0.78 F VS2 vs 0.81 G SI2

[xoxosbt]

Please let me know which one is the better stone, and better value for money. 0.81 is $800 cheaper than 0.78. But cut (which I believe is the most important) for both stones are excellent, basing it on lab reports and AGA chart. But what do you think? Photo is for 0.78 and link is for 0.81.

0.78 carat
F, VS2, Excellent cut, GIA
Polish/Symmetry: EX/EX
Fluor: None
Miscellaneous info: Canadian diamond
Table %: 55%
Table Height: 15.5%
Table Angle: 34.5'
Pavilion angle: 40.8'
Pavilion depth: 43.0%
Total Depth: 61.3%
Girdle: thin-medium, faceted 3.0%

James Allen Diamond, 0.813 carat
G, SI2, Cut: AGS0
Flour: negligible
Table %: 55.4%
Table Height: 15.3%
Table Angle: 34.4'
Pavilion angle: 40.8'
Pavilion depth: 43.0%
Total Depth: 62.1%
Girdle: thin-slightly thick


0.81 James Allen Diamond

 

[FB.]

Both have what appears to be an excellent cut. Number 1''s depth of 61.3% sounds excellent.
Personally, I would reject number 2 despite the AGS0 grade because I am reluctant to tolerate more than 61.8% depth. I would also reject it because the girdle is quite variable in thickness - spanning three grades (thin, medium, slightly thick). In my experience, such girdles can be a warning of not-quite-ideal cut.

I would go for the "safer" option of the F VS2. In addition to the reasons why I''d reject number 2, it will be extremely difficult to tell F from a D-E colour and VS2 will not have the "not eye clean" issues often associated with SI clarity stones.

 

[stone-cold11]

FB, GIA and AGS measure girdle differently.

AGS is thin at the thinnest place and thick at the thickest place, while GIA is only measuring thinnest and thickest of valley height. So you statement is actually comparing apples to oranges.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/girdles.66614/

 

[stone-cold11]

Both look good to me. Is the JA stone eye-clean? What is the diameter of the UD stone?

 

[xoxosbt]

Date: 12/17/2009 4:35:31 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Both look good to me. Is the JA stone eye-clean? What is the diameter of the UD stone?

According to the JA gemologist, you cannot see any of the inclusions without a loupe. So I suppose she''s saying it''s eye-clean.

Measurements of 0.78 stone (UD): 5.94-5.96 x 3.65
Measurements of 0.81 stone (JA): 5.95-5.97 x 3.70

 

[xoxosbt]

Here are some additional information. How would this affect deciding which is the better stone?

0.78 stone inclusion per gemologist:
"There is actually a minute cloud on under the table, it is opaque but, I did not initially see it when I first examined the stone but, upon further inspection you can see that it is partially white and it appears partially gray in appearance but, you have to sort of lean the diamond to see this. This inclusion does not reflect when you are viewing the stone table side up, when it is flipped over, it partially reflects. There is only cloud inclusion and it is not right under the table but, I would say closest to this facet.

There is only one feather that I could see, it is located on the pavilion side near the girdle. All feather inclusions, no matter how small or large, break the surface of the diamond otherwise, they are not feathers. The feather is very shallow and small, and I had to spin the diamond while continuously cleaning it, until I finally found it."

0.81 stone inclusion per gemologist:
semi-transparent white (see link above for magnified view)

Both gemologists say they are eye-clean.

 

[stone-cold11]

Sounds good then. Depends on if you want a branded H&A of JA or just an ideal cut stone, UD''s hearts image is slightly off, not sure if that is due to the image taking or the stone itself.

If it is me, I would be tempted to go the UD stone.

 

[xoxosbt]

Thanks stone-cold and FB. Are the inclusions not a concern? Given that UD stone was opaque (partly gray/partly white) and JA was semi-transparent white?

Also price difference is $800 --- might not be much to most people, but that can help me get a better setting. Is the quality difference worth $800?

 

[stone-cold11]

Well, there is a large price jump from a F VS2 to a G SI2 and also a large $/carat jump from a sub 0.8c to a above 0.8c stone. If you want the cheaper stone, sure, you probably will not be able to tell the difference, size wise or color or clarity wise. So depends on what you want...

 

[Dreamer_D]

I would get the F VS2. I like the color and clarity combo and it is less money, and in the vast majority of circumstances you won''t be able to tell the difference in cut quality. Unless you like knowing it is an H&A I''d save the cash and get the higher color/clarity combo!

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 12/17/2009 5:38:38 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
I would get the F VS2. I like the color and clarity combo and it is less money, and in the vast majority of circumstances you won''t be able to tell the difference in cut quality. Unless you like knowing it is an H&A I''d save the cash and get the higher color/clarity combo!

Actually it is more $$.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/17/2009 5:38:38 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
I would get the F VS2. I like the color and clarity combo and it is less money, and in the vast majority of circumstances you won''t be able to tell the difference in cut quality. Unless you like knowing it is an H&A I''d save the cash and get the higher color/clarity combo!

Whoops, sorry I was confused about the price difference! LOL! I think I would go for the G then as long as it was eye clean to my satisfaction. Sounds like it is.

 

[xoxosbt]

Thanks all for sharing your insights, comments, and expertise.

I guess I''m just really worried about the white/gray inclusion on the 0.78 as opposed to semi-transparent white on the 0.81, despite the fact that the former is a VS2 and the latter an SI2, but I''m imagining that the VS2''s inclusion is more easily spotted (because of color, size and location).

Also, I hope they''re not charging a premium for the "Canadian" mark.

My goal is to buy the better diamond, and not the better credential.

 

[glitterata]

I don''t think you''ll be able to see the inclusion in the VS2. Especially since the gemologist said it was eye clean.

However, I would go with the cheaper one. They have identical diameters, so they''ll look exactly the same size. Both are eye clean. It''s very hard to tell an F from a G face up, especially once they''re set. And both are beautifully symmetrical and score well on the HCA. I bet if you put them side by side you wouldn''t be able to tell them apart.

Does one seller have better policies (trade-up, etc)? If not, get the G.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/17/2009 10:09:37 PM
Author: glitterata
I don''t think you''ll be able to see the inclusion in the VS2. Especially since the gemologist said it was eye clean.

However, I would go with the cheaper one. They have identical diameters, so they''ll look exactly the same size. Both are eye clean. It''s very hard to tell an F from a G face up, especially once they''re set. And both are beautifully symmetrical and score well on the HCA. I bet if you put them side by side you wouldn''t be able to tell them apart.

Does one seller have better policies (trade-up, etc)? If not, get the G.

Ditto all this as well.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/17/2009 10:09:37 PM
Author: glitterata
I don''t think you''ll be able to see the inclusion in the VS2. Especially since the gemologist said it was eye clean.

However, I would go with the cheaper one. They have identical diameters, so they''ll look exactly the same size. Both are eye clean. It''s very hard to tell an F from a G face up, especially once they''re set. And both are beautifully symmetrical and score well on the HCA. I bet if you put them side by side you wouldn''t be able to tell them apart.

Does one seller have better policies (trade-up, etc)? If not, get the G.

My thoughts also.

 

[FB.]

Date: 12/17/2009 6:52:41 PM
Author: xoxosbt
Thanks all for sharing your insights, comments, and expertise.

I guess I'm just really worried about the white/gray inclusion on the 0.78 as opposed to semi-transparent white on the 0.81, despite the fact that the former is a VS2 and the latter an SI2, but I'm imagining that the VS2's inclusion is more easily spotted (because of color, size and location).

Also, I hope they're not charging a premium for the 'Canadian' mark.

My goal is to buy the better diamond, and not the better credential.

VS2 clarity is for inclusions that are detectable after some searching with a 10x loupe, but not usually detectable by eye. VS2 inclusions are usually impossible to see and are usually small and only a few within the stone.

SI2 clarity is for inclusions that are very obvious with a loupe (large and/or numerous inclusions) after just a few seconds of searching and often detetctable by eye. If not detetcatble by eye, then they usually have clouds which can cover considerable areas within the stone, causing linterference with light passage and a haziness of the light return; sometimes turning milky in sunlight.
If you're worried about inclusions, I'd have no hesitation in choosing the worst VS2 over the best SI2.