|
|
|
|
I would also recommend you trying to view some EC's in person to get a feel for what you like such as shape, colour tolerances etc. As for the JA diamonds, the pic isn't loaded for the last diamond, the first one looks nice, I am not keen on the others. I would ask for more photographs of any diamond you like if you are ready to purchase and also Idealscope images. IS isn't as useful as ASET for fancy shapes, but it could be of some use, so ask JA if they could provide these. |
|
|
|
|
The well cut EC is not that easy to find. please read the fancy cut guide under KNOWLEDGE (up above) for cut grade parameters
the table should be no bigger than 66/67, depth 66 or less (to minimize buying stone you cant see!) and symmetry and polish are not key factors. (good or better is sufficient)while a plus to have VG or better it doesnt mean the stone will be well cut and the polish grades are harder to achieve on step cuts. and the crown height should be 10% or higher 11/12 /13 is ideal but even 9% can sill be fine my EC is an eyeclean vs2 and good symm/good polish. it is otherwise as optimally cut for an EC as you can get. i used to be stuck on those factors too...........and bought and sold several stones with better clarity, color, polish and symmetry before i ended up with the stone i have now which is a fabulous stone in every way. |
|
|
|
|
I would stay under 65 on the table but keep in mind that a 68% emerald cut can have greater spread than a 65% depth one with the same l/w ratio. Especially if the 65 is cut with bad p3 angles and over steep p2 angles. http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/60/1/Performance-and-the-p3-facets%2c-a-discussion-about-step-cut-diamonds.aspx Well cut ones are hard to find as the vast majority are not well cut. When buying online I would first try the vg/vg polish symmetry stones but if a vendor has a g/g on stock so they can eyeball it in person I would consider it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
these two might be promising:
whiteflash Item Code 15759713 16777543 Shape Emerald Emerald Carat 1.21 1.31 Color G G Clarity VS1 VS1 Measurements 7.35-5.40X3.40 7.33-5.31X3.45 Table % 61 61 Depth % 63 65 Polish Very Good Very Good Symmetry Good Good Girdle TN-STK -TK Culet None None Fluorescence Faint None Certificate GIA GIA Sarin Report IdealScope Aset Price $6,220.00 $7,385.00 |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the feedback, everyone. It was very helpful, but, Wow -- this is tough!
I was thinking of using a local jeweler so that I could see them in person, but when I page through their inventory in the size/color I''m looking for, very few meet the recommended table/depth. Bummer. http://www.dimendscaasi.com/diamonds/default.asp bgray, I appreciate the suggestions from Whiteflash and I will look into those stones. I know Whiteflash gets high marks around here. My problem was that when I tried to look at their inventory, there were very few EC''s in my ranges with high star markings. The Whiteflash person that I talked to said that was just because they didn''t have all the info for those stones. But that does make it tricky to review them or know what to ask to see more of. Is it really possible that ones currently rated as one or two Whiteflash stars might still be worth looking at? Also, generally, how much can you trust a vendor (ex. someone at Whiteflash) to pull well cut stones for you to review? Are they pretty reliable about that? As a novice, I''m looking for some guidance from the vendor... Thanks again so much for the insights. |
|
|
|
|
I am not keen on this one.... |
|
|
|
|
Let WF be your guide, they have an excellent rep here - as to the star ratings this link explains it if you can read it, the print isn't very clear for some reason..... http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds_info/t/all_about.aspx?articleid=349&zoneid=21 |
|
|
|
|
Im curious why? When its not tilted it will have near perfect patterns.... Its only downside is its a bit deeper than some but in the good range. It is tilted to the back and left by around 5 degrees each in the picture.
|
|
|
|
|
It looks better in the bigger pic. I found it to have overly dark uneven areas/ bands to my eyes, but it does look better in the enlarged photo. |
|
|
|
|
ah ok, thanks. That is mostly the picture I think to about 85% certainty on my part. I'm working on my next article on patterns and it made me curious if there was something in that particular style that was turning people off or just the bad picture. Since I respect your opinion I thought I would ask. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks Storm, I got where you were coming from so I tried to describe what I was seeing as accurately as I could
|
|
|
|
|
Hello lovinsparkles:
Welcome to the wonderful world of ECs! Having gone through the same process earlier this year, I know how overwhelming this can all be. A few things to add: -- With fancy cuts, such as ECs, you HAVE to see the stone (or at least initially have an expert -- cutter or gemologist -- at the vendor see it for you). -- The legth-to-width ratio is something I did not see mentioned. This makes a huge difference to the look-and-feel of the stone/ring. It is STRICTLY a personal and cosmetic issue. Do you like a ''squarish'' EC (ratio close to 1.0) or a ''longish'' one (ratio close to 1.5+)? My preference was for something in the 1.2 to 1.4 range. -- I bought through WF -- great service, professional advice, knowlegeable staff. Customized setting. -- If it would help you see pictures and specs of the EC that I ended up getting, you can see it here (skip the first post, if you wish): http://www.pricescope.com/forum/rockytalky/all-she-wanted-was-a-cat-ring-pictures-t86356.html Good luck! --ECQ. (no longer) |
|
|
|
|
Thanks Emerald Cut Quest! Your stone is beautiful (and the story was great too)! You are right about the L/W ratio being important. I *think* I like around a 1.3 ratio on my hand (thanks for the chart Strmrdr -- I definitely favor the 1.3-1.4 range on that).
Following the suggestions I''ve heard, I''m working with WF right now to find some suitable options. All of your thoughts and recommended stats have been a big help for me narrowing things down. As soon as I find something promising, I''ll be back with pics for more feedback... Thanks again! |
|
|
|
|
Hi again emerald cut experts :)
Thanks for all the previous help, it really helped me narrow down the search. Now, I''d love to get your thoughts on an emerald cut stone I''m considering. Here are the specs, followed by pictures. Please tell me if you think this is a good one! I think it looks pretty but I am a novice and am going to be buying before seeing in person, so I''d love your thoughts! Carat 1.40 Color F Clarity VS1 Measurements 7.3 x 5.69 x 3.75 mm Depth Percentage 65.9 % Table Percentage 62 % Girdle M- Culet N Polish EXCELLENT Symmetry VERY GOOD Fluorescence NONE
|
|
|
|
|
One other possibility I''m looking at is a bit bigger/pricier, but the picture looked pretty to my eyes. Thoughts on this one? All I have is these stats and the magnified pic (pic at link). I like the idea of the medium florescence -- do you see any detriment to this from the pic, or can you only tell in person? Besides having better color and size, how does this stack up to the other one?
D, 1.51 carat, VS2 . Report: GIA . Shape: Emerald . Carat: 1.51 . Depth %: 66.5 . Table %: 62 . Girdle: STK . Measurements: 7.37-5.73X3.81 . Polish: Very Good . Symmetry: Very Good . Culet: Very Small . Fluorescence: Medium Blue Ratio: 1.29 http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/D-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1180657.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131 |
|
|
|
|
Hmm. What is the impact of the darkness on how the stone will look in real life? Less sparkly or something? I don''t know enough about those tests to know what they are supposed to mean in real life... I appreciate the analysis. Do you think I should keep looking? I don''t need a *perfect* stone, just one that looks clear, white, symmetrical, and pretty in person. And thanks diamondseeker and Dani -- appreciate the input! |
|
|
|
|
You know what, ls, (and in all due respect, Karl), you honestly have to see these stones with your own eyes- you yourself are the best indicator of whether the stone will work for you or not. Numbers/scopes/images are great tool to help evaluate a diamond and eliminate the dogs, but imo, the best tools are your own eyes. When we bought my EC, we worked with a trusted vendor who helped us using his skills as a diamond professional to pick the best stone for us, with our input of course. Bottom line: you need to evaluate these stones in person- you are going to drive yourself crazy trying to find a "perfect" diamond on paper, and that's sometimes a really hard thing to do!!! Best of luck with your search! |
|
|
|
|
They are indicators the final decision is your eyes. Personally I would keep looking as I like the indicators to look a bit better before spending money on getting one sent to me. |
|
|
|
|
That''s true, Karl. If you think this stone is not even remotely a potential winner, its not worth it for her to pay $$ to have it sent to her for her to see herself. You''re the expert!!!
|
|
|
|
|
The difference is the head shadow and the angle of the lighting. The head shadow of the IS and ASET simulates different viewing distances which is why different areas go dark. A diamond with head shadow issues will often look better in off axis lighting. In this case the higher than the stone(top is brighter in regular picture) and the stone responds different than when the lighting is strait on. Real world lighting is often off axis so they can look good a lot of the time but in specific situations they will look like the IS/ASET and it drives me bonkers because that is the position that is best to admire the patterns. There is something weird in the WF ASET setup with step cuts because the obstruction comes out looking black instead of blue, the IS shows it clearly as obstruction not leakage. ASET with back lighting would look totally different than the WF ASET pictures with step cuts. I look at the reds and greens in ASET then look at the IS to see what the black in the WF ASET pictures represents. |