EGL for EC== Please advise :D

[westjenn]

I'm attaching the GIA report for an EC ring I've been considering purchasing. Please give me your thoughts on it.

 

[westjenn]

Re: GIA for EC== Please advise

I just plugged the measurements into a calculator and it says it's too deep. I'm not sure what that means. I have pictures of the actual ring and can post it if helpful.

 

[chrono]

Re: GIA for EC== Please advise

71% depth is a little deep but not the end of the world.
67% is a little large but not the end of the world.
My biggest concern is the EGL lab report. Although EGL USA is the least inaccurate lab of all the EGL divisions, I would stick with GIA for now.

 

[westjenn]

Re: GIA for EC== Please advise

Ahhhh- I assumed it was GIA! I was too quick to type & didn't read it fully! So EGL... hmm... I'm attaching pix of the ring as well. I prefer a more elongated shape of EC but for the price and the vintage-ness of the setting I'm considering going for it.

 

[chrono]

Re: GIA for EC== Please advise

There is a pronounced black rectangle surrounding the table area. Are you all right with that?

 

[westjenn]

I honestly didn't notice that What causes that?? Also- is this a natural occurrence in some ECs? Also- wouldn't this make the clarity to be less than VS2? Or is this not a clarity issue? I obviously need to research my ECs more carefully It's kind of a daunting task though it seems. I seem to just find these vintage rings and fall in love :/

 

[chrono]

The cause is the cut quality. It is not a well cut EC.

 

[westjenn]

Back to the drawing board! Thanks so much Chrono!! There were a few more vintage ECs that I was considering, I'll be back to share after I do a little more research.

 

[Matthews1127]

https://www.petragems.com/blog/emerald-cut-diamonds-assessment-chart-guide-indepth-information/
This should help with "depth" concerns. The l x w ratio, alone had me worried...but the photo was blurry, so I may have just mis-read the info. According to what I could make out, the l x w ratio gave it a low ratio for a true, rectangular EC, which is what you said you were looking for. You want to look for a l x w ratio of 1.40-1.60:1 for a rectangular EC. It actually adds value to the stone; they are not very easy to find...and becoming more and more rare, from what I've read. People have decided to go with "fatter", more square EC's for the "larger" appearance for hand coverage...instead of going for the more elongated, rectangular EC's. I am of the opinion that if I want a square, step-cut diamond, I'm going for a Royal Asscher with true 1.00:1 l x w ratio, and full windmill action from center to corner.
I'm relieved you passed on the above Diamond, only because, as was pointed out, previously, you were losing serious light in the center of the stone. If it had been cut better, and hadn't been so dark around the "box" in the center, it would have been a very nice diamond...if you want a more square l x w ratio. It certainly was clear; VS1 clarity is very good for an EC!
I know you're disappointed, but the right one is out there (if you haven't found it, already)! Keep looking!!

 

[Rockdiamond]

From my perspective, the EGL report is most telling.
If it's a "professional" seller- as opposed to craigs list type of thing- they should be letting you know that EGL reports are widely viewed as inaccurate, by the trade, and educated consumers. If you bought the diamond and ever needed to sell that diamond, you'd learn this fact immediately.
EGL has give H color to stones that GIA subsequently graded M color ( I've seen that)
IMO, the first thing you want to consider, before the specifics of the diamond, are things like seller reputation.
Once you make sure you have a good seller, you need to pick a diamond!
The seasoned vets here are going to ask for ASET, and pics and videos.
You're in good hands with our regulars here.
Choose what you love. Have fun- it's exciting- I love emerald cuts too!

 

[MollyMalone]

Dunno why this nearly 2 year-old thread got resurrected today, but let me take this opportunity to remind folks that GIA does not grade mounted diamonds. So it's not unusual for reputable, and yes, professional, purveyors of antique-vintage jewelry -- as the ring in the OP appears to be -- to refrain from dismantling a ring or other piece in order to get a GIA report & instead, submit the ring to EGL-USA (now that AGS is willing to issue basic reports on mounted diamonds, I've seen a sprinkling of those, but fyi AGS doesn't grade the cut of a mounted diamond). If there is a lab report; much antique-vintage jewelry is sold without one. Examples from known (in a good way) antique-vintage jewelry dealers:
https://www.langantiques.com/vintag...t-rings/2-60-carat-art-deco-diamond-ring.html -- no report
http://www.trumpetandhorn.com/newport.html -- EGL USA
https://www.doyledoyle.com/shop/rings/105876r.html -- no report
https://www.georgianjewelry.com/items/show/17685-petal-pleasure-vintage-diamond-ring -- no report
http://www.jewelsbygrace.com/3-45ct-edwardian-old-european-cut-diamond-bezel-ring -- no lab report, but Qualitative Pre-Sale Report from PS Trade Member David Atlas is posted
http://www.loveaffairdiamonds.com/vintage-1-20ct-est-old-european-cut-diamond-bezel-ring-m-n-si2/ -- no report

So long as the vendor has a no-questions-asked refund policy & the return period is long enough to permit you to have a vintage or antique ring evaluated by an independent appraiser (or the vendor is willing to extend their usual return policy to permit you to do this), I don't consider the absence of a GIA report to be a deal breaker (altho' international customers probably wouldn't want to wrangle with the angst & expense of shipping a ring back to the States).

When it comes to vintage-antique jewelry pieces, ruling out all those that don't have a GIA report is needlessly limiting imo, can prove to be an example of "cutting of your nose to spite your face" since you may never again see another (with or without a GIA/AGS report) like the one that's captured your heart.

 

[sachiemay]

I'm so glad to see this post. I too have been looking at an EC with an EGL of J VS1. The rest of the specs are good but I've asked for a photo. I've shyed away from EGL and would only run GIA searches, but this diamond meets all of my criteria on paper so I didn't want to discount it. It's also slightly less than my budget. But reading they graded an M as an H? OUCH! I feel awful for the person who paid for it! Would it be worth to pay for a GIA cert? The company has a good return policy and I considered buying the diamond, sending it to GIA, and if it's not up to par, returning it. Is there a better way?

 

[sachiemay]

@westjenn, that is still a very pretty ring.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi Molly
You seem to be addressing my comment....
We agree that many lovely pieces offered by many outstanding sellers won't have a GIA report. Especially vintage diamonds in vintage pieces.
But the specifics here are totally different.
1) the stone in this thread was graded loose- it was also not a vintage stone.
2) offering a stone or piece sans a lab report is an entirely different scenario than offering a stone "Certified by EGL" One seller you linked to used that phrase, which is deceptive in itself. I didn't notice any other information about EGL and its implications. I honestly feel that's misleading. No question that EGL USA is the best of the EGL's - but that still does not change the fact that a dealer will immediately discount a stone graded H by EGL USA far more that they would if it's GIA. The EGL grades are simply not dependable.
Of course it's better for sellers if buyers are not educated about these implications.
Given the widespread confusion about "certified" diamond's in the general population and the profusion of sellers trying to take advance of it, I think it serves readers to be crystal clear about it.
But I do agree that sellers of vintage and new jewelry face different considerations.

 

[westjenn]

@sachiemay I liked it too! I could look at ECs for hours on end

 

[westjenn]

I just wanted to add after seeing Molly's post this morning: I guess I don't mind when old threads are resurrected- The conversation can still be valuable and helpful to some even 2 years later.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I'm so glad to see this post. I too have been looking at an EC with an EGL of J VS1. The rest of the specs are good but I've asked for a photo. I've shyed away from EGL and would only run GIA searches, but this diamond meets all of my criteria on paper so I didn't want to discount it. It's also slightly less than my budget. But reading they graded an M as an H? OUCH! I feel awful for the person who paid for it! Would it be worth to pay for a GIA cert? The company has a good return policy and I considered buying the diamond, sending it to GIA, and if it's not up to par, returning it. Is there a better way?

Yes this is a good subject to resurrect even if it is two years old.
After having seen this scenario countless times- the seller is aware that the EGL report is inaccurate. If the seller believed the stone actually was a J color, they would submit it themselves, and increase the price.
My own personal take is that such behavior belies people's trust.
I also felt terrible for the person who had paid for an H color when it turned out they actually had an M color. They learned this when trying to sell the stone to us. We insisted on submitting the stone to GIA before we took it in as a trade. That's why I'm vigilant in posting this info as often as needed so that folks don't get ripped off.