jane_e
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 42
My fiance and I have seen these two stones in person (not side by side though, at 2 different stores in very different lighting conditions...).
I have a clear preference for the 1st one, and he really didn't see any difference in the way they sparkled but preferred the slightly larger size of the 2nd one. I thought there was a weird dullness to the 2nd one (can't put my finger on it since it did sparkle but something in the table just looked "empty", does that make any sense?), and I also felt like I could see a lacking the symmetry of the second stone.
Here are the numbers and links to the GIA reports:
Stone 1: http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/ind...tVerification&reportno=2117226839&weight=0.71
.71 carat- G VS1
GIA Ex Cut, Ex Polish, Ex Symmetry, No Flourscence
5.71x5.74x3.53mm
Table 58%
Depth 61.7%
Crown Angle 35.5
Pavilion Angle 40.8
Girdle Thin to Slightly Thick Faceted 3.5%
Comes back a 2.7 on HCA, Very Good's on all factors (even though it's not under a 2.0, it looked gorgeous in person including them letting us take it outside in natural daylight-- should I be concerned about a 2.7?)
Stone 2:http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/ind...tVerification&reportno=1122103931&weight=0.80
.80 carat- F SI1
GIA Ex Cut, VG Polish, VG Symmetry
5.93x5.97x3.69mm
Table 57%
Depth 62.1%
Crown Angle 33.5
Pavilion Angle 41.4
Girle Medium to Slightly Thick Faceted 4%
4.0 on HCA, Good on 1st three factors, Very Good on spread
So I think this is a clear decision but is there something I may be missing? Or should we just wait and try to see AGS stones with better HCA's? Also to throw it into the mix, the 1st stone is priced at $3200 and the 2nd is $3600. Do those sound fair?
I have a clear preference for the 1st one, and he really didn't see any difference in the way they sparkled but preferred the slightly larger size of the 2nd one. I thought there was a weird dullness to the 2nd one (can't put my finger on it since it did sparkle but something in the table just looked "empty", does that make any sense?), and I also felt like I could see a lacking the symmetry of the second stone.
Here are the numbers and links to the GIA reports:
Stone 1: http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/ind...tVerification&reportno=2117226839&weight=0.71
.71 carat- G VS1
GIA Ex Cut, Ex Polish, Ex Symmetry, No Flourscence
5.71x5.74x3.53mm
Table 58%
Depth 61.7%
Crown Angle 35.5
Pavilion Angle 40.8
Girdle Thin to Slightly Thick Faceted 3.5%
Comes back a 2.7 on HCA, Very Good's on all factors (even though it's not under a 2.0, it looked gorgeous in person including them letting us take it outside in natural daylight-- should I be concerned about a 2.7?)
Stone 2:http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/ind...tVerification&reportno=1122103931&weight=0.80
.80 carat- F SI1
GIA Ex Cut, VG Polish, VG Symmetry
5.93x5.97x3.69mm
Table 57%
Depth 62.1%
Crown Angle 33.5
Pavilion Angle 41.4
Girle Medium to Slightly Thick Faceted 4%
4.0 on HCA, Good on 1st three factors, Very Good on spread
So I think this is a clear decision but is there something I may be missing? Or should we just wait and try to see AGS stones with better HCA's? Also to throw it into the mix, the 1st stone is priced at $3200 and the 2nd is $3600. Do those sound fair?