Help! Is this a good MRB choice?

[can24]

Hi there,

I need help knowing if this is an ok diamond or not. I won't be able to get an idealscope/ASET image on this stone, but I do have a video if that would help.

Here is the face up look:

Specs:
HCA 1.8
low crown angle: 32.5
J
VS2
strong blue fluor (no milkiness)
XXX

Thank you!!

 

[ac117]

No good - what's your budget and desired specs?

 

[can24]

Thanks for the quick response! Can you help me out on why it's not a good choice (sorry, trying to *learn* here too!!).

Desired specs:
8.7mm++ MRB
I like fluor on a J, but haven't seen a K in person
eye clean
excellent cut
HCA <2 (I don't know that this is a *requirement* more like, I want this thing to be a white sparkly fireball!!)

$15k

 

[ac117]

Well, the crown angle is too low and the stone doesn't look to have good optical symmetry. Although we do not have all the facts, the crown angle alone is enough to disqualify it. There are so many round diamonds, I wouldn't settle for this. Let me take a look and see what I can find...

 

[can24]

Oh ok! So even tho the HCA score is great, the crown angle will make it not actually perform well?

Thank you thank you!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

These are measurements to help you stay in ideal cut territory with a GIA excellent cut stone.

table: 54-58

depth: 60-62.3

crown angle: 34-35.0 (up to 35.5 crown angle can sometimes work with a 40.6 pav angle)

pavilion angle: 40.6-40.9 (sometimes 41.0 if the crown angle is close to 34)

 

[can24]

Thanks ac117 and diamondseeker for your replies. Here is the video of the stone as well...same answer?

http://segoma.com/v.php?type=view&id=701IJ8DFPP

 

[can24]

Here are the other specs if this helps:

Table: 60%
Depth: 59.6%
Crown: 32.5 degrees
Pavilion: 40.8 degrees
Girdle: M-STHK faceted, 4%

I saw this thread with this stone that has very similar specs - the IS came out pretty well actually.
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/judge-this-ideal-scope.200810/

What do you think? Still pass?

 

[gm89uk]

That stone appears to have better optical symmetry than your stone

For example, your crown of 32.5 is an average of 8 different values. They might range from 31 to 33.5 or whatever but the average is 32.5. Another stone may have 8 values very close to 32.5 and have the same value on the certificate. Stone B would have better optical symmetry but they look the same on paper.

I've looked your video and the symmetry is still not great (although you took your screenshot at a tilt).

Secondly you probably like this stone due to its spread, it's wide for the carat weight. This comes at a compromise, you will get brightness at the cost of fire. To achieve a shallow depth, your crown height is only 12.5 percent (due to large table and shallow crown angle). Much of dispersion and scintillation happens through the crown facets. By brightness and fire we mean the white light return is optimised but the rainbow coloured sparkles would be significantly less than an idealcut.

Some people are happy with this compromise and like this style of look and happy with the extra mm spread that comes with it, but I'd say the majority consensus is that a balance between brightness and fire is very important, particularly for an ER.

In addition to the above points, your diamond doesn't look very symmetrical so people will struggle to recommend it.

In the thread you posted, the comments said it's a good 60:60 stone which is the style that had a shallow depth and large table (60:60). The OP seemed aware of this style and was happy with the spread, just as long as you understand the difference. Even if you wanted to get this style, I think there are better options.

 

[can24]

Hi gm89uk, wow, thank you SO much for your response.

Yes, I like this stone for its spread, though I agree with you - the brightness and fire needs to be balanced. Got it re: symmetry.

And, ultimately I appreciate your recommendation to look for other options. Will pass!

Thanks again!

 

[can24]

Ok, so here's yet another option. Specs are:

2.53
J
Sl1 (eye clean)
HCA 2.1
XXX
Medium Fluor (I like this)
Crown angle: 35
Pavilion angle: 40.8
Depth: 61.6%
Table: 59%

And a video here: http://segoma.com/v.php?type=view&id=LV75Z15VRR

And if the one above isn't a good one, could you check out this list and recommend which ones would be?

Thank you!!

 

[can24]

Here's a better view of the table

 

[Dancing Fire]

May not be eye clean.

 

[can24]

I see the crystal you're looking at. Apparently the vendor says it's eye clean.

Other than the clarity, any performance issues you can see?

 

[bmfang]

Any word on whether the vendor will provide IS/ASET imagery?

Of the other ones in the list, the 2.5 J/SI1 with SB looks like it has complementary angles though it is under your preference for an 8.7mm+ stone.

 

[can24]

checking to see if they can do an idealscope, will see what they say.

Eh, that close to 8.7 should be fine - anything I should watch out for on that SI1, SB 2.5?

 

[bmfang]

Well, given that no images have been provided for that one, IS/ASET images to check light performance and an image of the diamond would be necessary to see if the strong blue fluor has a negative effect on the transparency and brilliance of the diamond.

 

[can24]

What do you think of this one?
https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R223-219195324?cid=diamondse

 

[bmfang]

Wow, for that price, it's not too shabby. CA/PA is approaching super-ideal territory. Can't really find anything similar at James Allen with similar specs and with medium fluor. Most of the ones I can find at JA seem to be 60/60 stones.

I'm a bit of a stickler for optical symmetry, so I'm immediately noticing that the arrow shafts don't meet up with the arrow heads (you may not really care about that however). The ASET is also revealing a leakage spot around the 2 o'clock position and there is a visible lighter ring of light reds and greens around the centre. The IS also shows that same leakage spot around 2 o'clock too (which seems to correspond to a yellowish area in the actual diamond image). But you can definitely notice the darker circle that surrounds the centre in the actual diamond image.

 

[can24]

Thank you!!

Do you think that spot has to do with the large knot seen in the cert?

 

[bmfang]

It's entirely possible that it is the knot as disclosed on the grading report that is where the leakage is located. I'm not a gemmologist and others here on PS are far more experienced than I am so I'm curious to see what else they have to say about this 2.23 J VS2.

 

[can24]

Me too.. I've always thought you're supposed to avoid knots

 

[can24]

Ok, got a new contender here:

2.21
I
XXX
HCA 1.0
Faint Fluor
All the great dimensions: 61.2% depth, 58% table, 35 crown, 40.6 pav angle
SI1

There is a crystal (white) on the table, but I don't think that bothers me. Apparently is eye clean.

What do you think?
I can't get an IS on it, but there is a good return policy!

 

[ac117]

Looks very nice! Numbers are safe and should be a great choice. Could you buy it and ask them send you an IS on it once they receive it? Not a deal breaker if it truly has a great return policy but doesn't hurt to ask.

 

[can24]

Still gathering my options over here - looking to make a decision in the next 3 weeks!

Here's one:
2.35
K
VS2
XXX
Faint fluo
great dims: 58%, 61.2%, 34 CA, 40.8PA, HCA of 1.2

Is it me, or does part of the inner part of the diamond look dark?

 

[LLJsmom]

Still gathering my options over here - looking to make a decision in the next 3 weeks!

Here's one:
2.35
K
VS2
XXX
Faint fluo
great dims: 58%, 61.2%, 34 CA, 40.8PA, HCA of 1.2

Is it me, or does part of the inner part of the diamond look dark?

The leakage in the center would bother me.

 

[gm89uk]

The leakage in the center would bother me.

There isn't really leakage in the centre, just areas of slightly reduced light return, that most likely won't be perceptible to the naked eye.

The more concerning feature is over obstruction (showing as black)

This may be due to a combination of long%star facet combined with long LGF% for the crown angle, and lack of symmetry. Light performance wise though, it is a great diamond.

 

[can24]

Thank you both for guiding me! I agree - the idealscope looks pretty darn good except for those obstruction areas. They look ominous!

 

[LLJsmom]

There isn't really leakage in the centre, just areas of slightly reduced light return, that most likely won't be perceptible to the naked eye.

The more concerning feature is over obstruction (showing as black)

This may be due to a combination of long%star facet combined with long LGF% for the crown angle, and lack of symmetry. Light performance wise though, it is a great diamond.

I hear what you're saying gm89. However I had the same thing with my MRB and I "felt" like I could see the darkness and that meant light wasn't getting reflected and that really really bugged the sh!t out of me. ( I had a great MRB but not a precision cut by WF OR BGD GOG OR VC.) Maybe other people will not notice. I hope for their sake they don't. So if I ever buy another MRB I will never choose one that has this. Good luck can24.

 

[can24]

ok ok - still in my final stages of selecting a stone. Take a look at this ASET image. (no IS available).

Dimensions are:
table: 58
depth: 61.2
CA: 35 deg
PA: 40.6 deg
XXX
Girdle is medium-slightly thick at 3.5%

The one problem is that it is an SI1 with a crystal on the table, but the crystal isn't black.