Bad idea to buy without IS/ASET?

[cardinalsfan]

I'm considering two different vendors' virtual overseas MRBs (in-house stones are not available for the size/budget I'm looking for). Neither vendor can provide an IS/ASET. There is a 10-day return policy, but I'd have to pay for shipping. Is it a terrible idea to buy without an IS/ASET if the HCA is <2?

 

[tyty333]

Do you have pictures of the stones? If so and they look good then may be worth ordering. If you have no pictures at all then No,
would not be worth ordering IMO.

If you have pictures, please post the pics or links to the stones where they are put on hold.

 

[flyingpig]

If they can provide well taken magnified images, that may be sufficient.
But I am more concerned about the not-free10 day return policy

 

[oldminer]

If the return shipping cost is rather small compared to the potential savings on buying this diamond at a distance without the images, you are still okay returning it.
If the HCA is <2 and the symmetry and polish are Excellent and if the critical angles are not extreme, but in the safe zone, then maybe you will save some money and get a very nice diamond. The risk is nominal if you can stand the return issue hassle and the somewhat uncertain feeling with taking on some element of risk to save sufficient money to make it sensible.. Check the HCA for the "LooksLike" visual size estimate. If it is less than average, then avoid the stone.

 

[denverappraiser]

I would be concerned about the overseas vendor too. Laws are different in different places. Issues like what happens if it gets lost in shipping and bank foreign-exchange fees can turn out to be pretty important.

 

[cardinalsfan]

Thank you all for your comments. I'm now looking at

this stone 62.8%, 55.5%, 36.5, 40.7 (iffy numbers, I know, but I like the crown)

and this stone 61.6%, 55%, 34.6, 40.9

@tyty333 @flyingpig @oldminer @denverappraiser @Karl_K any feedback would be much appreciated.

 

[MsShnooks]

Recommended PriceScope RBC proportions - project to establish some guidelines

I lost it a few times when proportion recommendations were very narrow. The seem to have been based on super ideal branded #'s. (I am not intending this as guide for those companies - if you are buying from our esteemed branded vendors you do not need HCA or guides like these) So I thought it...

www.pricescope.com

That links explains a bit about the different proportion. I am not having much luck clicking on the links but if the videos look good, then it’s worth ordering the diamond to have a look in person. Further to the comments above, I’d add to check out taxes and duties and how you can get them back if you return the stone.

 

[lovedogs]

Thank you all for your comments. I'm now looking at

this stone 62.8%, 55.5%, 36.5, 40.7 (iffy numbers, I know, but I like the crown)

and this stone 61.6%, 55%, 34.6, 40.9

@tyty333 @flyingpig @oldminer @denverappraiser @Karl_K any feedback would be much appreciated.

The proportions on the second one are safer and I'm not loving how the first one looks.

 

[cardinalsfan]

@MsShnooks thanks for the link. I'm a little concerned that the pavilion angle is a little high on both stones. Noted on looking into the taxes and fees issue.

@lovedogs thank you, what is it about the first stone that you don't like? For the second one, should I be concerned that the pavilion angle is a little high (i.e. there might be some 41 or 41+ contributing to the average)?

 

[lovedogs]

@MsShnooks thanks for the link. I'm a little concerned that the pavilion angle is a little high on both stones. Noted on looking into the taxes and fees issue.

@lovedogs thank you, what is it about the first stone that you don't like? For the second one, should I be concerned that the pavilion angle is a little high (i.e. there might be some 41 or 41+ contributing to the average)?

I am not anywhere near as good at eyeballing stones and understanding the factors contributing to looks compared to someone like @flyingpig , but I'll try to explain. To be fair, I don't like the video of the 2nd stone either, but the numbers are much more promising. The 2nd video is hard to parse because of the lighting and I feel like it was taken at a weird angle.

For the first one, there's something about how the arrows converge in the middle that I dont love. It's almost like the ends of the arrows (not the pointy parts facing outwards, but the "shafts" that come together in the middle) are kind of crowding the middle of the stone. Sorry I know that's a crazy sounding explanation but that's what I'm seeing. The thing I do like the about the 1st one are the "fat" arrows. I like that look overall. Here's one with "Fat" arrows that I prefer because the arrows look less "crowded" to my eye. Not saying but this one, but just using as an example using a quick search. https://www.b2cjewels.com/dd/183724...m_medium=referral&utm_campaign=pricescope.com

 

[cardinalsfan]

@lovedogs thank you for the detailed explanation! I do see what you mean about the "crowding" in the middle of the first one. Perhaps if the pavilion angle were 40.6 there would be less of that. The second stone's video was badly taken, I agree.

 

[cardinalsfan]

bumping for feedback

If it helps, @flyingpig or @Karl_K, here's a still shot of #1 (62.8%, 55.5%, 36.5, 40.7)


and #2 (61.6%, 55%, 34.6, 40.9)

 

[flyingpig]

#1 has noticeable leakage
#2 has wonky pavilion

Both are below 90/100 in my book

 

[Karl_K]

#1 has noticeable leakage
#2 has wonky pavilion

Both are below 90/100 in my book

agree with a *
*This is an opinion based on less than ideal data subject to the possibility of being over turned if better data is presented.

 

[lovedogs]

#1 has noticeable leakage
#2 has wonky pavilion

Both are below 90/100 in my book

@flyingpig you are an expert at seeing *why* certain stones dont look ideal based on factors of cut. For my own education, do you have an explanation for what I described above about the arrows on stone 1 looking "crowded"? Is that something related to cut angles, leakage, or just my own personal preferences about aesthetics ?

 

[flyingpig]

@flyingpig you are an expert at seeing *why* certain stones dont look ideal based on factors of cut. For my own education, do you have an explanation for what I described above about the arrows on stone 1 looking "crowded"? Is that something related to cut angles, leakage, or just my own personal preferences about aesthetics ?

It is the combination of the proportions, lighting, photography and cut quality.

1. Short LGH, small table, very slightly shallow pavilion (within the ideal range) make the arrows thicker and elongated.
2. Due to photography and lighting conditions, you have the areas circled in red appear dark and part of the arrows. Imagine the areas circle in red are white. It wont look as crowded
3. Due to variation in PA, you extra obstruction (circled in yellow)

 

[lovedogs]

Thanks @flyingpig that's really helpful. It's definitely the red pieces I"m noticing.

 

[cardinalsfan]

I'm so glad I found this forum. Thank you, @flyingpig and @Karl_K! Are these the areas of leakage?

 

[flyingpig]

I'm so glad I found this forum. Thank you, @flyingpig and @Karl_K! Are these the areas of leakage?

Yeap kinda..

I redraw the line. It needs to be a solid sharp defined triangle with just one color in most cases.

What you see here is a mixture of backlight and weak reflection of light from low and high angles.

 

[cardinalsfan]

Starting to understand a little better now. Thank you again, @flyingpig.

 

[Karl_K]

These computer generated images show back lighting only and the leakage present in "perfectly" cut stones.
The light areas between the arrow shafts is where leakage will start to show.
In well cut stones the leakage is minimal but gets significant the more deep the pavilion gets or steep deep the stone is.
The shapes of this area will vary depending on the configuration.
If there is a large variation around the stone in this area the pavilion could be wonky.

Do the pavilion mains drive light return in the modern round brilliant? | PriceScope

On many websites you will see it said that the pavilion main facets drive light return. Top labs and many grading systems use the pavilion angle as a basis for assigning a cut grade. Is this correct? We will be using computer generated Ideal-Scope images created in DiamCalc for this discussion...

www.pricescope.com