Got reports for both stone, which one would you choose?

[Kissmark]

Stone 1 (was posted earlier)

SHAPE: ROUND
CUT: BRILLIANT
MEASUREMENTS: 6.70 - 6.74 x 4.18 mm

CARAT WEIGHT: 1.16 CARATS
COLOR GRADE: F
FLUORESCENCE: NONE

CUT: EXCELLENT
SYMMETRY: EXCELLENT
POLISH: EXCELLENT
CLARITY GRADE: VS1


ENHANCEMENTS (BESIDES CUT/POLISHING): NONE
TOTAL DEPTH PERCENTAGE: 62.2%
GIRDLE THICKNESS: MEDIUM TO SLIGHTLY THICK
TABLE SIZE PERCENTAGE: 55%
GIRDLE FINISH: FACETED
CROWN ANGLE: 35.5‹
CULET: NONE
PAVILION DEPTH PERCENTAGE: 43.0%

I tried to use the Cut Adviser for the first time, and it came out to be
Factor Grade
Light Return Very Good
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Very Good
Spread or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 1.9 - Excellent
within TIC range


Stone 2
SHAPE: ROUND
CUT: BRILLIANT
MEASUREMENTS: 6.88 - 6.92 x 4.25 mm
CARAT WEIGHT: 1.26 CARATS
COLOR GRADE: F
FLUORESCENCE: NONE

CUT: EXCELLENT
SYMMETRY: EXCELLENT
POLISH: EXCELLENT
CLARITY GRADE: VS1

ENHANCEMENTS (BESIDES CUT/POLISHING): NONE
TOTAL DEPTH PERCENTAGE: 61.6%
GIRDLE THICKNESS: MEDIUM TO SLIGHTLY THICK
TABLE SIZE PERCENTAGE: 60%
GIRDLE FINISH: FACETED
CROWN ANGLE: 35.5‹
CULET: NONE
PAVILION DEPTH PERCENTAGE: 43.5%

From the Cut Advisor
Factor Grade
Light Return Good
Fire Good
Scintillation Good
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 4.7 - Good - Only if price is your main criterion

I''m not sure why the 2nd one got such a low score from Cut Advisor. The 2nd one is $2,500 more than the first. Which one would you choose? Thank you so much!! I got both on hold until Friday.

 

[strmrdr]

Do you have the pavilion angles?

 

[Kissmark]

No I was only given the depth, not angles

 

[UCLABelle]

Who are the graders of the stones?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Number 1 would be my choice with the information that was presented. Are they from two different vendors? That is the only way I can explain the price difference.

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Date: 7/4/2007 10:31:22 AM
Author: UCLABelle
Who are the graders of the stones?

This question also popped up with me. Which lab nowadays gives a crown angle and a pavilion depth? I know it is not AGS, GIA or HRD. So, which lab are we talking about?

Live long,

 

[whatmeworry]

Kissmark is looking at Tiffany. This is the style of their reports. crown angle plus pavillion depth%

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

come on Mr. Antwerp, keep up with current events

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

Oh, and I don't believe I am qualified to answer at this point. It looks to me like the obvious answer is stone 1, however, I think you need to do some fairly extensive research on crown angles and Tiffany pavilion depth rounding procedurse.

Also, while I am not 100% sure about this you might want to then observe some diamonds with differing crown depths. I suppose stone 2 must have much less crown depth (given that it has greater pavilion depth, less total depth and the same girdle) which should impact the performance of the diamond as well I believe, even though the crown angles are the same?

I am not knowledgeable enough at the moment to really say anything about these particular details, except that there is a good deal left for you to learn/observe before committing to a big Tiffany purchase! Also, they should have star and LGF numbers listed, put those out along with prices man! just for informational purposes if nothing else, though I know you don't want us making our decision based on price if you aren't planning to purchase in Tokyo.

 

[Kissmark]

Hi both stones are from Tiffany''s, so the reports are from the Tiffany Gemological Laoboratory Report. There are no "star and LGF numbers" (not sure what they are but I''ve put on here all the information that I was given).

The price for the 1.16 carat is 16K before tax, and the price for the 1.26 carat is 18.5K before tax.

Is there one that is obviously better than the other? or are the two pretty similar? Thank you for all of your help.

 

[whatmeworry]

One (the first one) looks better by the numbers than the other, but if you get a chance to see them both in person why not pick the one that makes you happy? If they both look similar to you, then pick the cheaper one.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Number 1 is clearly better as reflected by the HCA scores.

 

[Kissmark]

I didn''t want to rely too much on the Cut Adviser score because i ony have the pavillion depth not angle, and I just learned that the angle could change the score significantly. but anyway seems that stone 1 is a better choice for me....although I was hoping stone 2 is better so I can get the bigger one!

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

Date: 7/4/2007 11:30:18 PM
Author: Kissmark
I didn't want to rely too much on the Cut Adviser score because i ony have the pavillion depth not angle, and I just learned that the angle could change the score significantly. but anyway seems that stone 1 is a better choice for me....although I was hoping stone 2 is better so I can get the bigger one!

I am sorry, I am SO confused. I thought you said that you are in tokyo looking at diamonds, but you will buy it in America? so are these diamonds in America and you called a Tiffany's in the USA to find it? or are they in Japan and the price you have listed is the converted US dollar price, and you have decided to buy in Japan after all?

And either way you should get to actually look at it. I would think perhaps it is possible that Tiffany's is trying to reduce white light return so as to make the fire more evident, and through their research these numbers give what they believe to be the best performance of visible fire, scint, and still adequate brightness.

That is not necessarily true, just an initial thought, but if you are buying at Tiffanys then look at them and decide for yourself, as suggested above. The only problem with that would be that Tif. lighting would really make each of them really put on a light display, but perhaps you can pick a favorite anyway.

Also, I know for a fact they have star and LGF numbers so I am wondering if it is possible that they can get you all the angles as well. It might be useful to call someone higher up than your sales rep and ask how they got the crown angle--if it was measured directly then surely their machines measured the pavilion angle as well. But if it was calculated based on depth percentages then I suppose they don't have it.

 

[Kissmark]

Date: 7/5/2007 12:16:20 AM
Author: WorkingHardforSmallRewards


I am sorry, I am so confused. I thought you said that you are in tokyo looking at diamonds, but you will buy it in America? so are these diamonds in America and you called a Tiffany''s to find it? or are they in Japan and the price you have listed is the converted US dollar price, and you have decided to buy in Japan after all?

These stones are from America. I have been communicating with a salesperson in the states, and she picked these out for me. the prices are US prices. I will pay a deposite to hold them and pick them up when I go home next month. Therefore I haven''t seen them yet. I don''t intend to purchase from Japan so I didn''t pick out any stones here.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

oh well I say just hold out man. I know it is exciting to make the purchase now, but neither of them is REALLY sweeping you off your feet based on the numbers alone, so couldn't you wait a couple more weeks.

Then in about 2 or 3 weeks from now you could call up and see what they have. Get all your numbers then and tell them which ones you want to look at. Then it is only 1 week later and you can arrive and evaluate your final selection that you have weeded out based on numbers.

If there was one in stock that was REALLY doing it for you, then that would make sense. But right now there is NO reason to think that the quality of diamonds to select from in 3-4 weeks will be any less than what is available now. I think it could probably only get better.


Is there any particular reason why you have to commit to one of these before seeing them, rather than waiting and finalizing it in 1month?

Also, what would these equivalent diamonds cost in a Japanese Tiffany store! come on man, I am interested!