Octagon Cut Tourmaline: Pros, Cons and Scores

Tourmaline has a refractive index of 1.603 to 1.655 and a dispersion of 0.017. Its critical angle, from the low end of that range, is 38.6°, so a round design needs a pavilion of at least 38.6° for head-on light to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. We trace it with one index, 1.629, the midpoint of the published range, and a fire spread of 0.015, 0.86 of the published dispersion. Every picture here is our Light Return tracer at 1.603, and every figure is from the same light census that scores the other gemstones; the 3D Gemstone Simulator shows the Octagon Cut in tourmaline live. Tourmaline is strongly doubly refractive (birefringence up to 0.040), so its back facets can look doubled. Our census traces one index (1.629), so the doubling is not in these figures.

The Octagon Cut has 49 facets, a table of 60.0% of its width and a total depth of 61.0% of its width; its pavilion mains sit at 29.3°. In tourmaline, the census returns 74 of 100 for brilliance and 39 for fire, against 86 and 50 for the T73, our benchmark, in the same stone; the same Octagon Cut in diamond reads 71 and 76.

Is tourmaline good in an Octagon? Pros and cons, measured

Pros

Lighter than the same cut in diamond 1.10 vs 1.23 ct

Cons

Less fire in tourmaline than in diamond 39 vs 76
Fewer facets, less sparkle 66 vs 80
Loses more light when tilted than in diamond 84 vs 97
Returns less light than the T73 in tourmaline 74 vs 86

Compared with the T73 Round Brilliant in tourmaline and with the Octagon 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 Octagon Cut in tourmaline (white) against the T73 Round Brilliant in tourmaline (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 tourmaline: ahead on 2, level on 2, behind on 4.

Global70, the comparison 78, difference −8
Brilliance74, the comparison 86, difference −12
Fire39, the comparison 50, difference −11
Scintillation66, the comparison 80, difference −14
Spread100, the comparison 100, difference 0
Symmetry100, the comparison 100, difference 0
Shape-norm97, the comparison 93, difference +4
Tilt84, the comparison 74, difference +10

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 Octagon Cut gains in tourmaline

Lighter than the same cut in diamond

1.10 ct at 6.5 mm, against 1.23 ct for the same cut in diamond (−11%)

Weight follows specific gravity: 3.13 for tourmaline against 3.52 for diamond, so the same model at the same size weighs 1.10 ct here and 1.23 ct in diamond, 6.5 mm across. Nothing about the light changes with it.

A Octagon Cut 6.5 mm across, weighed from the model's measured volume and each stone's specific gravity.

Try it yourself: Weights in every gemstone on the Octagon Cut page

What the Octagon Cut gives up in tourmaline

Less fire in tourmaline than in diamond

Fire 39 against 76 for the Octagon Cut in diamond: 37 points lower

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 (0.015 in tourmaline) and counts a ray as fire when the two directions differ by more than 0.6°. The Octagon Cut reads 39 against 76 for the same cut in diamond. The figure is the census's; the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders tourmaline'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 Octagon Cut in tourmaline under the sunny-day lighting.

What helps: the Oval Cut reads 80 for fire in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.

Try it yourself: See the fire in the 3D Gemstone Simulator

Fewer facets, less sparkle

Scintillation 66 against 80 for the T73 Round Brilliant in tourmaline: 14 points lower

Scintillation follows the number of facets the stone shows: 100 × (1 − e^(−facets / 45)). The Octagon Cut has 49 facets and the T73 73, so 66 against 80. It depends on the geometry alone, so it is the same in every stone.

Octagon Cut · 49 facets · Scintillation 66

T73 Round Brilliant · 73 facets · Scintillation 80

Scintillation follows the number of facets: more facets, more and smaller flashes as the stone moves. Compare the facet counts under the drawings; each drawing shows only the crown. Drawn from each cut's own model.

What helps: the DG-Miliano reads 98 for scintillation in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.

Try it yourself: Compare the Scintillation spoke in the Cut Performance Wheel

Loses more light when tilted than in diamond

Tilt 84 against 97 for the Octagon Cut in diamond: 13 points lower

Tilt is how much of its face-up brilliance a stone keeps when the census tilts it 20° about its long axis, with 2,200 rays. The Octagon Cut keeps 84 against 97 for the same cut in diamond. The tilt strips below show the maps at 0°, 10°, 20° and 30°, with each picture's own leak share under it.

Octagon cut in tourmaline tilted 0 degrees: Light Return map, 19% of the face leaking — Tilt is how much of its own face-up light a stone keeps when tilted. 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.

Octagon cut in tourmaline tilted 10 degrees: Light Return map, 37% of the face leaking — Tilt is how much of its own face-up light a stone keeps when tilted. 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-Miliano reads 86 for tilt in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.

Try it yourself: Compare the Tilt spoke in the Cut Performance Wheel

Returns less light than the T73 in tourmaline

Brilliance 74 against 86 for the T73 Round Brilliant in tourmaline: 12 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 tourmaline, whose critical angle is 38.6°, the Octagon Cut returns 74 of 100 and the T73 86. The Octagon Cut's pavilion mains sit at 29.3°, the T73's at 40.8°. The maps below show where each stone's light returns from and where it leaks.

Octagon cut in tourmaline face-up Light Return map: red, green and blue show where the light returns from, gray shows where it leaks (Brilliance 74) — 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.

T73 round brilliant in tourmaline face-up Light Return map: red, green and blue show where the light returns from, gray shows where it leaks (Brilliance 86) — 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 96 for brilliance in tourmaline, the best of the cuts we score there.

Try it yourself: Open this Light Return map in the simulator

Our verdict on the Octagon Cut in tourmaline

Pick the Octagon Cut in tourmaline for this: it weighs less than in diamond. The catch: it shows less fire than in diamond, has fewer facets to sparkle with, loses more light when tilted than in diamond and returns less light than the T73.

If that catch matters more to you, the Oval Cut reads 80 for fire in tourmaline, 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 Octagon Cut model we traced.

Octagon Cut Tourmaline: questions

Is the Octagon a good cut for tourmaline?

In our census the Octagon Cut returns 74 of 100 for brilliance and 39 for fire in tourmaline, against 86 and 50 for the T73 in the same stone. Against that round and against the same cut in diamond it has 1 pro and 4 cons by our thresholds; the summary above names them.

What pavilion angle does tourmaline need?

At least 38.6° for a round design: tourmaline's critical angle is 38.6°, 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 Octagon Cut's pavilion mains sit at 29.3°.

How much does a Octagon weigh in tourmaline?

At 6.5 mm across, 1.10 ct in tourmaline, against 1.23 ct for the same cut in diamond (-11%): tourmaline's specific gravity is 3.13, diamond's 3.52.

Can I see the Octagon in tourmaline in 3D?

Yes: the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders it live, with tourmaline's own refractive index and dispersion. Tourmaline 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 Octagon Cut files

6 formatsMillimetersWatertight

Octagon Cut 3D files

The Octagon Cut as exact geometry: 49 planar facets, real-world scale, ready for CAD, rendering, printing and casting.

STEPExact faceted solid for CAD
3DMRhino, closed mesh on its own layer
STLWatertight mesh for printing and casting
OBJMesh for modeling and rendering
FBXBlender, 3ds Max, Maya, Cinema 4D, Unity, Unreal
GLBWeb, AR and quick previews

€9.99 · Personal useBuy the 3D files

GemCad96 index

Octagon Cut cutting files

The Octagon Cut as a faceting design: 41 + 8 girdles = 49 facets, 96 index, 8-fold mirror-image symmetry, ready for the machine.

.ascGemCad design file, 96 index gear
.csvTier table: angles, indices and cutting order
DiagramPrintable faceting diagram

€6.99 · Personal useBuy the cutting files

Save with a bundle: the Octagon 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).

Questions before you buy? Email us.

More gemstones and cuts

Tourmaline: optical properties and the top ten cuts · The Octagon Cut: specifications, model and files

Octagon Cut Tourmaline: lighter than the same cut in diamond