EC diamond opinions

[gemhunter917]

I am currently searching for a more rectangular emerald cut for an engagement ring. My initial round of inquiries came up with these specs from one vendor :

1.52 F VS2 GIA STK-TK N EX GD N Depth 61.1 Table 65 8.02x5.66x3.46 1.42:1
1.52 D VS2 GIA TN-M N VG VG N Depth 64.7 Table 65 8.07x5.63x3.64 Ratio 1.43:1

I''d like to stay in the 1.5-1.7 wt range and in the D-F colors. Any suggestions are welcome. Thanks for any thoughts in advance!

 

[strmrdr]

biggest suggestion and most important is get pictures.
ASET images are preferred but we can work with good regular pictures.
The numbers look ok so far, need crown height to complete the numbers from there its all about pictures.

 

[gemhunter917]

Still waiting on more pictures about the other two but I did get some preliminary pictures on these three.
They seem promising from their numbers so far. Any opinions on which ones I should get more detailed info on?

Size Col Clar Dpth Tbl PoL Sym Fluor Measurements Ratio
1.53 D VS2 67.5% 61% EX VG N 7.65-5.75x3.88 1.33
1.53 E VS2 66.3% 58% EX VG N 7.70-5.58x3.7 1.38
1.71 F VS2 65.7% 64% VG VG F 8.28-5.80x3.81 1.43

 

[gemhunter917]

Heres another shot of the three.

 

[dani13]

Great numbers on all 3....hard to tell from those pics since they are side views....Your final choice might be made based on what l:w ratio you prefer, since all of these stones seem lovely....Something about the first and second stones appeal to me....but I prefer the more squarish ec's vs. the more long/lean ones like # 3...you may be the opposite though.....

Good luck!

 

[strmrdr]

crown height looks good on all 3 but the pictures are pretty useless.....

 

[gemhunter917]

Here''s another closeup on these two

1.53 E VS2 66.3% 58% EX VG N 7.70-5.58x3.7 1.38
1.71 F VS2 65.7% 64% VG VG F 8.28-5.80x3.81 1.43

I appreciate the insight you guys are giving me. I think I''m like you too Dani. The look of a more squarish EC just draws me to it.

 

[gemhunter917]

one more for fun.

 

[Gypsy]

Okay. Let''s try this again.

We need pictures that looks STRAIGHT DOWN AT the stones from the top of the table. Like this:

The pictures you are posted and getting from the vendor are useless... sorry.

 

[gemhunter917]

No problem....part of the learning process. I guess I need to ask ERD explicitly for a top down view.

 

[Gypsy]

Yup. They''ve done it before! No worries! Also, since it''s ERD... ask Mark which one he likes best visually. He has a GREAT eye.

 

[shminbabe]

I love ECs too! Am looking for "mine" as we speak. Wish I could offer you advice, but I''m the other person who''s asking for it at the moment

.

Good luck (they look pretty to me).

Maybe I should look at ERD too?

jeannie

 

[gemhunter917]

I noticed your multiple EC threads! Maybe I should just sit back and follow your search.

 

[dani13]

Gemhunter....

Just wanted to mention, you are dealing with Mark, so you are in EXCELLENT hands. Like Gypsy said, ask him which stone he recommends...he has an awesome eye!! He totally picked out my EC for me and I trust him immensely. No matter what, you will end up with a gorgeous stone!!!!

Keep us updated!!!!!!!!!

 

[chrono]

Yup, a top down view would be very helpful. All the stones look great from the side, very nice crown height.
Which stone is which? Left, Middle, Right? Are they in the same order as the stats posted?

What is Mark''s opinion on all 3 stones?

 

[gemhunter917]

Yes, each stone is displayed in the order the stats are listed. I''ve been working with Gary and he hasn''t had much to say so far.
I''ll see if Mark can chime in with his opinions.

 

[shminbabe]

gemhunter,

let''s hunt for our EC gems together!

I called ERD today so we will see. I''ll also have better images from JA on Monday.

jeannie

 

[marcy]

I''ve only know one person who had a EC ering and it was the most cloudy, included, unsparkling diamond I ever saw. The one''s you have posted certainly look a billion times better than her''s. I''ll be anxious to see what you decide to buy.

 

[shminbabe]

I''ve been underwhelmed by the emerald cuts I''ve seen on people''s fingers too.

That''s what worries me about choosing this shape.

I''ve seen one really awesome EC but it was too expensive for me. At least I know good ones exist, though!


jeannie

 

[gemhunter917]

Just an update on the crown heights while waiting on the top down pictures.

1.53 E VS2 66.3% 58% EX VG N 7.70-5.58x3.7 1.38 Crown Height 15.7%
1.71 F VS2 65.7% 64% VG VG F 8.28-5.80x3.81 1.43 Crown Height 11.7%

I stopped by a local jeweler and was able to view a few F/G emerald cuts. I suppose it might have been the lighting provided in store, but I thought the G color stones were just as white as the F color ones. The ones I had viewed at Tiffany''s showed a clear difference between F/G. Its making me need to expand my parameters to include G stones. Shminbabe, I know you proclaimed yourself as being pretty picky so do you feel this way too?

 

[shminbabe]

Gemhunter,

I really don''t know. I''ve seen only a nice F and an awesome E. The E had it all over the F, but the E had better "numbers" (table and depth, didn''t know crown height) than the F. If I could see a well-cut G, I might. But every jewelry store I visit (i.e. the mall stores) has basically junk I wouldn''t consider anyway. If I could only see a few well-cut stones in the E F G colors then I would know. I think a G could work. Storm? Chrono? Others? I do think in this shape we need to be pickier than we would have to be in a round brilliant. I keep going back and forth in my mind - they are such different choices. And then, shopping online where you can''t see anything in real life unless you seriously think you might buy it. If we had a Tiffany''s nearby...we do have a good jeweler in town but again, it''s takes some digging to get crown height and if you want idealscope or ASET images, again, I''d be "calling it in" and I hesitate to do that if I really don''t plan to buy from them (which I don''t b/c their prices are $4-5,000 higher than I think I can find online). So that''s my conundrum. I guess we have to find an online vendor(s) we can trust, really trust to be our eyes and go from there. Then bring it here for discussion, then finally, bring a few (if you can) to an independent appraiser and see for ourselves. Even with the costs involved in doing that, we''d still save $$.

Long story short, I don''t know...for now I''m asking for E/F in a well-cut stone.

It appears that your crown heights are in the very low to very high end of the ideal range for crown heights. But I''ll let the experts speak to that.

Wish I knew more. Guess we''ll learn together.

How committed are you to the emerald cut? I vacillate, but I keep going back to it over all the others.

I know it''s not going to look BIG, though, so that is why it''s soooo important that it be as perfectly cut and sparkle as brightly and show off those facets as well as a fine EC can.

Ah, the hunt.

jeannie

 

[Hest88]

Date: 7/21/2007 7:54:27 PM
Author: gemhunter917
I suppose it might have been the lighting provided in store, but I thought the G color stones were just as white as the F color ones. The ones I had viewed at Tiffany''s showed a clear difference between F/G.

In the well-cut ECs I''ve seen, you don''t really start seeing a noticeable tinge until you get to an H--and even then only side by side with higher colors. They may not be *quite* a icy, but no one would ever call them anything but white.

 

[shminbabe]

Date: 7/22/2007 9:53:26 PM
Author: Hest88

Date: 7/21/2007 7:54:27 PM
Author: gemhunter917
I suppose it might have been the lighting provided in store, but I thought the G color stones were just as white as the F color ones. The ones I had viewed at Tiffany''s showed a clear difference between F/G.

In the well-cut ECs I''ve seen, you don''t really start seeing a noticeable tinge until you get to an H--and even then only side by side with higher colors. They may not be *quite* a icy, but no one would ever call them anything but white.

That''s reassuring.

jeannie

 

[chrono]

I''ve had a G EC in the past prior to my upgrade. The G was very white. No yellow tint. Not off white. No tinge at all. However, my new E EC is an icy white.

 

[gemhunter917]

Well Gary ruled out these two after inspecting them.

1.53 E VS2 66.3% 58% EX VG N 7.70-5.58x3.7 1.38 Crown Height 15.7%
1.71 F VS2 65.7% 64% VG VG F 8.28-5.80x3.81 1.43 Crown Height 11.7%

The 1.53 E looked really good, but had an imperfection under the table. While the 1.71 F didn''t reflect light very well. It seems you aren''t able to see the steps in the 1.53 E towards the center as it is all white. Whereas with the 1.71 F, you are able to make out each step because of the poor light reflection?
Heres the top down view of the two.

 

[Hest88]

Yeah, the one on the left is yucky.

 

[Po10472]

just doing my nosey........any mention of EC''s and I''m there.

What kind of setting are you thinking about?

 

[Gypsy]

Was it a visible inclusion on the 1.53 ? Cause that'' the one I was rooting for. How visible?

You know, I just saw Asscher Girl''s SI asscher, and on the hand and even really close up, if it weren''t for her showing us the location, I wouldn''t have seen it. Face down... it was completely visible. But it was a beautiful stone. I would have taken it inclusion and all.

Given Mark''s customer service and return policy, I would honestly buy it and see the inclusion for myself. It looks beautiful from all the pics. It may not even be visible to you.

And a little birthmark is a good thing when it comes to stone IDing, in my opinion.

 

[gemhunter917]

The comment on it was

"crystal inclusion too noticeable in center of stone under table"

so it made it seem pretty blatant.

Po10472....the setting is another wonderful issue to deal with

I''ve been wondering which would look better for smaller hands(ring size 3.5-4) : a very thin pave setting or the simple solitaire/side baguette setting for smaller hands.

 

[gemhunter917]

I widened my search parameters to include G colors and found this one.

1.77 G VS2 GIA STK N Polish:EX Symmetry:VG N Depth:63.1 Table:62 8.30x5.96x3.76 1.39:1

It seems good from the specs and picture though I do worry about the inclusion. Any thoughts before I ask for it to be brought in for more analysis?