Advice on this diamond..How can GIA grade this as an EXCELLENT cut?/

[analyticangel]

Opinions please on following

.68 H SI stone RB
GIA graded it on January 16 2007 as Excellent Cut VG POLISH VG SYmmetry

5.76x 5.80 x 3.39

Depth 58.7 %

Table 60 %

CA 32.5
PA 41.0

I dont understand how the table can be bigger than the depth and it be graded as excellent cutr What am I missing. Can this bea beautiful stone?

Thanks


Also this has a GIA dossier not a full cert so it does not have a plotting diagram?

Does that take away from the value?
Is that typical for smaller stones ?

 

[JulieN]

Yes, it can be a very nice stone!

And you're enjoying the quite a bit of extra spread.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 3/8/2007 8:36:22 PM
Author:analyticangel
Opinions please on following

.68 H SI stone RB
GIA graded it on January 16 2007 as Excellent Cut VG POLISH VG SYmmetry

5.76x 5.80 x 3.39
Depth 58.7 %
Table 60 %
CA 32.5
PA 41.0

I dont understand how the table can be bigger than the depth and it be graded as excellent cutr What am I missing. Can this bea beautiful stone?

Thanks

Also this has a GIA dossier not a full cert so it does not have a plotting diagram?

Does that take away from the value?
Is that typical for smaller stones ?

The GIA Dossier is often issued for smaller sizes. GIA laser-inscribes dossier diamonds because of the fact that there is no plot. For an SI of that size you may want to ask a gemologist to draw a plot for you if they have one on staff, just to see what is where.

While this is a different “look” than many of the smaller-tabled stones we see on PS, the PA/CA work together for great light return. The table size and low crown will balance it toward brightness over fire.Are the lower halves at 80-85%?That would suit this configuration nicely IMO. As a point of interest the AGS cut guidelines predict this combo to receive a 1-2 in light performance (depending on how the GIA numbers are rounded, optical symmetry, minors, etc)...so both labs consider this basic configuration highly even though it’s outside the conventional 'ideal' bullseye.Nothing wrong with that.

For the record, the GIA considers 53-59% small table, 60-64% medium and 65%+ large.This is about right for the global market - the paradigms on PS are different due to the abundant near-Tolk makes brought up for discussion.

 

[analyticangel]

Thanks John @ Whiteflash! so much for taking the time to answer I have listened to your presenation and read your posts and appreciate your opinion

The GIA number is laser inscribed as you said

The lower half is 75% not 80-85 What will that mean

I was concerned this stone was way too shallow ......

ahhhh so much to learn

A suggested match for studs was as follows

.68 H SI 5.73 x 5.77 x 3.42
GIA very good cut

Depth 59.5
Table 59

CA 34.0
PA 40.8

Lower half 80%


Your thoughts and others will be greatly appreciated
It cost significantly less than H&A and am trying to figure out what makes the most sense for studs

thanks everyone

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 3/8/2007 9:39:37 PM
Author: analyticangel

Thanks John @ Whiteflash! so much for taking the time to answer I have listened to your presenation and read your posts and appreciate your opinion

The GIA number is laser inscribed as you said
The lower half is 75% not 80-85 What will that mean
I was concerned this stone was way too shallow ......
ahhhh so much to learn

A suggested match for studs was as follows
.68 H SI 5.73 x 5.77 x 3.42
GIA very good cut

Depth 59.5
Table 59
CA 34.0
PA 40.8
Lower half 80%

Your thoughts and others will be greatly appreciated
It cost significantly less than H&A and am trying to figure out what makes the most sense for studs

thanks everyone

I thought I recognized your screen name, Angel.

On diamond #1: 75% LH is ok. It will have broader, less rapid flashes in its scintillation than 80%+ will in many lighting conditions.I asked this question because 75-80 is what I consider the premium range for higher crowns (when there is more fire in the balance) whereas makes with this size table and shallow crown often have 80-85, giving that brightness a more rapid scint quality.This difference is subtle and not a deal-breaker, especially if the price is right.

On diamond #2:Those primary measurements would normally receive EX.What is the girdle thickness (min/max and avg) and is there any comment regarding the cut grade on the report to explain VG?

Both of these are more shallow than we commonly see here, but the angles work.They're a hybrid of 60/60 and near-Tolkowsky and I imagine they'd be very bright on the ears. As earrings they are not perfectly matched in angles or depth, but the spread and tables are well-matched (the two most obvious factors). My priorities for matching earrings are spread-table-PA-CA-depth, in that order. These are not twins but they are better than many commercial pairings. For that matter, it is said that there's always a nose between the ears.

The two tests I'd suggest you put them to; are they beautiful to you (if ordering sight-unseen be sure the seller offers a good return option so you can test drive them) and are they the best value for the price?

 

[Richard Sherwood]

John, I appreciate the fair-minded advice you give as a vendor.

Angel, this might be a stunning stone. Definitely worth looking at. A little "out-of-the-box", but I see plenty such stones that have their own unique beauty.

 

[analyticangel]

OK Here goes I will try to post some pics for further opinions Thanks

 

[analyticangel]

Let me try again ...sorry other was too big

 

[analyticangel]

Here is an ear pic