Advice on Princess table size %

[rambar]

Hey guys, I saw a very nice looking (to me) 2.27 carat princess today and am considering buying it. Reading the numbers though, I am having some doubt about the table size as it seems that the preferred range is between 68%-75%. This stone has a table of 78% and a total depth of 73.4% with the following measurements: 7.47 x 7.26 x 5.33

My question is, should I avoid the stone purely based on the table size? Why is a table under 75% preferrable and what does a larger size mean in terms of the performance of the stone?

Thanks for any advice you can provide.

 

[stone-cold11]

Have you look at it under lighting conditions other than the store lighting?

 

[Rockdiamond]

HI Rambar,
Great questions!

Stone asked a good question- it is good to make sure to look at the stone under varied lighting environments.

If you post the figures here, you''ll get plenty of input.
My advice is to follow what your eyes tell you.
There are certain "advantages" to a smaller table.
The people cutting princess cuts, who specialize in fine cut and they do prefer a smaller table.
There is basis for the smaller table, but it may not apply to you.
In the real world, many shoppers with gravitate towards a stone with a larger table that may look larger for it''s weight.

SO- my answer is, no do not eliminate a stone simply because one or more of the measurements don;t agree with someone''s idea of a perfect cut- use your eyes.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 11/4/2009 3:02:57 PM
Author:rambar
Hey guys, I saw a very nice looking (to me) 2.27 carat princess today and am considering buying it. Reading the numbers though, I am having some doubt about the table size as it seems that the preferred range is between 68%-75%. This stone has a table of 78% and a total depth of 73.4% with the following measurements: 7.47 x 7.26 x 5.33

My question is, should I avoid the stone purely based on the table size? Why is a table under 75% preferrable and what does a larger size mean in terms of the performance of the stone?

Thanks for any advice you can provide.

if i were to buy a PC...it better be square!!

 

[Sizzle]

Date: 11/4/2009 7:26:23 PM
Author: Dancing Fire

Date: 11/4/2009 3:02:57 PM
Author:rambar
Hey guys, I saw a very nice looking (to me) 2.27 carat princess today and am considering buying it. Reading the numbers though, I am having some doubt about the table size as it seems that the preferred range is between 68%-75%. This stone has a table of 78% and a total depth of 73.4% with the following measurements: 7.47 x 7.26 x 5.33

My question is, should I avoid the stone purely based on the table size? Why is a table under 75% preferrable and what does a larger size mean in terms of the performance of the stone?

Thanks for any advice you can provide.

if i were to buy a PC...it better be square!!

Not everyones obsessed with a perefect square. My princess now is a perfect square, but I saw some beautiful non square princesses too. I believe a princess is hard to pick based on the numbers.

 

[rambar]

Thanks to all for your replies, I will answer them in order:

Stone-cold11: No I havent looked at it in natural light yet because I when I was shown it last night it was after dark

Rockdiamond: I will try and get the angle numbers. I have a copy of the small size report but they aren't mentioned on it. What are you referring to when you say that there are advantages to a smaller table?

Dancing Fire: It looks square, I have also seen alot of 'rectangular' princess cuts and am put off immediately but this one looks very square to me

 

[stone-cold11]

So it is not graded by GIA?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 11/4/2009 3:02:57 PM
Author:rambar
Hey guys, I saw a very nice looking (to me) 2.27 carat princess today and am considering buying it. Reading the numbers though, I am having some doubt about the table size as it seems that the preferred range is between 68%-75%. This stone has a table of 78% and a total depth of 73.4% with the following measurements: 7.47 x 7.26 x 5.33

My question is, should I avoid the stone purely based on the table size? Why is a table under 75% preferrable and what does a larger size mean in terms of the performance of the stone?

Thanks for any advice you can provide.

There are various proportion configurations which can result in a beautiful Princess, look at some AGS0 Peerless Princess from Jareds to get an idea of how well cut diamonds behave, then you can view some others in person with a good understanding of how well cut diamonds can look. Usually it is preferable to have the table smaller than the depth, large tables often result in a low crown height, this can affect fire and a large table can look glassy in some lighting conditions, but this is only a guideline.

 

[rambar]

Stone-cold11, yes it''s a GIA stone, certificate number 5106271443

Lorelei: Thanks, I will take your advice and look at some stones from there for comparison

 

[stone-cold11]

OIC, I asked because there will not be angles posted on GIA reports for princess cut.

 

[rambar]

Date: 11/5/2009 3:06:58 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
OIC, I asked because there will not be angles posted on GIA reports for princess cut.

Oh ok, well that''s that idea out of the window then

 

[Todd Gray]

Unlike round brilliant cut diamonds which can be judged ''by the numbers'' due to their symmetrical facet structure, a princess cut diamond can not be accurately judged by the numbers and thus the concept of your question is apt to drive you nuts

There are two articles written by diamond cutter, Paul Slegers, located within the Price Scope Journal section which might be of interest to you:

The Matter of Depth in a Princess Cut Diamond

Numbers and Perception: the case of square cuts

 

[rambar]

Does this stone look better? Or does anything stick out as being problematic? It's again a GIA certificate. RAP- 37%

Square Modified Brilliant
Measurements: 6.74 x 6.74 x 5.02 mm
Carat Weight: 2.02 carat
Color Grade: E
Clarity Grade: VS2
Proportions:
Depth: 74.5%
Table: 74%
Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick
Culet: None
Finish:
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 11/7/2009 2:22:18 PM
Author: rambar
Does this stone look better? Or does anything stick out as being problematic? It''s again a GIA certificate. RAP- 37%

Square Modified Brilliant
Measurements: 6.74 x 6.74 x 5.02 mm
Carat Weight: 2.02 carat
Color Grade: E
Clarity Grade: VS2
Proportions:
Depth: 74.5%
Table: 74%
Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick
Culet: None
Finish:
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None

Have you seen it in person?

 

[rambar]

Date: 11/7/2009 2:27:45 PM
Author: Lorelei
Have you seen it in person?

No not yet, my jeweller says he can order it for me to look at if I'm happy with the certificate.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 11/7/2009 2:29:48 PM
Author: rambar

Date: 11/7/2009 2:27:45 PM
Author: Lorelei
Have you seen it in person?

No not yet, my jeweller says he can order it for me to look at if I'm happy with the certificate.

Its a hard one to call, might be perfectly fine but although nothing particularly stands out as being a flag, no way to tell just from a couple of numbers....If your jeweller can order it in without a commitment from you then you could certainly take a look. What you could do to narrow the field is to ask your jeweller to bring in an AGS0 cut grade Princess of the colour and clarity you want, these will be pretty much of great cut quality and could make things easier.

 

[rambar]

Date: 11/7/2009 2:33:25 PM
Author: Lorelei

Its a hard one to call, might be perfectly fine but although nothing particularly stands out as being a flag, no way to tell just from a couple of numbers....If your jeweller can order it in without a commitment from you then you could certainly take a look. What you could do to narrow the field is to ask your jeweller to bring in an AGS0 cut grade Princess of the colour and clarity you want, these will be pretty much of great cut quality and could make things easier.

No, no commitment whatsoever Ok I will ask him to bring it in.

Yeah I've asked, but he said its near impossible to get AGS stones here in Dubai. Heck, if he brought in an AGS-0, I would do more than just look at it, I would buy it! LOL

Thanks

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 11/7/2009 2:35:18 PM
Author: rambar

Date: 11/7/2009 2:33:25 PM
Author: Lorelei
No not yet, my jeweller says he can order it for me to look at if I''m happy with the certificate.

Its a hard one to call, might be perfectly fine but although nothing particularly stands out as being a flag, no way to tell just from a couple of numbers....If your jeweller can order it in without a commitment from you then you could certainly take a look.

No, no commitment whatsoever Ok I will ask him to bring it in

That sounds fine, see my edit above for another suggestion!

 

[rambar]

Saw it, and edited mine too

 

[diamondsman]

Hi
as far as the depth and table are concerned for princess cut diamonds .

1) If the depth is to above 76% in many cases the stone would look smaller than the size it suppose to be .(even though it would have lots of brilliance and fire )
on the other hand if the depth is shallow the stone would look bigger than its size ,but ..would have no brilliance to it.

2) if the table is spready above 76%,it would take away from the brilliance and fire of the stone,as there would be a light leakage through the table.

3) compare ratios in order to get a square or a rectangular shape ,the closer the measurements are the squarer the stone

hope this helps

 

[John P]

Date: 11/7/2009 3:02:50 PM
Author: diamondsman

1) If the depth is to above 76% in many cases the stone would look smaller than the size it suppose to be .(even though it would have lots of brilliance and fire) on the other hand if the depth is shallow the stone would look bigger than its size ,but ..would have no brilliance to it.

"In many cases" is correct, but in actuality depth % simply cannot tell the spread story in a princess.

Use avg mm - not depth - to figure princess spread. Unlike RB with a single pavilion angle the chevroning on a princess can be manipulated to bulge (adding unnecessary weight even to shallow depths) or to flatten underneath a thick girdle (again keeping a shallow depth but still hiding weight). There is also the situation diamondsman warns of, where a high depth is related to lesser spread in the way it might be with a round. But on the opposite side there are fine-make cutters using small tables and angle combos resulting in higher depths to achieve AGS0 light performance, and the configuration has negligible loss of spread.

For example here are several square 1ct PCs for sale (links found via PS).

A, 5.51 mm
B, 5.47 mm
C, 5.44 mm
D, 5.41 mm
E, 5.41 mm
F, 5.36 mm

The depths for these diamonds (not in order) are 70.3, 70.9, 73.9, 76.8, 77.0 and 77.3%.

Anyone want to try matching those depths to the avg spreads given without referencing the db or seller sites? ...If you're wrong you have to wear a toga in your avatar photo!

 

[John P]

Anyone?

I''m mainly addressing those pros who feel a PC can indeed be judged based soley on depth %... Surely you can complete this exercise?

Come on - are you afraid of a little toga?

 

[rambar]

Ok so the stone arrived, looks nice to me, but would like some advice on the numbers if anyone can provide it? I am aware that GIA doesnt measure angles for PC so i''m assuming that these numbers that I was given were measured by the internal graders who had the diamond:

2.02 E VS2 Princess
Table: 74%
Depth: 74.5%
Crown: 13.3%/51.3o
Pavilion angle: 56.7%/39.0o
Meas: 6.74x6.74

Do these seem OK to those in the know? I am a bit concerned that maybe the measurements are small for a 2.02 carat? Or is this normal?

 

[diamondsman]

Hi
in my opinion the measurements are smaller than what a 2.00+ct. princess should be, I looked on line and checked similar stones and found one that has similar depth and table but measures 7.15X7.11X5.28mm.

go on line and see what a 2.00 ct. princess with the same specs. and check the measur.

hope this helps