Flourescense, Emerald Cut and more

[kevinraja]

Please note that stone #2 has Med Flourescense. How would medium Flour affect the F-color stone? Also the price per carat for the stone #1 is way too low when compared to other stones. Is this because #1 is below the 1.5carat threshold? Finally, how would rate the stones?

1.46 F VS1 Depth:66.5 Table:61 Girdle:med Cutlet:No Sym:vg Pol:vg Flr:no 8.24*5.29*3.52 $7427+ Area:43.59 LW:1.56

1.52 F VS2 Depth:66.2 Table:68 Gdl:md-stk Cutlet:no Sym:g Pol:vg Flr:mb 8.14*5.54*3.67 $7699+ Area 45.10 LW:1.47

1.52 G VS2 Depth:64.2 Table:63 Gdl:stk-tk Cutlet:No Sym vg Pol:vg Flr:no 7.77*5.75*3.69 $8474+ Area:44.68 LW:1.35

1.51 G VS2 Depth:65.2 Table:63 Girdle:med Cutlet no Sym:g Pol:g Flr:no 7.72*5.75*3.75 $8540+ Area 44.39 LW:1.34

1.52 G VS2 Depth:65.8 Table:67 Gdl:tn-med Cutlet:no Sym:vg Pol:vg Flr:no 8.18*5.50*3.62 $8717+ Area 44.99 LW:1.49

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Please note that stone #2 has Med Flourescense. How would medium Flour affect the F-color stone?

I wouldn't worry about fluorescence adversely affecting the beauty of a stone unless it is "very strong" or greater. Even then, it's often not a problem.

Also the price per carat for the stone #1 is way too low when compared to other stones. Is this because #1 is below the 1.5carat threshold?

Yes. There's a large price jump once you hit the 1.5 carat mark. Sometimes that can make a sub-1.5 carat stone a real bargain.

 

[windowshopper]

the 1.52 G vs2 is the best stone IMO

 

[kevinraja]

Windowshopper, which 1.52 G VS2 are you referring to? There is two of them listed.

 

[kevinraja]

Thanks Richard. You responses to my posts have been very helpfule in shaping my mind.

I was looking at the Emerald Cut chart at PS. For the stone to be Ideal, Premium cuts, the depth should be 60-65%. Does that mean, say, a stone with depth 66-67% might not be good? Are the percentages all good for theory only?

 

[Richard Sherwood]

I was looking at the Emerald Cut chart at PS. For the stone to be Ideal, Premium cuts, the depth should be 60-65%. Does that mean, say, a stone with depth 66-67% might not be good? Are the percentages all good for theory only?

The percentages listed are for a guide only. That''s not to say that a diamond which exceeds the recommended parameters might not be a good looking stone.

I think 66-67% depth would be fine, as long as the other parameters of the stone stayed in friendly territory.

 

[windowshopper]

depth 64.2, table 63--Gdl:stk-tk Cutlet:No Sym vg Pol:vg Flr:no 7.77*5.75*3.69 $8474+ Area:44.68 LW:1.35

best numbers and very nice ration--1:35 is perfect

 

[kevinraja]

Any reason why #2 is cheaper than #3,#4,#5? Even though they all have similar specifications, why is this huge price difference ($800-1000)? Can it be because of the medium blue flourescense?

 

[windowshopper]

yes absolutely a "deduction" however medium blue and less is really a plus for a lower colored stone--makes them look whiter and has no effect on the appearnace of the crystal. there is an old adage something along the lines of... jewelers buy their wives G color stones with FLuorescence becasue the price is lower and you get a much whiter looking stone

 

[kevinraja]

BUMP.