Help with 2ct 34/41 57%

[FinanceMan1212]

I have read that a 34/41 with angles all less than 41.2 are some of the best you can get in terms of fire. The GCAL diamond comes with the optical symmetry and Brilliance analysis and they look great. All these diamonds fall within ASG and GIA excellence.

Diamond 1: 2.02 E VS2 57% table $7,190


Diamond 2: 2.02 ct 34/40.8 57% table. $10,010. The optical symmetry and Brilliance looks a tiny bit better than diamond 1...but is it worth $3k more?




Diamond 3: 2.11ct 34/41 57% table $9,510. I am a little worried about buying a 34/41 without seeing an ASET report which GIA doesn't have.



Diamond 4: very comparable to diamond 2. F instead of E And VS1 instead of VVS2. $1,400 less

 

[DejaWiz]

Have you checked other sellers, such as Brilliant Earth?

https://www.brilliantearth.com/lab-diamonds-search/view_detail/11740217/

 

[FinanceMan1212]

Have you checked other sellers, such as Brilliant Earth?

https://www.brilliantearth.com/lab-diamonds-search/view_detail/11740217/

These are all from brilliant earth. I don't want to go over 2.25 CT.

 

[DejaWiz]

These are all from brilliant earth. I don't want to go over 2.25 CT.

My mistake...I now see the URL in your screenshots.

Just wondering: why such a super tight criteria of 34/41/57 (which will lean towards more brilliance) within the already super tight criteria for super ideal cut proportions?

We usually recommend the following for a diamond that leans towards more fire:

* Table width: 54-57%, 58% max
* Pavilion angle: 40.6° to 40.7°, 40.8° max
* Crown angle: 34.5° to 35.0°, if PA is 40.6° then 35.5° max, maybe even 36.0° as long as the ASET or ImageScope proves no light leakage

 

[mwilliamanderson]

According to this chart by the creator of the HCA the diamonds above would tend towards brightness not fire. You will want something in the Fiery Balanced or More Fire columns if you want to maximize fire.

 

[DejaWiz]

Here's an HPHT E VVS2 2.05ct with perfect balanced proportions. You'll pay a premium for the clarity, though.

https://www.brilliantearth.com/lab-diamonds-search/view_detail/11696838/

BE has a decent lot of 2.0-2.25 D-E VS2+ diamonds under their "super ideal" filter for decent prices, but you'll have to ask for the reports for a majority of them.

 

[Diamond Girl 21]

I actually really like the 34/41 combo. I own one and it is bright, but has excellent fire. Of course, each diamond has to be evaluated individually.

 

[mwilliamanderson]

I actually really like the 34/41 combo. I own one and it is bright, but has excellent fire. Of course, each diamond has to be evaluated individually.

That’s good to know. I had a 35/41 which wasn’t a great combo in many lighting situations.

 

[FinanceMan1212]

Here's an HPHT E VVS2 2.05ct with perfect balanced proportions. You'll pay a premium for the clarity, though.

https://www.brilliantearth.com/lab-diamonds-search/view_detail/11696838/

BE has a decent lot of 2.0-2.25 D-E VS2+ diamonds under their "super ideal" filter for decent prices, but you'll have to ask for the reports for a majority of them.

Don't want to pay for premium clarity under a 10x loupe. Also, I want to stick to 57% table. I do realize that 34.5 /40.8 is a great combo.

 

[FinanceMan1212]

My mistake...I now see the URL in your screenshots.

Just wondering: why such a super tight criteria of 34/41/57 (which will lean towards more brilliance) within the already super tight criteria for super ideal cut proportions?

We usually recommend the following for a diamond that leans towards more fire:

* Table width: 54-57%, 58% max
* Pavilion angle: 40.6° to 40.7°, 40.8° max
* Crown angle: 34.5° to 35.0°, if PA is 40.6° then 35.5° max, maybe even 36.0° as long as the ASET or ImageScope proves no light leakage

This diamond was my original choice.. But was considering going up in size. Also another important thing for me is that I want GIA or GCAL.

 

[FinanceMan1212]

I actually really like the 34/41 combo. I own one and it is bright, but has excellent fire. Of course, each diamond has to be evaluated individually.

Do the optical charts look good

I actually really like the 34/41 combo. I own one and it is bright, but has excellent fire. Of course, each diamond has to be evaluated individually.

Do the optical charts look good for diamond 1,2,4? Which one you choose?

 

[DejaWiz]

Don't want to pay for premium clarity under a 10x loupe. Also, I want to stick to 57% table. I do realize that 34.5 /40.8 is a great combo.

Okie dokie

 

[FinanceMan1212]

Okie dokie

Do you have an issue with the optical symmetry and Brilliance reports on the diamond? To me, looking at only angles is only one part. How do they look?

 

[DejaWiz]

Do you have an issue with the optical symmetry and Brilliance reports on the diamond? To me, looking at only angles is only one part. How do they look?

Nope, nothing that throws up any major red flags. The approach that I used when buying my last LGD was cut, color, clarity, then carat. Normally, color and clarity would have been swapped in order of importance, but turns out my wife is very color sensitive, so I had to put more priority on color.

Pure curiosity: is there a specific reason that you *must* have a 57% table width?

 

[Diamond Girl 21]

P

Do the optical charts look good


Do the optical charts look good for diamond 1,2,4? Which one you choose?

Some people are great at interpreting images. I really need to see a diamond in person. That being said, nothing major jumps out at me.

I do agree that a 41° pavilion angle is right on the edge, so it might look great or have issues. Most people recommend to avoid it because it's safer.

 

[lovedogs]

According to this chart by the creator of the HCA the diamonds above would tend towards brightness not fire. You will want something in the Fiery Balanced or More Fire columns if you want to maximize fire.

Was going to post this. Why do you need a 57% table? It only makes things harder. Same with sticking to 41 pac angle.

 

[FinanceMan1212]

Was going to post this. Why do you need a 57% table? It only makes things harder. Same with sticking to 41 pac angle.

I believe 57% is the sweet spot. Also, only 2 of the diamonds have a 41 pac angle. 40.8 are the others. They all fit into ideal cut for AGS GIA.

 

[mwilliamanderson]

Was going to post this. Why do you need a 57% table? It only makes things harder. Same with sticking to 41 pac angle.

I’ve been referencing it a lot! There’s a lot of info in that little index card

 

[DejaWiz]

I believe 57% is the sweet spot.

Now I am very intrigued and am always up for learning more!
What sources have you drawn from to make this conclusion?
Reason that I ask is because the more info that we can arm ourselves with, the better our recommendations get for folks seeking advice.

 

[FinanceMan1212]

Now I am very intrigued and am always up for learning more!
What sources have you drawn from to make this conclusion?
Reason that I ask is because the more info that we can arm ourselves with, the better our recommendations get for folks seeking advice.

I've used my eyes to look at diamonds. Not sure how else you could form an opinion without seeing in person.

 

[DejaWiz]

I've used my eyes to look at diamonds. Not sure how else you could form an opinion without seeing in person.

That's entirely fair. I was thinking you had drawn info from some reference and study materials, and was eager to soak up more of the sciency good stuff. I made an assumption...sorry.

 

[Karl_K]

I believe 57% is the sweet spot. Also, only 2 of the diamonds have a 41 pac angle. 40.8 are the others. They all fit into ideal cut for AGS GIA.

One of my favorite diamonds both on paper and visual was from a line of diamonds cut super tight 55-56tables 34/41 78%+ lowers and 55%+ uppers.
That does not mean that only those numbers are good.
Where the pavilion is reasonably tight and the lowers 77+ a 41 degree + a 34 degree crown works well with tables from 50 to 60 with different looks but high quality for their type.
There is nothing magical about a 41 pavilion angle or 34 crown angle, its all in the combination and execution.

 

[FinanceMan1212]

Thank you. So out of the diamonds I presented.. What would you select?

 

[Karl_K]

Thank you. So out of the diamonds I presented.. What would you select?

#1
It has a couple percent variation in the lower girdle % around the stone but who cares if your not paying top h&a dollar. Visible difference face up for all practical viewing 0.
As with all lab diamonds ask them to verify it is not cloudy or not have transparency issues.

edit: that is just out of the stones shown and is based on high bang for the buck but even if they were the same price it would have made the short list.

 

[FinanceMan1212]

#1
It has a couple percent variation in the lower girdle % around the stone but who cares if your not paying top h&a dollar. Visible difference face up for all practical viewing 0.
As with all lab diamonds ask them to verify it is not cloudy or not have transparency issues.

edit: that is just out of the stones shown and is based on high bang for the buck but even if they were the same price it would have made the short list.

Can you explain what you mean about the girdle and how it's related to the hearts and arrows? The first diamond is hearts and arrows according the GCAL report.

 

[FinanceMan1212]

#1
It has a couple percent variation in the lower girdle % around the stone but who cares if your not paying top h&a dollar. Visible difference face up for all practical viewing 0.
As with all lab diamonds ask them to verify it is not cloudy or not have transparency issues.

edit: that is just out of the stones shown and is based on high bang for the buck but even if they were the same price it would have made the short list.

 

[Karl_K]

Can you explain what you mean about the girdle and how it's related to the hearts and arrows? The first diamond is hearts and arrows according the GCAL report.

The lower halves/girdle facets are the facets on the pavilion besides the mains.
They are blue in this wire frame image:

How far they extend down controls the cleft in the hearts of the heart image. Looking at the clefts on the heart image for this diamond there is a bit of variation, this is caused by a bit of variation in the lowers.
In this case not enough to worry about but a bit much for some definitions of hearts and arrows.

Do the pavilion mains drive light return in the modern round brilliant?

Article by Karl K. On many websites you will see it said that the pavilion main facets drive light return. Top labs and many grading systems use the pavilion angle […]

www.pricescope.com

 

[FinanceMan1212]

The lower halves/girdle facets are the facets on the pavilion besides the mains.
They are blue in this wire frame image:

How far they extend down controls the cleft in the hearts of the heart image. Looking at the clefts on the heart image for this diamond there is a bit of variation, this is caused by a bit of variation in the lowers.
In this case not enough to worry about but a bit much for some definitions of hearts and arrows.

Do the pavilion mains drive light return in the modern round brilliant?

Article by Karl K. On many websites you will see it said that the pavilion main facets drive light return. Top labs and many grading systems use the pavilion angle […]

www.pricescope.com

I've read that 77% is ideal for 34/40.8 - 41 57% table

 

[FinanceMan1212]

The lower halves/girdle facets are the facets on the pavilion besides the mains.
They are blue in this wire frame image:

How far they extend down controls the cleft in the hearts of the heart image. Looking at the clefts on the heart image for this diamond there is a bit of variation, this is caused by a bit of variation in the lowers.
In this case not enough to worry about but a bit much for some definitions of hearts and arrows.

Do the pavilion mains drive light return in the modern round brilliant?

Article by Karl K. On many websites you will see it said that the pavilion main facets drive light return. Top labs and many grading systems use the pavilion angle […]

www.pricescope.com

Can you show me an ideal hearts and arrows picture so I can compare?

 

[FinanceMan1212]

Do you prefer either of these diamonds over it?