How does this diamond look?

[MichelleCarmen]

Opinions on this diamond? Thanks!

Report: AGS
. Shape: Round Ideal Cut
. Carat: 0.414
. Depth %: 61.1
. Table %: 54.5
. Crown Angle: 34.6
. Crown %: 15.7
. Star : 55
. Pavilion Angle: 40.7
. Pavilion %: 42.7
. Lower Girdle %: 76
. Girdle: Thin to Medium Faceted
. Measurements: 4.80-4.82X2.94
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Excellent
. Culet: Pointed
. Fluorescence: Negligible

 

[Lorelei]

Hi MC,

It looks great, should be a stunner.

 

[jet2ks]

Numbers are excellent. Can you get an IS or ASET

 

[Dreamer_D]

What''s it for MC?

 

[MichelleCarmen]

I already have the stone and am trying to determine if because the table is smaller than the other WF diamonds I have of the same size, this is why the diamond appears smaller than the other two. I was wondering if the table size stands out as being less than optimal.

The other two WF diamonds have tables of 57 and 56.8, and the above stone has 54.5.

It is set into a pendant and I want to upgrade it because it appears a bit small to me. It seems like it doesn''t stand out like I had hoped it would.

 

[Dancing Fire]

i love stones with smaller table.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 6/6/2009 3:29:56 PM
Author: MC
I already have the stone and am trying to determine if because the table is smaller than the other WF diamonds I have of the same size, this is why the diamond appears smaller than the other two. I was wondering if the table size stands out as being less than optimal.

The other two WF diamonds have tables of 57 and 56.8, and the above stone has 54.5.

It is set into a pendant and I want to upgrade it because it appears a bit small to me. It seems like it doesn''t stand out like I had hoped it would.

I also prefer a smaller table, more fire I think. But for a pendant or earings the appearance of size may be more important. I recall John P once saying that matching table size was important for matching side-stones on a ring, because table size affects perceived size. So I can imagine that the table difference *could* cause an appreciable size difference to someone who was comparing them really closely side by side.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Okay, thanks. Possibly it's mostly just the setting than, which is the WF four-corners pendant. It's extremely delicate. Maybe I'll look into switching the stone into a new heftier design. I had originally planned to get the Bellerina setting, however, the stone would have had to be over .50 ct. and at the time, I had to stick with something under the 1/2-ct. mark.

 

[Todd Gray]

Looks promising to me! I find table size to be more a matter of personal preference provided that the combination of crown and pavilion angle is within the center range which they are for this diamond.