Is this stone too deep?

[Ty Cobb]

I ask only because it graded out at a 2.6 even though it looks absolutely amazing in north facing light. Not store lights.

6.15x 3.83 mm
size .89Ct
Color: H
Flour: none
Precision of cut : Ex
symmetry: ex
Polish: ex
clarity: VS1
Depth: 62.3
Table: 56
Crown height: 15
crown angle: 34.5
star length percent: 50
Pavillion depth: 43.4
Pav angle: 41.1
lower half percent: 80
Girdle: medium to slightly thick
finish: faceted
culet: none

 

[peridot83]

I am no expert but...it seems to me the usual problem with deep stones, is the spread (or how it looks face up is small). In this case, for whatever reason, the spread is still very good . If you liked how it looked in northern light, and from your other posts you seem to have had exposure to a very good selection of excellent diamonds, then take it!

Hopefully, you''ll get a good price since the numbers are a little off of the super-ideal #s

 

[oldminer]

This is not an example of a deep stone. The general specs look pretty nice. Have you compared it to any others that you might also consider?

 

[Ty Cobb]

Well these are the ones I am comparing it to. Both of these were great stones on HCA, this one, which looked the best, has the worst HCA score, I know HCA isn''t perfect, but there is ussually a reason that HCA discounts a stone, and I am just curious. The above was a stone I looked at at Tiffs, #2 was at HW, and 3 was at Cartier. I am not seriously looking to buy anytime soon, just doing some looking and being curious.

#2
size 6.08-6.11 x 3.7
wt: .84 ct
color: f
fluor: none
Precision of cut : Ex
symmetry: VG
Polish: ex
clarity: VS1


Depth: 60.7
Table: 58
crown angle: 34.1
Pavillion depth: 43.4
Girdle: medium to slightly thick
finish: faceted
culet: none
#3
size 6.21-6.24x 3.8
wt: .91 ct
color: e
fluor: none
Precision of cut : Ex
symmetry: VG
Polish: ex
clarity: VS1


Depth: 60.0
Table: 58
crown angle: 35.4
Pavillion depth: 42.8
Girdle: medium to slightly thick
finish: faceted
culet: none

 

[peridot83]

Here's a link that may help:

Explains how eyes will like different things than the ASET images would suggest:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/NewCutGrading/GIAExAGSIdeal/

Explains different fires that occur based on shallow v. deep

http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/NewCutGrading/FireDispersion/

It compares a slightly deeper, slightly shallower, & ideal fire properties. The whole "new cut grading" tutorial is awesome, but takes a long time to weight through. That one page I sent you should show you the difference, and that at the level of diamonds you're looking at...it may all have to do with personal prefernce.

 

[Ty Cobb]

yeah I have read up the tutorials on this site and that one. I am just primarily curious with the 2.6 HCA number. With that type of number I was sure someone would be able to spot a dimension issue.

 

[Lorelei]

I don''t class this diamond as an example of a deep stone, it is deeper than many we see here, but overall the depth is fine. This diamond might have scored lower on the HCA due to the steeper pavillion angle, but a 2.6 isn''t a horrific score by any means.