Is this an Ideal cut?

[strmrdr]

3 or 4

 

[elle_chris]

Karl- why not #1 as well?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2009 11:39:40 AM
Author: elle_chris
Karl- why not #1 as well?

price

 

[elle_chris]

ahh.. thought there was something i was missing with that combo.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 4/22/2009 11:40:54 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/22/2009 11:39:40 AM
Author: elle_chris
Karl- why not #1 as well?

price

Give me nr 3 then!

 

[sandystone1]

Guys,

I was also more inclined towards #3. One last question was is 34/40.8 good combo?

Thanks
Sandy

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/22/2009 11:45:51 AM
Author: sandystone1

Guys,

I was also more inclined towards #3. One last question was is 34/40.8 good combo?


Thanks

Sandy

57/34/40.8/80 is a good combo

 

[sandystone1]

Guys,

I will be purshasing No. 3 or No.4 today. I hope it will turn out to be a good stone and my GF will like it (I will mention all you people when I propose her ). Thank You all for your expert opinion. I will let you all know how it looks once I have it in my hand.

Thanks
Sandy

 

[Stephan]

4... or 3?

 

[sandystone1]

Hi Stephan,

I have put both 3 & 4 on hold. I am more inclined towards 3 as it was commonly picked by all of you. However I am also thinking about 4 as it is little bigger. Do you think visually it will look bigger?

1.30 G VS1 Med faceted 0.9 HCA 61.3 57 35/40.6 (7.03 x 7.01 x 4.30 mm) Star 50% Lower Depth 80% $9500
1.36 G VS1 Med-Sl Thk 1.1 HCA 61.6 57 34/40.8 (7.12 x 7.09 x 4.38 mm) Star 50% Lower Depth 80% $9900

Thanks
Sandy

 

[Stephan]

Hi Sandy!
With such a little size difference, I think visual performances will decide which one looks bigger.
The problem in the Sandy case is: no Sarin, no IdealScope or ASET pictures.
So we have to work with rounded numbers (especially with GIA certificates).
I hope your eyes will be rounded too when you first see the diamond you''ve chosen.

Number 4 has an upper/lower girdle combination of 40.58/41.89 (yes strmrdr I know it''s rounded but we can''t do better).
Personally, with such a lower girdle, I prefer a little steeper upper girdle (for example: longer star facets).
That''s why I would buy nr 3.

 

[sandystone1]

I hope the it will be a good surprise when it arrives

When you mean ''Visual performance will decide which one looks bigger'', you meant by the spread right? If that is the case does no.3 has a good spread or no. 4?

Thanks
Sandy

 

[Stephan]

Date: 4/23/2009 2:25:47 PM
Author: sandystone1
When you mean ''Visual performance will decide which one looks bigger'', you meant by the spread right? If that is the case does no.3 has a good spread or no. 4?

Visual performance = light return, fire, scintillation.
Nr 3 has a slightly better spread (size compared to carat weight) than nr 4, but nr 4 is bigger. The size difference between nr 3 (7.02 mm) and nr 4 (7.105 mm) would not be important if you look at them side by side. I guess the difference in fire/scintillation will be more important to your eyes. But nobody can say which diamond will flash you. We only can guess and nr 3 is my guess.

 

[sandystone1]

I hear you all. It is my biggest online purchase ever and thats why I am a little nervous. Anyways I have that 30 day return window if things go south. At this point I can only hope, but I am def going with No. 3. Hopefully will have it by monday/tues and will let you all know.

Thanks Stephan.

 

[Stephan]

Sandy,

If you want to feel good after the purchase, go to an appraiser with the diamond.
Here is a list:
http://www.pricescope.com/appr_list.aspx

Good luck Sandy!

 

[sandystone1]

Thanks Stephan for the list. I will try to find from my list. I also came across another stone. The specs are very identical to No.3. I am getting this for additional 1000 bucks. Is it worth it? It is an VVS2 & bigger.


1.42 G VVS2 Med-Sl Thk 0.9 HCA 61.8 56 35/40.6 (7.22 x 7.19 x 4.45 mm) Star 50% Lower Depth 80% $10500

 

[Stephan]

G-VS1 will be eye clean.
On the VVS2, I don''t like the 1000 bucks more for clarity you won''t see and I don''t love the higher depth due to a thicker girdle.
Where is listed nr 3 (1.3ct)?
I can''t find it!

 

[sandystone1]

It is on BN. May be coz I have it on hold, you are not able to find it. Search this product ID: LD01124519 and then you will find it. If I am willing to pay 1000 more is the new stone I told ya still a buy?

Thanks
Sandy

 

[Stephan]

Oh sorry, the diamond is also deeper because of the smaller table.
But G-VS is a beloved combination on the forum, you should know that VS1 are very clean diamonds, don''t need to pay more.
But the 1.42ct could be very nice too!

 

[Stephan]

I still love nr 3 the most.

But Sandy, what we do here is gambling, all numbers on the GIA reports are rounded.

 

[sandystone1]

Stephan,

Believe me I have searched most of the big online retailers and everybody and all stones they sell have same typical combos (34, 34.5, 35, 35.5)/(40.6, 40.8, 41). And even if I find a retailer who does not average, the prices sky rocket. You are right, it is a gamble. I guess I have to take my chances.

Also, I saw 61.8/56 depth/table selling from anywhere between 15 - 20k for the sizes 1.25 - 1.6 ct.

I never thought this would be such a time consuming effort. Oh well I learnt something.

Thanks
Sandy

 

[Stephan]

If you choose the 1.42, say me because it''s bigger or because it''s a VVS.
But please don''t believe that 61.8% depth is better than 61.3%.
What I know is that a medium - slightly thick girdle is not a favorite on this forum.
La crème de la crème ideal diamonds have thin - medium girdles.

 

[sandystone1]

Does Med faceted griddles come under thin - med or they are different, like the one on No.3?

Thanks
Stephan

 

[Stephan]

I think nobody will correct me if I tell you that a medium girdle is the best you can buy.

 

[Stephan]

Faceted or not is a matter of preference, both are great.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/23/2009 4:36:46 PM
Author: QueenMum
I think nobody will correct me if I tell you that a medium girdle is the best you can buy.

I would.
there is no best only acceptable.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/23/2009 2:01:44 PM
Author: QueenMum

Number 4 has an upper/lower girdle combination of 40.58/41.89 (yes strmrdr I know it's rounded but we can't do better).

I really wish you would drop that nonsense.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 4/23/2009 6:06:46 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/23/2009 4:36:46 PM
Author: QueenMum
I think nobody will correct me if I tell you that a medium girdle is the best you can buy.

I would.
there is no best only acceptable.

Medium is better than slightly thick, thick, very thick.
With thicker girdles you loose spread.
Medium is better than very thin, very thin girdles are easy to chip.
Now is medium better than thin? I still believe it is safer.

 

[Stephan]

Date: 4/23/2009 6:09:23 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/23/2009 2:01:44 PM
Author: QueenMum
Number 4 has an upper/lower girdle combination of 40.58/41.89 (yes strmrdr I know it''s rounded but we can''t do better).

I really wish you would drop that nonsense.

What do you want to say?
That if a number is rounded we should totally disregard it?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/23/2009 6:13:47 PM
Author: QueenMum

Date: 4/23/2009 6:09:23 PM

Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/23/2009 2:01:44 PM

Author: QueenMum

Number 4 has an upper/lower girdle combination of 40.58/41.89 (yes strmrdr I know it's rounded but we can't do better).

I really wish you would drop that nonsense.

What do you want to say?

That if a number is rounded we should totally disregard it?

The entire idea is not correct by themselves lower and upper angles mean nothing and even relative to each other mean little.
For example lower angle and length has to be considered against table size and crown height(CA is not 100% correct for this but can be used) not the upper girdle angle.
For every table size and crown height there is a different set of lowers that are optimal.
Then once that is done you have to balance them against the mains to see if they are practical(min painting and digging)
The upper girdle angle has to be balanced against the lowers, mains,CH, CA, and table.
The stars by themselves are not very important other than the effect the uppers has on their size.

Even if you were correct trying to calculate it from even non-gia rounded numbers is bad data.