Here is my GIA stone any input wil help.

[cutiek1t]

Round 0.57 F color VVS1 , cut- very good, polish-excellent, symmetry-very good
depth-60.7%
table size 57%
crown angle 35.5
crown height 15.5
pavilion angle 40.4
pavilion depth 42.5
star length 55%
lower half 80%
girdle thin to medium
culet none
fluorescence none
additional inscr H & A
I just got it today so please let me know what you think .
Thanks

 

[Skippy123]

sound good to me!

Holloway Cut Adviser
Selected: 60.7% depth, 57% table, 35.5° crown angle, 40.4° pavilion angle
The result is for a symmetrical diamond with a medium girdle and very good polish
HCA scores were adjusted Dec. 15, 2001 and Feb. 6, 2003.


Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 0.7 - Excellent
within TIC range

Play w/this for fun https://www.pricescope.com/cutadviser.asp

 

[whatmeworry]

Actually, I''m more interested in what YOU think of the diamond. How does it look to you in different lighting? How does it look at arm''s length? From 8 inches away?

 

[cutiek1t]

Date: 7/12/2007 5:07:48 PM
Author: whatmeworry
Actually, I''m more interested in what YOU think of the diamond. How does it look to you in different lighting? How does it look at arm''s length? From 8 inches away?

The diamond looks really white and flashy , so far it really look good.

 

[whatmeworry]

Thanks Cutiek. It''s just that those diamond proportions are not one that is usually seen on this forum. And it''s nice to know what your impressions are.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

just curious, how much did you pay?

And I am sure it is fine I am wondering actually if it might take a larger change to make cut differences matter in smaller diamonds anyway--not to say that your's has any, but just in general. Just something I would like to find out more about

As we know the size def matters when considering numbers, so maybe in small diamonds precision cut isn't nearly as important as in larger diamonds? In particular it would also mean % represent smaller actual values and the corrosponding leakage effects would thus be smaller than in the larger diamonds where the % change represent a larger actual number. Anyway, something I need to research more at least.

 

[kcoursolle]

The specs look fine. It would be nice to have an ideal scope image to make sure.

Also, you can easily drop in clarity and even color too if you wanted to go bigger or save money. An eye clean SI will look identical to the naked eye to a stone with the same characteristics that is flawless.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

Yea, I second that, there is nobody that I know who could seperate my VS2 from an IF with their naked eye, and nobody that I am friends with that could do it with a loupe--nobody has been able to find the inclusion yet

. So a VS1, no worries there. Alot of options.

 

[cutiek1t]

Date: 7/12/2007 6:46:31 PM
Author: WorkingHardforSmallRewards
just curious, how much did you pay?


And I am sure it is fine I am wondering actually if it might take a larger change to make cut differences matter in smaller diamonds anyway--not to say that your''s has any, but just in general. Just something I would like to find out more about

As we know the size def matters when considering numbers, so maybe in small diamonds precision cut isn''t nearly as important as in larger diamonds? In particular it would also mean % represent smaller actual values and the corrosponding leakage effects would thus be smaller than in the larger diamonds where the % change represent a larger actual number. Anyway, something I need to research more at least.

I paid 2590 for it , hopefully i don''t over paid.