Choice between these two diamonds

[crease123]

Hi guys, I'm currently torn between these two round diamonds. I understand having idealscope/aset images will greatly help in determining the better amongst the two, but right now I only have these statistics.

Diamond 1:
2.01 ct, GIA excellent cut grade, I, Si(2) eye-clean
$13,376
Table: 56%
Depth: 60.9%
Crown: 34.0
Pavilion: 40.8
Measurements: 8.12 X 8.17 X 4.96
Polish/Symmetry: Excellent/Excellent
Girdle: M-STK

Diamond 2:
2.01 ct, AGSL Ideal cut grade, H, SI(2) supposedly eye-clean according to vendor
$14,425
Table: 55.1%
Depth: 62.0%
Crown: 35.0
Pavilion: 40.8
Measurements: 8.09 X 8.12 X 5.03
Polish/Symmetry: Ideal/Ideal
Girdle: Thin to thick

Please let me know your opinion! Thanks everyone

 

[stone-cold11]

Weird on the AGSL stone. AGS do not grade girdle that way, only numbers are given. If that is the equivalent description, AGS should not be giving it an AGS0 cut grade anyway due to the girdle variation. What is the actual report number?

 

[Lorelei]

The girdle is probably a typo, I have seen this a few times before, assuming it is then they both look good, can you get ASET or Idealscope images for these, or are they from Blue Nile?

 

[crease123]

Sorry, for the second stone, according to the agsl report, the girdle is "Faceted, 1.2% to 3.5%".

As of now, I was not able to obtain any idealscope/aset images, so these numbers is all I''ve got to work with.

 

[Ellen]

Either could be just fine, but without pics, I personally would lean towards the first. Just have an independant appraisor take a look once you get it. And make sure there is a good return policy with the establishment you''re buying from.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 8:02:53 AM
Author: crease123
Sorry, for the second stone, according to the agsl report, the girdle is 'Faceted, 1.2% to 3.5%'.

As of now, I was not able to obtain any idealscope/aset images, so these numbers is all I've got to work with.

That is fine and within good range of thin to medium, thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 8:07:56 AM
Author: Ellen
Either could be just fine, but without pics, I personally would lean towards the first. Just have an independant appraisor take a look once you get it. And make sure there is a good return policy with the establishment you''re buying from.

Ditto this.

 

[stone-cold11]

Both are fine from the numbers then. Need other images. Other than that, it depends on the price and color of the stone and which one you are more comfortable with.

So the vendor do not supply IS/ASET image?

 

[crease123]

Thanks for all the suggestions. May I enquire, just for my education, what are the reasons you guys are choosing rock 1 over 2?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 8:53:51 AM
Author: crease123
Thanks for all the suggestions. May I enquire, just for my education, what are the reasons you guys are choosing rock 1 over 2?

Of course! The second is borderline steep deep which means it could possibly show light leakage. Now it may not necessarily be a problem depending on which way the numbers are rounded ( which GIA does) but without images such as ASET or Idealscope we can''t tell if the diamond will show leakage or not, hence the preference for the first diamond with angle ranges in a '' safer'' zone.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/25/2009 8:57:41 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 2/25/2009 8:53:51 AM
Author: crease123
Thanks for all the suggestions. May I enquire, just for my education, what are the reasons you guys are choosing rock 1 over 2?

Of course! The second is borderline steep deep which means it could possibly show light leakage. Now it may not necessarily be a problem depending on which way the numbers are rounded ( which GIA does) but without images such as ASET or Idealscope we can''t tell if the diamond will show leakage or not, hence the preference for the first diamond with angle ranges in a '' safer'' zone.

Yep.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 2/25/2009 8:57:41 AM
Author: Lorelei
The second is borderline steep deep which means it could possibly show light leakage. Now it may not necessarily be a problem depending on which way the numbers are rounded ( which GIA does) but without images such as ASET or Idealscope we can''t tell if the diamond will show leakage or not, hence the preference for the first diamond with angle ranges in a '' safer'' zone.

The second is from AGS, still an average but not as much round as GIA. I prefer #2.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/25/2009 9:26:34 AM
Author: Stone-cold11

Date: 2/25/2009 8:57:41 AM
Author: Lorelei
The second is borderline steep deep which means it could possibly show light leakage. Now it may not necessarily be a problem depending on which way the numbers are rounded ( which GIA does) but without images such as ASET or Idealscope we can''t tell if the diamond will show leakage or not, hence the preference for the first diamond with angle ranges in a '' safer'' zone.

The second is from AGS, still an average but not as much round as GIA. I prefer #2.

With several of the AGS0''s I''ve seen lately, that title has come to mean little with me. Without pics, and wanting a bright stone, I''d still pick 1.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 9:33:56 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 2/25/2009 9:26:34 AM
Author: Stone-cold11

Date: 2/25/2009 8:57:41 AM
Author: Lorelei
The second is borderline steep deep which means it could possibly show light leakage. Now it may not necessarily be a problem depending on which way the numbers are rounded ( which GIA does) but without images such as ASET or Idealscope we can't tell if the diamond will show leakage or not, hence the preference for the first diamond with angle ranges in a ' safer' zone.

The second is from AGS, still an average but not as much round as GIA. I prefer #2.

With several of the AGS0's I've seen lately, that title has come to mean little with me. Without pics, and wanting a bright stone, I'd still pick 1.

Exactly.

 

[crease123]

Running stone #1 through the HCA test, I noticed that its located almost right on the border of the AGS ideal range, leaning outwards. Is this an area of concern?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/25/2009 10:27:41 AM
Author: crease123
Running stone #1 through the HCA test, I noticed that its located almost right on the border of the AGS ideal range, leaning outwards. Is this an area of concern?

Nope.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 10:31:49 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 2/25/2009 10:27:41 AM
Author: crease123
Running stone #1 through the HCA test, I noticed that its located almost right on the border of the AGS ideal range, leaning outwards. Is this an area of concern?

Nope.

Ditto!

 

[crease123]

Phew. Thanks guys. This has certainly been a stressful experience.

One more thing, does the "I" in rock #1 be of any concern?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 11:09:14 AM
Author: crease123
Phew. Thanks guys. This has certainly been a stressful experience.

One more thing, does the ''I'' in rock #1 be of any concern?

You mean the I colour? No concern at all, a well cut I will still be plenty white to most.

 

[crease123]

Thanks Lorelei! I''ve said this before and I will say it again, you are simply wonderful!

Just as a final note, with a budget of ~$13-14K, are there any better diamonds out there with around 2.0ct than these two? I''m getting nervous feet and just want a final confirmation before the go-ahead.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/25/2009 11:37:34 AM
Author: crease123
Thanks Lorelei! I''ve said this before and I will say it again, you are simply wonderful!

Just as a final note, with a budget of ~$13-14K, are there any better diamonds out there with around 2.0ct than these two? I''m getting nervous feet and just want a final confirmation before the go-ahead.

Ain''t she though?

I had a look, and don''t see anything else really. As long as you can return it, and have an appraiser look at it, you should be fine.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 1:06:36 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 2/25/2009 11:37:34 AM
Author: crease123
Thanks Lorelei! I''ve said this before and I will say it again, you are simply wonderful!

Just as a final note, with a budget of ~$13-14K, are there any better diamonds out there with around 2.0ct than these two? I''m getting nervous feet and just want a final confirmation before the go-ahead.

Ain''t she though?

I had a look, and don''t see anything else really. As long as you can return it, and have an appraiser look at it, you should be fine.

* blush* thanks Crease and El, that is so kind of you!!

 

[lovindiamonds]

I hate to hyjack the thread, but I have to ask.....what is light leakage??

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 1:10:14 PM
Author: lovindiamonds
I hate to hyjack the thread, but I have to ask.....what is light leakage??

No problem!

Light leakage is the result of a diamond letting light escape through it, when it should be returned to the eye as "sparkle." This is often caused by unfavourable crown and pavilion combinations, particularly those which are steep combos. This can be seen as dark patches or a dark ring around the table of a diamond and generally lesser performance.

ASET and Idealscope reflector images are very useful to show any light leakage in a diamond, these tutorials explain further and show light leakage in Idealscope images,

https://www.pricescope.com/idealscope_indx.asp

http://www.highperformancediamonds.com/index.php?page=education-performance

 

[John P]

Date: 2/24/2009 10:47:00 PM
Author:crease123

Diamond 2:
2.01 ct, AGSL Ideal cut grade, H, SI(2) supposedly eye-clean according to vendor
$14,425
Table: 55.1%
Depth: 62.0%
Crown: 35.0
Pavilion: 40.8
Measurements: 8.09 X 8.12 X 5.03
Polish/Symmetry: Ideal/Ideal
Girdle: Thin to thick

Please let me know your opinion! Thanks everyone

SC pointed out an inconsistency that comes up from time to time.

There is a glitch Blue Nile's programmed girdle interpretation. GIA and AGS treat girdle measurements differently. GIA measures at the 16 thinnest positions. AGS measured thinnest and thickest places everywhere along the girdle. This means AGS ranges will naturally be wider than GIA's. The BN computer applies GIA's system to all the uploaded reports, causing verbal descriptors to be inaccurate for AGS diamonds.

On this diamond, if there was anything wrong with girdle, weight ratio, durability, etc., it would have been penalized and downgraded by AGS.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 1:15:34 PM
Author: John Pollard

Date: 2/24/2009 10:47:00 PM
Author:crease123

Diamond 2:
2.01 ct, AGSL Ideal cut grade, H, SI(2) supposedly eye-clean according to vendor
$14,425
Table: 55.1%
Depth: 62.0%
Crown: 35.0
Pavilion: 40.8
Measurements: 8.09 X 8.12 X 5.03
Polish/Symmetry: Ideal/Ideal
Girdle: Thin to thick

Please let me know your opinion! Thanks everyone

SC pointed out an inconsistency that comes up from time to time.

There is a glitch Blue Nile''s programmed girdle interpretation. GIA and AGS treat girdle measurements differently. GIA measures at the 16 thinnest positions. AGS measured thinnest and thickest places everywhere along the girdle. This means AGS ranges will naturally be wider than GIA''s. The BN computer applies GIA''s system to all the uploaded reports, causing verbal descriptors to be inaccurate for AGS diamonds.

On this diamond, if there was anything wrong with girdle, weight ratio, durability, etc., it would have been penalized and downgraded by AGS.

I thought so, I have seen this before and it led me to believe the diamond was from BN.

 

[Kelli]

Date: 2/25/2009 1:10:14 PM
Author: lovindiamonds
I hate to hyjack the thread, but I have to ask.....what is light leakage??

Areas of a diamond where light is not reflected back to you, showing darkness instead of brilliance. The light exits through the bottom of the stone instead of being reflected, hence the term "leakage".

 

[Kelli]

Whoops I didn''t see the other responses to that already. Weird. Sorry to be redundant

 

[crease123]

Thanks for all the replies in this thread, words are beyond me to describe the gratefullness that I''m feeling.

Anyway, I found another diamond. This is supposedly a H&A too.

Diamond 3:
2.023 ct, AGSL ideal cut grade, I, VS2
$13,896
Table: 58.6%
Depth: 61.1%
Crown: 34.2
Pavilion: 40.7
Measurements: 8.08 - 8.11x4.94
Polish/Symmetry: ideal/ideal
Girdle: Faceted, 2.5% to 4.6%
AGS Cert # :10161001

This diamond is from USAcerted diamonds. Do they provide IS/ASET images? There isn''t much review on them on the site, what are their reputation on pricescope?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/25/2009 11:17:25 PM
Author: crease123
Thanks for all the replies in this thread, words are beyond me to describe the gratefullness that I''m feeling.

Anyway, I found another diamond. This is supposedly a H&A too.

Diamond 3:
2.023 ct, AGSL ideal cut grade, I, VS2
$13,896
Table: 58.6%
Depth: 61.1%
Crown: 34.2
Pavilion: 40.7
Measurements: 8.08 - 8.11x4.94
Polish/Symmetry: ideal/ideal
Girdle: Faceted, 2.5% to 4.6%
AGS Cert # :10161001

This diamond is from USAcerted diamonds. Do they provide IS/ASET images? There isn''t much review on them on the site, what are their reputation on pricescope?

This diamond looks promising, not sure if this company provide images but definitely ask them.