HCA question

[DJayNYC]

I have a question that I am sure has been answered before, but want to verify.

The diamond I had recently posted about on this forum was issued with a GIA cert. I then brought the stone to the IGI lab in NY for a confirmation of the GIA numbers and an appraisal. I was told that the GIA cert perfectly matched the stone. The table on the cert is 57% and the depth is 61.7%. However, the sarin report issued with my stone says the table is 57.4% and depth is 61.4%

Are these variations acceptable? I recall in the past that CutNut has said that GIA uses a sarin to obtain its results. Do the machines always produce such a discrepency? I am very pleased with the stone and everyone who sees it says it has the most "sparkle" they have ever seen (these are all amateurs, like me, however), which makes me happy with my purchase.

I just want to make sure that I use the right info for the HCA.

 

[pricescope]

GIA rounds the table size. 57% or 57.4% is not a problem.

Sarin readings have certain errors as any other physical measurements. I.e. you'll get slightly different results on different machines or even from one measurement to another.

This is perfectly normal.

 

[DJayNYC]

Thanks for the response...

I was able to track some old topics on here that seemed to address the issue. I was still unclear slightly on the fact that by using angles (which I know are the preferred measure), I end up with a 1.7 rating w/ ex, vg, vg, vg. But if I use the %, I get a 0.8 w/ ex, ex, ex, vg. Do the angles usually cause the readings to be that different? Either way, I am pleased with the naked eye appearnace, just curious.

Jay