I don't mind them if they don't dominate the overall look of the stone. I have an oval without any bowtie and a pear necklace without, but my pear earrings have quite visible bowties. They give some contrast and definition, but any more would be unappealing to me.

I think I've read enough to be conditioned into thinking of them as a fault, but I suspect you'd have to judge that on a stone-by-stone basis. Some fantastic stones without bowties, some mediocre stones without bowties and so on.

I like the one in the picture, but it is a beautiful diamond overall and the bowtie isn't too pronounced.

I have a cute little loose marquise that I used to wear in a ring (that has since been scrapped) and it has a bowtie.  It isn't always visible and it isn't the dominating thing when you do see it.  Now that it is loose I ought to try to take picture of it to share and see what others think of it.  Though it isn't very big (approx 3x5mm) but I can see so much more into this stone unset and IMO the bowtie is less visible.

I don't mind a bowtie, but I do not like massive ones where the first one you see is the bowtie.

Thanks guys!
You all bring up some good points.
as omc pointed out, there can be positive aspects to a bow tie, on some stones. AS Jen pointed out, MQ/PS/OV shapes can get a bad rap because they may be associated with negative bow ties- which do exist in my opinion.
Nice stone clgwli!
To me that looks like a great example of a nice bow tie- its an integral part of the personality.

Fancy Shaped diamonds like marquise, pear shape and oval are cut from more irregular rough diamonds.

This means cutters have to be creative when they design the polished stone, from the rough.
If we compare this with a round brilliant, the difference is stark.
There are varying degrees of cut in a round diamond- but mostly having to do with the angles, facet size, and table size. The cutter is basically "handcuffed" to the design.
There are 8 main facets on the bottom - also called the Pavilion of the round diamond- as shown on the plot off a GIA report



To give you an idea of the variety possible, here's the bottom facet design off the GIA report for the orange diamond at the bottom- there are four main facets on this diamond.

This is probably the most common.

Variety being the spice of life, there are others.



The stone below has the four main design- and exhibits a very small bowtie.
Yet some pear shapes with varying degrees of bow ties also have this four main design- so it can only be part of the reason.

I've never given much thought to specific variations in fancy cuts (I figured I'd go NUTS trying to sort it all out, so, I didn't even look). Now that the cat is out of the bag, so to speak, I must admit that I REALLY like this thread... More please!

Of course, now I wish that I had the plot to every pear – heck, make it ALL the fancies – I've ever seen...   (Told you I'd go nuts...)

I have to admit comparing the two stones just for facet structure and bowtie vs none (so leaving out the color) I do like the one in the halo more. 

I think in this case the bowtie really adds something wonderful to the stone.  It gives it kind of a sense of depth and personality.

I'm really liking this thread.  I normally don't go for pears and marquise or even ovals since I like square shapes most.  But I really am starting to find a whole new appreciation for a pear.

I'm not done yet, but I was doing the same 

But at least it is fun 

Do marquise come in different cuts like pears do?  I suppose I should look but figure it might be quicker to ask.

I think I like the 6 & 7 main pears best from what I've seen on DBL.

i'm going to have to start paying closer attention to the different kinds of cuts, all i know is i like chubby! chubby pear, chubby oval, chubby marquise, apparently i'm a chubby chaser.

Thanks for the answer David.  I really should look into different pavilion designs just for fun.  Not that one is better than another, but to see what speaks to me.

I started doing it with radiants (some day I will own a squarish radiant in about a S-V color range ) and noticed that some designs speak to me more than others.  I even saved some GIA reports to give to my husband and a matching picture of the stone to show him what I would really like if he just went out and got one for me (though he knows to come here LOL)

Anyway, I definitely agree that numbers aren't everything when it comes to searching for a stone.  I have bought quite a few vintage pieces and items from estate sales (the little marquise is one of those) and never used numbers there.  I just used my eyes.

I understand why some with the RBs want to use them, but I am not a fan of the absolute "ideal cut" anyway.  I don't like the contrasting arrows like that and I never will.  I have to believe I am not the only one who feels that way too.  Some love them so I won't discount that either.

But I think education the way one of my jewelers did it with me was good.   I've had 3 sets of diamond earrings made for me since I needed very small stones.  They showed me things and I chose what I wanted.  When I first bought a pair they were about .08 ctw and I got the best of the best.  The 2nd time it was really darn good but not ideal.  The last set I got .2 ctw, they are just good over all, but I like them.  And I actually like the way the good look in my ears more than the EX/EX/EX.  That's when I realized I disliked a certain round and liked another.

I also realized that it wasn't worth paying for VS1 or above in an earring since I never really see the inclusions anyway.   For these earrings, carat size was #1 priority, color was second (I like high color), cut was third and clarity was last.

I think learning about gems is awesome and knowing what might be good and what might not be is nice.  But it isn't always what everyone needs.

I prefer my eyes, which is why I like this place.  I like photos and video.  What I can't see in person, the pictures & video show me.  I have stones that absolutely speak to me (like this one http://rockdiamond.c...-butter-yellow-r3273)  I couldn't even tell you if it falls in a "good range" or not.  Because I don't care :p

As for which is the better cut, is it the one with the larger arrows?  I'm only guessing that because I like the other one better 

I prefer the one on the left.  It seems more "crisp" to me, if that makes any sense.  As far as which one is technically a better cut, I'll leave that to the experts on the forum.  It's probably the other one, though, like clgwli said!   

Mikla

I forgot to say this, but I am too!  That's why I was drawn to my little marquise.  It's definitely chubbier than many I've seen.  I wouldn't mind if it were more so too 

i particularly like the flower/star pattern of the facets, i definitely don't see it as 'less perfect' than a hearts and arrows diamond.