shape
carat
color
clarity

I can't decide, appreciate opinions

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by jbrusky, Mar 10, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
  1. jbrusky
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    by jbrusky » Mar 10, 2001
    I have narrowed my search down to these two (I hope) and would appreciate anyone's input on these two diamonds. They are the same price and equivalent in color and clarity, both GIA certs. Is one considered a more traditionally better cut? What is the significance of the HCA score? Thanks in advance! John#1
    1.06 ct
    6.59 x 6.66 x 4.01
    depth 60.5%
    table 57%
    crown 32.1
    pavilion 41.0
    symmetry/polish: very good/very good
    flour: none
    girdle: medium to slightly thick, faceted
    culet: small
    HCA score: 0.9#2
    1.04 ct
    6.55 x 6.57 x 4.00
    depth 61%
    table 55%
    crown: 33.0
    pavilion: 41.1
    symmetry/polish: very good/very good
    Flour: none
    girdle: thin to medium, faceted
    culet: none
    HCA score: 1.5
     
    


    


  2. jbrusky
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    by jbrusky » Mar 10, 2001
    Thanks (I think). Actually, I was thinking along the same lines. This person is a bit fussy and I think would be impressed with the bragging rites of an IF, and without any DEF's in her possession for direct comparison, I thought this issue might not come up. I will certainly have to give this one some additional thought. But I do feel much better about evaluating cut, which seems to be the trickiest part. Thanks again!
    John
     
  3. jbrusky
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    4
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    by jbrusky » Mar 10, 2001
    Thanks for the input. These are both internet stones, so unfortunately I can't compare them side by side. I will call the seller and ask them to eyeball them for me. They are H in color and IF in clarity both cost 7k. i know I can get a somewhat bigger stone (maybe 1 1/4 ct) with less clarity, but that is another issue, i suppose. The recipient is the type of person who in most things prefers quality over size. Of course I would love to here what you think knowing this new info. Thank you so much everyone for your help. John
     
  4. Garry H (Cut Nut)
    Super_Ideal_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    14,538
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2000
    by Garry H (Cut Nut) » Mar 10, 2001
    Gee thats tough.
    buy them both!
    I find many people would make this decision on percieved size if the stones were side by side which i suspect they are not.
    So sorry folks i will go for #1.
    But in the end they are both beauties.
    garry
     
    


    


  5. Garry H (Cut Nut)
    Super_Ideal_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    14,538
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2000
    by Garry H (Cut Nut) » Mar 11, 2001
    Interesting John, Why IF and H?
    About 1/2 the people i test can see H color along side D-E stones, yet I have never found an untranied person who can pick a genuine SI1 round brilliant from an IF.
    If the recipient is really that fussy I would suggest D-E-(F?) VVS2-VS1 for about the same $'s
    garry
     
  6. lawmax
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,317
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1999
    by lawmax » Mar 11, 2001
    Hi jbrusky,Both of these diamonds appear to be very well cut. Have you seen them? If so, do you favor the look of one over the other?I think that if I were to choose one, it would be #2. It is likely to be more fiery. Since I can't see them, I base that solely on my preference for the smaller table and I also prefer that stone's dimensions which show less variance, and makes the stone more perfectly round.The cut adviser will give you an overall idea of how beautiful the diamond will be. The difference between a .9 and a 1.5 will most often not be detectable. You would have to see them side by side to be able to tell if you preferred the look of one of these diamonds to the other.I just ran your numbers through the cut adviser: Stone #1 falls into Garry Holloway's Brilliant Ideal Cut range while #2 falls into his Tolkowsky Ideal Cut category, so while #1 may be more brilliant, #2 may have more of a balance between brilliance and fire (i.e., more reflection of colored light than #2). This is a matter of personal preference. I like to see lots of colors flying from diamonds and think this is much harder to achieve than just getting brilliance (white light).I hope that helps you. [​IMG]
     
  7. lawmax
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,317
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1999
    by lawmax » Mar 11, 2001
    I'm with Garry on this one. Unless it is extremely meaningful to someone to know that their stone is IF clarity, it is really a waste.I'd go with better color and VS or so clarity. Besides, with some inclusions identifiable under magnification, you can be sure that a diamond returned to you at the jeweler's is definitely yours.Just my preference. [​IMG]
     
  8. pricescope
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    8,266
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1999
    by pricescope » Mar 11, 2001
    Hi John,I think you found very nice diamonds and I hope they are priced reasonable since they are not in AGS0 range.Once the HCA score is below 2 there is a very good chance to have a very nice stone but there is no 100% guarantee that you'll like 0.9 more than 1.5. The first one with shallower crown might be a bit more brilliant and look just a bit larger (spread). On the other hand shallower crown will less visible from the side view...The best of course would be to see and compare the stones yourself. Could you do that?Did you find them in the local store or in the web? If in the web, you can ask the dealer to eyeball the stones for you or ask him to send them to the independent appraiser like David Atlas, AGA.
     
  9. pricescope
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    8,266
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1999
    by pricescope » Mar 11, 2001
    Lawmax, you're right about fire. I also think that the second one could be more balanced. Although it is tough to say based on the numbers only - it would be great to compare them side by side.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

Share This Page