Even moderate pavilion painting (2A, 3A) and digging anywhere on the diamond (1B, 2B, 2C) should be downgraded. However, crown-only painting (1A) should be treated differently, as it does not reduce performance until extremes and can be used to positively enhance optical properties. This agrees with the American Gem Society's diamond-specific ray-tracing research, studies at Moscow State University and independent leaders in the field of optics.

To this end, we believe crown-only painting should be independent of other painting/digging judgments.

I hope this article allows others to understand that the stereotyping of 'painting' or 'digging' is erroneous when the diamond is not in-hand. To make decisive evaluations one must know the diamond's configuration, what type of painting or digging was done, and to what degree. To speculate or stereotype will lead to invalid conclusions.

This study reinforces my assertion that the pavilion of the diamond is of prime importance. I have always maintained that “it's all in the hearts:” Precise, symmetrical pavilion construction at normal indexing is the foundation for premium performance and has been since long before we had wonderful tools like DiamCalc and ASET which are scientifically reinforcing my long-standing position, learned over five generations of experience and research.