; both sets have the apexes about two thirds to the culet. The remaining area are composed of four entiomeric pairs of quadrangular pavilion facets, similar to the pavilion facets of the round brilliant. However, there are four tiny triangular facets, straddling the edge of two of these pavilion facets, with the apex on the culet, and the base actually being the apex of the large "triangular" (now technically quadrilateral) lower girdle facets. Hence there are 1 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4x3 = 25 crown facets and 4x2 + 4x2 + 4 = 20 pavilion facets, for the total of 45 facets. Fire Rose: Still another of the Flower Series cuts. This is one of the very few hexagonal cuts. Its layout of the facets reminds one of that of Zinnia; if you take Zinnia, make it to have C6v symmetry instead of C8v symmetry, and force it into a hexagonal shape you'll have Fire Rose. Fire Rose has a hexagonal table, offset from the hexagon of the diamond by 30 degrees. The table and the star facets do not form two staggered squares like the Zinnia or the round brilliant, but two staggered equilateral triangles, to form the Star of David. Fire has 1 + 6 + 6 + 6 = 19 crown facets and 6 x (1 + 1 + 2x2) = 36 pavilion facets for the total of 55 facets. Marquise Dream Cuts: This is part of the "Dream" Cut series made by Michael Schachter, marketed by Maico Industries. Both the Dream Cuts Series, as well as the Royal Cut Series, are just take offs on the traditional fancies: instead of having a curved girdle, these cuts actually have straight lines. The reason given by both the Dream Cut marketers and Royal Cut marketers is that these stones look 10 to 50% larger the their actual weight. The Marquise Dream Cut looks like a marquise that has six straight edges. Actually it is a little bit more complicated. Consider a round brilliant; now, make it into a C6v stone instead of a C8v stone; then distort it into a marquise shape; and finally make the curved girdle edges of the stone into six straight sides to give you a Marquise Dream cut. Thus you have a table, 6 star facets (two kinds: two larger ones pointing to the traditional point of a marquise, and a doublet of entiomeric pairs), 6 kite facets (two identical facets and a doublet of pairs of entiomeric facets), 12 upper girdle facets (a doublet of entiomeric pairs along the traditional point of a marquise, plus two sets of doublets of entiomeric pairs) to give the total of 25 crown facets. The pavilion presumably has 6x3 facets, for the grand total of 43 facets. Pear Dream Cut: Another of the Dream Cut Series. As the name suggest, it looks like a pear, and instead of having a curved girdle, it is a Cs-symmetry heptagon. Again, it is a little bit more complicated. Consider a round brilliant; now make it in to a C7v stone instead of C8v stone; then distort it into a pear; and finally make the curved girdle sides of the stone into an irregular heptagon to obtain a Pear Dream Cut. Hence you have a heptagonal table, 7 star facets (one large one pointing to the traditional pear point, and three different entiomeric pairs), 7 kite facets (one pointing to the north end (see my definition of "north" in the description of the pear cut), and seven different entiomeric pairs of upper girdle facets for the total of 29 crown facets. Presumably the pavilion has 7x3 facets, for the total of 50 facets. Oval Dream Cut: Yet another Dream Cut. It is an oval, but instead of curved girdle it is an octagon. But the crown is not quite as easily obtained from the round as the two previous Dream Cuts. It has a hexagonal table that almost looks like a rectangle, with longer sides parallel to the major axis. From each of the six vertices of the table is a kite facet that reaches the girdle. Four of the hexagonal sides of the table, those that form the longer side of the rectangle, are edges of star facets. However, the two sides of the hexagonal table that parallel the minor axis are not edges of a triangular facet, but a trapezoidal facet. The lower edge of the trapezoid is formed by a triangular facet that straddles the major axis, and whose apex is on the girdle. Also there are four sets of doublets of entiomeric pairs of triangular upper girdle facets. Thus there are 1 + 6 + 4 + 2 + 2 + 4x2x2 = 31 crown facets and, to me anyway, an unknown number of pavilion facets. Baroness Royal Cut: This is a part of the Royal Cut Series developed by Raphaeli-Stschik of Israel, distributed by Suberi Brother of NY. The Royal Cuts and Dream Cuts are pretty similar, but there are some variations. This is actually identical to the round brilliant, except that it is octagonal, instead of round. Presumably also 57 facets. Duchess Royal Cut: Another Royal Cut. It looks like a marquise cut with six straight edges instead of two curves. The easiest way of picturing a Duchess is to start from the Marquise Dream cut. In the Marquise Dream, there are two large star facets pointing to the traditional points of the marquise. Take this triangle, and split it into 3 triangles sharing a common vertex at the geometric center of the parent triangle; two of the triangular facets are an entiomeric pair, sharing edges with each other and with two different kite facets and the remaining unique obtuse triangle formed; now, this unique triangle is tilted up so that the edge disappears and just becomes a part of the table. Hence the table is not irregular hexagonal, but irregular (C2v-symmetry) octagonal. Rest of the Duchess is the same as the Marquise Dream Cut. Thus there is one table, 6 kite facets, 3 doublets of entiomeric pairs of upper girdle facets, a doublet of a pair of star facets, and a doublet of an entiomeric pair of these new triangular facets, for the total of 27 crown facets. I assume that the pavilion has 6x3 facets for the total of 45 facets. Empress Royal Cut: Another Royal Cut. It looks like the traditional pear cut, but instead of a curve girdle it has 7 straight sides. Again, it is very similar to that of the Pear Dream cut. To form the Empress Royal Cut, take the Pear Dream cut and subdivide the large triangular star facet pointing to the sole point of the traditional pear cut in a same manner as for the pair of triangular facets in the Duchess cut. This will make the table an irregular (Cs symmetry) octagon. Hence there is 1 table, 7 kite facets (1 unique, and 3 different entiomeric pairs), 14 upper girdle facets (7 different entiomeric pairs), three entiomeric pairs of star facets and a pair of triangular facets just generated, to yield the total of 30 crown facets. Again, I assume that the pavilion has 7x3 facets, for the grand total of 51 facets. Star Cut: Some Israeli cutters have found a way to perfect the star cut to give it more fire and brilliance. The look just like 5 pointed stars you'd see in a US flag. Used for high-end jewelry designs. Great deal of rough is wasted, and are thus very expensive. Pancis Gems 1-800-426-4435 (JCK Jan 93, May 94) Queen Cut: a variation of a round cut, developed in Thailand to honor the Queen Sirikit's 60th birthday. This cut combines the crown of the round, and pavilion of a radiant cut. 32 crown facets and 28 pavilion facets. (JCK Feb 93) Flanders Brilliant: a computer developed cut by the National Diamond Syndicate. Looks similar to round, but is a octagonal, with alternate sides of it longer then the others (or a square with truncated corners). NDS: 1-800-621-5057. (JCK Jun 93) ==== end of section 9 ======