I thought I’d share a little bit from a Q&A email I took part in the other day.  This is THE biggest question guys have when it comes to buying a diamond for an engagement ring.  We were talking about a Hearts On Fire Diamond specifically…but it could apply to most premium cuts.  (Though I’m a dyed-in-the-wool HOF fanatic.)

Statement from my client: (At this point he was wondering if he was over thinking…)

The only thing tormenting me is HOF diamond vs. regular one of slightly bigger size, and better clarity & color.

My Answer:

Don’t worry about over thinking…but also keep your mind and heart on why you’re doing this.  It’s to give her something beautiful and special to show her and the rest of us that you love her and want to move forward in life as her husband.

With that in mind, let me address your concerns.

“A regular diamond of a slightly bigger size…”  Allow me to translate what you just said there (which is common…even among jewelry salespeople).

Regular=Less brilliant and pretty.  That’s just the way it is.

Bigger Size=heavier.  Not bigger to the eye…but as it weighs out on a scale.  You can’t even see the part that is making it heavier because it’s on the bottom half of the diamond.  That doesn’t make any sense to me.

So…let’s say we get a regular diamond that actually looks bigger.  You will gain a fraction of a millimeter around the outside of the stone…but for that you will lose brightness and brilliance and energy.  In essence…you will trade sparkle for an inconsequential amount of visual size.

I can get either. It’s not a problem.  But, knowing what I know and all that I’ve seen through the years…I always come to the same conclusion…and it’s one shared by the majority of our customers: sparkle…quality…and the story behind the diamond are what endure.  (It doesn’t matter how big a diamond someone gets…they will always see a bigger one.  But…the beauty of a HOF always, always…stands out.  That’s why I’m so high on them…)

Color and clarity…same thing.  A regular diamond that is tops on the color and clarity scales will NOT look brighter than a HOF that grades lower.  (And don’t even get me started on the types of certifications that is out there.  HOF only used the American Gem Society.)

There was more but it’s irrelevant to the point I’m trying to make which is:

CUT is EVERYTHING.  Don’t mess around with color and clarity until you have the cut thing nailed.

I will end there for now.  Look for more on this discussion in future posts.  (And by all means…email me your questions.  I’m more than happy to help.)

Click here to see an alternative pic that illustrates my point.  May not be suitable for everyone so it’s password protected.  The password is BLAG30.

Buyers beware!

That notion is far too simplistic. I find that “light return” percentages are rather meaningless for many reasons. A mirror returns 100% of the light shined on it. Is it as beautiful as a diamond? Nope!

There are various methods used to measure so-called light return. Mostly it is done by “virtual modeling” of the diamond. These models are defined by exterior measurements of a stone which are then used to create a computer model, which in turn is subjected to lig ht ray-tracing analysis (AGS and GIA and DiamCalc).

Others simply use only “face-up” lighting, pixel-counting methods and/or undefined numeric scales (Brilliant Scope and Isee2). But we already know that “100% light return” is definitely not the Holy Grail of diamond beauty – even if it were possible to achieve.

Ironically, the pictures that are offered as “proof” of 100% light return are a case in point. You should ask yourself why there are various shades of red/pink and black/grey and even white in these types of photos (Fire Scope and Ideal Scope).

Don’t they actually highlight different and/or varying degrees of “light intensity”? How drastically will they change when the diamond is tilted to one side or the other – as is the reality in everyday usage?

The look of a diamond changes dramatically whenever the position of the diamond, the light and/or the observer is changed. It should be easy to understand that viewing a diamond exactly perpendicular to its table is only a rarefied or “special” case. What do you suppose happens to the picture whenever you view a diamond from any other angle?

One thing everyone knows for sure, every gem diamond is a 3-Dimensional and dynamic work of art. No one can capture diamond beauty in a single photo. Any photo is a mere snapshot20of the full-motion picture of potential diamond beauty.

Perfection has always been a moving target. To be sure, lots of research has been done during the 300+ year development of the modern round brilliant. Cutters have always striven to do their best. Gemologists and other scientists have resolved to understand the complex math and physics.

And, of course, consumers have always voted for their preferences with their pocketbooks.

Suffice it to say there is no international standard defining appropriate light return. But yes, in a well cut diamond the majority of high intensity light that enters the diamond should return back to the viewer.

A diamond designed to return even 100% of low level light wouldn’t be very desirable.

In general, the major trade labs have recognized that “light return” is a misnomer and the use of it alone is misleading in analyzing the overall “light performance” of high quality diamonds.

It has been shown that a small amount of “leakage” is not only unavoidable: it actually creates positive contrast effects that are quite visually pleasing.

[This is a Guest Post from my buddy Maarten de Witte (The Diamond Wizard) an original member of the team that created Hearts On Fire, the World’s Most Perfectly Cut Diamond^®