Is this small "looking" for it''s carat weight?!!!

[elephant]

OK, my bf/fiance bought a stone and he thinks it looks smaller than other stones that we''ve seen of the same carat weight. The cut says it''s ideal though, so? He thinks his expectations might be high?

It''s a 1.51 carat, RB, "ideal cut"

Here are all the stats I know....

Dia. = 7.36
Total Depth = 4.55mm (61.9%)
Pav. Depth = 3.19mm (43.3%)
Pav. Angle = 41.0
Crown Height = 1.09mm (14.8%)
Crown Angle = 34.6
Table Size = 4.19mm
Culet = Pointed
Girdle Min. = 2.0%
Girdle Max. = 2.7%
Girdle Avg = 2.3%

HCA = 1.3

Any other stats you need? Does this face up small?

 

[MissAva]

Date: 7/29/2005 5:56:01 PM
Author:elephant
OK, my bf/fiance bought a stone and he thinks it looks smaller than other stones that we''ve seen of the same carat weight. The cut says it''s ideal though, so? He thinks his expectations might be high?

It''s a 1.51 carat, RB, ''ideal cut''

Here are all the stats I know....

Dia. = 7.36
Total Depth = 4.55mm (61.9%)
Pav. Depth = 3.19mm (43.3%)
Pav. Angle = 41.0
Crown Height = 1.09mm (14.8%)
Crown Angle = 34.6
Table Size = 4.19mm
Culet = Pointed
Girdle Min. = 2.0%
Girdle Max. = 2.7%
Girdle Avg = 2.3%

HCA = 1.3

Any other stats you need? Does this face up small?

It looks pretty close to me in terms of dia. Perhaps you saw diamonds which had a larger spread prior to this one.

 

[elephant]

That''s sort of what I was thinking.... I mean, we got this from WF, so we were able to really run the numbers and see the Ideal Scope, whereas in the stores, we really had no idea....

 

[Bagpuss]

I agree, it's pretty close to being the right diameter for its carat weight. Looking at similar ideal cuts yours looks only a little smaller, 7.3 as opposed to around 7.4 to 7.5, but not so much that it should make that much difference to the eye.

I saw a half carat recently that looked huge, but, of course, it was far too shallow.

BTW, I have ideal cut solitaire earings from WF and they're great. Really top quality stones and they sparkle like the dickens.

 

[Mara]

A well-cut 1.5c would be around 7.4mm average so yours is pretty close.

The only thing that would make it face up slightly larger would be a shallower depth but then you may compromise stone cut quality depending on how low you go. For me personally I like stones with depth around 60.5 rather than 62 or similar because you do lose a tiny bit of spread in the depth. But on a stone like this, it would be not that much lost. You''d probably not see much of a diff if the stone was 7.40mm at all.

 

[rosy]

It could be the setting making it look smaller or the dreaded diamond shrinking syndrome!

 

[elephant]

Thanks all! He made me look at it just to make sure it looked right. And it''s gorgeous!! Imagine that -- diamond shrinkage for a guy! I KNEW there was a reason I wanted to marry this man!

 

[karenleah15]

Yes the shrinkage thing is BAD! It just sneaks up on a person!!!! I am feeling it myself right now. UGH! What can a person do?

They should make a cure for this. Oh wait they have.....UPGRADES. LOL!

 

[rosy]

The only cure for diamond shrinkage syndrome is to get a bigger rock! That sucks because there''s no medical insurance that will pay 80% of the cost!