Down to 2 ... take a look & help me decide!

[New Guy :)]

Okay, so I think I''ve narrowed it down to 2. Which of these would you choose?

1. Round 0.72 G VS2 EX EX EX GIA N 61.5% 57% 5.76-5.81x3.56
Table 34.5*, 14.5% Pav 41.0*, 43.5% Girdle M-STK, faceted $2215

2. Round 0.70 H VS2 EX EX EX GIA N 61.7% 55% 5.72-5.75x3.54
Table 34.5*, 15% Pav 41.0*, 43.5% Girdle TN-M, faceted $2232

Which would you choose, and why? Or would you abandon these 2 and look for something different (I am comfortable with the Carat, Color, and Clarity of both -- I''m mostly thknking about Cut here)? Toss in your 2 cents ... I want to collect at least $0.30 of help before I decide!

Thanks for your help! Oh, and it will be set in the WF tiffany knife edge setting.

 

[stone-cold11]

What is the star and lower facet number?

Both look good from the numbers so far but borderline, I would like to see an IS image of them to decide.

 

[New Guy :)]

Both have the same specs: 50% star, 75% lower facet

 

[stone-cold11]

Hmmm... any chance of getting an Idealscope image?

75% lower facet a little iffy, prefer something higher. IS will really tell more, what with GIA's rounding of numbers...

 

[New Guy :)]

Also, what do you mean when you say they are "borderline"? By what standard?

Question #2: How do I get an IS image? Just ask? And should I be asking for anythig else as well?

Thanks!

$0.02 collected so far

 

[stone-cold11]

Who is the vendor? Online or Brick? Online some vendors provide IS images.

Using JA's stone as an example.

This is a 55.5T, 34.4CA, 40.9PA stone's IS with 75% LF.
http://www.jamesallen.com/grading_report.asp?pic=1225111&type=3

This is a 56.7T, 34.4CA, 40.7PA stone's IS with 74%LF
http://www.jamesallen.com/grading_report.asp?pic=1225109&type=3

IS of the second stone, with a slightly smaller PA shows less leakage under the table. With GIA's rounding, the numbers could be higher at 41.09, so more leakage is possible. Just to be safe, if without IS image, I would try and find something in the 40.8PA range for that crown angle.

 

[New Guy :)]

Online, from Whiteflash. It''s not in-house, though, as far as I know, so they don''t have the IS image linked on the stone''s webpage. If I ask, do you think they would be able to get one for me fairly easily?

Also, how noticeable would the difference be between your two example stones, when viewed in normal light? Do you think either of my stones is problematic, or is one just maybe not quite as good as the other?

Thanks again for your help.

Anyone else who wants to give feedback ... that would be appreciated as well

. The more opinions, the better!

 

[New Guy :)]

.

 

[stone-cold11]

If you are getting from WF, it will be safe to go with either of them as IS image will be available.

 

[Lorelei]

Hi newguy

I wouldn't want to pick between these without an Idealscope image so post them when you get them and we can take a look. The numbers are rounded so IS will show us which proportion configuration works best.

 

[New Guy :)]

Okay, I''ve requested the IS images. While I''m waiting, I have another few questions:

1. Should I be considering this stone as well?

Round 0.73 H VS1, EX cut, VG pol, EX sym, GIA N 62.8% 54% 5.76-5.80x3.63
Table 34.5*, 15.5% Pav 41.2*, 44.0% Girdle M, faceted, star 50, lower 50 (?-- Can''t read -- fuzzy)

Is it in the same league as the others? Or should I abandon it?

2. I''ve also been looking at a bunch of others, but all have a table size of 58 or more. Am I correct
that those won''t be as good? There''s one 57 as well (but the certificate isn''t uploaded, so I don''t know the other specs), and also a 56 (but with a 32.5 crown angle). Do any of those sound okay? I don''t want to do a big investigation if you
all think they won''t be worth it ... so let me know!

Thanks again!

 

[Lorelei]

1. Date: 7/13/2009 2:04:34 AM
   Author: New Guy
   Okay, I''ve requested the IS images. While I''m waiting, I have another few questions:
   
   1. Should I be considering this stone as well?
   
   Round 0.73 H VS1, EX cut, VG pol, EX sym, GIA N 62.8% 54% 5.76-5.80x3.63
   Table 34.5*, 15.5% Pav 41.2*, 44.0% Girdle M, faceted, star 50, lower 50 (?-- Can''t read -- fuzzy) Its too deep for me personally and the angle combo is questionable.
   
   Is it in the same league as the others? Or should I abandon it? I would pass.
   
   2. I''ve also been looking at a bunch of others, but all have a table size of 58 or more. Am I correct
   that those won''t be as good? There''s one 57 as well (but the certificate isn''t uploaded, so I don''t know the other specs), and also a 56 (but with a 32.5 crown angle). Do any of those sound okay? I don''t want to do a big investigation if you
   all think they won''t be worth it ... so let me know! 58% table can be fine as long as the other proportions are good.
   
   Thanks again!

 

[stone-cold11]

#1, no for me, unless an IS is available. Too steep in the pavilion, lower facet might be 80, could be good if in the 80s but GIA rounding makes that number quite useless.

#2, 58% or greater is ok if the angles compliment each other, just look different especially near 60%, some do not like that look. 32.5 CA could be good, again if PA compliments it, if you want a more brilliance oriented cut style instead of a balance between brilliance an fire of the more normal combination.

 

[New Guy :)]

Okay, so I''ll be choosing between the original two.

I''m in a bit of a time crunch, and the diamonds aren''t in-house, so I don''t think I''ll have time to choose based on IS images. So...

If you had to choose without IS images, which one would you pick? If you can''t stand to choose without them, which I understand, then just pretend someone if offering you a choice of one or the other for free. Which would you rather have?

Just throw something out there ... I won''t judge! Thanks everyone...

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/13/2009 11:23:31 PM
Author: New Guy
Okay, so I'll be choosing between the original two.

I'm in a bit of a time crunch, and the diamonds aren't in-house, so I don't think I'll have time to choose based on IS images. So...

If you had to choose without IS images, which one would you pick? If you can't stand to choose without them, which I understand, then just pretend someone if offering you a choice of one or the other for free. Which would you rather have?

Just throw something out there ... I won't judge! Thanks everyone...

I wouldn't pick any of them without IS, the angle combos are too risky.

 

[New Guy :)]

Okay, now I am seriously confused. Based on the angles, both of these diamonds could be AGS Ideal cuts!

But they''re too "risky?" Please help me to understand this, because you''re making me incredibly nervous!

I know it''s probably impossible to judge between them without IS, but do you mean I shouldn''t be buying either of them anyway without IS? Because from what I can tell, they are quality stones. The GIA says so, I think the AGS would probably say so, the HCA makes them look good, and everything else seems to indicate that they would both be fine.

You have me scared that I''ll open the box and be staring at a lump of coal! Please, help me to uderstand my risk so I don''t blow it!

Thanks again, everyone!

 

[New Guy :)]

Anyone? Please??

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/14/2009 11:15:55 AM
Author: New Guy
Okay, now I am seriously confused. Based on the angles, both of these diamonds could be AGS Ideal cuts!

But they're too 'risky?' Please help me to understand this, because you're making me incredibly nervous!

I know it's probably impossible to judge between them without IS, but do you mean I shouldn't be buying either of them anyway without IS? Because from what I can tell, they are quality stones. The GIA says so, I think the AGS would probably say so, the HCA makes them look good, and everything else seems to indicate that they would both be fine.

You have me scared that I'll open the box and be staring at a lump of coal! Please, help me to uderstand my risk so I don't blow it!

Thanks again, everyone!

Ok no need to worry! The crown and pavilion angles * could* show a bit of leakage, no way to tell without an Idealscope image. You don't have to be concerned you will open the box and something ugly will be staring up at you, it is just one of those angle combos which could show a bit of leakage. As GIA round the numbers the diamonds could be perfectly fine if the angles are actually shallower than stated, or there could be a little leakage if they are rounded in a steeper direction. The chances are good that these could be lovely diamonds but for me these crown and pavilion angles are best evaluated with an Idealscope to see how well all the proportions work together. If you are buying from a vendor with a good return policy then you are covered anyway. I am sorry that I can't tell you more but I don't want to mislead you, chances are the diamonds are good, but there is a small chance of light leakage which is why personally I would want an image before purchase.

 

[New Guy :)]

Thanks for clarifying!

I guess leakage is a chance I''ll have to take, unless I can get those IS images real soon. Even with some leakage, it''ll still look nice, right? That is, maybe it''ll look more like a Very Good cut instead?

Thanks for your help!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/14/2009 1:47:30 PM
Author: New Guy
Thanks for clarifying!

I guess leakage is a chance I''ll have to take, unless I can get those IS images real soon. Even with some leakage, it''ll still look nice, right? That is, maybe it''ll look more like a Very Good cut instead?

Thanks for your help!

Most welcome! Check the diamond out in plain daylight, look for a dark ring around the table or any dark or dead patches on the surface of the diamond. Don''t overthink this when looking just see if there are any darkish places on top of the diamond, if not then you are good to go! What I would do is try to chase WF up on the images if you can, but if you can''t get them quickly the chances are still favourable that the diamond will be good.

 

[New Guy :)]

Okay, so the IS images will be here *just in time* on Friday. I''ll post them for evaluation when I get them!

Thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/14/2009 4:12:06 PM
Author: New Guy
Okay, so the IS images will be here *just in time* on Friday. I''ll post them for evaluation when I get them!

Thanks!

Great news! I will be looking out for them!

 

[stone-cold11]

Good luck.

 

[New Guy :)]

I think I found a winner! Now I''m looking for confirmation from you wonderful folks at Pricescope. Long story short: Those 2 diamonds weren''t available, as they were being looked at by someone else. So WF gave me a few other suggestions, and I think I know which one I like best:

1.

GIA
Round Brilliant
Measurements: 5.63 - 5.68 x 3.53 mm
Carat Weight: 0.70 carat
Color Grade: H
Clarity Grade: VS1
Cut Grade: Excellent
Proportions:
Depth: 62.4%
Table: 57%
Crown Angle: 35.0°
Crown Height: 15.0%
Pavilion Angle: 41.2°
Pavilion Depth: 43.5%
Star length: 55%
Lower Half: 85%
Girdle: Slightly Thick, Faceted (4.0%)
Culet: None
Finish:
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Clarity Characteristics:
Crystal, Indented Natural

2.

GIA
Round Brilliant
Measurements: 5.74 - 5.77 x 3.53 mm
Carat Weight: 0.70 carat
Color Grade: H
Clarity Grade: VS2
Cut Grade: Excellent
Proportions:
Depth: 61.3%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 35.0°
Crown Height: 15.5%
Pavilion Angle: 41.0°
Pavilion Depth: 43.5%
Star length: 55%
Lower Half: 75%
Girdle: Thin-Medium, Faceted (2.5%)
Culet: None
Finish:
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Clarity Characteristics:
Cloud

3.

AGS
Round Brilliant
Measurements: 5.73 - 5.74 x 3.52 mm
Carat Weight: 0.708 carat
Color Grade: AGS 2.0 (H)
Clarity Grade: AGS 4 (VS2)
Cut Grade: AGS Ideal 0
Proportions:
Depth: 61.4%
Table: 56.4%
Crown Angle: 34.8°
Crown Height: 15.2%
Pavilion Angle: 40.7°
Pavilion Depth: 42.8%
Star length: 55%
Lower Half: 77%
Girdle: Faceted, 1.6 to 3.7%
Culet: Pointed
Finish:
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Fluorescence: Neglible
Clarity Characteristics:

And the winner is ............ #3 ............... right? My reasoning: They''re all similar, but it''s an AGS Ideal cut! Who could ask for more? (Okay, don''t answer that

.) From what I can tell, it should be great. I trust the AGS grading much more than the GIA in terms of top cuts. So, can my decision be final now? Is there any real reason to request IS images for all 3, or look for others (remember, I''m running out of time, and those things cost money!)?

Once again, thank you all for your help. Please give me feedback ASAP ... hopefully it will be the confirming kind!

 

[Lorelei]

NUMBER THREE!!!

 

[New Guy :)]

Lorelei,

It feels great to get your approval!

WF says this stone is "on hold" ... I''m not actually sure what that means (I''m awaiting an explanation), but perhaps it explains why it''s not listed on their website?

Either way, I''ve seen the AGS report, and it looks wonderful.

Thank you (and others) for giving me critical feedback along the way ... without it, I would have settled for one of those earlier options!

Horray for the Pricescope!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/16/2009 5:29:48 AM
Author: New Guy
Lorelei,

It feels great to get your approval!

WF says this stone is 'on hold' ... I'm not actually sure what that means (I'm awaiting an explanation), but perhaps it explains why it's not listed on their website?

Either way, I've seen the AGS report, and it looks wonderful.

Thank you (and others) for giving me critical feedback along the way ... without it, I would have settled for one of those earlier options!

Horray for the Pricescope!

LOL! GLAD to help! What that means is the diamond is reserved for you so that it isn't available to anyone else and will have been pulled from the website usually. You have made a great choice, congrats!!!!

 

[New Guy :)]

Also, any need to get an IS image before deciding? Or can I just take the AGS''s word on this one, and just enjoy the IS image when it comes?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/16/2009 5:34:58 AM
Author: New Guy
Also, any need to get an IS image before deciding? Or can I just take the AGS''s word on this one, and just enjoy the IS image when it comes?

I wouldn''t ''expect'' any nasty surprises on the IS image, it has very safe numbers, I think you can proceed and when the image comes IF there is an issue, which I very much doubt, you can have a rethink - but it shouldn''t take WF long to get the image anyway.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 7/16/2009 5:34:58 AM
Author: New Guy
Also, any need to get an IS image before deciding? Or can I just take the AGS's word on this one, and just enjoy the IS image when it comes?

Get the Idealscope image anyway. You might be able to see inclusions and their effect on optics better under the lighting and magnification of the US. The AGS image on the report is generated so its always better to get an actual image.