Learning about diamonds--- WF diamond example

[lilylover]

I am educating myself on diamonds, and I have a few questions. I knew the basics before joining this forum, but I am learning more and more.

So, for educational purposes only, could you guys tell me which of these diamonds would have the best appearance if I were to purchase it? In the pictures of each diamond, I personally think they all look great, but what do I know? For example, would the price difference between the 2nd and 3rd diamond be worth it?

Thanks in advance!

http://www.whiteflash.com/round/Round-cut-diamond-1204657.htm
Carat: 0.51
. Depth %: 61.1
. Table %: 61
. Crown Angle: 36
. Crown %: 14.5
. Star : 60
. Pavilion Angle: 40.6
. Pavilion %: 43
. Lower Girdle %: 85
. Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick Faceted
. Measurements: 5.07-5.14X3.12
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: None

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-1204653.htm
Carat: 0.50
. Depth %: 61.2
. Table %: 59
. Crown Angle: 34.5
. Crown %: 14
. Star : 55
. Pavilion Angle: 41.4
. Pavilion %: 43.5
. Lower Girdle %: 80
. Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick Faceted
. Measurements: 5.10-5.13X3.13
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Excellent
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: Faint

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-912950.htm
Carat: 0.512
. Depth %: 61.2
. Table %: 57.3
. Crown Angle: 34.7
. Crown %: 14.8
. Star : 53
. Pavilion Angle: 40.7
. Pavilion %: 42.8
. Lower Girdle %: 77
. Girdle: Thin to Slightly Thick Faceted
. Measurements: 5.12-5.17X3.15
. Light Performance: 0
. Polish: Ideal
. Symmetry: Ideal
. Culet: Pointed
. Fluorescence: Negligible

 

[stone-cold11]

1, 61.1% depth, 61% table, 36° crown angle, 40.6° pavilion angle, HCA 2.8

2, 61.2% depth, 59% table, 34.5° crown angle, 41.4° pavilion angle, HCA 5.1

3, 61.2% depth, 57.3% table, 34.7° crown angle, 40.7° pavilion angle HCA 1.2

Stone 2 is definitely out of the race. If you look at the IS/ASET, you will see a lot of light leakage just around the center of the stone making for a dull looking stone.

Stone 1 might be worthwhile, just on the borderline, some leakage but may be good for contrast, but has a larger table than most here would like though, this generally results in slight less fire than an ideal cut.

Stone 3 is an ideal cut ACA. The price markup is also partly due to the brand name. It has better optical symm as shown by the presence of H&A pattern but H&A is better, just personal preference.

We use the HCA as a rejection tool, usually anything under 2 is worth considering, 2-4 a maybe if you are on a tight budget. So it is possible for you to find an ideal cut that is not ACA, or even AGS0 graded with GIA, just more leg work to be down as you will be sorting through more stones to find the one, but the result might be a cheaper more affordable stone.

 

[Gayletmom]

Thanks for the question as I am learning, too. Stonecold, one perhaps elementary question: how do I find/figure out the HCA? Is it on one of the reports or do I have to do some math?

Thanks,

 

[stone-cold11]

I have link the HCA tool. https://www.pricescope.com/cutadviser.asp. It can be found under tools on the drop down bar above, as the cut adviser.

Just input the depth%, table%, crown angle and pavilion angles into the boxes provided and presto you get a score. All these information can be found on GIA/AGS report after 2006. Other labs may have some information left out, EGL I think have crown and pavilion depth % which is less accurate as an input for the HCA. Be sure to read on the warning and how to use the HCA http://diamonds.pricescope.com/ideal.asp

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 12/10/2008 5:55:52 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
1, 61.1% depth, 61% table, 36° crown angle, 40.6° pavilion angle, HCA 2.8

2, 61.2% depth, 59% table, 34.5° crown angle, 41.4° pavilion angle, HCA 5.1

3, 61.2% depth, 57.3% table, 34.7° crown angle, 40.7° pavilion angle HCA 1.2

Stone 2 is definitely out of the race. If you look at the IS/ASET, you will see a lot of light leakage just around the center of the stone making for a dull looking stone.

Stone 1 might be worthwhile, just on the borderline, some leakage but may be good for contrast, but has a larger table than most here would like though, this generally results in slight less fire than an ideal cut.

Stone 3 is an ideal cut ACA. The price markup is also partly due to the brand name. It has better optical symm as shown by the presence of H&A pattern but H&A is better, just personal preference.

We use the HCA as a rejection tool, usually anything under 2 is worth considering (edit to add:, these stones should then be assess using ASET/IS, your Mark One eyeball, to see which would you prefer), 2-4 a maybe if you are on a tight budget. So it is possible for you to find an ideal cut that is not ACA, or even AGS0 graded with GIA, just more leg work to be down as you will be sorting through more stones to find the one, but the result might be a cheaper more affordable stone.

 

[Gayletmom]

Thank you, I see the light! I had read the section on the use of the HCA previously but wasn''t clear on how to get it if it wasn''t listed.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 12/10/2008 7:25:18 PM
Author: Gayletmom
Thank you, I see the light! I had read the section on the use of the HCA previously but wasn''t clear on how to get it if it wasn''t listed.

Good luck in your search.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/10/2008 7:25:18 PM
Author: Gayletmom
Thank you, I see the light! I had read the section on the use of the HCA previously but wasn't clear on how to get it if it wasn't listed.

Welcome!

Just make sure you use the HCA in the right way as an elimination tool, it isn't used to select diamonds. And I like your third choice best. The first diamond could be an option for a fine make diamond, any leakage shown on the IS image ( not controlled leakage) might not be perceptible to the human eye. And to expound on the use of HCA scoring over 2, yes you can find some good diamonds in that way but you need images such as Idealscope and usually it is diamonds with top symmetry that will be among the best of these.