|
|
|
|
| ||
Diamond Jewelry Forums
 Picture Gallery
 Video Gallery
 Journal
|
|||
|
|  Search
|  Posted Today
|  Most Active
|  Help
|
||
 »
Home
»  » Diamond Prices and Grading »
 » RockyTalky
»  » HCA seems wrong...can this be true
|
|
 |
HCA seems wrong...can this be true |
 |
| P: 5/1/2004 5:20:43 PM | |
bdw146 Rough Rock Total Posts: 11 Last Post: 5/1/2004 Member Since: 4/16/2004 |
Hey all...I have a question/statement for you guys. Today I looked at 2 diamonds. One was a 1.25 carat and one was a 1.50 carat. Both were G VVS2. I had a Saran report run on both stones and the 1.50 carat stone came out with a score of 1.1 (crown = 34 and pavilion = 40.9) while the 1.25 carat scored a 2.7 (crown = 31.5 and pavilion = 41.4) We would think that the 1.50 carat would have much more brightness, fire, and scinitilation than the 1.25 but this wasn't the case. The 1.25 performed beautifully under regular sunlight while the 1.50 seemes to lose a lot of fire and inherited darkness in the center of the stone. Don't know if this makes a difference but the 1.25 has a table of 59% while the 1.50 had a table of 56%. Can anyone explain this? |
| Posted: 5/1/2004 5:20:43 PM | |
|
There are 4 replies to this message. There are 4 replies on this page. |
|
| P: 5/1/2004 5:39:01 PM | |
valeria101 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 14,048 Last Post: 4/30/2006 Member Since: 8/29/2003 |
You're in trouble  a search for "obstruction" and "fire enemy of brilliance" might give you the answer. The truth is probably a combination of the two issues... and, of course, I have not seen the stones! Also, somewhere is my inbox there is at leats one exaple of a Sarin report about 300% wrong  Ana "The greatest experts are only as good as the sum total of what they have seen." [Souren Melikian] |
| Posted: 5/1/2004 5:39:01 PM | |
| P: 5/1/2004 10:11:49 PM | |
Mara Ideal Rock Total Posts: 27,936 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 10/30/2002 |
well actually diamonds don't look their best in direct sunlight. indirect light is the best way to view them in my opinion, that is when you can really see what they are made of.
the 1.25 sounds like a slightly large tabled, more shallow stone. could definitely be a beautiful performer with those numbers, most likely alot more white brilliance than fire in the stone. where you have more fire, there is usually some brilliance sacrificed and vice versa. many people's eyes prefer a nice balance of the three (fire, brill, scint), but some people prefer one over the other...hence possibly why you feel the 1.25 performs better.
go with what your eye tells you BUT check out the stones in various lighting circumstances and not just sunlight, try indirect sunlight and other types before you make a decision.
good luck!
________________________________ |
| Posted: 5/1/2004 10:11:49 PM | |
| P: 5/1/2004 11:36:24 PM | |
|
bdw146 Rough Rock Total Posts: 11 Last Post: 5/1/2004 Member Since: 4/16/2004 |
Mara, Thanks so much for the advice. I agree with you...numbers can go so far but the final decision should be made by the eyes. I'll let you know what happens! Brian
|
| Posted: 5/1/2004 11:36:24 PM | |
| P: 5/2/2004 3:56:32 AM | |
Garry H (Cut Nut) Ideal Rock Total Posts: 11,587 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 8/16/2000 |
Thanks Mara, you beat me to the sunlight deal. The 31 crown stone would be unlikely to look as good in a posh food place, with very small point light sources that make for more fire. But at 2.7 it is not a disaster, and would also look very bright in office lighting if you held it alongside another diamond. Tt is also getting a better score for spread. Garry Holloway FGAA DipDT |
| Posted: 5/2/2004 3:56:32 AM | |
 Previous Page
|
Next Page 
|
Contact Us | Back Home | Privacy Statement | Forum Agreement | Forum Policies | |
| Ideal BB Version: 0.1.5.4.beta1 | Message forum software powered by the Ideal BB |
| |
Pricescope -
Knowledge -
Diamond Prices -
Tools -
Resources -
About
© 2000-2009 Pricescope. Terms of Use Privacy Policy Disclaimer
forum archives
