18 replies to this topic

[jtylerpate]

Is this ring going to give the brilliance and fire that I'm looking for?

GIA Certified
1.51 Round
E color
SI1
VG Cut
7.41-7.45 x 4.44 mm

Depth: 59.8%
Table: 59%
Crown Angle: 33.5
Crown Height: 13.5%
Pavilion Angle: 40.4
Pavilion Depth: 42.5%
Star Length: 50%
Lower Half: 85%
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick
Culet: None

Polish: VG
Symmetry: VG
Fluorescence: None

$11,350

I'm going to be buying this sight unseen. I've been told that the diamond is 100% eye clean.

I've placed these specs into HCA Pricescope and all checks out as Excellent throughout....is there much weight in these?

My worries are that the table is slightly large and the depth is JUST a little short. Also, should any weight be put in the 85% lower half?

I'm looking for the best diamond my $11,500 will take me in the 1.50 ct range.

Anyone have any opinions?

[jan]

The initial numbers are not one of a stone that gets really good light performance in my experience. Also SI1's alot of times have inclusions that can be seen with the naked eye in certain directions. For that kind of investment, I would deal with a vendor that actually views the stone and can take photos etc to make sure I'm getting a good quality . You don't really have to buy sight unseen unless you want to.



Here is an example of one that rocked on light performance and is definitely eye clean in all directions.

http://www.dbof.com/...-1-55-ct-si1-h/

[jtylerpate]

What figure or measurement is throwing you off?

That diamond you sent over as an example is nice, but I'm looking for D-E color in order to match my setting.

I used the HCA calculation on Pricescope.com and it checks out there. Is there another performance calculator online to use?

[davidelevi]

It might, or it might not. Unfortunately at this stage the only way to tell is to see the diamond. The information supplied by a grading report - and that is all you have - is woefully insufficient to do anything but rejecting the obvious duds, which this stone is not.

Also, once you reach a certain level of performance, personal taste really comes into it. Some people like highly simmetrical and "well balanced" diamonds. Others like different makes than the currently fashionable "superideal", some liking less symmetry and orderliness, and others liking fire and contrast at the expense of absolute brightness. The only way for you to know is to look at as many diamonds as you can in real life, not just reading grading reports. Or to get a dealer that can do that for you and help you in picking a good shortlist.

Edited by davidelevi, 07 September 2010 - 07:43 AM.

[davidelevi]

jtylerpate, on 07 September 2010 - 06:47 AM, said:

What figure or measurement is throwing you off?

That diamond you sent over as an example is nice, but I'm looking for D-E color in order to match my setting.

I used the HCA calculation on Pricescope.com and it checks out there. Is there another performance calculator online to use?

Bear in mind the HCA does not see the stone and works from averages; the problem is not "the model" (though it may be, with the HCA, since it at the end reflects Garry Holloway's preferences, not yours), it's the information available. The same goes for any other model.

Help me understand your comment about the setting - bear in mind that 1-2 (and even 3, but it depends on which 3) grades in colour between side stones or pave work and the centre will to all practical purposes be invisible once the ring is finished.

[jtylerpate]

Attached is a picture of the settings. The diamonds are F quality and I'm looking for a center stone in the D-E range in order to really set itself apart from the setting.

[jtylerpate]

Well, I can't seem to attach it.

[jan]

jtylerpate, on 07 September 2010 - 06:47 AM, said:

What figure or measurement is throwing you off?

That diamond you sent over as an example is nice, but I'm looking for D-E color in order to match my setting.

I used the HCA calculation on Pricescope.com and it checks out there. Is there another performance calculator online to use?

The problem is your budget. You won't get a top cut grade for $11500 in D,E or F color. You can get a stone that isn't cut so great though. But seems like a waste of money to me. If you go slightly smaller, or down in color, you can get a nicer cut grade or go up in budget.

[denverappraiser]

There's an online cut evaluation tool here that's much more useful for your application than the HCA:

https://www.gia.edu/facetware/

The reason you got VG instead of EX is because of the pavilion angle, not the depth, table or lower girdle length as you've speculated. How serious a problem this is depends on you. You've got an average of 40.4 and you need to average 41 in order to get EX with your other variables fixed. It makes the stone face up a little bigger and it changes the optics slightly. Of course, it's keeping the price down too.

All things told, that may be an acceptable tradeoff.

[jan]

jtylerpate, on 07 September 2010 - 06:47 AM, said:

What figure or measurement is throwing you off?

That diamond you sent over as an example is nice, but I'm looking for D-E color in order to match my setting.

I used the HCA calculation on Pricescope.com and it checks out there. Is there another performance calculator online to use?

The numbers I'm talking about is a shallow crown coupled with a shallow pavilion. Definitely not a sparkler as compared to an ideal cut diamond.

[davidelevi]

jtylerpate, on 07 September 2010 - 08:27 AM, said:

Attached is a picture of the settings. The diamonds are F quality and I'm looking for a center stone in the D-E range in order to really set itself apart from the setting.

Hmmm... first of all, in "normal" conditions (stone in a setting, looked at from above), most trained professionals would have problems telling a D from an F. Secondly, most people DON'T want too strong a contrast between the sides/melee/pave and the main stone - but each to his/her own. Thirdly, how confident are you that the melee is correctly graded for colour? In general, it has no report, which means you are trusting the seller. Can you? (honest question - I am not insinuating anything)

[jtylerpate]

Well, the diamond in Q is gone.

I would like to try to get some advice on two other stones that I am thinking about purchasing;

#1
GIA
Round Brilliant
1.40 Ct
7.10-7.50x4.48
F Color
Ex/Ex/Ex/no fluoresence
Table- 57%
Depth- 62.9
Crown Angle: 36
Pavillion Angle: 41
Star Length: 50%
Lower: 80%
No Cutlet
Med to Slightly thick

$10k


#2
[url="http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2121278093&weight=1.55"][url]http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2121278093&weight=1.55[/url][/url]

$10,350

It's an SI2, but I've been told that it is 100% eye clean.


Tough because if I could see the stone I would jump on it if I could verify it's 100% eye clean. Seems like a good buy with the dimensions and ex cut. Are there SI2 diamonds rated by GIA that are truly eye clean?

I'd like to have the larger diamond for the same cost, but would hate it if it comes and is not 100% eye clean.

[jan]

Not sure I believe that the SI2 E 1.55 ct. is eye clean. Didn't they even give you a plot of the stone or the real actual lab report to view?

What is the clarity on the 1.40 ct.? Are the number correct on the dimensions? It looks kind of wonked.

[denverappraiser]

'Eye clean' is a tricky thing that includes components about the lighting, your vision, and how well you know what to look for. To some a sugar cube is eye clean and others may not be able to pick out a barn at 100 paces but they can spot a pinpoint in a VS2. This is why 'eye clean' is NOT one of the standards used in setting the clarity grade. You've been told it's 100% eye clean and since that's the ONLY information you've got, you are relying 100% on the person who told you this. So .... are they reliable? Have they even seen the actual stone? (lots of internet dealers are selling stones that they've never even seen and you're hard pressed to get them to tell you this without pressing the question)

[davidelevi]

One other point on the 1.55 - what's the return policy? If you trust them to act on THAT honestly, and you have the time to get the stone, understand whether you like it and return it if you don't, it may be worth a punt.

[jtylerpate]

Once the diamond is set, do you think someone would be able to see the difference between a 1.40 and a 1.55?

[denverappraiser]

jtylerpate, on 10 September 2010 - 07:03 AM, said:

Once the diamond is set, do you think someone would be able to see the difference between a 1.40 and a 1.55?

No, not if they don't have the stones sitting next to one another and maybe not even then. You're setting a very low bar with this test as your standard by the way. Most people are hard pressed to spot the difference mounted between a F and a J, an IF and an I1, the difference between a 1.25 and a 2.00 carat or, for that matter, a diamond and a high quality fake without a cleaning and a careful inspection and without knowing what to look for.

[jan]

jtylerpate, on 10 September 2010 - 07:03 AM, said:

Once the diamond is set, do you think someone would be able to see the difference between a 1.40 and a 1.55?

Yes it if is a difference between 7.1 mm and 7.5 mm you can definitely see the size difference.

[davidelevi]

Jan - I respectfully disagree. Side by side, possibly just, depending on the setting. Apart from each other, no way.

Jtilerpate - easy test: get yourself a ruler, a piece of paper and a sharp pair of scissors and cut two squares of 7 and 7.5 mm side respectively. See if you can tell which one is left once a friend takes one away without you seeing which one.