Jump to content

Advice Needed On Princess Cut


rm23
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

As i'm french, i will do my best to write a good english...

 

I will received in few days a ring with a princess cut diamond for my wife.

I've a return policy as i contract with Union Diamond and his great seller Jimmy.

 

Here's the specs of the stone, extracted from the GIA report :

• 5.5 x 5.23 x 3.76 mm

• 0.86 carat

• E / VVS1

Finish EX / Symmetry EX

Fluorescence NONE

Comments NONE

thin - thick

Table 73% Depth 71.9 %

 

Direct link to the report :

http://www.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?f...amp;weight=0.86

 

As this is a princess cut (prefered by my wife), i heard that they are less sparkles and seems smaller than a round cut. That's why i prefer quality against weight.

The table proportion seems a little bigger than the recommandation for a top stone as i read it on your excellent website : http://www.diamond.info/diamonds/diamonds_4cs_cut5.shtml

Could you please give me your advice on this proportions ? Will they produce the best sparkles effect for a princess stone ?

For those who want to know, the price i paid is USD3900 for the stone.

By advance, thank you for your reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, no way to know if it will sparkle based purely on the report. Any guidelines - particularly on non-round brilliants - are just that; guidelines. Diamonds with exactly the same report information may look very very different in real life (it's a bit like buying a car based on the number of wheels and colour - it doesn't get you very far).

 

Doesn't Union provide photos and ASET/IdealScope images or Gemex/ISEE2 reports? Those won't provide a definitive answer, but at least will give some useful info re: sparkling and brightness.

 

One thing I would question - why go for a VVS1 stone? You are paying a large premium vs a VS2 for something you really won't ever see unless you look at the stone with a loupe (and you are pretty good at looking, too!)

 

BTW: Je voudrais écrire en Français avec la même qualité de vos Anglais...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer a clean diamond because the first diamonds (earrings) i bought was given for a VS2 and was really "ugly" under magnification, and don't want to do it again. That was my first experience in buying diamonds and I was quite disappointed (i don't look at them with magnification at the moment) : (

 

I think that light won't be stopped if they are no default so it will sparkles a bit more...

 

Yes i'm looking at stones with magnification as i'm an opal cutter (hobbyist, near professionnal, more than 200's cutted opals in my collection and around 20 top of the cream gemstones).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inclusions short of I2-I3 grade are extremely unlikely to have any effect on sparkle.

 

A VS2 inclusion should be relatively difficult to find under 10x magnification, so I'm a little wary of the grading.

 

Of course you will want to look at the stone under a loupe - my point is that once set and on your GF's finger, not too many people will look at it that way!

 

Edit: Fixed typo

Edited by davidelevi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, no way to know if it will sparkle based purely on the report. Any guidelines - particularly on non-round brilliants - are just that; guidelines. Diamonds with exactly the same report information may look very very different in real life (it's a bit like buying a car based on the number of wheels and colour - it doesn't get you very far).

 

Doesn't Union provide photos and ASET/IdealScope images or Gemex/ISEE2 reports? Those won't provide a definitive answer, but at least will give some useful info re: sparkling and brightness.

 

One thing I would question - why go for a VVS1 stone? You are paying a large premium vs a VS2 for something you really won't ever see unless you look at the stone with a loupe (and you are pretty good at looking, too!)

 

BTW: Je voudrais écrire en Français avec la même qualité de vos Anglais...

 

I don't mean to beat a dead horse and, by all means, buy VVS1 if you want but are sure your earrings are really VS2? That's a very strange complaint for that clarity grade unless the issue is either something else like color or cutting or it's badly misgraded. As Davide mentioned, VS2 inclusions are difficult for most people to find at all even under magnification, much less describing them as 'ugly'.

 

Neil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jan,

 

Sorry i don't write the dimensions correctly : Measurements are 5.28 x 5.23 x 3.76 mm

So it's a "perfect" square ; )

About the square, a diamonds salesman (not UD seller) told me that it's better to choose a not so square diamond as, when it is set in the ring, the diamond seems more square because of the optical phenomen with the band of the ring (the bigger side is setting perpendicular to the band)...

 

I agree the table on the stone i choose is maybe a little too big (under 70% will be better) ...

I will see if it's really a problem when i will have the diamond between my hand and play with it and the light.

 

I know that VVS1 is maybe excessive but i really want a stone with super characteristics, even if people can't look at them at a glance... That's something primary for my wife and i and for people who are so demonstrative with thier big 1.5 ct in J/VS2 ; )

 

Thank you for your replies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Neil,

 

I think you're right : the earrings were presented as VS2 but there was no certificate delivered with it (it's a common in France).

You have to trust the jeweller... They was 0.25 ct round cut daimond x2, and i think they are rather SI2. After this bad experience, i want to buy a real clean diamond for my wife...

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...