Also, is this all that really matters? IE. Do we look at all the numbers, %, and degrees simply to see it''s light return and essentially the idealscope picture?
It would be feasable to have another stone with the same #'s that looked nowhere near as good as that stone.
well done - it is a great example of a princess with near round diamond light return - and well photographed too.
Did you take it - or was it a vendor?
It is a vendor's photo - I have yet to see the diamond in person. On paper, the numbers don't look perfect though, that is why I asked if the idealscope is the ultimate judge. Here are the numbers:
1.03 ct
vs1
H
5.60 x 5.69 x 4.09
Depth 72.7 %
Pavil depth 61.4%
Pavil angle 57.5
crown Height 6.8%
Crown Angle 29.5
Table 77.3% (sarin), 73% (GIA)
girdle: medium to thick
Polish/Symmetry: Very good
Fluorescence: None
$3600 USD
What do you think? Is it a keeper?
Also, why is the table % so different between the sarin and the GIA report? Is this a big concern?
Is there anything in particular that I should have the independent appraiser check out? Or is he/she simply verifying that the diamond is actually what's on the cert/sarin report?
It's "good". It's not terrible yet it's not the best I've seen. There virtually no blacks which means there's not a lot of light being directed at the high angles and there is considerable leakage on the crown angles. Don't get me wrong .. I've seen worse, much worse. But I've also seen better.
There's a database of these images on our website you can compare to.