Emerald Pictures..... your thoughts?

[Defender]

Without offering exact stats, I am curious of any thoughts on a comparision of these two emeralds from the limited view that these pictures might offer. If I give the grading info and measurements it may influence the response, so I am just going to post these pictures for starters

I know that pictures may not convey the full story, but I thought I would see if anything sticks out on either of these when looking at these pictures. Both are in the 2.7 carat range.

By the way, both are VS1, so the imperfections and blemishes are mostly dust and dirt, so try to ignore the dirt.

stone #1 close up

stone #2 close up

 

[klavigne]

Stone 1 seems to have a rather large culet

 

[Defender]

Neither has a culet (as per reports)

 

[f0rbidden]

could be the photo''s, or the lighting, but #2 looks like it has less color to it than does #1 - again, this could be the pix.

 

[AmberWaves]

I am in no way an expert, or even a novice, but to me, the second one is whiter, and I like the setps on it better. It is also bigger to the eye. The corners on the second one also seem sharper, number one looks rounded a bit. Again, IMO

 

[E B]

I like #2 the best, just by looks alone (as I know nothing about Emeralds).

 

[Stephan]

Number 1 looks to deep and you can see a black inclusion in the middle of the table.

 

[sanfranciscoellen]

My untrained eye definitely likes #2 better

 

[Kaleigh]

#2 gets my vote. The other does look like it''s on the deep side and I like the shape of #2 better. The step cut also looks more apparent in #2, but take that with a grain of salt as I know next to nothing about EC''s. Good luck!!

 

[AChiOAlumna]

I like #2 better...the steps and table seem to be more conducive for a nicer cut.

 

[Defender]

Here is one more of both stones. The speckles and blemishes are mostly dust and dirt

 

[KittenKat]

Number 2 looks better to me, as well. It looks like it will be more brilliant.

 

[jaz464]

Don't know if it's just the pictures, but both seem to have great big bowties

And I guess I'm the only one who thinks #1 looks whiter.

 

[Ann]

I like the larger one.

 

[valeria101]

A quick note... and smaller picture.

 

[valeria101]

Wrote this long post and the computer decided to get it lost

Anyway, the short of it would be;


#1. relatively shallow cut with large table, less 'glitter'(contrast or scintillation). I would expect a slightly 'flat' stone, although not lacking brightness... If it was under 1 carat these would have been good news, near 3cts not quite. Imagining an IS image: red over the middle, with quite a bit of leakage on the corners and crown.

#2, relatively deep cut, with a smaller table. Better glitter than the other - perhaps a more lively diamond. It is not my fave species unless a very high crown cures the extinction (that darkness under the table apparent in the pictures). It may have a high crown as is (10%.. or so), but it may take another 10% to compensate and that just doesn't happen. And this is one reason why deep cut EC are not my favorites. Imagining an IS image with less leakage that the other, but allot of black under the table.

I tend to prefer the longer shape of #2, regardless of other specs.


Between these I might choose #2, but not with a light heart

If I could wave a magic wand, I'd take the crown of #2 and marry it to the pavilion of #1 somehow (shallower depth, higher crown & smaller table).






PS: did I get the numbers right? Anyway, 1 and 2 in there two posts refer to the numbers noted on my picture.

 

[strmrdr]

#2 in a heartbeat over #1

 

[Defender]

Well, here is some more info, which just confirms that just about everyone''s thoughts validate the facts.

Number 2 is a 1:36 ratio GIA VS1 I with 67% depth and 60% table crown ht 13.5% pavilion angle 40 degrees

Number 1 is an EGL 1: 45 ratio VS1 H with 72% depth and 60% table crown ht 16.6% pavilion angle 47 degrees.

These are both in the 2.6 to 2.7 carat range with selling prices in the 16-18k range.

One common assumption about certs was proven true , the EGL H is more yellow that a GIA I

Yes, I like number two the best...However, my only concern is that we prefer a ratio of 1:45 to 1:5 over this 1:36 ratio. tough call for us

 

[valeria101]

That should teach me to guesstimate stuff from pictures again...

Any chance you might be considering a different diamond that might just have all the details in place?



I am surprised by the noted difference of color too... was it some other branch of EGL than the US one?

 

[Defender]

The EGL is an overseas cert, so that is not such a surprise. However, I had hopes that it might have been only one grade off, rather than two.

I liked stone two, but decided that a longer l/w ratio would suit us better.