I wouldn't choose a stone solely based on numbers...the above stone has no video. I was just asking if this was better and worth looking into based on the the numbers and additional depth.
Thanks so much for all the help!. I really appreciate it!
I wouldn't choose a stone solely based on numbers...the above stone has no video. I was just asking if this was better and worth looking into based on the the numbers and additional depth.
I think the issue is that you haven't posted videos or pics of any of the stones you are considering, so we can't really help narrow it down.
Curious, is this from Distinctive Gem? Looks a little like a Rhino Gem report. I know he has a sarin machine and leases grading criteria from GIA and AGS..
No, it's not from DG. Do you know how to read the light return images?
Diamond #2 with the 40.6/35.0/58 combo should be nicely balanced between brilliance and fire.
Diamond #1 with the 41.0/33.5/58 combo should lean towards more brilliance.
Diamond #3 with the 40.8/34.0/58 combo should also lean towards more brilliance.
I'd be most interested in Diamond #2, based on my personal preference.
Would you be so kind as look up Gcal LG312941389 of the Gcal site and tell me what you think? The HCA score is 0.7.........would this work in a ring?
Thanks!
Would you be so kind as look up Gcal LG312941389 of the Gcal site and tell me what you think? The HCA score is 0.7.........would this work in a ring?
Thanks!
They mean a great deal, but they are computer generated based off of data that's been entered.
You can go off of those and likely be just fine, because the generated images are quite accurate.
Me, personally, would also want to see the live ASET images because my science and engineering brain require them for utmost appeasement.
Absolutely gorgeous diamond!
40.6/34.5/57 combo with a nice 15% crown height would work perfectly for a ring.
What about the low HCA score for getting dark close up?Absolutely gorgeous diamond!
40.6/34.5/57 combo with a nice 15% crown height would work perfectly for a ring.
Would you please be so kind to compare the first one with these below?
Also do you see anything bad about the inclusions in each one? THANKS!!!
Gcal 320190388 and Gcal and Gcal 3201903
What about the low HCA score for getting dark close up?
Would you please compare the first one to these 3:
Gcal LG320190388, Gcal LG320190378, and Gcal LG312941381
I don't know anything about inclusions...any comments? THANKS SO MUCH!
Thanks for looking! I asked your opinion about the other 3 stones because they are all between $200- $500 less expensive.I like this one the best out of the three.
Gem Certification & Assurance Lab
www.gcalusa.com
I like this one the best out of the three.
Gem Certification & Assurance Lab
www.gcalusa.com
Here is one more with the 34.5/40.6 combination.....but the table is only 56% and
the HCA score is .6. Would this be ok? even with the .6 HCA? It is $300 than the first one. Gcal LG320190390. Please don't just say "I like the first one". I would like to know if you think this is nice and whether the HCA score matters at .6
THANKS FOR LOOKING !
I like the first one.
If I may add my opinion, my favorites are
Gem Certification & Assurance Lab
www.gcalusa.com
and
Gem Certification & Assurance Lab
www.gcalusa.com
And between the two, I'd pick whichever one is cheaper. I prefer these to 320190378 because the pavilion seems to be cut a tad more evenly on these two.
Although I don't think you have anything to worry about on an HCA score of 0.6 for a GCAL 8x stone since it's already excellent in brilliance and scintillation, I personally prefer HCA scores of 0.9 or above for a ring. Just for mind-clean reasons, so I don't have to worry that I might see any obstruction/darkness. 34.5/40.8 is also one of my favorite crown/pavilion angle combinations. All this is purely personal preference.
If I may add my opinion, my favorites are
Gem Certification & Assurance Lab
www.gcalusa.com
and
Gem Certification & Assurance Lab
www.gcalusa.com
And between the two, I'd pick whichever one is cheaper. I prefer these to 320190378 because the pavilion seems to be cut a tad more evenly on these two.
Although I don't think you have anything to worry about on an HCA score of 0.6 for a GCAL 8x stone since it's already excellent in brilliance and scintillation, I personally prefer HCA scores of 0.9 or above for a ring. Just for mind-clean reasons, so I don't have to worry that I might see any obstruction/darkness. 34.5/40.8 is also one of my favorite crown/pavilion angle combinations. All this is purely personal preference.
If I may add my opinion, my favorites are
Gem Certification & Assurance Lab
www.gcalusa.com
and
Gem Certification & Assurance Lab
www.gcalusa.com
And between the two, I'd pick whichever one is cheaper. I prefer these to 320190378 because the pavilion seems to be cut a tad more evenly on these two.
Although I don't think you have anything to worry about on an HCA score of 0.6 for a GCAL 8x stone since it's already excellent in brilliance and scintillation, I personally prefer HCA scores of 0.9 or above for a ring. Just for mind-clean reasons, so I don't have to worry that I might see any obstruction/darkness. 34.5/40.8 is also one of my favorite crown/pavilion angle combinations. All this is purely personal preference.
Thanks for your comments...here is one more and it is the cheapest.
Gcal 320190423. Any thoughts on this one? Thanks very much!
Thanks for your comments...here is one more and it is the cheapest.
Gcal 320190423. Any thoughts on this one? Thanks very much!
Thank you sooooo much! I sincerely appreciate all your time and comments.I like it a lot! Since it's the cheapest, I'd definitely go with this one.
Thank you sooooo much! I sincerely appreciate all your time and comments.