Next move? Over graded

[Gypsy]

Good news! I agree with Molly and DS about the 1.5 carat stone.

Keep us updated!

 

[dad]

Will do, I think he is back in his store Tuesday, so I should know more next week. Thanks for the carat advice too, it is important that I am in the right ball park.

 

[gr8leo87]

It actually depends how much you 'credit' you have to spend with that jeweller. Is it the whole 16k that you initially paid 5 years back?

5 years back things were different with EGL - and many people readily traded in them too - as it left them more profit - but also because of customer saying I saw an F colour at ABC jeweller that was priced half of this - and then just went with the Jeweller who offered half price for an apparent F.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[AdaBeta27]

I am just questioning the knowledge base...

^ And I concur with you. Sometimes, especially with large stones, the advice to go lower in color or lower in clarity to get size must be taken with caution. And the reasons for that are:

1. As the diamonds increase in mass, the SIZE of INCLUSIONS that can graded SI1 or SI2 also increases, making it darned hard and rare to find a 100% eyeclean SI1 or SI2 in a 1.8ct or 2ct or more.

2. As the diamonds increase in weight (mass), they also concentrate tint more. It may be impossible to tell what color a .33ct mounted in a ring is without close inspection, you might find that I or J or lower in a large (like 1.7 - 2ct) diamond is so evident that you can't stand it. I have a 1.8ct J or K in a platinum ring. Especially under ordinary bluish fluorescent office lighting, that diamond (from the side) shows an unmistakable amount it tint. I can see why jewelers say stop at H, because for me, if I wanted a colorless or near colorless look, I have to go UP in color along with size. Not lower in color, as so many on PS seem to recommend.

To the OP: Twinning wisps are a good possibility to look for if you want eyeclean SI1 or SI2, as they often look bad on paper but look eyeclean in person. But here's the caution: Twinning wisps can adversely affect the brilliance. There are threads on PS about twining wisps. There is no easy recipe for getting a big eyeclean SI1 or SI2 diamond. Even VS1 or VS2 might show inclusions from the side, or at a tilt. Ask lots of questions and inspect the diamond carefully. I bought a not 100% eyecleam SI2 that is a fantastic diamond. The grade setting inclusion didn't show at all in the vendor's pictures except darkfield. I actually wore that ring at least 2 days before I even noticed the inclusion. But, now that I know where it is, that diamond will never be "eyeclean" to me. But I'm a person who doesn't need high clarity. I bought this diamond for myself, and it cost me half of what a VS1 would have cost. Also, most people will only see my big diamond(s) at arm's length, so nobody but me and the people I tell will ever notice that's it's not "flawless."

ETA: Ooops. I posted this before I read the moderator's comment about color and clarity arguments. I hope this doesn't violate terms of the board. But since the OP appears to still be evaluating options and trade-offs, I'll leave this post as-written.

 

[dad]

Thanks for the helpful advice... based on what I have gathered so far, I think this is what I will mention when the vendor asks what I am looking for. This is based, largely, on the information from Gypsy.

Again, I want an eye clean diamond worth approximately $16k.

Here's what I am thinking about mentioning: "In general I am looking for a GIA3X stone. I am looking for a G color and something eye clean for clarity (Si1). For the cut, I am looking for a table of 60% or less, and a depth between 59 and 62.4. The crown angle I am looking for is in the range of 33.5-35 with the pavilion angle ranging from 40.6-40.8. Of course, I am somewhat flexible on the combinations of the characteristics, but I wanted to give you something like a description of an 'ideal' diamond. I imagine the carats will depend on how the various characteristics come together as well."

Thoughts are appreciated.

 

[AdaBeta27]

There's what's called a "60/60" diamond, 60% table, 60% depth. Those can be good or bad. They are spready, relatively shallow, can face up "big" for their carat weight, and are usually more biased toward brilliance and brightness than fire. That's what you get (white light) from large tables and shallow depth and shallower crown angle. Fire (dispersion) comes from smaller tables and steeper crown angle. The "Pricescope standard" parameters that Gypsy or somebody gave are aimed at giving a good balance between fire and brilliance, and in all lighting conditions. There are good and bad 60/60 diamonds.
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/60-60-proportioned-diamond

There's an older, strict "cheat sheet" that originalted with Todd Gray of Nice Ice .com, who used to be a vender on here. You might look at the 5 minutes and 15 minutes to success articles at niceice.com just for a quick summary of buying "by the numbers."

I like small table 55-56%, and I like the fatter arrows so I look for Lower Girdle Facets more like 77. LGF 80 gives a more splintery loo, and I prefer arrows to be a bit chunky. (Arrows look black in photos but irl they are alternately flashes of white light or colored light.) I like broader, chunkier flashes. Some people like more splintery ones, like the Solasfera diamond's look.

Avoid the GIA excellent "Steep / deep" that's a deep stone with steep crown angle and also steep pavilion. They face up small for their carat weight and also are usually bad performers. Crown and pavilion angles have to work together. Generally increase one means must decrease the other, for performance's sake. The HCA cut adviser will help you flag combinations that are likely to be duds.

From an old thread on here, I think this was written by Lorelei:

depth - 60 - 62% - although my personal preference is to allow up to 62.4%
table - 54- 57%
crown angle - 34- 35 degrees
pavilion angle - 40.6- 41 degrees
girdle - avoid extremes, look for thin to slightly thick, thin to medium etc
polish and symmetry - very good and above

note - with crown and pavilion angles at the shallower ends ( CA 34- PA 40.6) and steeper ( CA 35- PA 41) check to make sure these angles complement in that particular diamond - eyeballs, Idealscope, trusted vendor input - check as appropriate!

 

[msop04]

I am just questioning the knowledge base...

^ And I concur with you. Sometimes, especially with large stones, the advice to go lower in color or lower in clarity to get size must be taken with caution. And the reasons for that are:

1. As the diamonds increase in mass, the SIZE of INCLUSIONS that can graded SI1 or SI2 also increases, making it darned hard and rare to find a 100% eyeclean SI1 or SI2 in a 1.8ct or 2ct or more.

2. As the diamonds increase in weight (mass), they also concentrate tint more. It may be impossible to tell what color a .33ct mounted in a ring is without close inspection, you might find that I or J or lower in a large (like 1.7 - 2ct) diamond is so evident that you can't stand it. I have a 1.8ct J or K in a platinum ring. Especially under ordinary bluish fluorescent office lighting, that diamond (from the side) shows an unmistakable amount it tint. I can see why jewelers say stop at H, because for me, if I wanted a colorless or near colorless look, I have to go UP in color along with size. Not lower in color, as so many on PS seem to recommend.

To the OP: Twinning wisps are a good possibility to look for if you want eyeclean SI1 or SI2, as they often look bad on paper but look eyeclean in person. But here's the caution: Twinning wisps can adversely affect the brilliance. There are threads on PS about twining wisps. There is no easy recipe for getting a big eyeclean SI1 or SI2 diamond. Even VS1 or VS2 might show inclusions from the side, or at a tilt. Ask lots of questions and inspect the diamond carefully. I bought a not 100% eyecleam SI2 that is a fantastic diamond. The grade setting inclusion didn't show at all in the vendor's pictures except darkfield. I actually wore that ring at least 2 days before I even noticed the inclusion. But, now that I know where it is, that diamond will never be "eyeclean" to me. But I'm a person who doesn't need high clarity. I bought this diamond for myself, and it cost me half of what a VS1 would have cost. Also, most people will only see my big diamond(s) at arm's length, so nobody but me and the people I tell will ever notice that's it's not "flawless."

ETA: Ooops. I posted this before I read the moderator's comment about color and clarity arguments. I hope this doesn't violate terms of the board. But since the OP appears to still be evaluating options and trade-offs, I'll leave this post as-written.

FWIW, I don't think this is "arguing" in the negative, childish sense. This is very true and helpful information for the OP. You're exactly right on both color and clarity in larger stones. A clean SI2 in larger stones is a unicorn! Thanks for posting!

 

[msop04]

There's what's called a "60/60" diamond, 60% table, 60% depth. Those can be good or bad. They are spready, relatively shallow, can face up "big" for their carat weight, and are usually more biased toward brilliance and brightness than fire. That's what you get (white light) from large tables and shallow depth and shallower crown angle. Fire (dispersion) comes from smaller tables and steeper crown angle. The "Pricescope standard" parameters that Gypsy or somebody gave are aimed at giving a good balance between fire and brilliance, and in all lighting conditions. There are good and bad 60/60 diamonds.
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/60-60-proportioned-diamond

There's an older, strict "cheat sheet" that originalted with Todd Gray of Nice Ice .com, who used to be a vender on here. You might look at the 5 minutes and 15 minutes to success articles at niceice.com just for a quick summary of buying "by the numbers."

I like small table 55-56%, and I like the fatter arrows so I look for Lower Girdle Facets more like 77. LGF 80 gives a more splintery loo, and I prefer arrows to be a bit chunky. (Arrows look black in photos but irl they are alternately flashes of white light or colored light.) I like broader, chunkier flashes. Some people like more splintery ones, like the Solasfera diamond's look.

Avoid the GIA excellent "Steep / deep" that's a deep stone with steep crown angle and also steep pavilion. They face up small for their carat weight and also are usually bad performers. Crown and pavilion angles have to work together. Generally increase one means must decrease the other, for performance's sake. The HCA cut adviser will help you flag combinations that are likely to be duds.

Yes, I agree with Ada... and I wouldn't totally discount 60/60 stones. Some people really love the way they look (I love them).

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thanks for the helpful advice... based on what I have gathered so far, I think this is what I will mention when the vendor asks what I am looking for. This is based, largely, on the information from Gypsy.

Again, I want an eye clean diamond worth approximately $16k.

Here's what I am thinking about mentioning: "In general I am looking for a GIA3X stone. I am looking for a G color and something eye clean for clarity (Si1). For the cut, I am looking for a table of 60% or less, and a depth between 59 and 62.4. The crown angle I am looking for is in the range of 33.5-35 with the pavilion angle ranging from 40.6-40.8. Of course, I am somewhat flexible on the combinations of the characteristics, but I wanted to give you something like a description of an 'ideal' diamond. I imagine the carats will depend on how the various characteristics come together as well."

Thoughts are appreciated.

You are really limiting him by only giving him one color and clarity grade. You will have a better chance of getting a great stone if you are just a little more flexible such as G-H, VS2-SI1 or whatever range you want. I'd go a little tighter on cut, though, and just say, "I am interested primarily in GIA Excellent cut stones within or very close to these parameters: table: 54-58 (or up to 59 if you really want that), depth 60-62.3, crown angle 34-35.0, pavilion angle 40.6-40.9." These are measurements that generally will fall into ideal cut (and are basically the parameters some of the vendors here use for their top cut categories). I would not go outside of these without an ASET image, and you probably won't get that.

 

[Gypsy]

Thanks for the helpful advice... based on what I have gathered so far, I think this is what I will mention when the vendor asks what I am looking for. This is based, largely, on the information from Gypsy.

Again, I want an eye clean diamond worth approximately $16k.

Here's what I am thinking about mentioning: "In general I am looking for a GIA3X stone. I am looking for a G color and something eye clean for clarity (Si1). For the cut, I am looking for a table of 60% or less, and a depth between 59 and 62.4. The crown angle I am looking for is in the range of 33.5-35 with the pavilion angle ranging from 40.6-40.8. Of course, I am somewhat flexible on the combinations of the characteristics, but I wanted to give you something like a description of an 'ideal' diamond. I imagine the carats will depend on how the various characteristics come together as well."

Thoughts are appreciated.

You are really limiting him by only giving him one color and clarity grade. You will have a better chance of getting a great stone if you are just a little more flexible such as G-H, VS2-SI1 or whatever range you want. I'd go a little tighter on cut, though, and just say, "I am interested primarily in GIA Excellent cut stones within or very close to these parameters: table: 54-58 (or up to 59 if you really want that), depth 60-62.3, crown angle 34-35.0, pavilion angle 40.6-40.9." These are measurements that generally will fall into ideal cut (and are basically the parameters some of the vendors here use for their top cut categories). I would not go outside of these without an ASET image, and you probably won't get that.

I agree the way you are phrasing it needs to be tweaked.

This is what you should say instead: In general I am looking for a GIA3X stone. I am looking for a G or H color and something eye clean for clarity and at least Si1. For the cut, I am looking for a table of 60% or less, and a depth between 59 and 62.4. The crown angle I am looking for is in the range of 33.5-35 with the pavilion angle ranging from 40.6-40.8. Of course, I am somewhat flexible on the combinations of the characteristics, but I wanted to give you something like a description of an 'ideal' diamond. I imagine the carats will depend on how the various characteristics come together as well.

Okay?

 

[dad]

Hi Gypsy, thanks for the help tweaking the note. I went ahead and sent it to him and we will see what he says. Thanks!

 

[msop04]

Hi Gypsy, thanks for the help tweaking the note. I went ahead and sent it to him and we will see what he says. Thanks!

How exciting! Please do keep us posted! [emoji4]

 

[gr8leo87]

There's what's called a "60/60" diamond, 60% table, 60% depth. Those can be good or bad. They are spready, relatively shallow, can face up "big" for their carat weight, and are usually more biased toward brilliance and brightness than fire. That's what you get (white light) from large tables and shallow depth and shallower crown angle. Fire (dispersion) comes from smaller tables and steeper crown angle. The "Pricescope standard" parameters that Gypsy or somebody gave are aimed at giving a good balance between fire and brilliance, and in all lighting conditions. There are good and bad 60/60 diamonds.
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/60-60-proportioned-diamond

There's an older, strict "cheat sheet" that originalted with Todd Gray of Nice Ice .com, who used to be a vender on here. You might look at the 5 minutes and 15 minutes to success articles at niceice.com just for a quick summary of buying "by the numbers."

I like small table 55-56%, and I like the fatter arrows so I look for Lower Girdle Facets more like 77. LGF 80 gives a more splintery loo, and I prefer arrows to be a bit chunky. (Arrows look black in photos but irl they are alternately flashes of white light or colored light.) I like broader, chunkier flashes. Some people like more splintery ones, like the Solasfera diamond's look.

Avoid the GIA excellent "Steep / deep" that's a deep stone with steep crown angle and also steep pavilion. They face up small for their carat weight and also are usually bad performers. Crown and pavilion angles have to work together. Generally increase one means must decrease the other, for performance's sake. The HCA cut adviser will help you flag combinations that are likely to be duds.

From an old thread on here, I think this was written by Lorelei:

depth - 60 - 62% - although my personal preference is to allow up to 62.4%
table - 54- 57%
crown angle - 34- 35 degrees
pavilion angle - 40.6- 41 degrees
girdle - avoid extremes, look for thin to slightly thick, thin to medium etc
polish and symmetry - very good and above

note - with crown and pavilion angles at the shallower ends ( CA 34- PA 40.6) and steeper ( CA 35- PA 41) check to make sure these angles complement in that particular diamond - eyeballs, Idealscope, trusted vendor input - check as appropriate!

60/60 don't face up 'big' for their carat weight. They face up what a carat diamond should face up that is around 6.5mm. Other combinations may face up big or small for their carat weight.

P.S Assuming a well cut 60/60 diamond not the wonky examples of 60/60 on Pricescope wiki.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[msop04]

60/60 don't face up 'big' for their carat weight. They face up what a carat diamond should face up that is around 6.5mm. Other combinations may face up big or small for their carat weight.

P.S Assuming a well cut 60/60 diamond not the wonky examples of 60/60 on Pricescope wiki.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

I disagree. 60/60 stones do tend to face up larger than other stones of the same weight (with smaller crowns and steeper depths, but of ideal cut). They also throw a lot of white light, which can be helpful in making a lower colored diamond appear whiter. Anyway... 60/60 stones are a preference. Personally, I like them a lot. My new upgrade is a 3.33 I color at 9.8 mm and is closer to 60/60 proportions, but looks unusually white (even at that carat weight). It just so happens that it scored less than 1 on the HCA, which a veteran PS member mentioned will produce a huge spread. So if you like the look of the 60/60s, there are several advantages to having one! And, yes, I'm a little biased. [emoji6]

 

[msop04]

For example, here are my stone's specs... Not "true" 60/60, but along those lines.

And, not the best photo, but...

 

[gr8leo87]

A 60/60 faces up like a classic 1 carat diamond should - this has been my experience from trading and looking at diamonds.

If something is 'around' 60/60 it may face up larger or smaller. That depth on that diamond is 59%/59% (which is DIRECTLY related to average girdle diameter and depth measurement) it will face up 'larger' for its carat weight. Now on the flip side make those proportions 61 depth and 60 table, the spread will be slightly lesser.

The diameter is not dependent on the depth. Infact it's the other way round. Depth is calculated as a percentage of avg girdle diameter.

From 59% depth to 61% depth (all within the ranges of 60/60) some stones may face up larger and some may smaller. A 60/60 however will usually have the classic diameter we have come to expect from diamonds for decades.

I LOVE the proportions on your diamonds. Perfecto! [OK HAND SIGN]

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[dad]

Thread resurrected! I have been in touch with the vendor and he is sending some certifications this week. I guess I will try to narrow a few diamonds down from there and then ask about idealscope images, etc. I'll keep you posted, but I just wanted to give you a heads up!

 

[mrs-b]

Hi Dad

I agree with Gypsy re the cut parameters. You really do want something that sparkles!

Re the color and clarity issue - I'd tend to stay at H or above. I color (and I have an I, so this is my disclosure!) is where you can begin to see tint - especially upside down or from the side. So just be aware of this. There are always people who CANT see tint in anything higher than a K/L - or those who can see it in an F colored stone - but the standard suggestion is H or above. G color would be safe and sufficient for the vast majority of people.

Re clarity - I normally sit at VS2. It's not just a 'mind clean' thing; I really *can* see inclusions in most SI1 stones. 'Eye clean' is normally measured from 10" away - or further. But a whole bunch of people like to get much more 'up close and personal' with their stone - and a whole lot of jewelers now give out loupes with rings or diamonds, so people *do* look at them under magnification.

Personally, I love super clean stones - and this is from someone who has owned plenty of SI1 and SI2 stones - and even a GIA I1 stone that I thought was killer! But if I can afford it (and it always does come down to money, doesn't it?) I prefer the rarity of a cleaner stone. I have a number of VVS and IF stones - and it always feel super luxurious to me!

So there's an argument for everything. Just work out what's important to you and go from there. But I'd take budget as your starting point - then cut. But even that is a personal opinion; diamonds are an inherently individual and personal choice.

Good luck!

 

[dad]

Okay! So the vendor sent me three options here to think about for replacing the stone. For those of you interested, the three stones (based on our recommendations) are pictured here. I would appreciate your opinions!

 

[ac117]

Hi dad! You could disqualify cert 3 and 4 already - they only have VG cut instead of EX. Even GIA EX is very broad and you have to hunt for a winner, so VG is actually not good at all.

For cert 2, the angles are not complimentary so I would also disqualify this stone.

Ask him to stay within these measurements to help you stay in ideal cut territory with a GIA excellent cut stone.

table: 54-58

depth: 60-62.3

crown angle: 34-35.0 (up to 35.5 crown angle can sometimes work with a 40.6 pav angle)

pavilion angle: 40.6-40.9 (sometimes 41.0 if the crown angle is close to 34)

 

[dad]

Thanks for the advice!

 

[Niel]

I actually don't mind the 60/60 specs of the second one/cert 3. It's my favorite and that's with the understanding that its a VG cut.

Seems like it would be eye clean as it mostly has twinning wisps.

Do you like that one? Have you seen it in person? Have you seen all three? Which did you like best?

 

[dad]

I have not seen any in person. The vendor mentioned he would send them out for me to look at (we are in different states). But, I thought I would get advice here before this happens. My reasoning is that if 1 or 2 of these are duds, I can ask for a better selection before they are sent out for my inspection.

 

[kenny]

Dad, I tried to slog through this thread.
I don't think I noticed the HCA being mentioned.
Sorry if it was and you already know about it.

https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca

There's a bulletproof 2-step process for finding a well-cut round:
1. HCA
2. Idealscope Image

Plug 4 numbers from the GIA report into the HCA, Depth%, Table%, Crown and Pavilion angles.
HCA gives a score.
Reject rounds scoring over 2.0.
Get an Idealscope image on those scoring under 2.0.

The IS image is needed because the crown and pavilion angles on the GIA report are actually averages of 8 angles around the diamond.
They may all be the same (a good thing) or very different but average out to a good angle (a bad thing).
An Idealscope image will reveal this wonkiness.
This is why the HCA is a rejection too, but not a final selection tool.

Post the Idealscope pic here for feedback or compare it to this chart:

http://ideal-scope.com/reference-chart-ideal-scope-images/



Unfortunately GIA's top cut grade of Excellent allows many bad proportion combinations.
That's why to assure the best cut/light performance you need to use the HCA and Idealscope even on GIA Excellents.

When it comes to color and clarity I encourage you to just go out and look at many examples and take note of what the grades do to the price.
Look into the side of diamonds because that's where you'll really see the body color and when we look at our diamond we usually did not flip our wrist up to get a perfect on-axis top-down view.
And get them away from those dang jewelry-store lights and place them face down on a white background.

Just make sure you only look at diamonds graded by GIA and AGS since, as you well know, many other labs lie and overgrade.

Determine your own personal comfort zone for color and clarity.
It may match or differ from what people here tell you '"You Need!"
After your research if you decide on a tiny D IF, a G VS2, a K SI2, or a humongous Z I2 then that is perfect choice for you.

Good luck.

 

[Gypsy]

Yup duds. Give.them specs above as requirements.

 

[kenny]

Okay! So the vendor sent me three options here to think about for replacing the stone. For those of you interested, the three stones (based on our recommendations) are pictured here. I would appreciate your opinions!

To get you started using HCA I ran these three for you.
Cert2 scores over 2.0 so I'd reject it.




Cert3 scores 1.6 EX VG VG EX so I'd get an IS pic on this one.

 

[kenny]

Cert4 scores 2.3 so I'd reject that one too.

 

[kenny]

To save time tell your vendor to run the HCA and not bother you with diamonds that score over 2.0.

Edit: On second look I might reject Cert3 for the twinning wisps and the very thin girdle ... and its GIA cut grade is only Very Good.
I'd need to learn much more about wisps before I'd be comfortable with them, and this diamond has lots and large ones.
Also the most serious grade-setting inclusion is listed first, and this one says wisps.



When shopping for a round, the most abundant shape, I can be picky.
I expect my choice to do well in every cut evaluation tool.

I'm not sophisticated enough to know why this one was blessed by HCA but not by GIA, but there are plenty of other fish in the round diamond sea.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Okay! So the vendor sent me three options here to think about for replacing the stone. For those of you interested, the three stones (based on our recommendations) are pictured here. I would appreciate your opinions!

Dad,
I know you are getting a lot of good advice here. I would just like to say that I am happy for you that the merchant is working to resolve your situation. I think you are one of the fortunate ones in this regard.

It looks to me like with the first stone (cert2) you would be trading your original position of a 2.11 J I2 for a 1.55 G Si1 Triple Ex. That is BIG move in the right direction. It would not be unreasonable to bring that one in and take a look at it and make sure you like it visually.

While you might be able to hold the merchants feet to the fire and insist on all kinds of specific criteria, you might be well advised to make a swift move to resolve your problem. What I am saying I guess is, if you make it too difficult for the merchant to do the right thing by you, he might begin to be lose interest in doing so.

You of course would have a better feel for the relationship, but I would not want to see you lose out on an opportunity to improve your position significantly. In some cases, as the saying goes, "perfection is the enemy of good".

 

[yssie]

Okay! So the vendor sent me three options here to think about for replacing the stone. For those of you interested, the three stones (based on our recommendations) are pictured here. I would appreciate your opinions!

Dad,
I know you are getting a lot of good advice here. I would just like to say that I am happy for you that the merchant is working to resolve your situation. I think you are one of the fortunate ones in this regard.

It looks to me like with the first stone (cert2) you would be trading your original position of a 2.11 J I2 for a 1.55 G Si1 Triple Ex. That is BIG move in the right direction. It would not be unreasonable to bring that one in and take a look at it and make sure you like it visually.

While you might be able to hold the merchants feet to the fire and insist on all kinds of specific criteria, you might be well advised to make a swift move to resolve your problem. What I am saying I guess is, if you make it too difficult for the merchant to do the right thing by you, he might begin to be lose interest in doing so.

You of course would have a better feel for the relationship, but I would not want to see you lose out on an opportunity to improve your position significantly. In some cases, as the saying goes, "perfection is the enemy of good".

Very, very strongly agree with this.

Have Cert2 and Cert3 pulled. They could well be lovely stones - they may not conform to all PS specifications, but PS specifications aren't for everyone in every circumstance - they aren't for me, for example, and I've been here a long time and know my way around MRBs!

Re. the HCA specifically - I will disagree with prior advice and urge against putting too much stock in it. It's a best-effort tool that's meant to help you wade through a large inventory, not select one specimen from a small handful - it is overly conservative, and eliminates many beautiful stones with absolutely no issues whatsoever to avoid introducing any duds, but in your position (working with a very, very, very customer-service-centric vendor who is going above and beyond for you but who may have access only to a small number of stones) you really can't afford to blindly eliminate potential beauties.

I also hope you will share your jeweller with us!