Another OEC question??

[Taylorbug!]

I am looking at an OEC and these are the numbers. Opinions please.

Width: 6.82mm
Length: 6.95mm
Depth: 2.76mm
Table Percentage: 50.60%
Depth Percentage: 40.50%

 

[Rhea]

That's very shallow! Like very very shallow. Are you sure the number is correct? Do you have any photos?

 

[Taylorbug!]

That's very shallow! Like very very shallow. Are you sure the number is correct? Do you have any photos?

Thanks Rhea....yes, they are correct. I copied and pasted from the sellers web site.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The measurements won't matter on a GOG stone because they should have ASET images...does this one have it?

 

[Dreamer_D]

I would not personally consider a stone with that depth.

 

[Taylorbug!]

The measurements won't matter on a GOG stone because they should have ASET images...does this one have it?

no aset images, only the sarin report.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Might be a good pendant stone but not for a ring.

 

[Laila619]

How odd, 40.5% total depth?! That is crazy. I too wondered if it's a mistake, but I guess it's not.

The picture of the stone actually looks good, but I just don't know what to think with that depth.

 

[Rhea]

That's too shallow for me. I can't imagine that it preforms that well. I'm a huge fan of the later OEC's which are shallow, but can't imagine this one looking great.

What do you think of it? What type of stone are you looking for?

 

[yssie]

What do you want it for?

I'd consider it as a curio stone... but for an "important" piece, with those numbers and that girdle, I wouldn't give it a second thought - and I'm pretty forgiving of "outside the box proportions"

 

[Taylorbug!]

Here is a video of the stone.

http://vimeo.com/38454901

 

[yssie]

Here is a video of the stone.

http://vimeo.com/38454901

Taylor - after watching that I have to change my vote, I wouldn't even consider it as a curio. It's completely dead in the centre, and that inclusion would drive me nuts

 

[Dreamer_D]

It looks better than I might expect for the proportions -- a 40% depth is.... well I have never seen a diamond so flat. But it looks glassy and has little light play. The inclusion seems fairly obvious for an SI1 as well. Its still not something I would choose. I suppose it all depends on what you want, though. I think people have pretty much said their opinions, but you might have different criteria for making the decision. If you opt to see it -- bargain significantly on the price.