D SI2

[Labalilo]

I am offered to buy a Brilliant,
2.02 ct, EW+ (D), SI2
Nil, prop VG, pol EXC, symn G
I would like to have your advice on the dimensions?
7.99 - 8.04 x 5.06
gi: medium 3.5%
td: 63.1%
t: 56%
hc: 16.5%
hp: 43.0%
Is it an intersting stone? Would you recommend it? Would you recommend a D SI2?

Thanks!

 

[kenny]

63.1% is too deep for a round to have good light performance.

Also personally I'd look for color and clarity grades more similar, like say G VS1, but that's just me.

What does EW+ mean?

 

[Labalilo]

Kenny,
Thanks for your reply.
EW stands for Exceptional White, in other term the D colour.
Of course G VS1 is better but it is a different budget.

The other stone I am offered is 2.00 F SI1, Nil, Gd, Exc, Gd. Td: 64.5%. t: 57%.

What do you think?

 

[distracts]

If it is a round brilliant, the second stone is way too deep also. 64.5? The center of that stone is going to look like a black hole compared to ideal cuts.

 

[kenny]

Cut is more important to the beauty of a diamond's light performance than color or clarity.
Yet cut is the least-understood and most complex characteristic of diamonds.
Fortunately you are looking at rounds, the easiest of all shapes when it comes to finding a well cut diamond.
Experts may be able to find a few that are well cut which would be rejected by the following process, but you and I are not experts and there are PLENTY of diamonds that pass this process.

Use two tools, HCA and Idealscope.
https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca
https://www.pricescope.com/tools/ideal-scope

From the lab report get these for numbers and plug them into the HCA:
Depth %
Table %
Crown Angle in degrees
Pavilion Angle in degrees
It will give you a score.
Reject diamonds that score over 2.0 and get and Idealscope pic on those that score under 2.0.

Compare the Idealscope pic to this chart. http://www.ideal-scope.com/1.using_reference_chart.asp



The reason for this second step, the Idealscope, is the Crown and Pavilion angles you entered into the HCA are averages.
A round diamond is not perfectly round, it has 8 sides so it has 8 crown angles and 8 pavilion angles.
The angles you use are the AVERAGE of those 8 angles.
They could all be the same, which is good.
Or some could be very high and some very low but average out to a nice number, which is bad.
The Idealscope picture would reveal this.

Next only consider diamonds graded by AGS or GIA.
Other labs lie.
Shocking but true.

Sellers know this so they (seem to) price EGL stones cheaper than GIA stones.
But you are not comparing apples to apples.
You are not really getting a F VS1 like EGL reports the grades; GIA would grade the same diamond H, SI1 or worse - maybe 3 grades worse, maybe 4 maybe more, nobody knows.

GIA and AGS-graded diamonds are not more expensive; it's just that you are not buying grades that are probably lies.
Think of buying a Lexus but finding out it's really a Toyota with a Lexus badge.
Such is the fraud that is astonishingly allowed to be perpetrated on the diamond buying public by these labs and their vendors.
They justify it by saying grading is subjective and done by humans.
Well, GIA and AGS use humans too.

 

[yssie]

A brilliant what, exactly?

After Kenny stated that 63.1% was too deep for a *round* brilliant, why would you think a stone w/ 64% depth might be an improvement?

Who graded these? And how old are the reports?

Have you seen them in-person?

 

[kenny]

Good point Yssie.
I assumed the OP meant round brilliant.

 

[Labalilo]

Kenny, Yssie,

Many thanks for the useful information!

2.02 ct, D, SI2
Nil, prop VG, pol EXC, symn G
7.99 - 8.04 x 5.06
gi: medium 3.5%
td: 63.1%
t: 56%
hc: 16.5%
hp: 43.0%

Is giving 3.2 HCA.

Certificate is HRD Antwerp. Reliable?

I definitely forget about the other one which has a td: 64.5%

Cheers!

 

[kenny]

HCA over 2.0?
Reject.

Keep shopping.