Bought Diamond...did I make the right choice

[nik]

Ok, So I bought the following diamond last weak

1.05 H VS2
HCA- 2.3
AGS - Ideal Cut 0
1.05 ct
H
VS2
Light perf: AGS Ideal 0
Symmetry- AGS Ideal 0
Polish- AGS Ideal 0
No fluoresence
HCA- 2.3
Table- 56.9
Depth- 61.3
CA-35
PA- 41
Star- (unable to read)
Lower facet- 79
girdle- thin to med
6.56 - 6.59 x 4.03 mm
AGS 0010351710

idealscope attached

 

[slumdog]

im not a pro but thats a great idealscope image!

 

[nik]

I then say the following diamond this weekend:

1.07 H VS2
AGS Ideal 0
Ideal symmetry
NO light performance (old system)
Table: 56.4
Depth: 60.8
CA 34.3
PA 40.9
star: 52
lower facet: 78
6.64-6.67x4.05
HCA- 1.3

Idealscope attached

Did I make the right choice? The price is the same? SHould I choose this diamond instead (its not too late)

Thanks all pricescopers for your help!

 

[jet2ks]

The diamond you bought looks great!! The HCA score is the result of the 35/41 angle combination (remember that HCA is trying to make a prediction and is trumped by actual images). That is one of those combos that we always like to see IS images on--it can be problematic if the diamond is not tightly cut or if it is a GIA stone and the angles were rounded down. Neither of those applies to your stone--the IS shows a well cut, high performing stone and the longer lower facets help that combination, as well. Personally, I see no reason to switch. The numbers and image on the second diamond are excellent, as well, but I wouldn't say it is any better or worse than the one you purchased.

 

[yssie]

could be the pic, but the first image looks a little leaky under the table?

 

[jet2ks]

Date: 8/31/2009 11:26:13 PM
Author: yssie
could be the pic, but the first image looks a little leaky under the table?

I think it is in the IS photo set-up, yssie. The second image looks similar in the table area, so could be glare or something else in the set-up. Even if there is some leakage, it is so minimal that the naked eye will not be able to tell the difference.

 

[Kaleigh]

Agree with Jet2k. I think you made a fabulous choice.

 

[stone-cold11]

Both look good.

When you say the #2 is with the old system, when is the report dated?

 

[nik]

Thanks everyone for their replies. Its dated August 2008, but has no grade of light performance unlike the 1.05. Does either image look slightly better? The jeweler recommends the 1.05. Also the 1.05 has a better H&A image, although neither claim to be H&A. Are the angle combinations better in the 1.07? (ie HCA score)

 

[stone-cold11]

What kind of report is that? A diamond quality document (DQD) or the diamond quality report (DQR)? If it is the DQD, it is light performance graded to get a AGS0 in cut, it may not show it but that is how it got the grade.

Safer numbers, but with the IS images you can basically ignored the numbers other than crown numbers. As everyone said before, both are good.

 

[ct-appr]

Looks great to me!

 

[nik]

Stone cold, the 1.07 is a DQD. Thanks for the information. I like that the 1.05 has a DQR, just more info for me

 

[Lorelei]

Its really up to you Nik, both diamonds look great but if you have a preference of one over the other then thats fine if you want to change it.

 

[nik]

Thanks Lorelei...out of curiosity, which one would you buy?

 

[BeachBum83]

Looks good to me!

Also, I would not be turned off by the 2.3 HCA. The diamond I ultimately went with was a 2.5, but the IS image and seeing it in person made me a believer. I''m no expert, but I think you did well!