Diamond Comparison

[Fiancee to be]

Hello all,
What do you guys think about these 2 stones? The first one I've seen in person, which is gorgeous, but the second is from an online vendor. The prices are almost identical, around $7,800.

1.33 carats
6.57 x 6.15 x 4.18
color G
VVS2
68% depth
79% table
thin to slightly thick girdle
culet, none
very good polish
very good symmetry
GIA cert.

1.5 carats
6.81 x 6.18 x 4.31
color G
VS2
69.8% depth
78% table
thin to thick girdle
good polish
good symmetry
culet, none
EGL report

Which one is the better deal? And are these good deals in the first place? Thanks in advance for any advice.

 

[windowshopper]

what shape?

 

[Fiancee to be]

Whoops, they are both princess cuts. It''s for an engagement ring, probably a solitaire cathedral setting. Though that is tentative. Thanks.

 

[valeria101]

Here's what I see in those numbers:

#1. at about 1.1:1 L/W these are just-about-square. A nice shape, if you agree...

#2. The depth % is promissing, but this does not mean the stones will actually have good spread because of the thicj girdles. It is easier to check for surface area as "spread" than target a certain depth %...

#3. Not sure what that LARGE table does to the brilliance of these guys - in theory it is possible that these proportions yield nice light return, but I would not bet this is the case

Betwee these, G/VS2 sounds much more sensible than G/VVS. The only difference the higher grade makes is one of price...


Hope the 0.2 helps...

 

[windowshopper]

i always wait to hear what ana has to say.............the super large tables make me nervous...........however with the depth and girdles it leaves alot more spread.............dont know about optics etc tho

 

[belle]

with princess, a good cut makes all the difference! as a general rule, you want a table that is smaller than the depth.

 

[Fiancee to be]

Thanks for the replies

.

So it is safe to say that I should be looking for a smaller table % if I want brilliance? Because I really want this stone to sparkle on her finger.

How about the pricing on these stones? Is it a good price for what they are? Thanks again.

 

[belle]

a smaller table isn''t the only thing to look for, it''s just one of a combination of things. one of the most important is your own eyes. if you''ve seen the diamond, and examined it in lighting other than bright jewelry store lights, and you like the sparkle then you should buy it. to answer your next question, with the numbers you''ve given, the price does seem to be par for what it is.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/1/2004 9:47:55 AM
Author: windowshopper
the super large tables [...] leave alot more spread..

Yeah... because these stone have practically no crown !

I don't think there is any way to judge brilliance from table and depth. AGS is making a cut grading system (much like their cut grades for rounds) right now... and they concluded that quite a bit more info is needed and even then. For what's that's worth, their findings sound realistic to me.

Before AGS comes up with their new words of wisedom, there's still AGA (see "Fancy Shapes" under "Knowledge" above) and the Ideal Scope and it's new refference chart for fancies (LINK).

All in all, finding that odd piece that at least sounds good by numbers is quite a ride

and there is a premium on the finds too! Off the bat, just two princess cuts somewhat close to the specs above but with nicer numbers (and looks - there are pictures for both) came up:

One 1.5 cts G-SI1 at DCD (LINK)

And one 1.37 cts H-VS2 at Blue Nile (LINK)

I wish there were Iscope pics for these, but N'ah...

Just my 0.2... there are many more experienced princess-cut advisers around here

 

[Fiancee to be]

Thanks all,
You''ve helped me out once again. Looks like I might have to save a little more money if I want a stone that really shines without dropping the size. It''s just so hard to be patient

.

Ah well, the search continues, thanks again everybody.

 

[belle]

your patience WILL pay off.........i can''t wait to see what you come up with!!