Whittled the list down to 2, which one will be the winner?

[bigbadbuff]

#1

#2

I''m having trouble deciding between these 2. Both perform about the same in Virtual Model, lightscope, and bscope tests. The biggest difference is inclusions.

The G VS1 has no visible inclusions from the top, as the cavity is only really visible from the girdle/bottom... but I don''t know about the cavity aspect, I don''t see that discussed often and it seems to be a rare inclusion. Anything wrong with the placement of this particular cavity to warrant concern? I admit I do like the idea of a cleaner stone, which this certainly is... lower in color (although it will be going in a platinum setting) but ex/ex for polish/symmetry.

The F VS2 has some small inclusions in the table but they seem small and few for a VS2 rating. I like the idea of being in the colorless range and don''t care about the inclusions here as they''d be eye clean I''m sure. vg/ex for polish/symmetry but I''ve read that matters little until you get into the higher end of clarity. Slightly better machine #s.


Not sure what to use as the deciding factors here, what would you do? Thanks in advance...

 

[wonka27]

Get a quarter out and flip a coin.

I think each has its own merits/pitfalls, but the reality is, these are both FANTASTIC diamonds and looking for negatives about either is really splitting hairs.

If I had to pick, I'd go with the F VS2. It would be cool to be in colorless, you shouldn't see those inclusions, and it has a 9.8 ISee2 score over a 9.5 ISee2 score for the G VS1. However, the plus of the GVS1 is better BScope score (esp. in scintillation) and even better clarity. I don't know what that inclusion is there on the VS1 - a very small chip or something - but the rest of that stone looks absolutely clean.

Reality is, you can't loose with either of them, so congrats!!!

 

[reena]

don't know a thing about RBs but i say, all other things being equal, go F VS2!!!

 

[Lynn B]

Just me humble two cents... I agree w/ wonka... you can't go wrong with either one! But PERSONALLY, I'd choose #2 because I like the larger table.

Lynn

 

[noobie]

I'd call Jonathan and ask him to look at them side by side and describe them to you and ask him if there is any discernable difference. If not, flip a coin or buy the combo you like best.




Lynn, what is it about a larger table that you prefer?

 

[Todd07]

Tough call

I'd pick the F VS2 - looks like it has better light return on the table when I compared lightscope images. When I got mine, I did what noobie suggested and had the vendor (Jonathan in your case) pull the stones and compare side by side.

 

[quaeritur]

I vote F VS2. I like the F over G, the 9.8 ISee2 score, slightly more saturation in the red under the table, and the fact that it has an indented natural. I think it's cool to have a remnant of the rough on the cut stone -a little reminder that mother Nature made it. But those are personal prefs. These are both beautiful.

 

[strmrdr]

----------------
On 8/25/2004 9:10:56 PM noobie wrote:



I'd call Jonathan and ask him to look at them side by side and describe them to you and ask him if there is any discernable difference. If not, flip a coin or buy the combo you like best.

Thats what I would do too,

 

[Lynn B]

="padding-bottom:0;marginTop:0;marginBottom:0;">----------------
On 8/25/2004 9:10:56 PM noobie wrote:


Lynn, what is it about a larger table that you prefer?

----------------[/quote]


Gee, noob, I'm not sure... I just remember that when I was shopping for stones, one of them had a smaller table (53 or 54%, I think?)... and I remember distinctly that (while it was undeniably a beautiful stone) I just much preferred the look of a larger (56/57) table. I am sure there are technical arguments both ways regarding light return, fire, brilliance and scintilation

but I don't "know nuthin' " about that!

I only know that, personally, I like the look of a table that's a bit larger.

Lynn