I Need Clutch Help on an Emerald Cut Diamond

[jroot]

I am pressed for time and looking for opinions on the following Emerald Cut Diamond which I have been considering buying over the internet, I am a little perturbed b/c I can''t see the diamond in person and having read many posts about specs being misleading esp. w/fancies. Although I have done much independent research I have concluded that I am woefully underqualified to make this decision and I have decided to open the forum for candid opinions from all of you on the quality of this stone, and what would be a fair asking price... The specs are:

.83ct Emerald Cut
Color: D
Clarity: VVS2
GIA Certified (12/6/01)
6.31 x 4.84 x 3.10
Depth: 64%
Table: 64%
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Fluorescence: None

Additionally I requested and received the Sarin Report from the Dealer, and it reads:

Length/Width: 1.30
Total Depth: 63.6% (3.11mm)
Crown Angle: 36.1 (36.1-36.1)
Crown Height: 10.9% (10.9-10.9)
Pavilion Angle: 55.3
Pavilion Depth: 50.8%
Table Size: 65.3% (65.3-73.5) 3.19mm
Girdle Thickness 2.0 (1.9-2.1)

After plugging these numbers into the AGA Cut-Grading Calculator on the www.gemappraisers.com website I received these results:

Cut: Emerald
Weight: 0.83 carats
Table % 64 Grade: 1B
Crown Height % 10.9 Grade: 3A
Girdle Thickness Medium to Medium Grade: 1A
Total Depth % 64 Grade: 1A
Polish / Symmetry Excellent Grade: 1A * Not a primary determining factor.

Final Grade: 2B

After culling all this info. on the diamond I still need help with the interpretation and final analysis. First my understanding is that the 10.9 crown height % is a cause for concern, but how much concern?? Second how should I interpret a final grade of 2B, is this a good grade for a diamond, International Fine Trade Cut sounds very impressive but on the other hand the diamond is 3 classes removed from Ideal Cut which gives me some pause. Additionally I could really use some feedback interpreting the Crown Angle #, and the Pavilion Angle and Depth #''s...I thank you in advance for putting up with this obnoxiously long post, and helping a very nervous guy get over the hump.

 

[Nicrez]

----------------
On 3/29/2004 3:42:01 PM jroot wrote:

I am pressed for time and looking for opinions on the following Emerald Cut Diamond which I have been considering buying over the internet, I am a little perturbed b/c I can't see the diamond in person and having read many posts about specs being misleading esp. w/fancies.
I too have a fancy and I can understand apprehension. I don't suggest to buy unless you can deal with the return policy within the time limit, AND it's a reputable vendor with good recommendations. None of us are EVER qualified enough to buy the perfect diamond, some of us just get a feeling...

Although I have done much independent research I have concluded that I am woefully underqualified to make this decision and I have decided to open the forum for candid opinions from all of you on the quality of this stone, and what would be a fair asking price... The specs are:

.83ct Emerald Cut
Color: D
Clarity: VVS2
(why a D? I am a color SNOB, and I ADORE D's, but a good F is more economical. As is a good VS2!)
GIA Certified (12/6/01)
(can you ask WHY it's from 2001? Can they get a newer one to make sure it's still the right weight, etc..?)

After culling all this info. on the diamond I still need help with the interpretation and final analysis. First my understanding is that the 10.9 crown height % is a cause for concern, but how much concern?? Second how should I interpret a final grade of 2B, is this a good grade for a diamond, International Fine Trade Cut sounds very impressive but on the other hand the diamond is 3 classes removed from Ideal Cut which gives me some pause. Additionally I could really use some feedback interpreting the Crown Angle #, and the Pavilion Angle and Depth #'s...I thank you in advance for putting up with this obnoxiously long post, and helping a very nervous guy get over the hump.

I think the reason the crown is icky, is because your table is so large, compared to the depth. Due to a larger top facet that is visible, the crown angle must correspond, so that throws the cut in that area into 3...Ideally a stone would be best with a table slightly lower than depth. I know a well cut emerald/radiant, idealy is lower in percents, but there is still a ratio to consider, and not just go by "good...the numbers are low".

Find one with a lower table than depth by 1-3% at least, and I have a feeling that the depth being comparatively deeper will make it look it's carat weight (you loose that "larger" appearance when you lessen the Table %), but you may gain in sparkle and light reflection.

Diamonds are a tricky deal, and if you want perfection, make sure you have the time, money and priorities set to deal with it...good luck!!!----------------

 

[rocks]

the problem isn't so much the table % as the crown angle. in all liklihood, this ec is "flat", and won't have much life. also, do keep in mind the fact that you will not have much of a selection in the certified .80 to .90ct range. believe it or not, most fine emerald cuts of this size aren't certified.

as always, cut should be the first thing you consider, and you really should see the stone. good symmetry may be fine, but in an emerald cut, when buying sight unseen, you should look for very good or excellent symmetry. the architecture/geometry of emerald cuts is very unforgiving.

 

[jroot]

Thank you both for your input it is very helpful... as a follow up I was wondering what crown angle is desirable in an EC??

 

[AFOGD]

jroot,

I have recently purchased an emerald cut, and I can tell you that by *far* the most beautiful stone I saw (and the one I got, after seeing about two dozen) was graded a 2B, and for largely the same reasons that yours was: Mid-60s in table and depth and in the 10.x% range for crown height. In other words, I would not let the numbers of the stone scare you off *at* *all*.

*However*, it was amply clear from my experience that the numbers were *awful* predictors of the "life" of the stone, at least within the range of reasonably-well-cut stones I was looking at. Within that range, some were dull and dead, others were quite lively, and one was spectacular. I could not predict which would be which by the numbers inside this range.

Good luck on the search,
AFOGD

 

[rocks]

you really do have to see the stones. as a rule, i prefer smaller tables (62% or below) and steeper crown angles (14% or more by estimation)... all that said, you really do have to see them...preferably side by side.

unlike many on this forum, i am not a fan of lower color stones (below f, by my standards), but given the limited number of high color and clarity, smaller emerald cuts, you should consider expanding your search to include larger lower color and clarity stones ( to .90 plus gvs2's). you may get lucky and find a really beautifully cut stone.

good luck!

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/29/2004 9:20:05 PM rocks wrote:

you really do have to see the stones. as a rule, i prefer smaller tables (62% or below) and steeper crown angles (14% or more by estimation)...

----------------

The 14% is crown height not angle ( a 14 degres angle is something very flat). There are nu rules in place for the pavilion angles on a n Ec for this (or any) pavilion height - those would depend on the stone's proportions... Besides, it is the pavilion's cut that influences light return even more: and here proportions, and the length of the 'keel' (bottom facet replacing the culet) matter.

However, without hard rules in place, it is nearly impossible to hunt down Ecs by numbers. It may help to order one from a sellers that picks stones by light return, Otherwise, anything can be done with enough patience, I supose.

Would an Iscope pic be convincing about any stone? ( HERE are some examples for ref )

How about these:
0.92 E-VVS1

and a square...
0.89 D-IF

 

[jroot]

Thank you all for continuing to weigh in, Thanks esp. to Valeria for the instructive examples and the two stones you managed to find, I am requesting more info on the .92 as we speak and will post the full rundown when I receive it for commentary. I also have been looking at another stone lower in both color and clarity and when I get the sarin report and the cert. I will post that stone's specs as well, and I hope you all will continue to lend your knowledge to my decision. Thanks so much.

 

[jroot]

Alright I'm calling on all you knowledgeable folks out there to give me your candid opinion on another Emerald Cut stone. The stone is larger, it is lower in color and lower in clarity than the previous post, but it may be a winner, let me know...

1.08 ct Emerald Cut
Color: H
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 63.9%
Table: 62%
Polish: VG
Symmetry: VG
Culet: N
Girdle: MD-STK
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.66 x 5.38 x 3.44

The Sarin Report reads:

Length/Width: 1.24 (I know this is outside the previously suggested range of 1.30-1.45 but what is the effect of this??)
Total Depth: 3.44 (63.9%)
Table: 3.28 (61%)
Crown Height: 14.9%
Pavilion Depth: 46.7%

And when plugged into the AGA Cut Calculator the diamond rates as a 1A



Cut: Emerald
Weight: 1.08 carats
Table % 62 Grade: 1A
Crown Height % 14.9 Grade: 1B
Girdle Thickness Medium to Slightly thick Grade: 1A
Total Depth % 63.9 Grade: 1A
Polish / Symmetry Excellent Grade: 1A * Not a primary determining factor.

Final Grade: 1A

I currently have this diamond on hold for 24 hours and the asking price is $3750, please send me your thought!!!

 

[valeria101]

Both this and the E-VVS are squarish (less than 1.3:1 LxW) - is this ok ?

Otherwise, for what numbers can tell this is a good cut. I am not sure that the "one carat mark" and the extra notch of cut grade make H desirable over D/E. The first couple of grades on the AGA charts already contain parameters characteristic of exceptional stones. If anything, a note on brilliance would mean more than the numbers allowed for the 1A-2A classes.

Also, there is no rule to pair color and clarity grades: there are D/E-VS out there too! 9taking into account the goal stated at the begining of this thread).

You will get to see the thing before a final decission, I hope

While ECs are not exactly suposed to outsparkle all other cuts, they should get quite some flash of their own. With no rules to translate such visual impression into numbers, the stone remains to be seen to be believed.

 

[valeria101]

0.91 E-VS1, 65% depth, 58% table, 1.4LxW

and ONE more...

No, I have no objection against the H grade, it just seem a different choice tahn the first few altogether.

 

[jaye]

My husband and I purchased a 1.11 ct. emerald cut stone about 8 wks. ago. I specifically wanted very close to 1.5 to 1 ratio or more because I prefer that look. I very much wanted to compare some stones. We do not live in a large metropolitan area where I could view a number of stones at a regular store, so I arranged for three different Pricescope vendors to send 4 stones total to an independent appraiser near where we live in order to make a final decision. These stones were all very good by the numbers, but upon seeing all four together one really stood out. My crown height percent is 11.4, color E, VS1, depth and table (per appraiser) both 61. It has tons of life. Many vendors will send stones to an independent appraiser without you having to pay up front. If you select a stone, then you pay that vendor and the appraiser releases the stone to you once the vendor gets payment. This method may allow you to compare some stones.

 

[jroot]

Valeria, or anyone else I have a question about the .91ct diamond that valeria sent me a link to from UnionDiamond... I am in the process of getting additional info on the diamond but I want to understand the effect of 58% table as opposed to one in the low to mid 60's... Also the depth is 65% and while I remember in an earlier thread Valeria said to find a stone w/ a depth at least 1-3% larger than table, what is the effect of thie depth being 7% larger. I really appreciate all the help that you people have given me, it has made the process so much easier, and made my purchase so much more educated

 

[valeria101]

So I am the culprit

I am definitely NOT a "diamond guru": so I hope my posts do not get in the way.

Usually I get to comment on ECs with too large tables, not too small. I'd wish it the other way around ! Smaller tables get a very elegant look - in my opinion. The new Royal Asscher design went that way, and old stones also have small tables (down to below 40%, sometimes). Cutting larger tables seems to represent a better economic decision (get the most finished weight out of one some rough). So one just does not see small-table stones very often Too bad! I find the look arresting

For once, the larger pavilion facets account for more dispersion of light reflected through the diamond (what made old cuts look spectacular in candle light). I also blame the small table of the old asscher for the 'hall of mirrors' effect: impossible in deep stones with large tables.

Conclusion: the stone deserves to be seen. At least in a decent 3X picture. I was happy to find it listed

 

[jroot]

Well Valeria, every stone you pick is snatched out from under me right before I get my hands on the info

.. The .91ct E VS2 is gone...if you have the wherewithal to help me continue to find prospects I am trying to set up an appointment with AGA (I live outside of Philadelphia) where I can take a look at the final few and decide in person...Right now I am going to take a look at the 2 stones whose info I have posted on here earlier, Tony Rixom from Union Diamond assures me the .83ct is not flat stone but I don't know how much puffery goes on even with reputable vendors...Therefore I want to see it in person...Same thing with the 1.08ct stone, however I realize that these are two very disparate stones, and the .91ct would have rounded out the field nicely, however it is gone, thus I could use help finding a couple more to look at, thanks for all your help