Good proportions or not?

[ilovediamonds2]

Can someone help me decide if this stone has good proportions? It isn''t ideal or H&A but is very pretty. Here are the specs from the cert:

1.76 H SI1 round brilliant
Diameter 7.56x4.85
Crown angle 34.6
Pavillion angle 40.9
Cutlet .3
med to slightly thick girdle
Table 55.6
Depth 64.2
Symmetry Excellent
Polish Very Good
Florescence Medium

The price is $14,500

 

[JulieN]

which lab?

 

[Carlotta]

That''s a very deep stone, so it will appear smaller than other stones it''s size...
whiteflash has a 1.76 that it not as deep, and it measures 7.82-7.86

 

[JulieN]

It''s just too small for it''s weight and overpriced.

Medium what flouresence?

 

[ilovediamonds2]

IGI

 

[ilovediamonds2]

I don''t recall what flouresence - only that it said medium. Is it true that the depth just makes this particular stones spread not as good but it can still be a very nice diamond?? I an new at this....

 

[Carlotta]

Date: 7/27/2006 10:56:44 PM
Author: Carlotta
That''s a very deep stone, so it will appear smaller than other stones it''s size...
whiteflash has a 1.76 that it not as deep, and it measures 7.82-7.86

I meant "smaller than other stones it''s weight".
Interesting.....

It gets 1.9 on HCA.....(with 2 excellents, a very good, but only Good for spread (because of depth))....

 

[ilovediamonds2]

I think I understand. If I could get it for less that this do you think it would be a good way to go? Can you give me the link to the one at Whiteflash that you mentioned?

JulieN - How overpriced do you think it is?

 

[JulieN]

I brought it down to an I SI1 to account for the IGI report. (IGI stones are priced less, even if they are accurate.) And I brought the carat weight down to 1.60-1.65 to give it the same spread. I'm seeing lots of stones in the 9000 range, so a 50% markup over online prices.

 

[ilovediamonds2]

Ouch!

I understand the spread factor.

Can you explain what you mean by the IGI pricing and accuracy? Do they measure accurately? How do they compare to EGL? I saw alot of EGL certs on the whiteflash website.

 

[JulieN]

IGI and EGL reports are comparable. http://www.abazias.com/database/NewDiamondInfo.asp?stock=30410374&flag=ps 1.64 H SI1 EGL, under 9K.

The 1.76 is a huge ripoff.

 

[JulieN]

In this thread, you said the stone cost 9.5K https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/help-me-choose.48469/

This is the 1.76 that Carlotta mentioned http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/round-ideal-cut-cut-diamond-2408708.htm

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 7/27/2006 10:44:38 PM
Author:ilovediamonds2
Can someone help me decide if this stone has good proportions? It isn''t ideal or H&A but is very pretty. Here are the specs from the cert:

1.76 H SI1 round brilliant
Diameter 7.56x4.85
Crown angle 34.6
Pavillion angle 40.9
Cutlet .3
med to slightly thick girdle
Table 55.6
Depth 64.2
Symmetry Excellent
Polish Very Good
Florescence Medium

The price is $14,500

The total set of these measurements does not fit.

We can suppose that depth of 64.2 is correct, since it can be checked in the diameter, and there, it also is 64.2%.

Now, either crown and/or pavilion angle are incorrect, or the girdle description is. With the angles mentioned, the girdle would definitely be stated ''Very thick'', so I fear that the angles are just smoke and mirrors. Of course, this is nice in the HCA, and some people might be tricked by this.

Now, I see a lot of people commenting on these proportions, but nobody picks up that the figures are totally bogus. May I ask for some more attention to this?

My advise, please check these figures with the vendor, and if he sticks to the figures mentioned, there is just one solution: RUN.

Live long,

 

[JulieN]

It was noticed. It's just such an obvious "pass" stone.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 7/28/2006 6:36:32 AM
Author: JulieN
It was noticed. It''s just such an obvious ''pass'' stone.

There is a difference, and a very important difference.

This might be a case of a vendor, totally and intentionally mis-representing a stone. If that is the case, not only the stone should be a pass, but that vendor as such should be a pass.

Now, it could also be a typo, and nothing may be wrong, and the stone might even be fantastic.

Live long,

 

[Regular Guy]

Paul, others,

Not intending to hijack, but...what do you suppose is the reasonable expectation that a non-specified vendor would a) not only know how proportions work together, but b) know when they really don''t compute together, and could read documentation carefully enough to note an irregularity. I am discounting mis-reprentation, here, of reported numbers that are actually, purposely, being mis-read, and reported, which you may not be doing.

 

[oldminer]

In spite of many posts claiming that charts of numbers won''t help in buying a diamond, here is a great thread giving strong evidence that parametric screening of potential purchases is a very good way to eliminate problem diamonds from the short list of which to buy. The stone is too deep for a round diamond although it may be very pretty. You simply can get better combinations of a little less depth and therefore have a larger diameter for the same cost. I suggest to keep looking. Someone without knowledge will buy the one you listed anyway.

 

[Carlotta]

The other thing is that the diameter is listed as one number (probbly the average)....it could also be very out of round!!!

 

[ilovediamonds2]

The diameter is specifically listed as 7.52-7.59 x 4.85. I looked at the certificate and wrote down the numbers exactly as I saw them. The diamond is VERY pretty but I am not a professional so that is why I am here to ask for help. From the reasearch that I did over the past several days it seems as though it can be VERY pretty but the depth eats up the carat weight and I could get a larger diameter with a smaller carat weight and have a gorgeous stone. The stone retails for 14,500 but the vendor says that he isn''t going to charge me that full price. I originally thought it cost 9500 but misunderstood the information. It retails for 14,500 and he is gong to sell it to me for 9800 because I know him somewhat. Still I am not sure. It seemed to have good proportions according to the HCA.

 

[mrssalvo]

I'd pass too. I just wouldn't buy a stone that wasn't certified by AGS or GIA, preferably AGS, but that's me.

ETA: I'd also pass b/c the stone is too deep, i'm about getting the most size for my $$

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 7/28/2006 7:33:11 AM
Author: Regular Guy
Paul, others,

Not intending to hijack, but...what do you suppose is the reasonable expectation that a non-specified vendor would a) not only know how proportions work together, but b) know when they really don''t compute together, and could read documentation carefully enough to note an irregularity. I am discounting mis-reprentation, here, of reported numbers that are actually, purposely, being mis-read, and reported, which you may not be doing.

The possibility exists, that a vendor does not understand proportions, and does not see that they do not fit. And the possibility even exists that it is a typo on the grading report (I have seen it in some cases on GIA-reports).

But is it acceptable that a vendor does not see it?