Help with opinions! 4.37 carat EC

[sbingus]

I have another stone that i need your opinions plz! i have seen this stone a couple times, the only concern that I saw was that it was a little more elongated(1:42) than what i prefer...i believe what i like is 1.30-1.35..anyways here is the stats. Oh, one more concern I have now that I have a copy of the GIA report is that the table seems smaller(55%) is this because its a narrower stone? Please excuse my ignorance, I am new to this

4.37 carat
Emerald cut
I color
vs1 clarity
polish very good
symmetry good
flour. none
table 55%
depth 67.5%
girdle thin-slighty thick
l:w ration 1.42

please tell me what you think of this stone. thanks in advance!

 

[strmrdr]

numbers sound good.
55% table is a smaller table than the other one.
It is a look that I would prefer but some don''t.
The table % is a percentage of the width.
ie a 55% table is 55% of the width of the stone.

 

[sbingus]

strmrdr- so is it correct to assume that if you have a narrower stone than the table % will be lower than if you have a wider stone? ie a 1.42 ratio ec will have a smaller table than a 1.30 ratio ec? thanks for you time!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/30/2009 6:20:38 PM
Author: sbingus
strmrdr- so is it correct to assume that if you have a narrower stone than the table % will be lower than if you have a wider stone? ie a 1.42 ratio ec will have a smaller table than a 1.30 ratio ec? thanks for you time!

in mm yes for the same % if they are the same weight and depth.

If both diamonds were 6mm wide the table would be the same width if it was the same %.
One 4x6 would have a larger table in MM than one say 3x7 for same %
Lets use 50% the table is 2mm wide on the 4x6 and 1.5mm on the 3x7