shape
carat
color
clarity

Have all the info & pics....need your advice!!

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

Stone_Seeker1

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
32
Hello out there in diamond world!! I''ve been lurking for a long time and I''ve learned so much from this site!

What I''ve been looking for is around 2.5ct, I color or better, SI2 or better, and ideal cut. I''m not looking for perfection just eye clean from the top and good cut and light return.

I have 2 stones that I would like some opinions on. Both are eye clean from the top

Stone #1
2.53
F
SI2
Excellent Cut
Excellent Symmetry
Excellent Polish
Fluorescence: Strong Blue
Table 56%
Depth 61.6%
Crown Angle 35
Pavillion Angle 40.8
$20,200

idealscope
sarin
40x

Stone #2
2.65
I
SI2
Excellent Cut
Very Good Polish
Very Good Symmetry
Fluorescence: None
Table 56%
Depth 61.2%
Crown Angle 34
Pavillion Angle 40.6
$21,700

idealscope
sarin
40x


Comparison

What do you think? I feel lost and I would appreciate any help that you could give me!

Let me know if I left anything out!
 
Can''t seems to view any of your links.

But from the numbers I would choose stone #1. It is cut into the ideal cut parameters for both AGS and GIA, that is the safest bet. I will comment more if the links work later for me and makes me change my position. :P

Good Luck. :)
 
I think you are linking to pics inside your gmail account which is why it will not work for us.
 
Thanks. Ok...I''ll try to do one at a time

Stone #1 idealscope

2.53 - IS 395091.jpg
 
Stone #2 idealscope

2.65 - IS 50495.jpg
 
Stone #1 sarin

2.53 - sarin 2.53.jpg
 
Stone #2 sarin

2.65 - sarin 2.65.jpg
 
Stone #1 40x

2.53 - 40x smaller.jpg
 
Stone #2 40x

2.65 - 40x smaller.jpg
 
Everything looks ok to me for stone #1. Just check with JA to make sure that the stone does not get hazy, oily in the sun from the strong fluor. Rarely happens but no harm in asking, just to make sure it performs the best.

EDT:
I have a VSB fluor stone and it just turns slight blue in the sun or the presence of UV, clear as any stone.
 
Date: 10/31/2008 12:00:10 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Everything looks ok to me for stone #1. Just check with JA to make sure that the stone does not get hazy, oily in the sun from the strong fluor. Rarely happens but no harm in asking, just to make sure it performs the best.

EDT:
I have a VSB fluor stone and it just turns slight blue in the sun or the presence of UV, clear as any stone.
You mean WF?

I agree, the first one looks good and would be my pick.
 
Weird... I find the stone with that parameter in JA but not WF... The format looks definitely WF though...

EDT:
Maybe WF called it in, looks like a virtual stone though, almost everyone listed it on the price comparison search.
 
Thanks so much Ellen and Stonecold!!
1.gif
You guys are great!

Do you think that #1 is good for the money? I''ve heard you guys recommend to other people that they should keep looking. Do you think I should?
 
Nope, this is about as good a cut as it gets unless you are going for H&A which you said you aren't. :)
 
Date: 10/31/2008 12:16:49 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Weird... I find the stone with that parameter in JA but not WF... The format looks definitely WF though...

EDT:
Maybe WF called it in, looks like a virtual stone though, almost everyone listed it on the price comparison search.
It is, which means they did call it in.



SS, yes, this is a good price for this stone. I say go for it!
2.gif
 
Date: 10/31/2008 12:25:14 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 10/31/2008 12:16:49 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Weird... I find the stone with that parameter in JA but not WF... The format looks definitely WF though...

EDT:
Maybe WF called it in, looks like a virtual stone though, almost everyone listed it on the price comparison search.
It is, which means they did call it in.



SS, yes, this is a good price for this stone. I say go for it!
2.gif
Yep both great stones but I would also pick the first one.
 
I too prefer the looks of number 1, the ideal scope is prettier.
 
Thank you all so much for your replies!

The funny thing is...the people at WF said they preferred #2. They said it''s crown angle will make it appear whiter than it is and even though they''re both eye clean from the top you could see some inclusions on #1 if you got real close. Also, they said that #2 is bigger which is always a good thing.

Maybe I would have to see them in person to decide. It''s all so confusing!!
19.gif
 
Date: 10/31/2008 1:16:54 PM
Author: Stone_Seeker1
Thank you all so much for your replies!

The funny thing is...the people at WF said they preferred #2. They said it's crown angle will make it appear whiter than it is and even though they're both eye clean from the top you could see some inclusions on #1 if you got real close. Also, they said that #2 is bigger which is always a good thing.

Maybe I would have to see them in person to decide. It's all so confusing!!
19.gif
Hmmm. I don't want to argue with them, they have the stones. I could maybe see a bit "brighter", but not whiter. The first is 3 color grades higher, plus the fluorescence. It should definitely look "whiter". And the size difference at this level is not going to be noticeable when set.

Tell ya what, I would ask them to have Brian (head honcho) look at them and give his opinion. And whatever one he suggests, I'd get.
28.gif
 
Date: 10/31/2008 1:24:47 PM
Author: Ellen
Date: 10/31/2008 1:16:54 PM

Author: Stone_Seeker1

Thank you all so much for your replies!

The funny thing is...the people at WF said they preferred #2. They said it''s crown angle will make it appear whiter than it is and even though they''re both eye clean from the top you could see some inclusions on #1 if you got real close. Also, they said that #2 is bigger which is always a good thing.

Maybe I would have to see them in person to decide. It''s all so confusing!!
19.gif
Hmmm. I don''t want to argue with them, they have the stones. I could maybe see a bit ''brighter'', but not whiter. The first is 3 color grades higher, plus the fluorescence. It should definitely look ''whiter''. And the size difference at this level is not going to be noticeable when set.

Tell ya what, I would ask them to have Brian (head honcho) look at them and give his opinion. And whatever one he suggests, I''d get.
28.gif

Agreed.
 
I also prefer #1. Good luck!
36.gif
 
I prefer #1, but if WF says #2 is prettier, they have it in hand and have eyeballed it.

Truthfully for that kind of money, I''d say send them both and you''ll keep the one that you like best. Shipping and insurance is cheap compared to the $20K investment.
 
#1 looks prettier in the pictures but I would trust WF opinion over mine.
2.gif
 
Date: 10/31/2008 2:47:31 PM
Author: purrfectpear
I prefer #1, but if WF says #2 is prettier, they have it in hand and have eyeballed it.

Truthfully for that kind of money, I''d say send them both and you''ll keep the one that you like best. Shipping and insurance is cheap compared to the $20K investment.
Agreed with this, look at them both yourself, or follow Ellen''s advice and have Brian make the decision for you, he is a diamond-nut-expert-extraordinaire.
 
You guys are so great! Thanks so much for all the advice!! I''m gonna take a look at both of them and then decide.

Does anyone know of an independent appraiser in South Carolina or Charlotte, NC?
 
Date: 10/31/2008 2:54:17 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 10/31/2008 2:47:31 PM
Author: purrfectpear
I prefer #1, but if WF says #2 is prettier, they have it in hand and have eyeballed it.

Truthfully for that kind of money, I''d say send them both and you''ll keep the one that you like best. Shipping and insurance is cheap compared to the $20K investment.
Agreed with this, look at them both yourself, or follow Ellen''s advice and have Brian make the decision for you, he is a diamond-nut-expert-extraordinaire.
Thritto that piece of advice!
 
Definitely #1.
 
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
Top