Need help choosing between 2 diamonds I’m looking at. I’ve picked out a setting on clean origin (Braided Halo) and just wanted to get opinions on which diamond seems to be the best and if anyone has dealt with clean origin before? Also, I’m open to considering other loose lab diamonds if anyone has suggestions they recommend. Working with a budget of about 5k. Thanks for any advice!
Until GIA and AGS start grading MMDs properly (by which I mean precise colour and clarity, not just 'colourless/near-colourless' and 'very slightly included / slightly included' etc.), which they must be doing in the first place to put the stones into the correct wide-band grades, I think we are stuck with IGI and GCAL!
Until GIA and AGS start grading MMDs properly (by which I mean precise colour and clarity, not just 'colourless/near-colourless' and 'very slightly included / slightly included' etc.), which they must be doing in the first place to put the stones into the correct wide-band grades, I think we are stuck with IGI and GCAL!
Both seem to be decent in terms of providing a good amount of info, though, if not quite to the level of full SARIN scans, so it's not all bad IMHO
While the HCA may give the 1.01 a passing score, I'd want to investigate it further. If you aren't aware, there are 8 crown and 8 pavilion angles on a round diamond. When you look at a lab report, only ONE value is provided which means each respective angle is rounded & averaged. The problem arises in the fact that at 41.2 pavilion wonky things can and do happen. It's very difficult to find a diamond with a 41 pavilion that doesn't exhibit an issue. Some on this forum seek a 34/41 combo for instance.
Depending on the vendor and their capabilities they may be able to offer you a fully detailed SARIN report on the stone in question, which would provide the 8 individual values so you could confirm if there are any issues or not. Also, if there is a H&A image available, you might be able to pick up on some issues as well. However, I see the H&A image is only available on the other diamond.
Another issue that is probably beating a dead horse is the fact this is an IGI certificate. Granted, this is a synthetic stone but in the natural stone segment IGI is not well respected or trusted. Therefore, I am not sure how much I trust the reported data, or the color/clarity grading.
Someone mentioned the 1.07 D looked out of whack to them based on dimensions. I am not certain I agree with that sentiment. The H&A image looks good and the dimensions seem inline for the weight proportions. If available, I'd like to know more about the crown, pavilion, table and depth values before passing harsh judgment.
https://www.diamdb.com/compare/1.01ct-round-6.52x6.52x3.93-vs-1.07ct-round-6.65x6.65x4.01/
Try using the following criteria for a round:
In addition to the above, keep in mind that you want COMPLIMENTARY angle combinations. What does this mean? Shallow pavilion paired with a steep crown (35c/40.6p). Or maybe the opposite, such as a 34c/41p. Ideal Tolk proportions are 34.5/40.75. Since GIA and AGS don't round to the hundredths, another very popular combo is 34.5/40.7 or 34.5/40.8.
- 54-57 table
- 60-62.4 depth (prefer 62 or less)
- 34-35 crown (maybe 35.5, if paired with 40.6 pavilion)
- 40.6-40.9 pavilion (maybe 41, if paired with a 34 crown)
- 75-80 lower girdle facets, aka LGF's
I can't stress the importance of the crown/pavilion relationship. In a sense, diamonds are a math game and all this criteria determines how light bounces (or leaks) inside the diamond. When the geometry lines up properly, you get a firey diamond that has edge to edge brightness and actually looks bigger & whiter because it is cut properly.
Hopefully this gets you pointed in the right direction. Good luck.
While the HCA may give the 1.01 a passing score, I'd want to investigate it further. If you aren't aware, there are 8 crown and 8 pavilion angles on a round diamond. When you look at a lab report, only ONE value is provided which means each respective angle is rounded & averaged. The problem arises in the fact that at 41.2 pavilion wonky things can and do happen. It's very difficult to find a diamond with a 41 pavilion that doesn't exhibit an issue. Some on this forum seek a 34/41 combo for instance.
Depending on the vendor and their capabilities they may be able to offer you a fully detailed SARIN report on the stone in question, which would provide the 8 individual values so you could confirm if there are any issues or not. Also, if there is a H&A image available, you might be able to pick up on some issues as well. However, I see the H&A image is only available on the other diamond.
Another issue that is probably beating a dead horse is the fact this is an IGI certificate. Granted, this is a synthetic stone but in the natural stone segment IGI is not well respected or trusted. Therefore, I am not sure how much I trust the reported data, or the color/clarity grading.
Someone mentioned the 1.07 D looked out of whack to them based on dimensions. I am not certain I agree with that sentiment. The H&A image looks good and the dimensions seem inline for the weight proportions. If available, I'd like to know more about the crown, pavilion, table and depth values before passing harsh judgment.
https://www.diamdb.com/compare/1.01ct-round-6.52x6.52x3.93-vs-1.07ct-round-6.65x6.65x4.01/
Try using the following criteria for a round:
In addition to the above, keep in mind that you want COMPLIMENTARY angle combinations. What does this mean? Shallow pavilion paired with a steep crown (35c/40.6p). Or maybe the opposite, such as a 34c/41p. Ideal Tolk proportions are 34.5/40.75. Since GIA and AGS don't round to the hundredths, another very popular combo is 34.5/40.7 or 34.5/40.8.
- 54-57 table
- 60-62.4 depth (prefer 62 or less)
- 34-35 crown (maybe 35.5, if paired with 40.6 pavilion)
- 40.6-40.9 pavilion (maybe 41, if paired with a 34 crown)
- 75-80 lower girdle facets, aka LGF's
I can't stress the importance of the crown/pavilion relationship. In a sense, diamonds are a math game and all this criteria determines how light bounces (or leaks) inside the diamond. When the geometry lines up properly, you get a firey diamond that has edge to edge brightness and actually looks bigger & whiter because it is cut properly.
Hopefully this gets you pointed in the right direction. Good luck.
Whats your opinion on a round with the following:
Thank you for all the information! I have some studying to do
1.10 ct
Color E
VS1
Ideal Cut
35.0 Crown
40.8 Pavilion
58 Table
60.5 Depth
Glad all my rambling made sense.
Just curious....but are you of Asian culture? I ask because high color and clarity is a big deal. I personally have no qualms with E and VS1, but you could probably stretch your dollar a little further if you don't have cultural reasons or high sensitivities.
For instance, a good eye clean SI1 or VS2 may offer a better bang for the buck. Couple that with a G/H color and you may save a few more bucks. Depending on the type of inclusions, SI1 works for many people and given the fact clarity is rated with 10x scopes, most people can't see much difference with their NAKED eye. Those suffering from mind clean issues, or with higher visual acuity may find more value in a VS2+ clarity.
Color is more subjective IMO. Although even for graders, it can a tough gig identifying 1-2 color grades difference unless side by side, with white backgrounds, proper lighting, etc. In the real world, it's less likely you'd notice but some claim they can. I tend to be picky, but my wife's color sensitivity makes me look like I'm a blind bat. In that regards you have to know you, but if you targeting D/E colored stones simply because they are "the best" I'd encourage you to go look at some stones in person and determine if you can really see the difference in a variety of lighting conditions before you pay the price premiums associated with higher colors. I personally never thought I'd see a lower colored stone I truly liked, but @lovedogs has a CBI K/M (trouble remembering which) that is gorgeous.
As far as the specs, the table is okay. I do worry a little about the 35/40.8 combo. Technically it falls within the criteria I listed earlier; however, having looked at a few ASET's, etc that more easily show leakage it seems that angle combo is hit and miss and depends on how tightly the stone was cut. Perhaps a video, etc might be helpful if an ASET isn't available.
If the stone is on hold, perhaps you could give a link so we can further evaluate it?
300x240.png)
