My first "what do you think of this diamond." Fingers crossed

[Picabia]

Any opinions? It''s just in my budget, love the color, the fluoro isn''t hazy. Am I on the right track?

Carat weight: 0.90
Cut: Excellent
Color: F
Clarity: VS2
Depth %: 59.3
Table %: 60
Symmetry: Excellent
Polish: Excellent
Girdle:
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Medium
Measurements: 6.27-6.30x3.73
Crown angle: 32.5
Pavilion angle: 41

 

[stone-cold11]

Promising from the numbers. But it is cut for brilliance and spread, probably sacrifice some fire performance for it.

 

[Picabia]

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but what is spread?

I''m working on getting an IS image--ordering my own in the mail as well.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Not the typical proportions that are seen in ideals, but complimentary none the sell. As stone says, the diamond is shallow and therefore measures bigger in diameter than a similar traditional ideal cut would. The diamond may favour brilliance/white light return over fire. I would suggest if you can comparing it to a more balanced cut to see which look you prefer.

 

[stone-cold11]

spread is how large it face up, the diameter for a round.

 

[Picabia]

Hm. Well I wouldn''t mind it looking bigger

Hopefully I don''t mind the loss in fire. I''ll keep looking at more stones...

 

[yssie]

Date: 5/4/2010 2:03:14 PM
Author: Picabia
Hm. Well I wouldn''t mind it looking bigger

Hopefully I don''t mind the loss in fire. I''ll keep looking at more stones...

I would suggest looking at some stones in person - I had a shallower stone and the difference in performance type can be quite striking.

 

[Picabia]

I will look at them in person. I''m just lining up a few to go see. Did you dislike the performance of your shallower stones? Or are you just saying it''s noticeable?

 

[yssie]

Date: 5/4/2010 3:41:16 PM
Author: Picabia
I will look at them in person. I'm just lining up a few to go see. Did you dislike the performance of your shallower stones? Or are you just saying it's noticeable?

It's very much personal perference. I prefer a more fiery stone - and by that I don't mean a stone that outputs more fire, because in spotlighting any diamond will turn into a fireball, but one that outputs fire in more types of lighting (this is the difference between BIC/TIC/FIC on the HCA).


My first stone was 33/40.7 (some obstruction issues, but amazing bright white brilliant performance). Second stone I went the opposite direction: 35.8/40.6 (not nearly as much white light return but noticeable fire in situations wherein I'd seen none in the former). Unfortunately no stones of the latter type were available in the size/colour/clarity combos I was looking at for my new stone, so I went with a very middle of the road 34.5/40.8 that is also a spectacular, very balanced performer. This last is the route I recommend.

 

[Lorelei]

Go and view some AGS0 Peerless from Jareds if there is a store nearby or Hearts on Fire branded h&a, this will give you a comparison of well cut rounds.

 

[Picabia]

No jared nearby, but I''ll see if I can find a shop with some kind of branded H&A.
Would you say, then, that this stone is not a great cut Lorelei? I kind of like how big the diameter is (makes me feel better about not hitting the 1ct mark).

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 5/5/2010 9:41:11 AM
Author: Picabia
No jared nearby, but I'll see if I can find a shop with some kind of branded H&A.
Would you say, then, that this stone is not a great cut Lorelei? I kind of like how big the diameter is (makes me feel better about not hitting the 1ct mark).

It could be a great 60 60 type stone ( 60% depth 60% table) but I am only guessing based on the numbers and I don't want to mislead you. It could theoretically favour brilliance over fire but thats not to say you wouldn't see any fire as its hard to estimate the performance and personality of a diamond from the basic numbers, if you like it in person and have compared some others thats a good reason to shortlist it.