help me pick between these two diamonds!

[eakim29]

Okay, after months of trying to be absolutely certain, we've finally picked two out and are going to order one tomorrow! Please let me know which one you would choose and why . . . ! Thanks!

emily

Diamond #1:
1.011 ct
VS2
F
H&A
Depth: 61.1% (GIA)
Table: 55% (GIA)
Diameter 6.48
Crown Angle: 34.1
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Culet: 0.2%
Girdle: 1.6%
no fluorescence
unbranded
$6985

Diamond #2
1.10 ct (megascope says 1.096)
VS2
F
H&A
Depth 61.0% (GIA)
Table 56% (GIA)
Crown Angle: 34.3
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Culet: 0.6
Girdle: 1.4%
Diameter 6.68
no fluorescence
branded
$7524

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

both excellent spec's - it all comes down to symmetry now.

if you have images through ideal-scope or similar then that will tell us more.
Otherwise the branded stone wins????

 

[eakim29]

Thanks, cutnut, for the reply! Here are the pix:

Diamond #1:

 

[eakim29]

Diamond #1:

 

[eakim29]

Diamond #1:

 

[eakim29]

Diamond #2:

 

[eakim29]

Diamond #2:

 

[eakim29]

Oops, here's the first pic for Diamond #1 (h&a view):

 

[eakim29]

i'm leaning toward the 1.011 ct; the extra $ for the slightly bigger one (1.096) doesn't seem worth it to me. Or is it worth it for a branded diamond?

What's your take on these pics, cutnut (or anyone else)?

Thanks! --emily

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The H&A's are more symmetrical in the unbranded stone.

But for me the most interesting thing is that you are being asked to compare 2 ideal-scope type images that have been taken in completely different environments.

The lighting in #1 seems more fair to me.
The #2 lighting indicates the stone has had very little back light, possibly directed in a parallel orientation the (bad) way the Firescope does (is it a FS image?) and a longer exposure.

we have been messing around far too long at Ideal-scope.com in establishing an industry standard method so that all dealers and labs can provide standardised ideal-scope images.

We just better hurry it up to stop this mess!!!

Any way enough of that.

Both are exceptional stones.
The branded stone is not better because of its brand (what ever that might be) than the 'unbranded stone'.

 

[eakim29]

Thanks so much, cutnut!

We've decided to go with the unbranded diamond from goodoldgold.com. (The other one was a superbcert.)

woo-hoo--the diamond is on its way! thanks again!

 

[Mara]

Hah my eyes are GOOD. While scrolling down the post I thought--that second stone looks like a SC from it's 'typical' IdealScope image (seems all SC stones look the same under IS!)...and then you noted that it was a SC.




I would have chosen the unbranded as well--the price difference for the branded in this situation does not seem worth it and Jonathan is very picky with his stones, so you know that you have a discriminating eye helping you out. Was the Bscope good?




Post pictures when you have them!!