|
|
|
|
| ||
Diamond Jewelry Forums
 Picture Gallery
 Video Gallery
 Journal
|
|||
|
|  Search
|  Posted Today
|  Most Active
|  Help
|
||
 »
Home
»  » Diamond Prices and Grading »
 » RockyTalky
»  » Princess Cut with 58% table a bad thing?
|
|
 |
Princess Cut with 58% table a bad thing? |
 |
| P: 2/4/2003 5:17:45 PM | |
Greg G Rough Rock Total Posts: 36 Last Post: 3/10/2003 Member Since: 1/27/2003 |
From the GIA Report: Measurements: 6.12 x 6.01 x 4.36 Weight: 1.3c Clarity: VS2 Color: G No fluorescence Proportions: Depth: 72% Table: 58% Girdle: Medium Cutlet: None Finish: Polish: Very Good Symmetry: Very Good Comments: Additional clouds are not shown. Symbol (number) is present on the girdle. Cost: $7900 I hadn’t seen a princess cut with such a small table before but I think it looked pretty cool with the sloping front. Using my new ideal scope it did seem to be pretty leaky. The guy at the store said it was because the ideal scope was not so good for princess cuts. I decided to just throw in the towel and have him mount the cz calibration stone and be done with it (ok, so I didn’t do that…). He said the small table was done on purpose and was something that was being played with on Polar Bear Canadian diamonds to make it sparkle a bit more like a round cut. Does that make sense? Should the small table scare me away? He didn’t have a Sarin report for me to check out though if I want to pursue it I could ask him for one (or something similar). Is this enough information for any conclusions to be reached? -Greg |
| Posted: 2/4/2003 5:17:45 PM | |
|
There are 2 replies to this message. There are 2 replies on this page. |
|
| P: 2/4/2003 10:17:02 PM | |
Rhino Ideal Rock Total Posts: 4,865 Last Post: 11/22/2009 Member Since: 3/29/2001 |
While having a smaller table than total depth isn't a bad start it's certainly not enough to make to make a critical judgment with respect to light return. The most critical things to consider besides that is the relation of 3 pavilion angles and 3 crown angles. I have found that the limited #'s given even on Sarin reports can be tricky and misleading. A fairly recent stone we examined had a 72 depth with a 68 table. On paper ... off to a good start. End result ... no so ideal. http://www.goodoldgold.com/princess_1_27ct_d_vs1.htm Optical analysis is crucial in the selection of princess cuts *if* overall brilliancy and light return are important in your purchase. Glad you're having fun with the idealscope. Rhino Rhino |
| Posted: 2/4/2003 10:17:02 PM | |
| P: 2/6/2003 10:08:40 AM | |
|
soda Rough Rock Total Posts: 8 Last Post: 3/6/2003 Member Since: 11/20/2002 |
wow thats the first time i've ever seen a poor princess bscope report. I thought for a minute, every princess scored high  did the 6.5% crown height really suprise you? Tall crown 10%+ small table 58-63% normal depth 67-70% seem to be what everyone is selling with very high brilliance scope reports. You can take a look at diamondoptics.com search and see all of their "premier" rocks fall in the category eh? |
| Posted: 2/6/2003 10:08:40 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
