Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Help! Are HCA scores less than 1 bad?

M

mbf365

Rough_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
24
Hi there,

Turning to the PriceScope community that I've heard such awesome things about! My FI and I are comparing diamonds and have done a good amount of research but we are still confused about HCA scores. I've read that anything under 2 is great, but then I've also read that between 1 and 2 is best and anything under 1 is a shallow stone or can have issues.

Is this true? We found (what we think) is a great diamond on Blue Nile but it scores 0.5 on HCA. Here is a link to the diamond:

https://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond...MONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=sameTab

Help!?
 
It's certainly not a bad stone. I'd probably want an ASET image on that one because of the angles. A 34 crown angle goes best with a higher pavilion angle of around 40.9. A higher crown angle of closer to 35 will do better with a 40.6 pavilion angle. So this one is within the good parameters, it's just not the best angle combination. The actual stone video looks good, though. I hope you are also looking at VS1 stones as they are extremely clean if you like higher clarity and it would give you more stones to choose from.
 
diamondseeker2006 said:
It's certainly not a bad stone. I'd probably want an ASET image on that one because of the angles. A 34 crown angle goes best with a higher pavilion angle of around 40.9. A higher crown angle of closer to 35 will do better with a 40.6 pavilion angle. So this one is within the good parameters, it's just not the best angle combination. The actual stone video looks good, though. I hope you are also looking at VS1 stones as they are extremely clean if you like higher clarity and it would give you more stones to choose from.
Click to expand...

Oh wow, you are so knowledgeable about this! Thank you!

And yes, we are looking at VS1 stones and even VS2.

This is another VVS2 that we're looking at: https://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond...MONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=sameTab

Unfortunately there is no video of this stone right now but on paper it looks great and scores 1.8 on HCA. My fiance's only concern was the 55% table. He read that it's a good idea to get a slightly bigger table than that so that the stone looks bigger. Not sure if there is truth to that or not so it's not a major concern.
 
Noooo, the size of the table has nothing to do with the diameter of the stone! It's just the flat part on top of the diamond at the top of the crown. I love a 55 table. I dislike large ones! You use the diameter measurements to compare face up size.

Now I'll go look at that stone!

This one has pretty good numbers. I'll take a quick look and see if I see anything I like better. Is G color your preference?
 
Ahh! Thank you so much :)

I do like G or higher, however, if there was the perfect stone that was an H I would consider it too. Just nothing lower than that.

You're the best!
 
Most of their best cut stones are in the Astor Ideal section which costs a little more. I couldn't find any that were better than the two you chose in the ideal category.

(Links removed to stones out of budget because they weren't working anyway.)
 
Last edited:
Those Astors are beautiful but outside our budget unfortunately :(
I'm not sure about fluorescence as I have heard it can actually help some diamonds look whiter. However, it's so hard to know for sure without seeing it in person. So I guess it would be safer to go with no fluorescence.
 
I don't know why BN links don't work when they paste them!!! I linked the main stone pages and not the grading reports.

That H has the numbers I most desire when looking for stones for myself. I actually love fluorescence as do many here. I had a fluorescent stone once and bought a UV light so I could see it! But my original ring had medium and I honestly didn't know for 25 years until I was considering resetting it and the jeweler told me it had it! So really, there are no negatives to it other than some prejudice against it on the part of some jewelers (which is crazy). Rarely are there negative effects up through strong blue unless clarity is really low.
 
mbf365 said:
Ok what about this one? It seems to be priced low, which is probably a sign there's something wrong with it but to me it looks pretty good. It has the 55% table you like!

https://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond...MONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=sameTab
Click to expand...

Well, we normally aim for 34-35 for the crown angle, and 40.6-40.9 pavilion angle. However, that stone looks nice and may be the best choice of the three you have posted. I can't see the twining wisps in the magnified image which is a good sign. 1.2 cts is nice.
 
diamondseeker2006 said:
I don't know why BN links don't work when they paste them!!! I linked the main stone pages and not the grading reports.

That H has the numbers I most desire when looking for stones for myself. I actually love fluorescence as do many here. I had a fluorescent stone once and bought a UV light so I could see it! But my original ring had medium and I honestly didn't know for 25 years until I was considering resetting it and the jeweler told me it had it! So really, there are no negatives to it other than some prejudice against it on the part of some jewelers (which is crazy). Rarely are there negative effects up through strong blue unless clarity is really low.
Click to expand...

1st, to address your original question. The HCA is a rejection tool, not a selection tool. Once you get below 2, that is the end of that tool's usefulness.

2nd, to address your question about fluoresce. When I entered the business, I paid a ten to fifteen percent premium for medium to strong blue fluorescent diamonds, so long as they were not overblues. Then came the investment craziness at the end of the seventies and shoe clerks were now manning the phones to con the next guppie out of his money to buy these "investment grade" diamonds. No way to train a shoe clerk quickly about fluorescence, so fluorescence is thus bad!

Besides, it would not be enough to train the shoe clerk, it would require actually looking at the garbage they were touting. That would take time, someone who knew what he was looking at, and money to do, so that was never going to happen.

In February 1980, a one carat diamond traded hands, between dealers, in the diamond bourse for over $60,000 per carat. By the end of February, the bubble had burst and prices were in free fall. Prices fell and things returned to normal, except that fluorescence never regained favor.

There are those of us who love it, but the market punishes it. You can get a better price for such a diamond on the buy, but you will play heck if you ever need to sell. Thus, buy with great caution.

I now return you to the capable hands of Diamond Seeker who is providing you with excellent service.

Wink
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top