Jump to content

Newbie, Please help me choose between these two diamonds!


FLGIRL
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello, this is my first post here. I am looking for a 2 carat, round diamond, D-G, SI 1, GIA XXX.  I am considering these two and would value any input or recommendations.  The picture is diamond number two.  Thank you

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EBFC6F5E-1BF3-4394-82AF-CA01BEB15ED7.jpeg

E5D620DC-0D48-4EF7-94DF-AEAC7215DEC7.jpeg

BFD2CED1-AD55-4575-B8AD-9F654923C227.jpeg

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by FLGIRL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and I'd probably flip the opposite way based on the reports alone (#2). Why? Personal preferences; #1 has a larger table and a shallower crown, and I tend to prefer the opposite (probably more fire, at the expense of some brightness). On the other hand, #1 is going to be visibly larger, and it seems to have nice proportions.

The other factor to consider is clarity - you didn't post pictures of #1, but there is a fair amount of inclusions under the table: are they visible? Do they bother you? #2 has a large cloud under the table, which is easily visible in the very bright photo you posted; does it affect appearance in any way, especially under more "average" light conditions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am still waiting on pictures for stnoe #1. I'm concerned about the cavity.  I will post when I receive them.   I'm not sure about the inclusions.   RE:  Stone # 2, I asked about the cloud, if it made it look hazy, and of course they said no.  The diamond is about 2 hours away, so trying to decided if it's worth the drive!  They said it's more like VS2 qualty.

I'm sensitive to inclusions.   I had a smaller (1.3) IF, G that iI'm replacing.  I want 2 Cts., so I know I need to make some concessions.  Just trying to figure out what I'm comfortable with....

 Thanks for your input!

Edited by FLGIRL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FLGIRL said:

I'm concerned about the cavity.

Why? It's no more visible than an included crystal, provided it's kept clean. And an SI-grade characteristic means GIA does not think it's a threat to integrity or durability.

3 hours ago, FLGIRL said:

The diamond is about 2 hours away, so trying to decided if it's worth the drive! 

Especially if you can see more than one, I'd definitely say yes. You are going to make a $20-25k decision; I'd say it's worth "investing" a Saturday. There's only so much anyone can say without seeing the diamonds, and videos like those aren't really helpful, in my opinion.

3 hours ago, FLGIRL said:

I'm sensitive to inclusions.

I would not look for SI1, then... especially in a larger stone.

1 hour ago, FLGIRL said:

I should add this as choice number three

On paper, I like it far less than either of the two above. While theoretically the combination of shallow crown and steep pavilion angles works, I really don't like the effect (it's bright but "flat" to my eyes). This said, 1) the paper only goes so far, and the proof of any diamond is in the seeing, and 2) different people prefer different looks - which is one of the reasons GIA's 'Excellent' cut grade is so broad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of the 4, this is the one I like most - on paper.

There is also significantly more information available (ASET, H&A images), which demonstrates it is a well cut but not H&A diamond, and it comes from a vendor that I (personally) respect and trust. Then again, none of the others are likely to be H&A - or cut significantly better than this one.

If ultimate size is not an issue, in which case #1 is slightly larger, but it's an SI1 and it's not (in my opinion) as nicely cut as this one, I'd go with this one, assuming the price is right. Points to note (and reasons why the price is not sky-high): the slightly thick girdle, and the faint fluorescence. I can sleep easy over both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are very welcome!

I wouldn't say that there is an "ideal range" as such, but what I tend to like is a pavilion angle between 40.6° and 41.0° and a crown angle between 33° and 36° (the higher the crown angle, the flatter the pavilion, as a rule). Table... as small as possible (I don't mind a 53%!), because coupled with those angles it means a nice high crown and a lot of fire, even if it means the diamond may look a bit smaller and less bright.

The reason why I emphasised the "I" above is not out of egocentrism 😉 - it's to highlight that that's my set of personal preferences; other people - including some that I highly respect - have completely different tastes and would much prefer other proportions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was more useful before GIA and AGS developed cut grading systems, and before there was widespread technology to take good quality images - including reflector images - and videos of diamonds... Now they even want to charge for using it, which is frankly taking the mickey.

It also reflects Garry Holloway's personal preferences - which are perfectly fine, but are personal, just like mine - rather than an objective (or at least multi-personal, like the GIA cut grade) view of diamond aesthetics, and it ignores a huge number of factors that influence diamond looks - some about cut, and others not (clarity, transparency, symmetry of pattern).

I would put very limited store in it... if you can see the diamond! Otherwise, I think you'd get pretty much the same advice out of me looking a report as you would out of the HCA (i.e. I bet you that the HCA "liked" #1, #4, #2, #5, #3 in that order and rejects 3 and 5, with 2 not great because of size - my order is 4, 2, 1, 5, 3, with 1 lower because I like high crowns. I promise I haven't used the HCA...)

Edited by davidelevi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have still not purchased my diamond.  I appreciate the input.  I'm interested in this stone that is available at online company "With Clarity."  Any input regarding this company , and the stone?  Offered for $22,600 USD.  The GIA report states "Clarity grade is based on clouds that are not shown."  Is this standard?  The stone looks very clean on the plot, so wondering if it's too good to be true.

https://s3.ap-south-1.amazonaws.com/finestargroup/CertiImages/1367372424.pdf

 

Thank you!

Edited by FLGIRL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...