3 to choose from PICK ONE

[EZBUDDY]

which sounds best in your honest opinion

3 choices:

RB .75 H SI-1 GOOD CUT 5.96*5.9*3.88 TABLE IS 59.1 NO fluorescence
RB .72 F I-1 EXCELLENT CUT 5.76*5.88*3.8 TABLE IS 58.1 SLIGHT fluorescence
RB .72 G SI-3 IDEAL CUT 5.78*5.88*3.79 TABLE IS 57.5 NO fluorescence

The diamond would be placed in a 6 prong tiffany''s style setting...Your help would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you!

 

[Jennifer5973]

There''s not a lot of info here to make the best suggestion...

But based on this, I am leaning towards #3, the G, SI3, becasue I prefer the smaller tables...But the SI3 does concern me--it must be an EGL stone. I''d really check this stone out to make sure it is eye-clean and accurately graded. I have an EGL stone but it is true that they can be off from GIA and AGS grading, especially foreign labs, so make sure you are getting what you pay for.

You really need more info--like the crown/pavillion numbers, to make a sound judgement here...

 

[TLS]

first thing I want to say is that I am not an expert, just a consumer who has spent a ton of time researching... have you seen any of these in person? what do the inclusions look like? I would cross the 1st one off my list completely because of the "good" cut, you can probably for the same price can get a much better cut stone. I would probably be crossing off the 2nd one off too since it''s an I1 and likely to have noticeable inclusions. It all depends on what you want, some people have been very happy with I1''s I am sure and as long as you understand what you are getting then it is all up to you to make the decision as to whether you are comfortable with eye visible inclusions. Have you seen the inclusions in that one? I am curious about how the last one looks, have you seen the inclusions on this one? Do they have certs and from whom? What are the prices and have you tried the search engine here on pricescope to see what the price ranges should be for these?

Also, you need crown and pavilion angles if you can get them to truly determine how well cut these are.

Who is grading the last one as Ideal? Sounds like an EGL stone with the SI3 clarity rating, so I am curious how you know it''s an "ideal" cut - is this just the jewelers opinon or have they run it through a sarin?

also the diameter measurements on the last two don''t seem very good. Not sure if these qualify as "out of round". maybe an expert can chime in.

 

[Lynn B]

Ditto what Jennifer said. Also - the F/I1 is a very extreme color/clarity combo. Personally, I probably wouldn''t even consider that. Have you had a chance to see these stones in person? What did your eyes tell you?

Lynn

 

[Maxine]

Do you have any other measurements???? There are other threads on this page that address the SI3 issue....it''s probably actually the same as I1........plus even the diameter of 5.78x5.88 might be a concern........have you done a search of diamonds on pricescope? Are the ones you''r looking at priced about the same???

 

[asblackrock]

Hi EZBUDDY
There is inadequate information to comment on the cut (depth %, crown and pavilion angles, girdle thickness and culet size are needed) and this will primarily determine how good these stones look.

From the info you have given:
1. the table sizes are all on the high side
2. the diameter varies by 1-2% which again is a bit high

Dont know if this bothers you, but you will probably see the inclusions in stones 2 & 3 with the naked eye.

I am only a novice, but I dont think you will get many comments from the experts without more info.
Hope this helps.

Edited to add: This was posted at the the same time as the others - I am a slow typist!

 

[belle]

have you seen these stones and compared them yourself?

 

[TLS]

As black rock - what is the problem with the table on the 3rd, I believe that still falls into AGS ideal parameters. Also, some people actually prefer the larger tables that the other two have even though they fall outside what is considered "ideal".

 

[asblackrock]

Hi TL1
You are right - AGS "ideal" table sizes are 52.4-57.5, so stone 3 just makes it. I tried to be cautious with my wording ie "on the high side" rather than "too high".

I have also slowly learned the numbers are only a guide to a RB''s performance. I know that there are lots of diamonds which are stunning, with numbers which individually fall out of the ideal range, but which combine well and produce a great looking stone, but if I had to make a decision based on numbers alone, I would personally think it safer to stick to the middle ground (just my opinion).

You are very right about personal preferences too. eg high fire might not be a priority, brilliance and scintillation may be more important. A diamond really needs to be seen to make a final judgement.

Sorry if I have stated anything misleading EZBUDDY.

 

[Maxine]

Date: 1/29/2005 8:52:17 PM
Author: asblackrock
Hi TL1
You are right - AGS ''ideal'' table sizes are 52.4-57.5, so stone 3 just makes it. I tried to be cautious with my wording ie ''on the high side'' rather than ''too high''.

I have also slowly learned the numbers are only a guide to a RB''s performance. I know that there are lots of diamonds which are stunning, with numbers which individually fall out of the ideal range, but which combine well and produce a great looking stone, but if I had to make a decision based on numbers alone, I would personally think it safer to stick to the middle ground (just my opinion).

You are very right about personal preferences too. eg high fire might not be a priority, brilliance and scintillation may be more important. A diamond really needs to be seen to make a final judgement.

Sorry if I have stated anything misleading EZBUDDY.

That said, there still is not enough information......re: depth, andgles etc...........to be able to predict what the stones will look like .........

 

[NyssaLynne]

Date: 1/29/2005 6:55:36 PM
Author: Lynn B
Ditto what Jennifer said. Also - the F/I1 is a very extreme color/clarity combo. Personally, I probably wouldn''t even consider that. Have you had a chance to see these stones in person? What did your eyes tell you?

Lynn

As the proud and happy owner of an F, I1 diamond I must say you really have to see it in person before deciding against it. My diamond only has 2 eye-visible flaws, one which is hidden with a prong and another which is only visible at a few certain angles. Just looking at it straight on you would not see either of them.

 

[Lynn B]

Oh, Lynne, I am so sorry if I was offensive in any way.

Your ring is absolutely GORGEOUS

and I can certainly see why you are in love with it!

These "which would you pick?" threads (particularly when so little info is provided) are always difficult for me... I want to be helpful to the poster, but it''s pretty much grabbing at straws to find something -- anything! -- to comment on!

I know that a lot of people do try to somewhat "match" color and clarity grades... and I was simply relating that. But there will always be wonderful, beautful stones outside of any so-called "guidelines".

Lynn

 

[EZBUDDY]

Hi everyone!

Thanks for your quick replies!
Now, to answering some quick questions...

Yes, I have seen these diamonds in person and in all honesty they all look the same, other than the size of the .75 to the .72's they look the same. I am not a trained gemologist, just a regular Joe, so, can barely see any of the inclusions face up. However, under the loop, I was able to see the inclusions in the three which where not very big.

In all honesty, I was leaning toward the first stone, just because it's larger than the other two, however, if i would get more sparkle with the other two smaller diamonds, I would rather trade off size for sparkler.

Anyhow, both smaller diamonds inclusions would be covered by the prongs of the setting and would not be visible to the naked eye. In terms of the certification, I'm not sure who its by (I believe EGL), but, I do know that there was a Sarin Report for the two smaller stones. I will get the dimensions and more info by tuesday and post the results of the report to get a better understanding of the diamonds.

I would like to get an H&A but am limited in budget which is why I've chosen these:

By the way pricing is as follows(which includes the white gold tiffany's style 6 prong setting):
$ 3500 cdn
$ 2500 cdn
$ 2900 cdn

Thanks again.

GLEN

 

[fire&ice]

My gut leaned towards #1. Spready w/ a nice combination of color/clarity. What are the depths of the stones? Is #1 closer to 60/60? Also, the mm measurements are tight on the first. The third has a more than 10% swing.

I don''t know. The price on the first seems to be much highe - perhaps because it is a full 3/4 carat. Is this your only choices?

In the end, what does your eye gravitate towards. Also, remember to view the stones under different kinds of lighting.