diamcalc favor please!

[alice123]

i''m considering the following diamond:

1.97 carat
6.82 x 6.85 x 4.17
table: 59.8
depth: 61
crown: 34.7
pavillion: 40.7
girdle: medium to slightly thick
cutlet: none

i need to make a relatively fast decision and do not have a lot of experience. the diamond looks great to my eyes, but due to circumstances, have not, and will not have lots of time to compare. from what i read the angles are good, but wanted to check w/ someone w/ diamcalc since the table is larger than "ideal". is someone could produce a diamcalc image w/ info and or explanation that would be extremely appreciated!

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Hi Alice. The dimensions you listed are more for a 1.17 than a 1.97. Is that what you meant?

You didn't list color or clarity so I'm assuming you're wondering about the cut. If the polish and symmetry are "very good" or better, then you're probably looking at an AGS "1", or AGA "1B" ranking, with proportions that are technically very good to excellent.

I ran the statistics through the DiamCalc software, and came up with a very respectable Light Return Analysis and simulated IdealScope image:

Light Return (mono)…...: 0.98 Very Good
Light Return (stereo)…..: 0.98 Very Good
(Non) Leakage (mono)..: 0.89 Good to Very Good
(Non) Leakage (stereo).: 0.91 Very Good to Good
Contrast............................: 0.95 Very Good to Good
(Non) FishEye Effect…...: 1.00 Very Good

-----------
IdealScope- In general, the darker pink areas indicate areas of greater light return, with the lighter pink areas indicating areas of lesser light return. The black areas indicate areas of greater contrast, with the gray areas indicating areas of lesser contrast. The white areas indicate areas of light leakage. A good explanation of the IdealScope image along with examples can be found at https://www.pricescope.com/idealscope_indx.asp

Disclaimer- The facet arrangement and symmetry of the image will probably vary from your actual diamond, which may affect the light performance indicated, sometimes dramatically. The computer generates an image with “perfect” symmetry, which is rare. Also, the star/lower girdle facet lengths may be different from your diamond. The computer simulation is reproduced best when the actual diamond is being viewed and the image "tweaked" to the appearance of the diamond, or Sarin info is downloaded directly into the program. However, this "blind" reproduction should be helpful in considering the major light performance aspects.
-----------

There's a minor amount of light leakage indicated under the table which you would probably have a hard time seeing. If it looks good to your eye, the color, clarity and finish check out, and the price is right, I see no reason to pass it up. If you're a cut geek seeking for perfection, you might want to compare some other stones.

 

[Richard Sherwood]

simulated idealscope image...

 

[alice123]

thanks so much! you are right i did make a mistake - the carat weight is actually 1.19. does that make sense given the angles and other info?

the GIA cert also has the table at 60% but the sarin had it had 59.8 (or whatever number i had posted earlier)

let me know if that changes anything! THANKS SO MUCH FOR THE HELP! this board is great!

 

[Richard Sherwood]

-----------
does that make sense given the angles and other info?
-----------

yep.

-----------
the GIA cert also has the table at 60% but the sarin had it had
59.8 (or whatever number i had posted earlier. let me know if that
changes anything!
-----------

not really, because the angles are the important factor in determining performance.