Experts help me choose one of these 3 diamonds please!

[diamond911]

Help which number combinations are a better cut or overall diamond. I am wavering because I am reading so much on here and I want the better value for money spent. Diamond #3 is $2000 less for some reason... are the #1 and #2 worth $2000 more in your opinion? I don''t mind spending more if they are better so money is not the issue- please give your preference. They are all in the 1.70 Carat ballpark. I am more confused than ever.... what would be your choice?

#1 (H, VS2, No fluor) Diameter 7.79
Table%: 55.3
Depth%: 60.4
CA: 35
CH:15.8%
PA: 40.6
PD: 42.4%
LGF: 75
STAR: 51
GIRDLE: 2.2%
CERT: GIA (ex polish, ex symmetry)
inclusion: feather, needle, cloud, natural indent, clean table


#2 (H, VS2, Negligible fluor) Diameter 7.68
Table%: 56.2
Depth%: 61.8
CA: 35.2
CH:15.5%
PA: 40.6
PD: 42.7%
LGF: 81
STAR: 52
GIRDLE: 1.7-3.8%
CERT: AGS (ideal polish, ideal symmetry)
Inclusion: Indented natural on the girdle, feather near girdle, crystal, clouds are not shown- clean table


#3 (H, eye clean SI1, strong blue fluoresence) DIAMETER 7.62- this one is $2000 less
Table%: 56
Depth%: 62.4
CA: 34.5
CH:15.%
PA: 41
PD: 43.5%
LGF: 75
STAR: 50
GIRDLE: 3.5%
CERT: GIA (ex polish, ex symmetry)
Inclusion: feather, crystal off center, pinpoints are not shown, clean table

 

[Lorelei]

Can you get Idealscope images for these? The third might be fine but an IS image would be useful to check it out properly. Have you checked that the fluorescence isn't making the stone look cloudy? This is rare but always best to check with strong blue.

 

[diamond911]

I have asked for an idealscope for all and they are in progress so I will post it for sure once received. As for #3, a gemologist pulled it and took a look and it is not milky hazy etc... they said that it looks like an "above average" and completely eye clean. What do you think, are any numbers alone a concern or not as strong? Thanks,

 

[diamond911]

Any other opinions on the cuts and numbers, are LGF numbers on one better than the other. Is the third one too deep?

 

[yssie]

Ditto Lorelei - ISs would be the next step in deciding.



No, the third is not too deep. You''ll be sacrificing a little in face-up spread (not enough to be visible), but it won''t affect performance in any way. There is no "better" or "worse" LGF within a certain range..you''re fine.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/14/2010 10:04:10 AM
Author: diamond911
Any other opinions on the cuts and numbers, are LGF numbers on one better than the other. Is the third one too deep?

We need the exact diameter for the third diamond, it is the maximum depth I like to go for that type of diamond. It could possibly benefit from longer LGF''s of around 80% with that angle combo but there is no way to really know how effectively this stone is cut just going by the numbers unfortunately.