shape
carat
color
clarity

Help! I can't decide which stone to buy!

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by CJ, Jan 10, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
  1. CJ
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    2
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2001
    by CJ » Jan 10, 2001
    I have three round brilliants that I'm considering but I just can't seem to make up my mind. The three stones are quite different (color, size, clarity, price) but I'm trying to judge them (right now) simply on their cut and proportions.Here are the three stones...1.38 HSI1, Dep: 59.3%, Tbl: 55%,Girdle: Thin - Medium, Culet: None, Polish: Very Good, Symm: Very Good, Fluor: None, Crown Angle: 32.3, Pav Dep: 42.7%.1.50 GSI1, Dep: 59.9%, Tbl: 59%,Girdle: Medium - Thick, Culet: None, Polish: Good, Symm: Very Good, Fluor: None, Crown Angle: 31.9, Pav Dep: 43.4%.1.42 HVS1, Dep: 59.0%, Tbl: 61%,Girdle: Medium, Culet: None, Polish: Very Good, Symm: Very Good, Fluor: None, Crown Angle: 33.7, Pav Dep: 43.3%.The first two stones are from the same jeweler. The 1.50 stone is in a mounting (Is that a bad sign?) so it would have to be taken out of its current mounting and set in the ring that I buy. I don't know if I should disqualify this stone becuase it's in a mounting already. Any advice/suggestions would be much appreciated. I need to make up my mind in the next couple of days. Thanks in advance!
     
    


    


  2. CJ
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    2
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2001
    by CJ » Jan 10, 2001
    Leonid-Thanks for the info!I do have the GIA certs on all three stones. I've seen all three stones but unfortunately they're from two different jewelers so I haven't been able to put them next to each other to compare. I liked all three stones but as I mentioned previously, one stone was mounted so it made it more difficult to inspect it. Through the loupe there's no doubt that the VS1 stone looks MUCH better than the SI1 stones (as one would obviously expect). Do you think this difference in clarity makes a difference in the naked eye beauty of the stone? I didn't happen to notice any inclusions with the unaided eye on any of the stones. Between the 1.38 H stone and the 1.50 G stone I could not tell much difference in color (but again the mounting didn't help with the examination of the stone). One thing that concerns me about the first stone (1.38 H)is the 55% tbl. I've been told by some people that this table is too small...that a diamond with a table like this will appear smaller than it truly is. On the other hand, I've also been told that the table size is just personal preference. What do you think? Here are the measurements on the 1.38 and 1.42 stones (for whatever its worth)...1.38 HSI1 7.28 - 7.32 x 4.33mm1.42 HVS1 7.32 - 7.38 x 4.34mmDoes the 1st stone still sound like the way to go?Thanks again!
     
  3. pricescope
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    8,266
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1999
    by pricescope » Jan 11, 2001
    CJ,As for the table, quite contrary! 55% table is not small but just right: within AGA and AGS ideal ranges while 61% is not. Tolkowsky recommended even smaller table - 53%. It won’t make the diamond looks small but give it more fire and brilliance. Spread factors (diameter to weight ratio) for no. 1 and 3 are equal while brilliance, fire and scintillations are better for no. 1.Look at the MSU charts: www.gemology.ru/cut/english/podrobno_2.htm. You can see how light return and fire decrease with table increase from 53% to 60%!So based on the proportions only no.1 is still looks the best to me [​IMG] The only concern can be thin to medium girdle for the no. 1. If you are going to use prong setting, you have to check whether you can avoid thin girdle under the prongs.The rest is upon your taste and preferences.At any rate, all these three diamonds are a great find. Where did you find the local dealers who can offer these nice diamonds with Sarin reports? I hope the price is fair too...
     
  4. StevL
    Brilliant_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    598
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1999
    by StevL » Jan 11, 2001
    CJ,
    Your getting good advice! Read the responses closely, they should be a lot of help. Price should not be based just on the diamond, but other perks and services should be considered too.Good luck, and let us know what you decide.------------------
     
    


    


  5. moediamond
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    60
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2000
    by moediamond » Jan 11, 2001
    Hello,
    I agree with Leo. Number 1 seems to be the ideal choice. I also do setting work and I've never had problems mounting thin girldled diamonds. I just hope you're not being charged more than $6000 for the 1.38 loose diamond..
     
  6. pricescope
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    8,266
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1999
    by pricescope » Jan 11, 2001
    Hi CJ,First a few questins. Do they have GIA lab reports? Have you seen the stones? Do they look good? Which one do you like? Could you see any inclusions with unaided eye? Could you see a difference between H and G colors?Based only on the cut proportions the first one is more apealling to me. The third one has a bit large table. Although all of them can be quite lovely. As for the mounted stone, it is recommended to inspect loose stone. If it doesn't have any hidden flaws, It shouldn't be a reason to disqualify it.On the other hand, it is not recomended to buy diamonds with round carat weight, i.e. 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, etc). The price per carat jumps but you cannot see the difference in the size.So if you don't see obvious inclusions in SI1 and much difference between H and G, the first one looks more atractive to me...leonid
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

Share This Page