Good price for strong blue fluorescence diamond?

[dalat]

Hello everyone,

I found the diamond below for $3500.00. The jeweler said it is eye clean and does not show fluorescence color in sunlight. Please advice me if this is a good purchase or not:

GIA 3 EX
0.91 ct
Color H
SI2
Fluorescence: Strong BLue
Clarity: feather

table 58%
depth: 62.7%
crowd angle: 35
pavilion angle: 41.2
thin to slightly thick

I am new to this, please be gentle!

Thank you in advance,

Dalat

 

[Niel]

i dont think this stone is the one for you....
if you use this
https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca
you can see it falls outside the range of what you look for in a good diamond. this are the general specs you are looking for


depth - 60 - 62% - although my personal preference is to allow up to 62.4%
table - 54- 57%
crown angle - 34- 35 degrees
pavilion angle - 40.6- 41 degrees
girdle - avoid extremes, look for thin to slightly thick, thin to medium etc
polish and symmetry - very good and above



but ones you find one with those specs or a good HCA scope (under 2) you want to get an Idealscope image, along with a geologists review.

is 3500 your budget from the stone?

 

[Niel]

this would be one i would look into, same price, better cut, still near colorless, seems to be white, better clarity, and the depth would probably make the mm size about the same as the one youre looking at... sure the CTW is smaller, but the face up SIZE wouldnt be much different

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.83-carat-j-color-vvs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-96003

 

[dalat]

THank you for the reply.

$3500 is not my budget for the stone, however, less expensive is better, as we will also have to pay for our own wedding.

I was reading an article from gold old gold that said HCA should not be an end-all determination, and only use it as a guideline to weed out poor performers. It goes further to say something along the line that GIA /AGS ranking are generally better than using just HCA along, and put a few case examples as well.

I thought by being graded as strong blue fluorescence drove the price down significantly while the GIA 3 EX is a better indicator than HCA value.

Dalat

 

[Niel]

its true, like i said, those are general outlines. Can you get an idealscope to prove its good even though the HCA score is bad?

because a good stone can still fall within 2-3, but yours was if i remember 3.8?

If you cant get an idealscope i would look elsewhere

 

[dalat]

I attached the idealscope image provided by the jeweler. Looks like there are some light leakage at the center?

I am not good at looking at these images.

 

[Niel]

is that an ideal scope? It looks like the hearts and arrows viewer.. hmm

 

[dalat]

Here's the diamond image:

 

[dalat]

is that an ideal scope? It looks like the hearts and arrows viewer.. hmm

is it a heart and arrow viewer? I thought maybe the backlight color was blue instead of red? (different version of the idealscope?

Thanks for the help. P.s. is this a good size for .4 total ct weight pear shape side stones ring?

Dalat.

 

[delight]

that's not an idealscope. The h&a viewer is only good for seeing optical symmetry. Idealscope is red and black.

 

[Niel]

as for .4tcw pear sides... i think that sounds nice, Brian Gavin has a handful of three stones with side pears, and I think all of those are .4 TCW.

 

[diamond_concierge]

Generally speaking, strong blue flourescence is not considered a desirable feature in a diamond. It would have a negative impact, albeit small, on the price for the seller. Many people are ambivalent about flourescence, as it is only visible under ultra-violet light. Personally, I love flourescence. I specifically sought out the strong blue flourescence for one diamond in my personal collection because it makes such a sensation on the dance floor! To each their own. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Unlike most people in the jewelry field, I think flourescence is a plus for the optical effect under UV light.

 

[Christina...]

Hi dalat! Can you post a link to the GIA report? You are correct that the HCA is simply a weeding tool and should not be used as a selection tool. Its also harsh on pavilion angles over 41 which is probably why this one is scoring poorly. GIA also averages and rounds their proportions making it more difficult to predict likely performance. When purchasing site unseen I think its very important to work with a vendor who can provide idealscope images of the stone. Idealscope images are a much better indicator of performance. Also it appears that the actual photo of the diamond was taken under direct lighting, is it possible to request another in a more natural lighting environment?

 

[dalat]

Here's the link:

GIA number: 1149934661


http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=1149934661&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547