Between the two...

[Mr New York]

Have to decide between two I''ve narrowed it down to:

Diamond 1
J, S12 (eyeclean, white inclusion)
. Shape: Round Ideal Cut
. Carat: 1.53
. Depth %: 62.5
. Table %: 56
. Crown Angle: 35.5
. Crown %: 15.5
. Star : 50
. Pavilion Angle: 40.8
. Pavilion %: 43
. Lower Girdle %: 80
. Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
. Measurements: 7.33-7.36X4.59
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Excellent
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: None

~$7000
-----------------------------------------------

The 2nd one confuses me because the numbers on the AGS report are slightly different then the virtual ags numbers WF gave me. Which one would be more accurate?

Diamond two:
Report Type: Diamond Quality™ Document
Shape and Style: Round Brilliant
Measurements: 7.78 - 7.81 x 4.70 mm
Cut Grade: AGS Ideal 0
Color Grade: AGS 3.0 (J)
Clarity Grade: AGS 6 (SI2) (eye clean, white feathers)
Carat Weight 1.722
Fluorescence: Negligible
Comments: Additional twinning wisps and surface graining are not shown.

Polish:
Symmetry:
Table: 56.5%
Crown Angle: 33.5
Crown Height: 14.4%
Girdle: Faceted, 0.8% to 3.5%
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Pavilion Depth: 43.0%
Star Length: 50%
Lower Girdle Length: 78%
Total Depth: 60.3%
Culet: Pointed

~$8200

-------

And for the life of me I can''t figure out how to put pics on no matter how many old threads I read haha. Any comments are much appreciated.

 

[Mr New York]

Diamond 1.

 

[Mr New York]

Diamond 2 IS

 

[Mr New York]

40x diamond 2

 

[Mr New York]

Sarin report

 

[strmrdr]

whats your criteria? size or price?

 

[Mr New York]

Specifically I''m trying to decide:

1. Is the 1200 worth the .19 jump.

2. Is the IS image of diamond 2 anything to worry about.

3. whether HCA number makes a diff. Diamond one is like 2.4 and diamond 2 is .8 or .9 depending on what numbers you use.

 

[honey22]

I prefer the look of IS #1

 

[strmrdr]

One stone is shallower than the other so you actually comparing...
7.33-7.36 vs 7.78 - 7.81 more so than .19cts.
That is a noticeable difference but it is up to you if it is worth $1200.

Cut wise they are both acceptable.

 

[stone-cold11]

Same here, Stone 1 IS looks better.

 

[Mr New York]

Date: 9/25/2008 6:39:47 PM
Author: strmrdr
One stone is shallower than the other so you actually comparing...
7.33-7.36 vs 7.78 - 7.81 more so than .19cts.
That is a noticeable difference but it is up to you if it is worth $1200.

Cut wise they are both acceptable.

Yeah I noticed that. The price doesn''t bother me really. Am I just getting stuck on a small thing with the difference on the IS?

 

[:)]

#1 may be a little more firey.
there will be a visible size difference.

Have you considered having the two shipped to an appraiser that you and WF agree to so that you can look in person before making a decision? (you would have to pay for the appraisal)

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/25/2008 7:57:22 PM
Author: Mr New York

Date: 9/25/2008 6:39:47 PM

Author: strmrdr

One stone is shallower than the other so you actually comparing...

7.33-7.36 vs 7.78 - 7.81 more so than .19cts.

That is a noticeable difference but it is up to you if it is worth $1200.


Cut wise they are both acceptable.

Yeah I noticed that. The price doesn''t bother me really. Am I just getting stuck on a small thing with the difference on the IS?

The first one has slightly better optical symmetry.

The second has better spread and slightly better angles but a small bit less optical symmetry.

The plus and negatives balance each other out so it comes down to $ and size.
Either one would make a Lady happy!

 

[Mr New York]

just wired $ for #2!!!