shape
carat
color
clarity

Help w ovals considering purchase

jj345

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
6
Hi all, very new to diamonds but am only interested in ovals, and I know they can be tricky. Considering these, please see videos attached.
GIA grading, all have no fluorescence, no culet, excellent polish and symmetry:
1st for $68k is 3.3 ct E VVS1, 8 main pavilions off axis, depth 65.3%, table 55%, girdle very thick, L:W 1.38 (11.19x7.7x5.29)

2nd for $53k is 2.62 ct D IF, 6 main pavilions, depth 63.6%, table 58%, girdle slightly thick to thick, L:W 1.44 (10.83x7.51x4.77)

There’s also a third one for $68k that I’ve seen in person but forgot to take a video of, it’s a 2.61 F VVS1, 4 main pavilions, depth 62.5%, table 64%, girdle slightly thick, L:W 1.45 (11.16x7.7x4.81), hopefully will post video soon, and going to look w ASET scope at first two stones today.

I’m not super concerned about first stone hiding carat weight bc it’s offered price is similar to third stone, just concerned if the thicker girdle and depth makes it duller (though in person compared to second stone this didn’t appear so). Mainly looking to minimize bow tie, and it looks as if first stone has less bow tie than second but happy to hear thoughts! Also don’t know how to evaluate for fish eyes so if you guys see something..? Much appreciated!!
 

jj345

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
6
Hi all, very new to diamonds but am only interested in ovals, and I know they can be tricky. Considering these, please see videos attached.
GIA grading, all have no fluorescence, no culet, excellent polish and symmetry:
1st for $68k is 3.3 ct E VVS1, 8 main pavilions off axis, depth 65.3%, table 55%, girdle very thick, L:W 1.38 (11.19x7.7x5.29)

2nd for $53k is 2.62 ct D IF, 6 main pavilions, depth 63.6%, table 58%, girdle slightly thick to thick, L:W 1.44 (10.83x7.51x4.77)

There’s also a third one for $68k that I’ve seen in person but forgot to take a video of, it’s a 2.61 F VVS1, 4 main pavilions, depth 62.5%, table 64%, girdle slightly thick, L:W 1.45 (11.16x7.7x4.81), hopefully will post video soon, and going to look w ASET scope at first two stones today.

I’m not super concerned about first stone hiding carat weight bc it’s offered price is similar to third stone, just concerned if the thicker girdle and depth makes it duller (though in person compared to second stone this didn’t appear so). Mainly looking to minimize bow tie, and it looks as if first stone has less bow tie than second but happy to hear thoughts! Also don’t know how to evaluate for fish eyes so if you guys see something..? Much appreciated!!

Sorry it won’t let me attach videos, here's the youtube link to them: 1)
2)
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
24,280
Well, I would say the bow-tie looks less on the first one (3.3). Beyond that, I cant really say much. I wish you had more of
an up-close video of the stones.

So, when I look at ovals I like to see lots of flashing through the center vs. mushy gray areas.

The blue areas below through the center show the "nice" facets that are reflecting light well. The red zig-zag lines are showing
mushy areas that do not return like well. You want to maximize the "nice" facets and minimize the "mushy" facets.
797143

Also, you do not want a flat crown. Make sure the crown has some height to it and along with not too large of a table (or you can
just end up with a lot of glare sometimes).
841437
 

lulu_ma

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Sep 9, 2020
Messages
1,427
Have you looked at these? Nothing in the perfect colorless carat range you want right now but excellent light performance and bow tie free.

 

jj345

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
6
Have you looked at these? Nothing in the perfect colorless carat range you want right now but excellent light performance and bow tie free.


Thank you I have! They just don’t have any with the specs I want right now but planning on periodically checking :)
 

jj345

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
6
Have you looked at these? Nothing in the perfect colorless carat range you want right now but excellent light performance and bow tie free.


Well, I would say the bow-tie looks less on the first one (3.3). Beyond that, I cant really say much. I wish you had more of
an up-close video of the stones.

So, when I look at ovals I like to see lots of flashing through the center vs. mushy gray areas.

The blue areas below through the center show the "nice" facets that are reflecting light well. The red zig-zag lines are showing
mushy areas that do not return like well. You want to maximize the "nice" facets and minimize the "mushy" facets.
Capture.PNG

Also, you do not want a flat crown. Make sure the crown has some height to it and along with not too large of a table (or you can
just end up with a lot of glare sometimes).
snip1.png
Thank you very much, sorry we don’t have a better video! We went and looked with the ASET scope today, both appear with a strong red area in the center triangles region with small symmetric blues, small red and green near the tips, no big green areas and whites mostly look dispersed, to my untrained eye maybe above average optics to slightly better? We also looked outside in natural light (it was drizzling) and neither looked like they had big mushy areas. For crown height the 3.3 wins, also its girdle is thick but the facets look more symmetrical than the 2.62, so we’re leaning more in favor of that right now.
 

aisak901

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 18, 2021
Messages
51
Sorry it won’t let me attach videos, here's the youtube link to them: 1)
2)

I prefer the first stone and agree that stone #2 has a more prominent bow-tie.

I'm not sure that you need to be concerned about fisheyes with the depths of these stones, since it seems that fisheyes occur in stones that are cut too shallow and the depths of these stones are on the upper end in reference to oval grading charts floating around out there.
 

jj345

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
6
I prefer the first stone and agree that stone #2 has a more prominent bow-tie.

I'm not sure that you need to be concerned about fisheyes with the depths of these stones, since it seems that fisheyes occur in stones that are cut too shallow and the depths of these stones are on the upper end in reference to oval grading charts floating around out there.

Thanks a lot! We were thinking along the same lines for depth and fisheye but heard that numbers can’t always be trusted for ovals, everything just seems harder with fancy cuts haha
 

Diamond Girl 21

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 26, 2017
Messages
1,449
Thank you I have! They just don’t have any with the specs I want right now but planning on periodically checking :)

I'm not sure if you'd be interested, but Distinctive Gem also offers custom cutting.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    5 Jewelry Styling Tips For Your Date
    5 Jewelry Styling Tips For Your Date - 09/22
    5 Reasons To Design Your Own Custom Engagement Ring
    5 Reasons To Design Your Own Custom Engagement Ring - 09/20
    Avant-Garde: Fab or Fail?
    Avant-Garde: Fab or Fail? - 09/17

Holloway Cut Advisor



Top