any problems with this diamond?

[bof]

this is a whiteflash diamond. the price seems pretty good (about $3500). are there any problems with this diamond other than the non-ideal polish and symmetry? it scored a 0.7 EX/EX/EX/VG on the HCA. this seems like a great deal after looking at all the super-ideal H&A diamonds.

Report: GIA
Shape: Round Ideal Cut
Carat: 0.95
Color: H
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 61.5
Table: 54
Crown Angle: 34.2
Crown %: 15.6
Pavilion Angle: 40.6
Pavilion %: 42.6
Girdle: Thin-Medium Faceted
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: No
Measurements: 6.31-6.38X3.90

Thanks for your input.

-bof

 

[aljdewey]

BOF......There's no reason to suspect there is anything wrong with this diamond. In fact, I asked about it myself and almost went with it.




It would be an ideal stone in proportions, but it isn't because of the symmetry/polish. Diamonds cannot be considered ideal unless they have ideal (or excellent) on both.




It's something that won't be discernable to your eye, but on paper it disqualifies it from being ideal. Think of it this way: A superideal diamond is like a 4.0 grade in college. Having that said, a 3.8 and a 3.9 are still both As.....they just aren't a 4.0.




This diamond is a great find.....but if you want to have total confidence, call the vendor and ask him about it. Nearly every vendor here is friendly and eager to help accurately represent their goods.

 

[Mara]

AL you should post the scope image..

 

[aljdewey]

I didn't get that far, Mara. I spoke to Brian that day regarding several stones, and they are so busy right now that I didn't want to run him through the paces on too many stones.




Wait......I just found my notes from my convo with him on this diamond. Brian said the stone has 3 small white inclusions near the center of the stone.....they do reflect a bit, but it's absolutely eye-clean. This stone has a fabulous price.....as a basis for comparison, another vendor quoted me $4500 for an .934, H, SI1 stone with AGS0 proportions.




This stone is nearly 25% less....*just* because the polish/symmetry aren't "perfekt!"

 

[bof]

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-548804.htm#

here is the link to the stone. there is a link for an idealscope image. does that look like a lot of light leakage or is it just me?

boF

ps-thanks for the quick feedback. i really appreciate it.

 

[aljdewey]

Holy COW......Mara.....girl, you have a memory like a steel trap! I DID get the image scope on that one.




BOF, yes that it the Image scope. Here's a picture of the actual stone that I was also sent.....AWESOME.




The bald truth is this: we all get sooooo accustomed to seeing these PERFECT ideal images in blood red and midnight black that we forget not ALL diamonds perform this way. The trade off in not having the technicolor ideal-scope.......you save nearly $1000! Not bad at all.




Keep in mind two things:




1) ALL diamonds have some light leakage.....and that's not a bad thing. It's what gives a diamond contrast....body....character. Think of it like a voice.....a monotone with no inflection changes makes for a very boring speaker. A diamond is the same way.




2) Leakage is depicted by WHITE areas on the scope image. The only "white" areas are right around the girdle.....the rest of the areas are pink.




This diamond, for the money, is GORGEOUS. I'm not trying to talk you into this AT ALL.......at the end of the day, you are the one that has to live with your purchase and feel confident that you made a wise decision.

 

[strmrdr]

It looks decent not like a super-ideal but better than any almost any mall store diamond and it doesnt have a super-ideal price.
It looks like a decent deal for the $$.

 

[Mara]

Here is the image...didn't seem to work AL.

This is a picture from WF on the .95 H VS. Stone looks really good! I could only make out that it wasn't an ACA from the slightly thinner arrows.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 12/3/2003 10:34:24 PM Mara wrote:







Here is the image...didn't seem to work AL.

----------------

Huh???? Mine's right there in the post.

 

[Mara]

Not for me.....it just keeps showing a red X where your picture is. Also, I keep getting weird login popups for email.copyright.com when I am on this thread...what's that?!

 

[roshita]

Here are some things to think about.

1) The range of diameter measurement: The diamoeter varies by 1.1% and a smaller variance would be better.

2) The good polish and very good symmetry with the AGS 0 Cut Grade proportions would make this an Ideal Cut not a "Super-ideal" Cut diamond.

3) There is some variance in the angles of the bezel facets in the crown that may result in a different visual appearance for different parts of the stone when viewed from the top.

4) The pavillion depth of 42.6% is on the low end of the AGS o grade for Pavillion depth %. The 0 grade ranges from 42.2% to 43.8% A shallow pavillion depth % usually results in light leakage in the center of the stone when viewed from the top. This is confirmed from the idealscope image.

5) The idealscope shows light leakage around the girdle area. This would likely indicate that the upper girdle facets are higher than they could be.

6) The idealscope shows decent light return and symmetry. There are stones that would appear much worse and ther are stones that would appear much better.

Is this stone "acceptable"? it depends on you, your eyes and how you balance the "look" of the diamond with the price and your concerns for your budget.