2 diamonds advice

[bbb in to]

more questions for the experts and enthusiastic amateurs
all opinions greatly appreciated
this is a diamond for a platinum solitaire
the 2 diamonds are almost an identical price (number 2 is actually about $200 cheaper)
both are hrd certified
which would you recommend

1.

1.26
F
VS2
very good cut
finish grade good
7.08 x 7.1 x 4.19
table 59%
crown 13%
pav 43.5%
girdle 3%
cutlet pointed

2.

1.56
G
SI2
(took me about 5 mins and alot of help and direction to actually find this single inclusion with x10 , it is not on the table but on one of the kite facets to the side - i cannot see it with the naked eye - the dealer said if there was such a thing as an SI1.5 that is what it would be - he seemed like a trustworthy fellow)
very good cut
finish good
7.57 x 7.58 x 4.56
table 61%
crown 12.5%
pav 45%
girdle 3%
cutlet pointed

they both looked sparkly to me but neither really took my breath away (should that happen - it's my first diamond viewing)

thanks for help

bbb

 

[Giangi]

HRD is an EXCELLENT place to start.

Reject both. You've already answered your question yourself saying ''they both looked sparkly to me but neither really took my breath away'' => this shouldn't happen... You must be absolutely in love with your diamond!

BTW, I prefer #1

 

[TheDiamondangel]

What lab is HRD?

 

[bbb in to]

from my limited experience (and also info on these forums) it is a european lab based in antwerp

i am now quoting cut nut / paul (can't link to his original post - sorry)

it is at
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/hrd-vs-gia.2840/

"With GIA being the most reputable lab (together with AGS) in the U.S., it is natural for you to put a lot of faith in their grading report. On the other hand, HRD is a rather unknown report in the U.S., and as such, its value is underestimated.

First, I want to look at both reports in detail.

Colour-grading: My experience with both labs teaches me, that in the very high colours (D-E-F), HRD is generally more strict than GIA. In Antwerp, I try to buy specific HRD higher range E-colours, and very often, I get a GIA D-grade for them. The other differences between the two labs are minimal.

Clarity-grading: GIA is generally slightly stricter in clarity-grading than HRD. For borderline-impurities, GIA will give one clarity lower than HRD. The big difference is in their highest grade, which has a different name. HRD works with 'loupe-clean', and will grade an impurity that is less than (I think) 4 micron as loupe-clean, since it cannot be noticed with a 10x-loupe. GIA works with 'internally flawless' and 'flawless'-grades, and this is totally different. Therefore, most HRD-LC-stones get a GIA-VVS1-grade. In other clarities, the difference is minimal.

Proportion-grading. GIA does not give a grade on proportions, whereas HRD gives a highest grade of 'Very Good'. For us, cut-geeks, the range of 'very good' is way too broad, but some information might be better than no information.

Symmetry- and Polish-grading. GIA gives separate gradings here, with the highest possible being 'Excellent', while HRD combines the two into a Finish-grade,with the highest possible being 'Very Good'.

Detailed information. GIA gives you table size, total depth, while HRD gives you table size, crown height and pavillion depth, while you can calculate total depth yourself from the measurements. When giving girdle size, HRD uses another notation than GIA, and because of that the girdle will appear about 1.7% thicker on a HRD-report than on a GIA-report.

These are the differences. Personally, as a professional, I find it easier to make a first selection of goods, if I can work with a HRD-cert, than if I need to work with a GIA-cert.

Now to politics. Working in Antwerp, and having thousands of HRD-reports available here, I do not understand why HRD does not do a better job of promoting its report in the U.S. I fear that politics is the reason behind this.

A few years ago, GIA was apparently preparing to set up a lab in Antwerp. Somehow, this lab has never started, and HRD is now heavily promoting its report in Canada, Dubai, the Far East, but not in the U.S. Could there be some kind of gentleman's agreement between the two labs?

Also, HRD is an organisation, that is run by representatives of the Antwerp diamond trade. Most of these representatives stem from the biggest offices in Antwerp, who often have established business relationships with U.S.-importers. These importers make sure that all their stones get GIA-reports, and as long as they keep up the image of a GIA-report being the only reliable one, they make life very difficult for small Antwerp companies, who try to sell HRD-reports in the U.S.

To sum it up: as far as I am concerned, HRD is not a less reliable lab than GIA, as long as you are aware of some basic differences. In the end, it all comes down to where you are buying the stone. You need to buy it from a person, who can check a report, and who is professional enough to interpret that report, and if this does not suffice, you can still work with a professional appraiser.

 

[Giangi]

Right now HRD is better than GIA in my opinion. Considerably stricter than GIA on collection colors and on SI and P 1 grades... Also, they include all #'s on the reports. Very helpful. I'd say that HRD is the european equivalent of GIA and AGS.

 

[Anthonyd]

Yes they are virtually equivalent but I am still lost on the difference n scale for cut parameters. Is HRD "very good" equal to "ideal"?