|
|
|
|
| ||
Diamond Jewelry Forums
 Picture Gallery
 Video Gallery
 Journal
|
|||
|
|  Search
|  Posted Today
|  Most Active
|  Help
|
||
 »
Home
»  » Diamond Prices and Grading »
 » RockyTalky
»  » Emerald diamond help
|
|
 |
Emerald diamond help |
 |
| P: 6/28/2004 6:44:05 PM | |
sleeplater Rough Rock Total Posts: 1 Last Post: 6/28/2004 Member Since: 6/28/2004 |
0.73 E VVS2 GIA $2,600 65.2 64 GD VG None 6.51x4.28x2.79 I'm very new to this, I understand the color, carat and clarity, and I like the grades here for that, but the depth, table, polish and symmetry are foreign to me. Can you help me grade this diamond based on those (4) items I just listed? In the specs at the top those items are sequential from the value: (65.2) to (VG). Thanks, Kyle PS If I listed the price could you tell me if this is a good deal?
|
| Posted: 6/28/2004 6:44:05 PM | |
|
There are 5 replies to this message. There are 5 replies on this page. |
|
| P: 6/28/2004 6:53:36 PM | |
researcher Ideal Rock Total Posts: 2,440 Last Post: 5/26/2008 Member Since: 4/27/2004 |
Have you checked out Dave Atlas's cut charts? You can find them at http://www.gemappraisers.com/ by clicking on the AGA cut grade charts and rules. From the chart, it looks as though your stone is a little deep which means it will face up a bit smaller than other stones of the same size. Hopefully an expert will reply and tell you whether the depth is something to be concerned about!
|
| Posted: 6/28/2004 6:53:36 PM | |
| P: 6/29/2004 3:13:30 AM | |
valeria101 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 14,048 Last Post: 4/30/2006 Member Since: 8/29/2003 |
I would call 65% depth in an EC rather low - something close to 70% is more usual. All in all, I would not consider those numbers as detraction but wander a bit of how the stone actually looks like - and for that table and depth are definitely not sufficient information. Will this stone be smaller than others of less depth? Maybe, but it is debatable if one may want to seek the proverbial needle of less than 65% depth just to find out that the respective is a flat stone with no life. Also worth keeping in mind are the stone's proportions: 65% depth means a different thing in a 1.5:1 L/W stone thanin a square or round, since depth is computed relative to the width (the shorter section). "Very Good" symmetyry is very good news for a non-round and if the difference reative to "Good" woudl show in any shape, than a step cut like this has the greatest chances to benefit from the extra touch  All in all - those numbers loos smashing. Is it feasible to take a look at the stone (at least in pictures) before buying it? Ana "The greatest experts are only as good as the sum total of what they have seen." [Souren Melikian] |
| Posted: 6/29/2004 3:13:30 AM | |
| P: 6/29/2004 6:57:11 AM | |
Giangi Ideal Rock Total Posts: 2,530 Last Post: 10/29/2006 Member Since: 1/23/2003 |
Sounds like a good stone, but I would recommend getting a Sarin report to make sure the crown is >11% and an IdealScope image so that you can get an idea of the leakage present in this particular stone.
_____________ |
| Posted: 6/29/2004 6:57:11 AM | |
| P: 6/29/2004 12:09:20 PM | |
Hest88 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 3,681 Last Post: 11/24/2009 Member Since: 1/22/2003 |
That sounds like a pretty fine cut. Table and depth in the low-mid 60s is perfect, with the caveat that with fancy cuts the numbers may not tell all. Even so, as Giangi said, there's a lot more than just table and depth to determine if it's a great stone, with crown angle being one of the more important stats. If you can get a Sarin that would help a lot.
|
| Posted: 6/29/2004 12:09:20 PM | |
| P: 6/29/2004 1:06:50 PM | |
|
researcher Ideal Rock Total Posts: 2,440 Last Post: 5/26/2008 Member Since: 4/27/2004 |
Random question: if the cut charts say stones < or = to 65% cover the 1A-2A, shouldn't sleeplater look for a stone in this range? I know that, with princess stones, there are more stones out of the ideal range than in it, but I searched until I found a stone that met the desired specifications. As I said before, I know nothing about emerald cuts, but I don't understand why Dave wouldn't have made his charts to cover a wider range of depths if they are considered great.
|
| Posted: 6/29/2004 1:06:50 PM | |
 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
