How does this radiant rate?

[jusradiantshopping]

I just had Bob at Whiteflash pull this radiant in to be examined. Here are it''s stats. Tell me what you think:

1.01 Carat Radiant

Cut: Very Good
Color: G
Clarity: VVS1
Depth: 65.2%
Table: 65%
Symetry: Very Good
Polish: Very Good
Girdle: Medium to Thick
Cutlet: none
Flo: None
Meas: 5.75x5.43x3.54mm (1.06 L/W)

My original target was a bit better in color and thinner on the girdle, but the depth and table on this stone really stood out.

 

[jusradiantshopping]

Here''s a picture, Idealscope and Sarin on it (Thanks, Bob!). Maybe this will generate some opinions:

 

[SuzyQZ]

Oh my!

(my heart is going pitter patter!)

That looks just lovely to me! Will you be seeing it in person?
It looks good enough to eat!

Tell us what you think when you see it in person, and whether it lives up to your expectations.

ETA: I wouldn't worry too much about the G color, unless you are really sensitive to it or definitely prefer a colorless D,E,F. In my book, a G is perfectly acceptable. I would love to own this stone!

 

[lionluv]

I don''t know why you aren''t getting many responses to your question, so I thought maybe I would help to get the ball rolling again perhaps? In my layman''s opinion I think there is very little to find wrong or suspect with this stone. The parameters look to all be within the AGA guidelines for a premium cut. I think you are very lucky to have found a radiant > 1. carat with depth and table in such a desirable range. The only "flaw" I can see is PERHAPS the girdle could be thin to medium, but I have also been advised (by Whiteflash) that a medium, or med-sl. thick girdle is not a major issue with a radiant cut. But that is only if you are looking for a very minor fault. I have been viewing a 1.21 carat radiant that has a depth of 68.7 & table of 67 (7.19 x 5.49 x 3.77), L/W ratio 1.31. I favor the rectangular shaped radiants. I would like it if the depth were just a tiny bit lower, but alas, it is not! I have also been told (by "The Original Radiant Cut" people (brand) that higher depths up to 70 are permissable with a rectangular shaped radiant, esp. one well over 1 cwt. I have viewed this diamond in person with a 10X loop, and it is very clean. It is also very sparkly and does not appear to have any "dead" spots or glassy appearance at the edges. I believe Whiteflash sounds like they have an excellent reputation and they give you a return guarantee, right? So, if you get the diamond (and buy a loop), view it yourself under all sorts of lighting conditions and angles (especially subdued lighting) and you like the sparkle and see no dead spots, then that is one plus. Then if you take it to a certified appraiser to have it checked against the certificates provided to you as everyone here on this forum suggests and the appraiser basically agrees with the grading/specs. on your certificate, then I think you have yourself a great diamond! Hope this generates some replys from the "experts" because I am just a radiant shopper trying to make up my own mind!

 

[jusradiantshopping]

Thank you both so much for your opinions and advice. I know by experience lately that it''s hard to get anyone to care about a thread with "Radiant" in the title. Sometimes it feels like you have to be talking about Rounds, Royalty (royal asscher or princess) or Really big diamonds to draw any real attention.

To answer your question SuzyQZ, I have not seen the diamond in person yet. I plan on using every second of my 10 day inspection to examine the stone, take it to an appraiser to verify the certificate, and purchase insurance. It was so hard to find a diamond that fit what I was looking for AND was this close to AGA 1A standards, that I don''t think I can bear to let this one get away.

lionluv, I too was worried about the girdle, but the Sarin showed it to be 3.4 average thickness. I figure that amounts to a strong medium and shouldn''t be too much to worry about. I''ve found surprisingly little information regarding the effect of girdle thickness on radiants out there, so I still feel a little uninformed on that decision. I chose Whiteflash because they have quite the reputation amongst users of this forum. After comparing their service and especially price/quality, I certainly have to agree.

 

[SuzyQZ]

Date: 4/26/2006 9:54:07 PM
Author: jusradiantshopping
Thank you both so much for your opinions and advice. I know by experience lately that it''s hard to get anyone to care about a thread with ''Radiant'' in the title. Sometimes it feels like you have to be talking about Rounds, Royalty (royal asscher or princess) or Really big diamonds to draw any real attention.

To answer your question SuzyQZ, I have not seen the diamond in person yet. I plan on using every second of my 10 day inspection to examine the stone, take it to an appraiser to verify the certificate, and purchase insurance. It was so hard to find a diamond that fit what I was looking for AND was this close to AGA 1A standards, that I don''t think I can bear to let this one get away.

lionluv, I too was worried about the girdle, but the Sarin showed it to be 3.4 average thickness. I figure that amounts to a strong medium and shouldn''t be too much to worry about. I''ve found surprisingly little information regarding the effect of girdle thickness on radiants out there, so I still feel a little uninformed on that decision. I chose Whiteflash because they have quite the reputation amongst users of this forum. After comparing their service and especially price/quality, I certainly have to agree.

Good luck to you. I hope your diamond exceeds your expectations and that it really sings to you! It looks so lovely to me, really! Keep us posted on the results. Us radiant lovers gotta stick together!

 

[diamondfan]

I also thought the girdle could be an issue, since it can carry weight. I do not know a ton of details about radiants, though, so just going by a general guideline! you have to see it in person to really know!

 

[coda72]

Date: 4/26/2006 9:54:07 PM
Author: jusradiantshopping
Thank you both so much for your opinions and advice. I know by experience lately that it''s hard to get anyone to care about a thread with ''Radiant'' in the title. Sometimes it feels like you have to be talking about Rounds, Royalty (royal asscher or princess) or Really big diamonds to draw any real attention.

I think most people on here don''t have radiants therefore they don''t have much knowledge about radiants. I wouldn''t take it personally that not a lot of people respond. I would have responded, but I''ve been out of action for a couple of days, but then again I''m far from an expert. By the numbers, picture, and idealscope this looks like a good one. There is a little bit of light leakage in the center visible in both the idealscope and picture, but I doubt it will be noticeable under most light conditions. I think you may be suffering a bit of weight loss with the thick girdle just looking at the measurements. I have a radiant just .02 carats bigger and my measurements are a bit bigger. But I don''t think any of these things should be enough to stop you from at least taking a look at it.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The girdle should be at least 3% on a square 1ct sastone to reduce the very high chance of chipping.

Radiants draw a lot more color - consider dropping clarity to VS2 and going up to D-E or maybe F - but G is pretty good.

The light return is as good as it gets - but the symmetry is way less than VG - ask Bob if he can see the sym problems with naked eye - on light and on dark backgrounds.

 

[MissAva]

I think it looks pretty, but Gary raised some good points.

(Sorry more people have not written back, but Coda is right those of us who don’t know much about radiants would not wish to lead you astray!)

 

[jusradiantshopping]

Wow. Thanks, everyone for the outpouring of replies!

I''ve just got off the phone with Lesley Harris of Whiteflash (Bob is attending a conference for the week), and relayed to her the concerns raised here about symmetry. This is a fairly recently (Jan, 2006) GIA certed stone. With that in mind, is it still possible for the symmetry to really be that far out of whack?

I''ll post the findings from Whiteflash as soon as Lesley gets back to me.

 

[jusradiantshopping]

Well, after talking things over with Bob and confirming the GIA certificate, I decided that this was the diamond...

I have to say, I am certainly not dissapointed. In fact, I was completely blown away when I got this beauty:

The pictures do not do it justice.. I will post more pictures when I get a new camera. This is the temp setting, the real setting to be finalized after I pop the question

 

[JulieN]

congratulations! glad that you had a good experience.