7 replies to this topic

[icebergtec]

Hello:

I would like to get some expert analysis of these pieces, please. How would you rank them, in order of overall cut quality? Also, if you would be able to price each for me, that would be awesome. Any additional thought or recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you in advance.

Carat Color Clarity Cert. Dept. Table Flour Sym. Pol. Girdle Culet Measurement
1.04 F SI2 GIA 62.2 56.0 none exc exc med-sthk-f none 6.52x6.47x4.04
1.04 F SI2 GIA 62.6 58.0 med exc vgood thn-sthk none 6.42x6.48x4.04

Shape: Round
Carat Weight: 1.04ct
Color: F
Clarity: SI2
GIA Cut Grade: Excellent
Optical Symmetry: Superior
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Culet: None
Lab Report: GIA
Lab Report #: 17217313
Width: 6.50mm
Length: 6.52mm
Depth: 4.05mm
Table Percentage: 55.00%
Depth Percentage: 62.20%
Crown ∠: 34.50°
Pavilion ∠: 41.00°

[denverappraiser]

There’s not enough information provided on the first two to say anything useful about the cutting and we know nothing at all about the dealers or the deal so we can’t say much about the pricing. You may be able to find similar (or even identical) stones offered by the dealers here to use as a basis for comparison. Check the link at the top of the page titled ‘find online jeweler’.

Much of the same applies to the third one but I notice you list ‘Optical Symmetry: Superior’. This is not a GIA grade and it begs the question where this came from. Presumably it was applied by the dealer and, presumably, someone saw it in order to give it this grade. Who? What’s the scale, what's being measured and how?

Neil

[jan]

Optical Symmetry: Superior

Who graded that and how did they arrive at that conclusion?
Also, have you seen the diamond in person? What kind of inclusions did it have and is it eye clean. Sometimes SI2's are not.
Have you thought about getting a higher clarity with a slightly lower color grade?

Edited by jan, 14 November 2008 - 10:14 AM.

[barry]

Really impossible to give you any tangible advice just based on the lab report numbers.

[icebergtec]

Thanks for the responses.

Here is the link to the full scope of information on the rings. This is from goodoldgold.com I hope this helps you help me.

Thanks again.

Round H&As:
[url="http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamondResults.php?shape=1&ctMin=1&color=15&optSym=3&priceMax=6500&resultsColumns=268435471"][url]http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamondResults....lumns=268435471[/url][/url]

{comment} "I would highly recommend the 1.04 F SI2 as the inclusions are hard to see with the naked eye making it an excellent SI2"


Princess Cuts:
[url="http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamondResults.php?shape=16&ctMin=1&color=15&priceMax=6500&resultsColumns=268435471"][url]http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamondResults....lumns=268435471[/url][/url]

{comment} "The D SI1 would be a nice option. Girls love to know they have the most rare color grade in the world."

If you can get me price quotes, that would be super.

[denverappraiser]

Ask your sales associate what they mean by 'optical symmetry: superior'. This is a ranking system that is unique to that particular store. There are prices right on the links you supplied, neither of the first stones you mentioned are listed at all. Are you looking for a round or a square cut?

Neil

Edited by denverappraiser, 14 November 2008 - 03:59 PM.

[icebergtec]

denverappraiser, on Friday, Nov 14 2008, 06:56 PM, said:

Ask your sales associate what they mean by 'optical symmetry: superior'. This is a ranking system that is unique to that particular store. There are prices right on the links you supplied, neither of the first stones you mentioned are listed at all. Are you looking for a round or a square cut?

Neil

Neil,

She is open to either. What is your remarks on the cut quality of the stones? Could I do better in terms of price or quality for the same price?

Thanks.

[denverappraiser]

I haven’t seen or in any way tested the stone so I really can’t give a useful opinion about the cutting. She (or at least somebody there) has, and they have given an opinion. They think it’s ‘superior’. The other opinion we have is that GIA called it ‘excellent’. To paraphrase Martha Stewart, this is a good thing. If the dealer is subdividing that grade based on what they see and what tests they are doing, that’s fine, but there is simply not enough information on the report to do what you want and I don’t have a clue what they have done to decide it’s ‘superior’. Superior to what? Words like this can be extremely broad like calling a car a 'creampuff' or they might be useful and it’s terribly important to understand what they mean when they use it. As I said, it is NOT a standard industry term and it is NOT part of the GIA grading system.

‘Excellent’ is GIA’s top grade, as I’m sure you know. The PGS results on your web link suggest that it would be eligible for an AGS-0, which is their top grade, save for the ‘very good’ polish (‘ideal’ polish grade is required for a stone to get top marks in the AGS system and it’s unlikely that a GIA-vg would be graded that way). This is probably why it’s being sold with GIA instead of AGS paper. I would expect it to be slightly less expensive than an otherwise similar stone from the same dealer with the AGS pedigree for this reason. Frankly this strikes me as a reasonable tradeoff unless you really want that document with the ‘ideal’ word printed on it.

Neil