Need response quick making a decision tomorrow

[topps9898]

Please review this diamond and tell me what you think. I put money down and im going to buy if I hear good results from this forum.

GIA certificate
2.01 ct princess cut: Rectagular modified brilliant
Measurements.7.07x6.70x5.09mm

Proportions
depth 76%
Table 74%
Girdle thin to thick
Cutlet none

Finish
Polish VG
Symmetry VG

Clarity SI2 (eye clean face up)
Fluorescence none

The inclusions on this diamond are crystal, feather needle, extra facet. They all appear to be deep within the stone (center right) and the jewler offered me a life time guarentee. He also stated that these inclusions would not effect the brilliance of the stone. THe price is $10,400.

Is this a good stone? Is this a good price? Please write back ASAP, I have already left a down payment. I appreciate everyones help and look forward to hearing your responses. Thanks.

 

[topps9898]

Also is there a way to figure out the crown height? thanks.

 

[abbott]

What''s the color??? Abbott

 

[topps9898]

WOW I cant believe I forgot to list that lol Its a G color

 

[valeria101]

It could be a bit larger for those 2 carats, but not allot larger (7-something milimeters or so)... so the extra depth does eat up material but I can imagine worth. Good brilliance sounds great... Btw. how can you tell ? "Very Good" smmetry sounds even better - although "good" is not a proble, better is super safe. "Eye clean" SI2 is again a desirable happening that may not turn out immediately around the corner.


Perhaps a piece with both table and depth about 65%, thin/med girdle, and tops brilliance showing on IdealScope picture would have made my day - but I have no idea where such a thing might reside right now

I see that the piece you are considering is square... this is too, and it would be larger, I think. I wuldn't venture to say anything about the clarity but the seller can (obtaining a decent copy of the lab report, for starters).

Another piece turns up definitely larger, but rectangular and with some worrisome inclusions right in the middle (which could be visible, but...that's just a drawing). Perhaps worth asking because of the nice proportions though this.

These two diamonds are listed by multiple sellers, as usual. I was looking for the stone not the seller when making those links. 'Guess any seller using this database could provide details about the lot.

Two other stones sound like decent alternative - if you might be interested in one:

One F/SI2 with EGL report - no indication of inclusions, but the proportions sound nice and it is perfectly square and larger this

Another G/SI1 (this) turns up at Blue Nile... square, a hair shallowe than the line I usually draw at 60% depth, and more expensive than the intended 10k. Since square radiants do not appear to be very coomon, I didn't refrain to list this one. This is not in BN's signature collection, which means other sellers could source the stone as well.

If inspecting any of these options is tempting and you definitely have no time left for more choices than one, I would ask about the first one - it souds quite promissing: size, cut and clarity included.

Hope the 0.2 worth is not confusing. I am not trying to say the piece you selected or it's price are out of line. But there's always some choice - hence the lineup.

Best of luck !

 

[topps9898]

Thanks I really appreciate the response. The stones you listed were radiant Im looking for princess cut, is there much of a difference? Overal do you think the price and quality of this stone is good or should I contiune looking else where. My price range is between 10k-11k Thanks.

I would also appreciate any other opinipns if anyone has any.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/30/2005 9:17:53 AM
Author: topps9898
The stones you listed were radiant Im looking for princess cut, is there much of a difference?

Arrrgh ! Silly... my mistake...

The two kinds look pretty different allright. I do preffer radiants (more likely to find a reasonably deep cut) so perhaps I was just seeing things that were''t there in your post.

 

[topps9898]

Ana I really appreciate your help. From what I can see similar GIA certified Princess cuts were a bit more expensive. What do you think of this diamond knowing that its a princess cut. Thanks again!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/30/2005 10:49:40 AM
Author: topps9898
What do you think of this diamond knowing that its a princess cut.

Yeah... the princess shape is more popular, hence the premium. There are more of them to choose from too...

I guess the proportions (table, depth...) are more common for princess than radiant, but the same rule applies: the deeper the cut, the smaller the stone face up. You might want to look over the AGA tables (under Knowledge/Fancy Shapes on top of this page) for this.

I cannot guess how brilliant this is based on those stats - some standardized photos (made with Ideal Scope, or some other sort of 'scope) would have given more to comment on online. Since you have already seen the stone, the use of such tools is somewhat less obvious. You may find out if there is much left to desire from a certain stone if there isn't much to choose from, but the really ugly stuff (glaring inclusions, obviously flawed symmetry) gets voted off by intuition and visual inspection, I would think.

Diamonds with large tables usually have low crown height and look somewhat flat from the side when set. Not sure how many would consider this a major detraction for a princess diamond, since most are flat anyway. (see drawing below).

GIA stats do not tell brilliance and the most important clue about clarity is your comment saying that this looks clean. I simply do not know how it is in person

Just IMO, as usual...