Is this a good one?

[sfoz]

Hi all,

I''ve been reading this forum for a while and the info you guys give is really great. Was wondering if you all could give me your opinion on this diamond. Is it a good cut, price, etc...?

Price: $5,398.00
Report: GIA
Shape: Round
Carat: 1.11
Color: E
Clarity: SI1
Depth: 60.9
Table: 59
Crown Angle: 35.1
Crown %: 14.6
Pavilion Angle: 41
Pavilion %: 43.1
Girdle: 7
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Faint
Measurements: 6.69-6.75X4.08

Thanks,
Otik

 

[phoenixgirl]

The price is very much dependent upon the cut quality. Your stone scores a 3.0 on the HCA, meaning that its angle should produce a "very good" (but not excellent) cut.

Here are similar stones for price comparison:

Stone 1

Stone 2

Stone 3

Stone 4

 

[Rhino]

Hi sfoz,




The stone you posted dimensions on is generally a stone that is a known leaker. Below are the results of what this crown/pavilion/table combo will generally have. The ring of white under the table is all leakage (light being leaked through the pavilion which ideally should be returned through the crown). While phoenixgirl is doing a tremendous favor showing you other options to what you have it is very possible that they are similar to this as there is no crown or pavilion angles listed on the stones she's referring.




If you're going to look at stones with crown angles over 35 degrees then that pavilion angle needs to be trimmed up closer to the 40.7 (or slightly shallower) zone. That is if you're concerned about how bright or brilliant the diamond will be.

My .02c

 

[sfoz]

Thanks for the replies. I appreciate you taking the time to give your feedback.

Rhino, I saw the diamond on Whiteflash, which had the following IdealScope image of it: http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=GIA-12618537#

Your image and the one they provide are very different. Just wondering why that is?

Thanks,
Otik

 

[aljdewey]

SFO - it's because they aren't the same thing.




The picture on the WF site is the Idealscope image - take of the actual diamond itself.




The model GOG has posted about is a simulation generated by software with the information plugged in.




Both are useful, but they aren't an apples-to-apples comparable item. It would be like trying to compare a photograph of you to a composite sketch drawing of you made by someone's verbal description of you---they have similar properties, but they don't present the same.




I'd consider the Idealscope image the more true representation between the two; it's a picture of the "actual" stone.




Plus, in this thread, (https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/question-for-dave-atlas-rich-sherwood.11994/) ........you'll notice that Jonathan points out the images are " 2 possibilities out of thousands that you could possibly have. It's hard to say without specifically knowing the details on the minor facets."

 

[Amber]

correction on top degree... 34.1 NOT 34.4

 

[diamondsman]

Hi amber

From the numbers you have provided, that stone looks nice,just wanted to know about the polish,symmetry and flour.
Yes, J colors (especially with e.g.l grading) are best mounted in a yellow gold shank ,with a white head,They seem to draw a bit color if mounted in white metals.
I don't understand what you mean you didnot see anything with the loupe?

 

[Amber]

By not seeing anything with the loop, I mean I did not see any inclusions in the stone. Fl-none, polish VG, sym. VG. Culet-none. Thanks for your input!!

 

[diamondsman]

It is very unusual for someone not to be able to see an Si1 quality, with a Loupe, somtimes it has to be pointed out to you, and then you will see it. many times people think it is dirt.
but any way, It must be a a nice si1 . and that's good.

The numbers are right, It is not a bad looking stone. go for it.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/21/2004 3:12:40 PM diamondsman wrote:


It is very unusual for someone not to be able to see an Si1 quality, with a Loupe, somtimes it has to be pointed out to you, and then you will see it. many times people think it is dirt.
----------------

This is totally false. The above statement implies that it's tough to find an eye-clean SI1 and NOTHING could be further from the truth.

 

[diamondsman]

adjwy wrote

(This is totally false. The above statement implies that it's tough to find an eye-clean SI1 and
NOTHING could be further from the truth.)


The consumer clearly says with a loupe!!
I guess you are not in the business and you don't know what a loupe is .
it is a magnifying glass to see imperfections in a diamond.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 1/21/2004 3:25:36 PM diamondsman wrote:


The consumer clearly says with a loupe!!
I guess you are not in the business and you don't know what a loupe is .
it is a magnifying glass to see imperfections in a diamond.

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

Not only do I KNOW what a loupe is, I OWN one! I don't need you to tell me what one is. Having said that......if the inclusions are are WHITE and they are wispy, they might not be readily visible even with a loupe.

And really.....make up your mind, will ya? Two months ago you were accusing me of being a covert spy in the trade and that I HAD to be affiliated with a vendor. Now I'm not in the business.

I'm not in the business. Period. Big deal. You're commenting on what CONSUMERS see, and I AM a consumer.

 

[diamondsman]

I don't want to go into this , and really tell you what I think of you..
but in your pursuit to discredit me, which you will not succeed,
you over looked the words LOOP(loupe) and instead of apologizing , you rant about what I think.
I also have seen your tempermental replies with foul language and have commented that it is not appropriate for this fourum.
Every time I post a message you are commenting and trying to discredit me, It will not happen I am in the business for 30 years.

sorry amber, If I misunderstood you ,and have commented wrongly, But I understood that you have looped the stone?

 

[aljdewey]

I don't want to go into this , and really tell you what I think of you..

This would be a waste of your time; I couldn't possibly care less what you think of me.

but in your pursuit to discredit me, which you will not succeed,
you over looked the words LOOP(loupe)

I didn't *overlook* the word loupe at all. Your statement was "it's *very unusual* for customers not to visualize an inclusion in an SI stone (with a loupe)."

There's nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. I understood your statement, I just didn't agree with it, and I still don't.

 

[diamondsman]

aljdewey Wrote
----------------[/quote]This is totally false. The above statement implies that it's tough to find an eye-clean SI1 and NOTHING could be further from the truth.

----------------[/quote]


It is not about your reading comprehension, it is about your memory, look at what you wrote a few minutes ago. (look at quote)
EYE CLEAN , Doesn't mean looking under a loop (loupe), It means exactly what it says naked to the eye.

I know it is very hard for you to apologize to me. cause you are on an ego trip.

Oh by the way ,If you are not in the business ,how many stones have you seen to suffice your statement of not being able to see an si1 inclusion with a LOUPE. one? two ? three?
that is not enough.
So please don't insult my intelligence .

I will not comment to you any more, as you said It would be a Waste of my time.

 

[diamondsman]

caveat emptor- let the buyer beware.

your opinions are led by resentment and are biased.

adjwy wrote
"Two months ago you were accusing me of being covert spy in the trade and that I HAD to be affiliated with a vendor"

 

[Amber]

We were told the cut was "ideal" so it is good to know the numbers are good. I got what I was told was an SI1 color K many years ago (uncerted) from a now bankrupt Krigels Jewelery store. At that time I didn't even know what a GIA or EGL cert was. I got a typed appraisal from the woman who sold it to me, so I felt comfortable with everything I had been told, and I wore it happily for many years. Later when I tried to sell it so I could upgrade to a larger stone, I was told it was at least an L, maybe even an M color. EGADS!! Imagine my surprise! It was 1.50 but cut deep so not much sparkle. I guess we all live and learn from our mistakes. I have read on this forum that EGL USA is somewhat more reliable then EGL European. At least the jeweler is honest in saying the large 3.19 J colored stone should be set in yellow gold with white gold prongs. He told my brother he would sell it for 15K. (Seem reasonable?) He knows he would be giving up some on the color in order to get the larger size. He is still looking though. He hoped to get a 3 carat that is beautiful without spending much more that 14-16K. Again thank you for all your replies and helpful info. Just trying to help Big Brother not make the same mistake I did!

 

[icelady]

----------------
On 1/21/2004 3:18:57 PM aljdewey wrote:

----------------
On 1/21/2004 3:12:40 PM diamondsman wrote:

It is very unusual for someone not to be able to see an Si1 quality, with a Loupe, somtimes it has to be pointed out to you, and then you will see it. many times people think it is dirt.
----------------

This is totally false. The above statement implies that it's tough to find an eye-clean SI1 and NOTHING could be further from the truth.
----------------

Aljdewey,

That is not at all how I read diamondsman's post. There was no implication that it is "hard to find an eye-clean SI1". Just that it is unusual to use a loupe and not see the inclusions in an SI1.

 

[diamondsman]

hi Amber

The price on the 3.19 sounds good, is he taking in a trade of your 1.50cts. and charging you 15K? or is it just 15k without your stone?

 

[Amber]

15K, no trade.

 

[diamondsman]

I think that it is a good price, for a 3.19 rbc. jsi1 e.g.l u.s.a

go for it.