help! just when I thought I was getting the hang of it...

[hoorray]

I thought I had the cut issues figured out until I kept reading here, and realized that is more than just the range, but the interdependencies between the dimensions.

I read Niceice''s "tight" dimensions on a previous thread, and have not found many in the range I am looking at that fit within those specs. (The only one I''ve found is smaller, so I''d have to trade off size by .15 - .30 mm.)

So 2 questions: will the difference between the following 2 stones and one within those "tight" specs be discernable? and, which of the following 2 stones looks like the better of the 2?

#1
2.358 F VS1
8.57x8.61x5.25
61.1 depth
56 table
35 (34.8-35.2) crown angle
40.6 (40.3-40.9( pavilion angle
.4 culet
1.2 - 2.0 (1.5 avg) medium girdle
Ex polish and symmetry
Hearts & Arrows

#2
2.52 E VS2
8.8x8.7x5.4
61.4 depth
57 table
35 (34.9 - 35) crown angle
40.8 (40.7 - 40.9) pavilion angle
.2 culet
1.5 - 2.1 (1.7 avg) medium girdle
Ex polish and symmetry
Hearts & Arrows

The first one is slightly more expensive, but they are both in the range I am looking.

THe Niceice "tight" specs were:
Total depth between 59 - 61.8%
Table diameter between 55 - 56%
Crown angle between 34.3 - 34.8 degrees
Pavilion angle between 40.6 - 40.9 degrees
Girdle: thin to medium, faceted or medium, faceted
Culet: GIA None or AGS Pointed
Polish: GIA Excellent or AGS Ideal
Symmetry: GIA Excellent or AGS Ideal

thanks for the help!

 

[pqcollectibles]

Hooray, Hooray!

LOL! Just had to do that!

I ran the HCA. Both scored very well! E, VS2 was 1.6 Ex/Ex/Ex/Vg and the F, VS1 was 0.8 Ex/Ex/Ex/Vg. Prices are vveeerrry close too! WOW! What a choice!

You've got one very lucky lady! Either one of these rocks is gonna knock her socks off!

And both will shine like sunbeams!

Check out the inclusions plots and confirm type, size, color and location of inclusions. In a VS??? Well,.... do it anyway. If the plots look good, and you don't absolutely feel like you gotta have the lower HCA score with a touch better clarity, I'd go bigger in carat weight.

Strong recommendation for professional evaluation as well!

Just my $0.02 worth.

 

[Rank Amateur]

I'll guess that in the bigger sizes that the tight specs you are looking for are hard to find. The $$ to lose by trimming the fat off the stone just aren't worth it to the cutter.

Give NiceIce a call. For the size and $$ you'll be spending it will be worth their while to do the searching for you.

 

[Abazias]

I would agree with PC and choose the large stone. There are three benefits for diamond number two: the color is a grade higher and the clarity is a step lower then again, why pay a little bit more for something you will not see anyway. And of course, it is a large diamond. Always a bonus point! Either diamond is an excellent choice. Happy diamond shopping!

Go Gators!
Felicia

 

[69gm]

both of these sounds like winners but if i had to choose between the two, i'd go with #2 as well. the clarity is neglible, the color is better (though i doubt anyone could tell), it's bigger (which is very readily visible) and it's cheaper as you mentioned.

as pq mentioned, see if there's a way to spot the inclusions, although on a VS2 you'd have to be superman to see anything with the naked eye.

you've got 2 great choices but between these two, #2 gets my vote.

 

[niceice]

----------------
On 6/11/2003 4:25

6 PM Rank Amateur wrote:
I'll guess that in the bigger sizes that the tight specs you are looking for are hard to find. The $$ to lose by trimming the fat off the stone just aren't worth it to the cutter.

Give NiceIce a call. For the size and $$ you'll be spending it will be worth their while to do the searching for you.---------------

Larger stones are available with tighter proportions, we recently sold a six carat, G, VS-2 that was cut to our preferred range of proportions... We tend not to inventory a lot of larger stones but it is likely that we can find you one. But did you read the rest of our post regarding proportions where we mentioned that a diamond with a steeper pavilion angle in the 35 degree range with a pavilion angle in the range of 40.6 - 40.9 degrees is often quite beautiful because the pavilion angle controls most of the light? We're happy to do a search for you, but it sounds like you've already found two great contenders!

 

[Mara]

69 that is the MOST AWESOME icon picture!!!!!! Very cute! Are those your cats?

(PS sorry for going off topic! I'll throw in a few cents on topic to make up for it)

I like diamond #2 also. Why? Because I like bigger stones and these both appear to be excellently cut so it doesn't seem you are 'sacrificing' anything to get it. Plus it's an E over an F....like an extra perk. However, are you paying significantly more for diamond #2 because of the extra ctw and E color? If the are priced similary, definitely #2. But if there's a huge $$ jump, its really your call on what you want to spend. They both look really amazing..it's a little harder to find well cut stones the larger carat size you go...larger facets and all. But yours look great!

 

[hoorray]

-------------But did you read the rest of our post regarding proportions where we mentioned that a diamond with a steeper pavilion angle in the 35 degree range with a pavilion angle in the range of 40.6 - 40.9 degrees is often quite beautiful because the pavilion angle controls most of the light? ----------------

Thanks Niceice. I did read this part of your post, and it is the issue that is starting to confuse me. Even tho I'm a huge believer in Internet shopping, at this point buying this diamond without the "look, touch and feel" capability is getting difficult since I don't have much hands on experience to apply all these specs to, and can't just put them all in front of me to pick the final one.

I think I will go with #2 if it checks out. Now I need to find an independent lab on the west coast.

Thanks for the inputs everyone!