Emerald Cut, 1.72ct, I, VS2

[RaginglySilent]

Hi PSers,

Been lurking for a bit, but this is my first post, so I'm calling on your mercy and assistance.

I'm working with I.D. Jewelry in NYC and so far have had a great experience. What do you all think about this stone?

• Emerald cut 8.26 x 5.66 x 3.87 mm
• 1.72ct
• I
• VS2
• Polish: EX
• Symmetry: VG
• Depth: 68.4%
• Table: 62%
• Girdle: Medium to Thick
• Cutlet: N
• Fluor: N
• L/W: 1.46

I'm not sure how I feel about the inclusion that appears to be right in the center of the face in the zoomed in pic. Are there any major concerns that I should look out for based on these specs and the pics?






Thanks in advance for any/all help!

 

[JulieN]

Not bad.

Ask if the symmetry is uneven to the naked eye.

 

[LLJsmom]

That inclusion is reflecting, unless that isn't an inclusion and just something dirty. I would pass.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I generally only look at VS1 emerald cuts because you can see inclusions more easily in them than brilliant cuts. But I agree with the others that you need to find out if that is the inclusion reflecting. I think light return looks acceptable. I personally do not favor a stone that elongated and prefer ratios under 1.35. But if the you find out that is just a dirty spot reflecting or it is invisible in real life viewing, then it is a stone to consider.

 

[RaginglySilent]

Thank you all for the advice. Upon further inspection of the stone, Yekutiel noticed it wasn't just dirty, but had a sizable inclusion right in the center. So he found me a much nicer diamond. What do you all think about this one?

Emerald cut 8.16 x 5.86 x 3.70 mm
1.7ct
I
VS1
Polish: EX
Symmetry: EX
Depth: 63.1%
Table: 61%
Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick
Cutlet: N
Fluor: N
L/W: 1.38

 

[chrono]

It is a pity the ASET for the new EC isn't as good as the previous EC.