Another lost soul looking for guidance re: Princess cuts
Would appreciate any input from the regulars and experts on PriceScope ... this board and site have provided an invaluable education as I have been ring shopping, and I just wanted to extend my thanks to all those whose posts I have read over the past couple of weeks.
My girlfriend has expressed a desire for square stones. I've been looking at princess cuts because the largest supply of square stones seems to be in princess cuts. She wants a 3 stone ring with side sapphires. We went ring browsing one day and she was concerned that the princess rings we saw did not have enough of the "wow" factor (i.e., fire and brilliance, or just plain "sparkle", as she put it), but she still prefers the square stone to a round brilliant (which, as I'm now well aware from reading the boards here, will have a bigger "wow" factor).
I'm convinced that I can find a nice princess cut which will be suitably sparkly, and I've seen about a dozen princess cut stones in person (I live in NYC, and a couple recently engaged friends gave me recommendations on 47th Street).
Here are the basic specs on the two "finalist" stones:
#1: G VS1 1.79ct Ex Polish, VG Symmetry, 70.9% depth, 82% table, Thn-Med, no culet, no fl. Not sure of exact dimensions but ratio was under 1.05. Priced 22% back from Rap.
#2: G VS2 1.73 Good Polish, Good Symmetry, 72.4% depth, 71% table, ExThn-Thk, no culet, no fl. 6.64x6.52x4.72 (1.018 ratio). Priced 15% back from Rap.
As #2 was a GIA cert, there were no details on crown height, but it looked pretty good (didn't seem to be too shallow or too deep; I guess it would fall as 2B or better on the AGA princess chart). The crown definitely looked deeper than #1.
Obviously the table on stone #2 is much better, and while I did not view the 2 stones side by side (different vendors) I remember #2 having more fire. #1 is priced a little better but it is a wash on the finished product (in fact, #2 may be a little cheaper on the end product).
#2's girdle is of concern (more the ExThn than the Thk). However, I did examine the stone (set in a temporary springclip type setting) with a loupe and the girdle seemed to be fairly even all the way around (although I did not see that small portion of the girdle that was under the prongs of the temporary setting (two prongs on each of two opposite sides of the stone, the corners did not seem to be thin)).
I have the following questions but would appreciate any input:
- What premium for good proportions / discount for the large table might be applied?
- What discount for the girdle on stone #2 might be applied?
- How concerned should I be about the girdle? According to what I could find here (topic "sarin report - girdle question", scroll down to last post), the difference between an extremely thin girdle and a thick girdle should be readily apparent, even to the untrained eye, in a loupe, but I could detect no such significant variation in my examination (unless it was hidden under one of the prongs of the temp setting). Should I be wary enough to keep looking?
Any answers to these questions or other input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again.
Matt
New York, NY
Would appreciate any input from the regulars and experts on PriceScope ... this board and site have provided an invaluable education as I have been ring shopping, and I just wanted to extend my thanks to all those whose posts I have read over the past couple of weeks.
My girlfriend has expressed a desire for square stones. I've been looking at princess cuts because the largest supply of square stones seems to be in princess cuts. She wants a 3 stone ring with side sapphires. We went ring browsing one day and she was concerned that the princess rings we saw did not have enough of the "wow" factor (i.e., fire and brilliance, or just plain "sparkle", as she put it), but she still prefers the square stone to a round brilliant (which, as I'm now well aware from reading the boards here, will have a bigger "wow" factor).
I'm convinced that I can find a nice princess cut which will be suitably sparkly, and I've seen about a dozen princess cut stones in person (I live in NYC, and a couple recently engaged friends gave me recommendations on 47th Street).
Here are the basic specs on the two "finalist" stones:
#1: G VS1 1.79ct Ex Polish, VG Symmetry, 70.9% depth, 82% table, Thn-Med, no culet, no fl. Not sure of exact dimensions but ratio was under 1.05. Priced 22% back from Rap.
#2: G VS2 1.73 Good Polish, Good Symmetry, 72.4% depth, 71% table, ExThn-Thk, no culet, no fl. 6.64x6.52x4.72 (1.018 ratio). Priced 15% back from Rap.
As #2 was a GIA cert, there were no details on crown height, but it looked pretty good (didn't seem to be too shallow or too deep; I guess it would fall as 2B or better on the AGA princess chart). The crown definitely looked deeper than #1.
Obviously the table on stone #2 is much better, and while I did not view the 2 stones side by side (different vendors) I remember #2 having more fire. #1 is priced a little better but it is a wash on the finished product (in fact, #2 may be a little cheaper on the end product).
#2's girdle is of concern (more the ExThn than the Thk). However, I did examine the stone (set in a temporary springclip type setting) with a loupe and the girdle seemed to be fairly even all the way around (although I did not see that small portion of the girdle that was under the prongs of the temporary setting (two prongs on each of two opposite sides of the stone, the corners did not seem to be thin)).
I have the following questions but would appreciate any input:
- What premium for good proportions / discount for the large table might be applied?
- What discount for the girdle on stone #2 might be applied?
- How concerned should I be about the girdle? According to what I could find here (topic "sarin report - girdle question", scroll down to last post), the difference between an extremely thin girdle and a thick girdle should be readily apparent, even to the untrained eye, in a loupe, but I could detect no such significant variation in my examination (unless it was hidden under one of the prongs of the temp setting). Should I be wary enough to keep looking?
Any answers to these questions or other input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again.
Matt
New York, NY