Advice on EC specs and ideal scope pic

[ideal_emerald]

Hey everyone, so glad to finally have something exciting enough to post for the first time!! I have been looking for an e-ring for several weeks and decided to go with Whiteflash, for a custom 3-stone EC ring (0.3 ctw sides). After searching through all the available center stones in my size range, I thought I had found the perfect one according to the GIA specs. But of course this doesn''t always mean it will look the best!

I just received the Whiteflash pictures and reports for the stone. Although I''ve used the ideal scope a few times before I''m not very educated as to what constitutes a good EC, other than what''s on the ideal scope website. Just wondering if Garry or anyone else can let me know what they think? I''ll post the 40X pic and sarin report below, and of course the wax pics when I get them!

Here are the GIA specs of the stone:

Weight: 0.82 ct.
Shape: Emerald
Color: E
Clarity: VVS1
Measurements: 6.67 x 4.55 x 2.83 mm
Depth: 62.2
Table: 66
Girdle: Slightly Thick
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluorescence: None
Culet: None

And here''s the IS pic from Whiteflash:

I''m most concerned about the multiple thick black lines along the length as well as the gray lines beside the keel, not so much about the whiteness in the corners since I''ve read that''s always there in the EC.

Thanks so much for any help!

 

[ideal_emerald]

here''s the 40X pic

 

[ideal_emerald]

...and the sarin report:

I have 2 concerns about the report. Firstly, the "Culet Off Center" number seems huge! Is this normal for an EC or is this something to be worried about?

The other concern is the low Crown Height, since I've heard this is very important and the AGA ideal is 12-15%, with mine being in the Class 2B range.

Should I keep looking or this one a winner?

Thanks again for any help, I really appeciate it (as will my soon-to-be-fiancee)!

 

[strmrdr]

Its a nice one that will have a lot of wide flashes as its moved and tilted.
The ones with the thinner lines of red/black running the lenth are a little brighter overall but so far it looks nice.
Some like the other style better but the ones with bold patterns and large wide flashes like that one are the ones I like slightly better.
Its a matter of personal preference more than anything.

edit: in the 40x pic you can see the bold patterns which because of the tilt look off on the bottom but it gives you the idea.
I like it :}

 

[strmrdr]

bad scan on the sarin tell them to rerun it.
the numbers dont match the images.
The sarin has a lot of problems with some EC cuts so even re-running it might not help.

 

[strmrdr]

This is a wire frame of an ec cut showing the bottom facets.
The sarin didnt properly detect the facets iv colored red and blue giving the bad reading.

 

[Rod]

I''m not a huge fan of EC''s, but I''m surprised at how nice I thought this stone looked. From what I''ve read from his posts on this site, if Storm likes the stone, you''ve likely picked a nice stone. I would certainly trust him to help me.

Good luck....and you must post pics when the ring is complete for us all to drool over.

 

[strmrdr]

crown height:
with the bad scan I cant say if the 9.5 is right.
Most of the time id like to see atleast 10 but with the proper angles under it 9.5 can work.
With the problem the sarin is having with it I suspect the pavilion facet angles were held pretty close to on another which I think should work well with the lower crown if it is indeed lower.
I havent done enough research to say for sure but thats my gut feeling.

Have them check it for fire and if it throws sparks all over the place then the crown height is fine and table size is fine.
If it looks glassy then the table is too big and the crown too flat.
By looking at the available data I dont think that will be the case.
WF has a good return policy so there isnt much harm in checking it out in person which is the most important test.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

I really feel like your eyes are the best judge for ECs. Numbers are great to follow but honestly I trust my eyes over numbers with fancies. I think it looks like a nice stone. Nice ratio. If you think it looks great than I would go for it. I am a big EC fan so I am very excited for you!

 

[valeria101]

'Ideal-emerald' ... well said. Ok, there is no official standard and I am not in the position to make one

, but you could compare the IS picture with the reference chart given for emerald cuts at www.idea-scope.com.

-------better to worse ---------->


The pattern of red and black is not 'standard' issue, so only the amount is relevant for the comparison. To me, your stone stands somewhere around the second position. Which is quite great, since the first seems to be relatively rare birds.

It may be that Gary hates contrast brilliance (black under the IdealScope) more than I do. I do hate it too - when the reflective facets do look black like in the IScope setup, but that takes relatively strange lighting. I happened to see that one in a jewelry shop - despite the famous jeweler's lights, but you see... that day there was a power failure!

No kidding: in low gray, diffuse light from a street-level window among high-rise buildings, the diamonds were dead with little inky patches floating around instead of glitter like flakes of soot - alien indeed. Oddly enough, I didn't see that at home - probably because I never stay in the dark with diamonds on. Sure enough, a stone like the top of the line would have never shown the dark patches while brilliance in strong light would work. But it may take a while to find one and if you do, you may also notice that loosing the 'darkness' comes at a price - those facets that look like soot flakes in the dark are also the brightest in strong light.

This probably is too much digression already.

The shape looks lovely and the grades sound very respectable - F/VS would have been just as respectable and this is higher

Sure enough, this part about 'lovely shape is a matter of taste and up to you.

M2 2c

 

[ideal_emerald]

Thanks so much for your responses!

I feel a lot better about the stone now, it seemed so great initially and then the IS pic and sarin really had me worried, but you''ve all made me feel much better about the whole thing. I''d still love any other input about the ideal scope pic from anyone who knows about ECs. The gray strips kind of bother me, since I''m guessing this is partial leakage, but I can''t tell how bad it is.

strmrdr: I emailed Whiteflash to get the sarin redone and to get them to check for fire, thanks for all the info on what it all means.

Rod: thanks for the insight, i''m glad you like it!

Ana: that''s good to know, I''ll have to look at it in low lighting during my 10-day refund period to make sure it''s not too horrible.

Tacori: I agree about the ratio, that was a key point in choosing this stone. There were some other very nicely cut stones but they were in the range of 1.3:1 which to me looks like it doesn''t know if it wants to be rectangular or square! This one was on the low end of good ratios for me (I like up to 1.6) but the only 2 nice ones I could find near 1.6 had some statistic on the GIA that made me wary. Still, it''s kind of tempting to get them brought in and inspected for the $50 each it would cost for shipping them into Whiteflash...

These are my other two favourites in case anyone cares to comment:

http://www.whiteflash.com/emerald/Emerald-cut-diamond-1740696.htm (too deep??)
http://www.whiteflash.com/emerald/Emerald-cut-diamond-1740695.htm (depth and table too large??)

Here''s the AGA numbers for EC grades of cut in case you''re not familiar with them:
http://diamonds.pricescope.com/fnc2.asp

I''m torn as to whether I should spend $100 to get these brought in. I don''t want to spend that much money uselessly, but I wouldn''t want to miss an amazing stone. What should I do?

 

[belle]

i''d wait on bringing the other ones in. i think the one you are looking at has real potential. if anything i would have it shipped to you for a look before bringing in more.

 

[ideal_emerald]

Thanks for the reply belle. The only problem is that I''m not in the US, so I''d have to pay luxury tax (17% here) every time an item crosses the border, if I understand the laws correctly. I''m doing my setting with Whiteflash so I need to get everything done and mounted before getting it shipped here. Then I have to hope everything is perfect so I don''t have to return it (eg. if the stone is off-center) and pay the 17% again.

I guess I should just pay the $100 and get the other two stones analysed, but is there any chance they will be as good as this one?

 

[belle]

oh sorry, ie... i must have missed that you were out of the country.
you know, i really don''t think wf would steer you wrong. if this stone is not lively (though i really suspect it is) they won''t push you into taking it. i would call them and talk to them about what you want and if they think they could get something better under your requirements. they are honest and helpful. you could always ask to speak directly with brian, he will make sure you get a beautiful diamond.

 

[plg_cp]

Date: 2/8/2006 9:53:51 PM
Author: ideal_emerald
The only problem is that I''m not in the US, so I''d have to pay luxury tax (17% here) every time an item crosses the border, if I understand the laws correctly.

I just checked the Canadian Border Services Agency website and found the following from here:

"Return to sender after payment of duty and tax

If you decide to return a non-commercial mailed item to its sender, you can get a refund on any duty or tax you paid on it. Simply complete Form B-2G, Customs Informal Adjustment Request, or complete the Request for Refund located on the back of Form E14, Customs Postal Import Form, and send it to the nearest
Casual Refund Centre listed on the form.

When you ask for a refund, you have to show proof that you returned the goods, such as a credit note or a letter from the sender.

However, you cannot get a refund on Canada Post''s $5 handling fee."


Mark

 

[Tacori E-ring]

I do think those others are a bit deep (which is not necessarily a bad thing with ECs but it looks smaller). My EC has a depth of 62 (I think!?!). I would wait to see this stone in person. People always talk about ECs being dull or glassy but they have obviously never seen mine

I love the long flashes of light/sparkle that it throws off. I think you will be really pleased.

 

[plg_cp]

I think based on the positive feedback you''re getting from PS''ers, you should ask to speak to Brian about the stone. Have him look at it and give his opinion on the visual performance. If he likes it, maybe arrange to view it in person, given the fact that you should be able to retrieve the duties?

You may want to ask Whiteflash on the technicalities of them sending it to you to view. Is it considered a sale that is then refunded, or something else? Then call CBSA to verify the process on their end.

Mark

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Forget the sarin data, unless you can findout the girdle it too thin etc

There is no really accurate way for the #''s to say if the stone is good or bad that the ideal-scope will not do better.

It is a very good ideal-scope image - great light return and enough contrast