Sorry for bumping my threads up but I just wanted to see if anyone else had any other opinions? I've asked WF for their opinion on the stone and to see what else they could find for my budget. They did say this stone is eye clean. Thanks everyone!
ok, there is some leakage and the table is on the large size, but to my eyes even though the numbers are outside ideal range, it is an attractive diamond - I have seen much worse!! See what the good folk at WF say about it, it also looks very clean for an SI2, going by the picture it looks good to me, even though there are far better on paper.
Thanks! I''m worried about the leakage as well so I''ve asked them about that. They seem like a great vendor so hopefully they''ll be able to find me something better in my budget. I went from wanting a cushion to a round so it''s hard to mentally switch modes I guess
See what they say, if nothing else comes up then this still might be a contender. If you want a Superideal then this isn''t the one, but if a " nice make" of cut is what you want for the budget, then this might work.
It doesn''t need to be ideal...just gorgeous of course I was just thinking we could get a larger carat weight for our budget if we go just slightly outside of ideal parameters. I guess I can trust WF''s eyes to tell me whether this stone performs anywhere close to where the ideal stones perform.
Actually, I really like the look of this diamond and I have seen loads from WF in the almost 2 years I have been here. This one has really caught my interest as a very attractive stone, I will be curious to say what WF says as to whether it is a possible for you....
Yes, the first diamond faces up how it should with the mm diameter.
The next diamond you posted has a shallow crown angle, with no info it is hard to say how it might look - big table again too. The second has possibilities, but we need more info as it isn't in house. Of course with SI clarities, with the diamonds not being in house it is hard to tell if they are eyeclean. I can't seem to open the GIA report for the third, but this too looks like it might have possibilities.
I got excited for a moment thinking that the first diamond was within firey ideal cut range, but it isn't. I think you can do better than this diamond, it scores a 2.7 on the HCA. The second diamond we can't say as we need the crown and pavillion angles.
Cookie & Affiliate Policy:
We may generate affiliate revenue through the links/ads on this site. We NEVER accept paid reviews and take great pride in providing honest opinions and objective information on products & services.