Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

GIA 0.9, F, VS2, 3EX Diamonds - need advice

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
W

w3ss

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
61
Found this site a few days ago and have read alot.

I want to get a GIA 0.9, F, VS2, 3EX diamond but willing to comprimise a little if the price is right. I''m working with Kate@WF and here are some choices so far. She''s also getting me some SI1s.

#1 - .90 F VS2 - this one in my opinion would be a better option than the above. $4,450.00.

Report Check for GIA Report Number: 2106138690
Report Type: GIA Diamond Dossier®
Date of Issue: October 10, 2008
Laser Inscription Registry: GIA 2106138690
Round Brilliant
Measurements: 6.11 - 6.15 x 3.81 mm
Carat Weight: 0.90 carat
Color Grade: F
Clarity Grade: VS2
Cut Grade: Very Good
Proportions:
Depth: 62.1%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 35.0°
Crown Height: 15.5%
Pavilion Angle: 40.0°
Pavilion Depth: 42.0%
Star length: 50%
Lower Half: 80%
Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick, Faceted
Culet: None
Finish:
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Clarity Characteristics: Cloud

#2 - Round 0.91 F VS2 EX Cut GIA EX EX N 61.9% 56% 6.20-6.23x3.85 - $5,385.00

Report Check for GIA Report Number: 17341348

Report Type: GIA Diamond Dossier®
Date of Issue: June 12, 2008
Laser Inscription Registry: GIA 17341348
Round Brilliant
Measurements: 6.20 - 6.23 x 3.85 mm
Carat Weight: 0.91
Color Grade: F
Clarity Grade: VS2
Cut Grade: Excellent
Proportions:
Depth: 61.9 %
Table: 56 %
Crown Angle: 34°
Crown Height: 15 %
Pavilion Angle: 41°
Pavilion Depth: 43 %
Star length: 50 %
Lower Half: 75 %
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted
Culet: None
Finish:
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Clarity Characteristics: Cloud, Feather


Any thoughts?
 
Welcome to Pricescope
35.gif


The second one looks very promising, that would be my pick, do you have an Idealscope image for it?
 
same, stone 2.
 
Definitely not the 0.92c F SI1. Too deep, you can spot the leakage from the IS/ASET.

The 1.0c F SI1 is a FIC, this stone will show more fire but less brilliance, also it is deeper, so face up will look smaller than an ideal cut.

VG in polish/symm probably will not affect performance unless you are looking for those arrows patterns, if not, they are a good deal as they will be cheaper than those stone with Ex grade.
 
Date: 11/19/2008 3:31:46 AM
Author: Lorelei


Date: 11/18/2008 6:59:22 PM
Author: w3ss
This one did much better on the cut advisor:

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-680233.htm
Click to expand...
I would stick with the original second stone.
Click to expand...



What about #3:
1.01 ct G SI1 Round Ideal Cut
Report: GIA
. Shape: Round Ideal Cut
. Carat: 1.01
. Depth %: 60.2
. Table %: 58
. Crown Angle: 33.5
. Crown %: 14
. Star : 55
. Pavilion Angle: 40.6
. Pavilion %: 42.5
. Lower Girdle %: 80
. Girdle: Thin to Slightly Thick
. Measurements: 6.47-6.53X3.91
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: Pointed
. Fluorescence: None

Should I even consider G color? Its a bigger stone then #2 and around the same price

 
Date: 11/19/2008 10:11:42 AM
Author: w3ss

Date: 11/19/2008 3:31:46 AM
Author: Lorelei



Date: 11/18/2008 6:59:22 PM
Author: w3ss
This one did much better on the cut advisor:

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-680233.htm
Click to expand...
I would stick with the original second stone.
Click to expand...




What about #3:
1.01 ct G SI1 Round Ideal Cut
Report: GIA
. Shape: Round Ideal Cut
. Carat: 1.01
. Depth %: 60.2
. Table %: 58
. Crown Angle: 33.5
. Crown %: 14
. Star : 55
. Pavilion Angle: 40.6
. Pavilion %: 42.5
. Lower Girdle %: 80
. Girdle: Thin to Slightly Thick
. Measurements: 6.47-6.53X3.91
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: Pointed
. Fluorescence: None


Should I even consider G color? Its a bigger stone then #2 and around the same price

Click to expand...
Do you have an Idealscope image for this one please? Absolutely you can consider G colour, that is a sweet spot for many and can be an excellent choice.
 
Here it is...

1.01 ct G SI1 Round Ideal Cut.JPG
 
Too much black in the IS, avoid it for a ring stone.
 
Thank you! I still prefer the original second diamond. Are you trying to hit the full carat mark preferably? Also do you have the actual pic of the G colour diamond?
 
Date: 11/19/2008 10:32:15 AM
Author: Stone-cold11
Too much black in the IS, avoid it for a ring stone.
Click to expand...
Why please?
 
Black is head shadow reflection, so basically it means at close viewing distances it will look dark as the head is blocking the major source light return from that stone.
 
Date: 11/19/2008 10:50:50 AM
Author: Stone-cold11
Black is head shadow reflection, so basically it means at close viewing distances it will look dark as the head is blocking the major source light return from that stone.
Click to expand...
Indeed but as to its suitability for a ring stone maybe it might be best for Whiteflash to advise accordingly should our poster be seriously considering it according to his priorities.
 
Date: 11/19/2008 10:33:04 AM
Author: Lorelei
Thank you! I still prefer the original second diamond. Are you trying to hit the full carat mark preferably? Also do you have the actual pic of the G colour diamond?
Click to expand...
I dont necessarily have to hit the full carat mark. I''m happy with 0.9.

1.01 ct G SI1 Round Ideal Cut Dia.JPG
 
From this magnified pic, you can see a lot of black.

Up to you, I am only voicing my opinion.
 
Date: 11/19/2008 11:01:39 AM
Author: w3ss


Date: 11/19/2008 10:33:04 AM
Author: Lorelei
Thank you! I still prefer the original second diamond. Are you trying to hit the full carat mark preferably? Also do you have the actual pic of the G colour diamond?
Click to expand...
I dont necessarily have to hit the full carat mark. I'm happy with 0.9.
Click to expand...
Then I would consider the original second stone in that case.
 
I appreciate all opinions
1.gif


Trying to find a 0.9 carat with a 5K budget. I think original stone #2 is the best I have found so far. I'm still waiting for the IS and pics from WF.
 
I think I prefer the 0.808ct stone, just my preference.
 
Date: 11/19/2008 12:07:08 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
I think I prefer the 0.808ct stone, just my preference.
Click to expand...
Can I ask why this is your preference?

I wonder how a .8 well cut compares to an average 1 ct
 
What about this stone?
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/5133/

Im really liking the WF ''Sleek Line Pave'' Diamond Engagement Ring setting though. Would I be able to ship a stone to WF and get them to set it? Anyone know the cost to set if I dont buy the stone from them?
 
Date: 11/20/2008 12:18:26 AM
Author: w3ss
What about this stone?
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/5133/

Im really liking the WF 'Sleek Line Pave' Diamond Engagement Ring setting though. Would I be able to ship a stone to WF and get them to set it? Anyone know the cost to set if I dont buy the stone from them?
Click to expand...
This is a beautiful diamond. What you would need to do is discuss the setting procedure with GOG and WF and concerning what would happen if in the very rare instance - the diamond was damaged during setting. If you buy the diamond and setting and have it done from the same vendor then they will usually take liability should anything go wrong, however you would need to check in this case as to what the situation is.
 
The GOG round you should call up Jon to check on what is the effect of the Medium Yellow Fluor on the stone, which is I suspect the main cause of the low price for this round as a yellow fluor is thought to be able bring down the color of a stone in certain lighting conditions, aka. presence of UV light source. Medium Fluor should not be readily noticable but I never seen a yellow one yet so I cannot guide you there.

As to why I prefer the 0.808ct WF, I just do not like the ring of black around othe center of the 0.837ct stone, looks like head shadow obsuration and it should be undetectable in normal viewing condions. As I say, just my preference. :P More importantly is the eye-cleanliness of both rounds.

As for comparison between a ideal cut lighter stone and average cut heavier stone, look at this tutorial for a graphic example between a 0.65ct normal and 0.5ct ideal cut round.
 
Jon will indeed be able to advise concerning yellow fluorescence in this hand picked stone as this one has come up before. It is also a diamond which is eligible for lifetime upgrade policy so it could be a possible choice.
 
Here''s another...

Shape: Round
Carat weight: 0.88
Cut: Hearts & Arrows Ideal
Color: E
Clarity: SI1
Certificate: AGS

Depth: 61.7%
Table: 54.7%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Neglible
Measurements: 6.12*6.19*3.80

Crown Angle: 34.9°
Crown %: 15.90
pavilion Angle: 40.7°
pavilion %: 42.80
 
Date: 11/20/2008 11:02:55 PM
Author: w3ss
I might try to stick with WF for now...


http://www.whiteflash.com/round/Round-cut-diamond-1313920.htm#


Its an I color... scared that they may appear yellow...
Click to expand...

I have a RB VVS-1, I stone that is not certified (we bought it 25 years ago and didn''t know a lot then). It looks absolutely white facing up and matches my G side stones perfectly in my new setting. We had no idea it was an I color until it was removed from it''s setting to be put into my new ring. We had an insurance appraisal done while the stone was out of it''s setting and found out the color and clarity.

I would think that one of these exceptionally cut stones you are considering would look even whiter than mine does, and I bet face up you would see no difference at all. You could always ask WF or GOG to pull the stone and check the color too.
9.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top