i need help on 2 different princess cuts!?

In most cases, you don't want to go over 75% for depth and 74% for table (it's best to stay in the 62-72 range for table and 64-75 for depth). You also want to try and keep the table equal to or less than the depth. I would seriously pass on both these stones--you can do much better! While size can be nice, a poor performing stone is not worth it. If you're looking to find a good stone that's as much bang-for-the-buck as possible, look for G-I colored stones with VS1-SI2 clarity (many will face up very white and be completely eye-clean). If you haven't discovered the site yet, try going to www.gemappraisers.com for comprehensive information regarding the desired numbers for princess stones.

As for your second question, can white gold tarnish, I wouldn't say tarnish, but it does fade. It does have to be "serviced" from time to time, a plating of Rhodium (sp?), which I beleive is in the same family as platinum is adhered to the surface, which keeps its silvery-finnish.

If a stone looking reasonable large for it's weight is what you are after, neither qualifies: deeper stones look smaller face up than less deep cut ones of the same weight.

Most princess cuts selected for their brilliance seem to come with tables a bit smaller than depth, and definitely under 75% - but the "look" of the stone (beyond aparent size) it's a matter of choice, really. Unless you have set to get a brilliant stone for which a narrower set of proportions must apply.

Oh... and why VVS? Those clarity grades are quite high. If this is what you want, these are fine, of course. Otherwise, you may want to take into account that definitely VS2 and most of the time SI1 look just as clean. Clarity grades are determined at 10x - so they are not degreed of "eye clean"-ess. It is the number, size and position of inclusions detercted at 10X that determines the grade - not whether those inclusions are visible or not. So IF and VS2 may look the same, but are definitely not priced the same.


Anyway, those are good prices already, all things considered - at least relative to what the couple hundred quotes for similar "specimens" around here would be.

Betwen the two stones, I would simply get the one that looks better ( = has better brilliance in 'usual' lighting conditions, away from the jeweler's display)...

don't waste your time or your money with those stones I'll post more helpful advice later....

the G will look microscopic for its carat weight due to that absurdly high depth....with the secon done, that table is so high, that the stone will look glassy and lifeless and flat...but it will certainly look very large for its carat weight. I would consider both very very poorly cut stones... sorry