Emerald Cut Synthetic rutile: more fire in synthetic rutile than in diamond
Brilliance 48 · Fire 95 · Scintillation 72 · in our census, where the T73 scores 81 · 94 · 80 in synthetic rutile
How the Emerald Cut handles light in synthetic rutile, measured: brilliance 48, fire 95 and 28% leakage, set against the T73 in the same stone and against the same cut in diamond.
Light Return map of the Emerald Cut in synthetic rutile, face-up, from our own tracer at refractive index 2.616. Red, green and blue return light to the eye; gray leaks.
Emerald Cut Synthetic rutile
Synthetic rutile has a refractive index of 2.616 to 2.903 and a dispersion of 0.330. Its critical angle, from the low end of that range, is 22.5°, so a round design needs a pavilion of at least 39.4° for head-on light to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. We trace it with one index, 2.760, the midpoint of the published range, and a fire spread of 0.284, 0.86 of the published dispersion. Every picture here is our Light Return tracer at 2.616, and every figure is from the same light census that scores the other gemstones; the 3D Gemstone Simulator shows the Emerald Cut in synthetic rutile live. Synthetic rutile is strongly doubly refractive (birefringence 0.287): its two rays have critical angles of 22.5° and 20.1°. Our census traces one index, so every figure for it is a rough approximation.
The Emerald Cut has 57 facets and a total depth of 68.6% of its width; its pavilion mains sit at 41.0°. In synthetic rutile, the census returns 48 of 100 for brilliance and 95 for fire, against 81 and 94 for the T73, our benchmark, in the same stone; the same Emerald Cut in diamond reads 55 and 87.
Is synthetic rutile good in an Emerald? Pros and cons, measured
Compared with the T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile and with the Emerald Cut in diamond.
A difference counts from 3 points (Brilliance, Fire, Tilt, Leakage), 5 (Scintillation,
Symmetry), 4% (face-up size per carat) or 5% (weight); Tilt counts as a pro only for a stone within
5 points of the brilliance it is compared with. How we measure.
All eight scores against the T73
At a glance: the Emerald Cut in synthetic rutile (white) against the T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile (dashed): solid white where
it reaches further, hatched where it falls short. Each pro and con is explained, with pictures, below.
Against the T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile: ahead on 1, behind on 7.
Global70, the comparison 88, difference −18
Brilliance48, the comparison 81, difference −33
Fire95, the comparison 94, difference +1
Scintillation72, the comparison 80, difference −8
Spread96, the comparison 100, difference −4
Symmetry64, the comparison 100, difference −36
Shape-norm63, the comparison 87, difference −24
Tilt85, the comparison 94, difference −9
Face-up light census, a different measure from the Cut Grading Tool; Spread and Shape-norm above 100 sit on the ring. Spread is the census's estimate from depth alone; the face-up size in the pros and cons is measured from each model's outline. Open it in the Cut Performance Wheel; these are the same census figures as our Cut Performance Index.
What the Emerald Cut gains in synthetic rutile
More fire in synthetic rutile than in diamond
Fire 95 against 87 for the Emerald Cut in diamond: 8 points higher
Fire is the share of the returned light that splits into color at the exit facet: the census traces each exit again at the refractive index minus and plus the fire spread (0.284 in synthetic rutile) and counts a ray as fire when the two directions differ by more than 0.6°. The Emerald Cut reads 95 against 87 for the same cut in diamond. The figure is the census's; the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders synthetic rutile's fire live.
The fire figure is the census's, traced at the refractive index minus and plus the fire spread. See the fire in the 3D Gemstone Simulator: the Emerald Cut in synthetic rutile under the sunny-day lighting.
Face-up size 105 against 100 for the T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile (T73 = 100): 5% more face-up area for the same weight
Face-up size is the outline's area per carat, measured from each model (T73 = 100): 105 for the Emerald Cut against 100 for the T73. The same volume spread over a longer or shallower outline shows more face for the weight; it is the same in every stone, because specific gravity scales every cut alike.
Emerald Cut · 6.91 x 4.61 mm at 1.00 ct · Face-up size 105
T73 Round Brilliant · 6.08 mm at 1.00 ct · Face-up size 100
Both stones weigh 1.00 ct in synthetic rutile and are drawn to the same scale in millimeters, from each cut's own model. Face-up size is the outline's area per carat, with the T73 at 100: a deeper stone, or a rounder outline, spreads less area for its weight.
Symmetry 64 against 100 for the T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile: 36 points lower
Symmetry reads how evenly the pavilion facets of each design family are cut: 100 − 6 × their scatter in degrees. The Emerald Cut reads 64, the T73 100. It depends on the geometry alone, so it is the same in every stone.
Emerald Cut · 57 facets · Symmetry 64
T73 Round Brilliant · 73 facets · Symmetry 100
Symmetry scores how regular the pavilion facets are within the design. Compare how evenly the facets repeat around each pavilion. Drawn from each cut's own model.
Returns less light than the T73 in synthetic rutile
Brilliance 48 against 81 for the T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile: 33 points lower
Brilliance is the share of the 3,200 census rays that enter the stone and come back out of the crown towards the viewer. In synthetic rutile, whose critical angle is 22.5°, the Emerald Cut returns 48 of 100 and the T73 81. The Emerald Cut's pavilion mains sit at 41.0°, the T73's at 40.8°. The maps below show where each stone's light returns from and where it leaks.
Emerald Cut in synthetic rutile · Brilliance 48
T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile · Brilliance 81
Red, green and blue = light returning to the eye; gray = leakage, light that leaves heading down or stays inside. This is the head-on view; the Brilliance score averages a wider cone of light, so the score can differ from what one picture shows.
What helps:the DG-M5 reads 97 for brilliance in synthetic rutile, the best of the cuts we score there.
2.80 ct at 6.5 mm, against 2.31 ct for the same cut in diamond (+21%)
Weight follows specific gravity: 4.26 for synthetic rutile against 3.52 for diamond, so the same model at the same size weighs 2.80 ct here and 2.31 ct in diamond, 6.5 mm across. Nothing about the light changes with it.
A Emerald Cut 6.5 mm across, weighed from the model's measured volume and each stone's specific gravity.
Leakage 28 against 10 for the T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile: 18 points higher
Leakage is the share of the census rays that enter the stone and leave through the pavilion, or through the crown heading down. The Emerald Cut leaks 28% in synthetic rutile against 10% for the T73 in synthetic rutile. Grey in the maps below is leaking light; the share under each picture is that picture's own.
Emerald Cut in synthetic rutile · Leakage 28
0° · 33% leak
10° · 36% leak
20° · 39% leak
30° · 46% leak
T73 Round Brilliant in synthetic rutile · Leakage 10
0° · 10% leak
10° · 6% leak
20° · 10% leak
30° · 15% leak
Each frame is the Light Return map with the stone tilted away from you by the angle shown; gray is leakage. The share under each frame is that picture's own.
What helps:the DG-M5 reads 2% for leakage in synthetic rutile, the best of the cuts we score there.
Our verdict on the Emerald Cut in synthetic rutile
Pick the Emerald Cut in synthetic rutile for this: it shows more fire than in diamond and faces up larger for its weight. The catch: it has a less regular pavilion than the T73, returns less light than the T73, weighs more than in diamond and leaks more light than the T73.
If that catch matters more to you, the DG-M5 reads 97 for brilliance in synthetic rutile, the best of the cuts we score there.
Every figure on this page is from our light census, traced at one refractive index: a simulation of the geometry, not a grading report. The 3D files and cutting files below are the same Emerald Cut model we traced.
Emerald Cut Synthetic rutile: questions
Is the Emerald a good cut for synthetic rutile?
In our census the Emerald Cut returns 48 of 100 for brilliance and 95 for fire in synthetic rutile, against 81 and 94 for the T73 in the same stone. Against that round and against the same cut in diamond it has 2 pros and 4 cons by our thresholds; the summary above names them.
What pavilion angle does synthetic rutile need?
At least 39.4° for a round design: synthetic rutile's critical angle is 22.5°, from the low end of its refractive index range, and head-on light has to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. The Emerald Cut's pavilion mains sit at 41.0°.
How much does a Emerald weigh in synthetic rutile?
At 6.5 mm across, 2.80 ct in synthetic rutile, against 2.31 ct for the same cut in diamond (+21%): synthetic rutile's specific gravity is 4.26, diamond's 3.52.
Can I see the Emerald in synthetic rutile in 3D?
Yes: the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders it live, with synthetic rutile's own refractive index and dispersion. Synthetic rutile is traced by the same light census as the other gemstones, with its refractive index and fire spread derived from published values, so its scores are on the same scale; the pictures here are our Light Return tracer, and the Cut Performance Wheel sets it against any other cut and stone.
Get the Emerald Cut files
6 formatsMillimetersWatertight
Emerald Cut 3D files
The Emerald Cut as exact geometry: 57 planar facets, real-world scale, ready for CAD,
rendering, printing and casting.
Save with a bundle: the Emerald Cut 3D files are also in Jewelry Essentials 3D, 10 cuts for €29.99 until 1 December, then €39.99 (€99.90 as single files). Buy the bundle.
Save with a bundle: the Emerald Cut cutting files are also in Faceter's Classics, 10 cuts for €22.49 until 1 December, then €29.99 (€69.90 as single files). Buy the bundle.
Not sure the files open in your software? Get the cube free: the same six formats, for your email address, used only to send them (privacy).
