Diamond Assistance Please

[Jetsetter]

So, I was look at a 1.5ct diamond but although the one I identified seemed ok from the GIA report, I was told that there would be too much light leakage due to the crown pavilion angle in relation to the pavilion angle.

I''ve been scouring stones to get a better angle ratio.
Is this stone better? This was the best I could find for this size, cut, color and clarity.

http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=2111101299&weight=1.53

http://img.bluenile.com/is/image/certs/?src={/4/GIA2111101299_zoom.jpeg}&fmt=swf GIA Report Image

Maybe I''m not looking for the right thing.

Thanks
Jeff

 

[stone-cold11]

looks good from the number, but would prefer to double check with an Idealscope image.

 

[Mike Asscher]

Hi jetsetter,

Depending on what you are looking for in a diamond this diamond looks really good if
you are looking for a diamond with a bit more ideal proportions, Ideal proportions are small table higher crown.

If you are looking for a stone which is a little more wide spread, my preference, you should look a little further to find a diamond that has a table on or around 59-62 percent and a slightly lower crown say 13-14.5.

again just my personal opinion as I prefer a diamond with a natural look and not the look of an idea cut stone.

If you do look for an ideal cut stone it looks great


good luck in finding your perfect stone.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi All!

Mike, we seem to have similar taste!
I also prefer a slightly "spreadier" stone.

Jetsetter- have you seen the effects of "light leakage" firsthand?

I ask because what''s referred to as "light leakage" may not be a bother to you at all.

That''s why it''s probably a good idea to actually look at diamonds

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 10/7/2009 4:07:35 PM
Author: Mike Asscher
If you are looking for a stone which is a little more wide spread, my preference, you should look a little further to find a diamond that has a table on or around 59-62 percent and a slightly lower crown say 13-14.5.
again just my personal opinion as I prefer a diamond with a natural look and not the look of an idea cut stone.

What do you mean by natural look? How can it be natural when you have polish it to a specific proportion?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 10/7/2009 5:06:43 PM
Author: Stone-cold11

Date: 10/7/2009 4:07:35 PM
Author: Mike Asscher
If you are looking for a stone which is a little more wide spread, my preference, you should look a little further to find a diamond that has a table on or around 59-62 percent and a slightly lower crown say 13-14.5.
again just my personal opinion as I prefer a diamond with a natural look and not the look of an idea cut stone.

What do you mean by natural look? How can it be natural when you have polish it to a specific proportion?

I * think* Mike means he prefers the more "traditional" cut round brilliants of fine make rather than the superideal types we often see here as having a more natural look, 60 60 types and brilliant ideal cut proportions and so on. Ones that were considered fine make by the trade over many years for RB's. As he has grown up with diamonds and has vast experience of them, that is probably what he means, the h&a superideals are relatively recent in the overall scheme of things.

Mike if I am wrong please let me know, would be very interested to know what your preferences are!