GIA EX Cut Diamond with 3.7 HCA Score Is this a good Diamond?

[fashionangel]

Here''s the details.

1.33 Ct, E, VS2
Cut: EX
Symm/Polish: VG
Table:58
Depth:62
Crown:36.5
Pavillion:40.8
Girdle: Medium to Slight Thick (faceted) 3.5%
Star & low half: 50 & 80

I input the data into the HCA cut advisor & the score is 3.7. Is there anything wrong with this diamond? Why does it score low on HCA? Thanks.

 

[kenny]

People keep repeating the mantra, "HCA is a rejection tool."

I think that means reject stones that score over 2 and only further investigate those under 2.

3.7 is over 2.

 

[stone-cold11]

Can you get a better IS? Looks promising from the IS. IS trumps HCA score as a rejection tool, but it is still a rejection tool, there is still no selection tool at present.

The pavilion angle is slightly large for that crown angle, thus the VG HCA score, but looks like it is almost compensated by the large lower half number. The IS has only slight leakage.

One thing to note that for this stone, it will probably have a slightly smaller diameter than the near tolk proportion cut as more weight is present in the crown due to the larger crown angle. For example, an ideally cut 1.33c stone should have a diameter of around 7.1mm

 

[jet2ks]

Ditto Stone Cold

A better IS would tell a lot more.

 

[fashionangel]

is this better? the diameter is 7.00 X 7.10 X 4.37

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 10/14/2009 10:00:36 PM
Author: fashionangel
is this better? the diameter is 7.00 X 7.10 X 4.37

Fashion, others here have more experience than I reading IS''s, but...especially from the point of view that you are looking for the IS to disprove the HCA score, I think you have not succeeded.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The ideal-scope image has been over saturated. If you play in photoshpop you will see a little leakage.
But the stone also has great symmetry and has been painted which effectively lowers some of the crown angles. I also feel the rounding on the data is a bit tough on the stone.
It might be worth looking at, but I suspect that when dirty it would not look as good a slightly shallower stone

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 10/15/2009 4:03:44 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
The ideal-scope image has been over saturated. If you play in photoshpop you will see a little leakage.
But the stone also has great symmetry and has been painted which effectively lowers some of the crown angles. I also feel the rounding on the data is a bit tough on the stone.
It might be worth looking at, but I suspect that when dirty it would not look as good a slightly shallower stone

Ditto Garry, it isn't a bad stone by any stretch of the imagination, in fact for the proportions it looks surprisingly good, yes you could do better but it depends on what you are looking for. Also looking at the LGF which are rounded, I would say those are close to the seventies than the eighties, a longer LGF would be preferable but it seems to work in this stone.

 

[stone-cold11]

Ditto what Garry and Lorelei said.

 

[jet2ks]

Thritto

 

[AshNZ]

Date: 10/15/2009 4:03:44 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
The ideal-scope image has been over saturated. If you play in photoshpop you will see a little leakage.
But the stone also has great symmetry and has been painted which effectively lowers some of the crown angles. I also feel the rounding on the data is a bit tough on the stone.
It might be worth looking at, but I suspect that when dirty it would not look as good a slightly shallower stone

Is over-saturation (ie IS image fiddling) a real problem with online vendors Gary?

Ash