Last Question

by lawmax » Oct 10, 2000

Hi Gloria,Does this diamond have a lab certificate? Try to get a copy of it and post all of the measurements. That will help the experts help you.lawmax

 

by lawmax » Oct 10, 2000

Hi,What lab did the cert come from? I believe experts have noted that the crown height percentage is key with radiants. Some like it to be around 12% if I'm not mistaken (of course I could be). Try to compare a few with similar color, clarity, and differing table, depth and crown percentages. See if you notice a difference and see if you can compare them in different types of lighting. Whatever you do, don't just go by what diamonds look like in those blaster gem lights that some dealers pop onto the counter or have above. They make everything look good, but nobody lives life under those lights! Keep us posted,lawmax

 

by pricescope » Oct 10, 2000

Gloria, fancy shapes are very difficult to judge based only on data. They should be viewed alive. Based on D. Atlas charts for radiant, http://www.gemappraisers.com/chrt3.htm , the table of this diamond is too large. Large table usually causes less fire (dispersion). Do you have more info on proportions: crown and pavilion?Have you seen it? How does it look like? To be absolutely sure whether it worth it's price you might need advice of an independent expert.

 

by StevL » Oct 11, 2000

I agree with Rock, but I would add that I prefer a smaller table size too. Maybe in the mid 70's.Gloria, if you like the diamond, that's the most important part....... enjoy------------------

 

by RockDoc » Oct 11, 2000

It has been my experience that the best looking stones have a MINIMUM of a 10% ( preferable 12%) crown.This of course also requires the relevancy of a REASONABLE crown angle as well. Over-shallow or over steep crown angles can negatively affect the stone brilliance and dispersion as well.nfortunately, most radiants and princesses do not have this crown height.. common to find from 4-7% but 10+ is harder to find.rockdoc
------------------