After months hunting for the right diamond...

[fmc]

Let me start with, am I ever glad I found this site! I knew absolutely nothing about diamonds, after several weeks of reading this forum, I finally got a better understanding of how the diamond industry works, what to look for, etc. So the ultimate question is, have I picked a "good" diamond? Here are the specs;

Weight: 1.59 carat
Cut Shape : Round Brilliant
Color; G
Clarity: VS1
Cut grade: Excellent
Polish; Excellent
Symmetry; Excellent
Fluorescence; None
Measurements; 7.61 - 7.65 x 4.59 mm
It's a H&A diamond
HCA : 1.1

Dimensions are;
Table : 58%
Star length: 50%
Overall Depth: 60.2%
Pavillion height; 43.5%
Crown height: 14.0%
Crown angle: 33.5
Pavillion angle: 41
Lower girdle/half facet length; 80%
Culet: None
Girdle: medium (2.5%)

I'm giving up a brand new car to buy this diamond, all worth it as long as I get a "good" diamond...so please any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you to everyone for making this site incredibly informative and useful, keep up the good work

 

[minmin001]

sorry if I missed it on your post but is it a GIA report?

 

[gamer2be08]

If it is EGL, stay far away. GIA all the way. If it has no certificate, that is a definite no.

 

[Christina...]

The HCA was 1.1 which is excellent and the numbers look good, but I'd like to know who did the report as well.

 

[Christina...]

If it is EGL, stay far away. GIA all the way. If it has no certificate, that is a definite no.

I agree about staying away from EGL, they tend to grade more loosely than many others, but there are more reputable labs than just GIA, so don't let that scare you away from this stone, so far it looks great.

 

[fmc]

it's GIA certified and all numbers come from them (except for HCA of course). Sorry I forgot to mention that. Thanks

Here's a pic of the stone

 

[Lula]

Congratulations -- the stone's numbers and HCA score look great. But the final judge should be your eyes, because each diamond has a different "look" to it. Even a group of well-cut diamonds will show slight differences in the way they look (i.e., more white light vs. more fire vs. a "balance" of the two). A diamond's attractiveness depends not only on the way the proportions work together as a whole; the quality of the crystal the stone was cut from; the quality of the cutting process, etc., but also on your own vision and preferences. So all we can tell you is that so far you've done everything right (GIA; stone's proportions; HCA) and the next step is to simply observe the diamond in real life over a wide variety of lighting conditions, and compare it to other diamonds (well-cut and not-so-well-cut). If it looks the "best" to your eyes, after making the comparison, then you've found your stone!

 

[farmer gal]

It should be a great choice!

 

[minmin001]

looks like a JA diamond, did you put it on hold? If so, can you share the link so we can take a look at the idealscope image?

 

[fmc]

No, its not on hold. I'm essentially debating between that one that I mentioned and the following stone;

GIA Certified
Weight: 1.6 carat
Cut Shape : Round Brilliant
Color; G
Clarity: VS1
Cut grade: Excellent
Polish; Excellent
Symmetry; Excellent
Fluorescence; None
Measurements; 7.50 - 7.53 x 4.67 mm
HCA : 1.6

Dimensions are;
Table : 56%
Star length: 55%
Overall Depth: 62.2%
Pavillion height; 43.0%
Crown height: 15.5%
Crown angle: 35.0
Pavillion angle: 40.8
Lower girdle/half facet length; 75%
Culet: None
Girdle: medium (3.5%)

I'm so confused between the 2. Please help...I think the last one i mentionned has more fire but the other one is brighter

 

[lbling]

Personally just going by pictures and not specs alone I like the second one. I' m not a whizz on brilliant diamonds but I think just to the eyes the second one is much nicer. Good luck on choosing the perfect diamond. It can be a real struggle sometimes.

 

[yssie]

Ditto Lula - both of those will have very different personalities. Request ISs from JA on both if you haven't already to confirm.

If you can't compare both of those stones specifically in-person, my advice is to go to a few local jewellers, see if they have stones w/ various types of proportions, and compare what they have in different lights (by a window in direct sunlight, in the diffuse office lights, in the spotlights under the counter) and find out what your eyes consistently prefer. Then look at the numbers on those stones and see if there are any trends. Not failsafe, but a step in the right direction. If you know you/she prefers white light return the first is the choice of those two.

 

[Pecel]

both of those will have very different personalities.

Yssie, so my question is why they will have very different personalities. Which spec will have the greatest impact on the 'personality' of the stone? Total depth, crown angle, table percentage?

 

[fmc]

I requested the IS images for both, it will take 2-3 business days. The more I look into it, the more I'm getting confused to be quite honnest. I'm leaning towards the second one at the moment but if you ask me after lunch, I'll probably tell you the first one

Can an expert or someone in the field make a recommendation to what diamond I should buy from jamesallen thats not over 23k. Thanks for all the help everyone

 

[tyty333]

Look forward to seeing the IS images...could just be the way the pic was taken but the first one looks like it may have
some leakage under the table. IS will show.

 

[fmc]

I finally got the images. The first image is for the first diamond I posted (ID1) and ID2 is for the second diamond.

 

[stone-cold11]

Both Idealscope image look good to me. The first stone is placed slightly too far into the idealscope when the image is taken.

By different personality, yssie probably meant the cut and patterning. It is a preference thing, some like one type over the other.

For these 2, the first stone has a larger table, slightly shallower crown, generally slightly brighter and bigger diameter than a stone of more tolkowsky proportions, TIC, but sacrifice some fire performance compare to a TIC, which the second stone is a prime example of. Also to note is the lower half size, this result in the thickness of the arrow shafts. The 1st stone has a larger lower half, so thinner arrow shafts than the 2nd stone, giving it a more splintery look. Some prefer that some don't.