is it better...

[ajdubya126]

I know there are not a lot of oval people on here, but I thought I''d go ahead and ask. I found an eye-clean E SI2 that is well within our budget. The only problem is that the length to width ratio is 1.26. I know the recommended L-W ratio is between 1.33-1.6, but too me it looks fine just a little fat.

I also found a H SI2 that is within our price range as well. The inclusions are noticeable 11X, but it has a great L-W ratio....I think it''s 1.47?

My question is, which one to sacrifice? I know there is a perfect rock out there, but I don''t want to keep searching and just want to lead (tell) him in the right direction.

I''ll post the links here...


http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI2-Premium-Cut-Oval-Diamond-892570.asp

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/E-SI2-Premium-Cut-Oval-Diamond-892599.asp

 

[BigDiamonds]

I would find first if either/both are eye-clean. No sense in mentally torturing yourself if one is not a viable candidate.

FWIW, I think fat ovals are great. i don''t know if it has any impact on light performance tho...?

 

[shminbabe]

i love fat ovals and i would pick the eye clean one over the one with the "better" l/w ratio. i think the ratio on the eye clean one is fine, really. it is a matter of personal preference of course but i really don''t like to notice inclusions. there was an inclusion that was visible particulary when my stone was less clean and that always bothered me. i loved my oval otherwise. it was stolen. i have no idea what its l/w ratio was. i''d gotten it way back before ever researching diamonds. i loved it, but seeing that inclusion at times bothered the heck out of me.

jeannie