Help understanding Sarin report girdle numbers

[grabinski]

I have been reading numerous old posts on this forum for several weeks now, and I appreciate the help of everyone. Now I have a specific question about the diamond that I am considering:

Could someone please give me some advice on regarding the attached Sarin report? I am a little concerned that the girdle is too thin, but I don''t understand those numbers. Are they a minimum, a maximum, and an average % value? Any other comments regarding the cut of this diamond would be very much appreciated.

Thanks,
Jim

 

[elmo]

You don't have to worry about the girdle being too thin on that one. The numbers mean that the thickness of the girdle valleys ranges from 1.2% to 2.6% of the stone's diameter. According to AGS, this can be between 'thin' to 'slightly thick' and still be 'ideal' (someone who has a reference can give exact %s but this is a little under 1% to a little under 3%). But from a consumer's standpoint, anything more than 'medium' in more than just a spot or two is dead weight

.

Assuming the Sarin and lab report agree, because of the 58% table this may be close but is not "ideal" proportions, so I hope the seller isn't charging the price of an ideal. It still stands a chance of being a really good looking stone.

You don't mention weight. For that diameter (6.2mm), I hope it's mid-high eighties. If it's low nineties, you'd be paying a premium for the price jump at 0.90 for no benefit whatsoever.

 

[grabinski]

Thank you Elmo. The weight is 0.90, so maybe the porportions are not quite right. It is H, SI1, and the price is $3600. Does anyone think that I would be paying too much since the diameter is small.

Thanks again everyone,
Jim

 

[elmo]

It's not that the proportions necessarily "aren't right", it's that the cutter met his objectives on that one

.

 

[Giangi]

AGS GIRDLE GRADING:

Ext.Thin 0.00 to 0.08%
Very thin 0.09 to 0.50%
Thin 0.51 to 1.20% ---> AGS 0
Medium 1.21 to 1.70% ---> AGS 0
Sl.Thick 1.71 to 2.95% ---> AGS 0
Thick 2.96 to 4.20%
Very Thick 4.21 to 5.70%
Ext.Thick 5.71 % or more

 

[DX Toronto]

Hi Grabinski


This looks like a really great diamond. This looks like one of those AGS1 stones that will out perform a lot of AGS 0’s at the extremities of the AGS 0 specs

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Michael

Diamond Exchange Toronto

 

[Richard Sherwood]

-----------
the diameter is small.
-----------

With a 60.8% depth, the diameter is not small, but right where it ought to be.

The price is excellent as well.

 

[Rhino]

Just a note from your friendly neighborhood Rhino.

The girdle measurements commonly given on Sarin/OGI reports and AGS Reports are the girdle thickness at the points of the girdle knows as the "valleys". There are actually 3 areas around the perimeter of diamond where the girdle is measured. The other areas are the "halves" and also the "bezels". Girdles can vary greatly in their thickness at these other junctions, particularly the halves where the upper girdle facets meet. When upper girdle facets are cut to certain angles it can either flatter the stone (increasing contrast or light return, a positive factor) or it can also increase leakage in the diamond (a negative factor). To learn more about this and it's effect on the diamonds optics check out this page ... http://www.goodoldgold.com/the_girdle.htm and on our minor facets page I've updated some of the info regarding the upper girdles and their impact on optics. When the upper girdle facet angles are changed it alters the girdle thickness at the halves. http://www.goodoldgold.com/minor_facets.htm

I know I have more work to do on both of those pages but they make for interesting study.

Peace,
Rhino

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Actually hRD measure at the mainn junction - a far better system

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Great work on your minor facets pages Rhino. As usual, you're on the cutting edge.

I tend to like the contrasting spots of leakage on each side of the arrow tips and upper girdle break points, versus the stones which have the minor facets "tweaked" to eliminate this leakage.

I think they enhance the stone by contributing to the light-dark-light-dark contrasting scintillation of the diamond, and make the light return areas more pronounced in comparison.

Contrast is definitely an important part of the equation. Some of the shallower stones have awesome light return, yet lack contrast. This makes for more of a "headlight" look, versus a "dancing of the facets" look.

 

[elmo]

Very interesting discussion on the "other" forum about this as long as you cut through the noise level and brand wars. It looked to me like one of the MSU researchers Serg might agree with you, Richard...a bit of randomness and leakage in the right places and amount possibly helps add some visual interest, maybe in the way that a small amount of some pretty funky aromas can make a great bottle of wine memorable

. For instance, the Richard Sherwoods and Dave Atlases of the wine world can often use the descriptors 'barnyardy', 'sweaty', and 'volatile' to describe a particuly fine bottle.

 

[pricescope]

----------------
Very interesting discussion on the "other" forum about this as long as you cut through the noise level and brand wars.
----------------

Elmo, there is no crime in mentioning (or linking) any "other" forum here

 

[Richard Sherwood]

"Volatile". I like that word. I'll have to work it in my diamond descriptions.

A volatile mix of brilliance and fire, soothed by the cool white hue of an E color...

 

[elmo]

----------------
On 6/29/2003 1:43:51 PM Richard Sherwood wrote:

"Volatile". I like that word. I'll have to work it in my diamond descriptions.

----------------

That's pretty funny

. I've seen "explosive" used enough times for diamonds, why not "volatile"? Just don't put them together the same sentence

.

I think with wine it's a reference to a fermentation byproduct other than alcohol that smells something akin to a highly aromatic organic solvent.

 

[grabinski]

Thanks again everyone. I think that I am going to buy this stone.

Rich,

Do you do verifications and appraisals? I live in Tampa, and I would like to drive down and commision you for verification and for an appraisal. The diamond is inscribed with the GIA number, so if I brought it to you already in the setting, or should I bring it loose and then take it to a jeweler to be set?

Jim

 

[Richard Sherwood]

-----------
Do you do verifications and appraisals?
-----------

Yes. I'm an independent appraiser who does not buy or sell, but only appraises.

-----------
I live in Tampa, and I would like to drive down and
commision you for verification and for an
appraisal.
-----------

Great. Sounds like fun. A 0.90 would run $90 for verification and appraisal, and would take a little over an hour to do on a while-you-wait appointment basis. If the mounting is a diamond mounting, it will probably run $25 additional (or up to $45 for a complex diamond mounting).

-----------
The diamond is inscribed with the GIA number, so if
I brought it to you already in the setting, or
should I bring it loose and then take it to a
jeweler to be set?
-----------

It's always easier and more accurate to grade a stone when it's loose, but insurance companies like the stone to be appraised as mounted. A catch-22, if you will.

If you have the mounting, you could bring it and the stone down loose. I could appraise it loose, and then take a photo of it sitting in the mounting, and include the mounting in the appraisal.

If you decide to have it mounted before bringing it down, I could get some of the information off your cert that is difficult to get from a mounted stone.

Whatever is most convenient for you.

Thanks,