Need advice on princess cut diamond...

[dgeee]

Hi all:

New to the forum. Great info you have here!

I''m in the market for a princess cut diamond and have been shopping around and doing my research, as everyone does I suppose! Much of my research as of late has been based on the princess cut AGA chart. I''m attempting to stay above a Class 2B and am looking specifically at depth and table percentages...is this a good way to go? I''ve been targeting diamonds in a range of 64%-75% depth and 62%-77% table.

I''ve listed 5 diamonds below that I''m interested in and would really appreciate some feedback on. I like diamond 3 because it''ll look bigger but am unsure how the less than ideal ratio of 1.1 will look.

Thanks for any help.
Dave


---
All are princess cut, have no cutlet, no fluorescence, and list as premium cut grade

DIAMOND 1
Weight: 1.01
Color: H
Clarity: VVS2
Depth: 67.4
Table: 76
Girdle: not listed
Polish: G
Measure: 5.83x5.73x3.86
L/W Ratio: 1.02
Symmetry: VG

DIAMOND 2
Weight: 1.01
Color: I
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 65.1
Table: 77
Girdle: Extra Thin-Thick
Polish: G
Measure: 5.73x5.68x3.70
L/W Ratio: 1.01
Symmetry: G

DIAMOND 3
Weight: 1.03
Color: H
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 64.5
Table: 68
Girdle: Med-Thick
Polish: G
Measure: 6.00x5.46x3.52
L/W Ratio: 1.1
Symmetry: G

DIAMOND 4
Weight: 1.04
Color: I
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 72.1
Table: 75
Girdle: Thin-Med
Polish: VG
Measure: 5.66x5.56x4.01
L/W Ratio: 1.02
Symmetry: VG

DIAMOND 5
Weight: 1.16
Color: I
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 74.4
Table: 78
Girdle: Med-Slightly Thick
Polish: VG
Measure: 5.95x5.66x4.21
L/W Ratio: 1.05
Symmetry: G

 

[valeria101]

There seems to be some confusion here... about the AGA charts! These cuts would never make the top of my list, looking at the numbers, of course.

About the AGA chart, I am not sure whether you noticed this or not, but most cut classes contain a pair of intervals for table size and a pair of intervals for depths: the pairs are supposed to be read in order : the first depths interval with the first tables interval and so on. Pairing the measurement for table with another measurement for depth does not put that stone in an intermediary cut class, but rather through it off the list. Stones with the depth % close (within 2-3 %) of the table % are most likely to comply with any of the AGA categories. The others simply do not make the cut. For example, on your list of four princess cuts, stone #4 is the closest to this principle, the others quite far.

There is one more measure on the AGA chart: the table and pavilion % - as you may imagine, completely off numbers for these could through a stone from it's class, if the number is not either within the interval of the class or close enough (in the adjacent class intervals, that is).

All in all, my "favorite" interpretation of the AGA charts leads to prefer stones with close numbers for both table and depth below 65%. It is generally accepted that the table% should better be less than the depth%, but, given that the vast majority of princess cuts are deeper than 65% (no go for me, because this makes them look way smaller than a round of the same weight) I would probably not reject a stone with a slightly bigger table (than 65%).

As for "squareness" - a 1.1 may not look exactly square, but this also depends on the size of the stone. I feel that stones around 1ct still look square at this point... This really is a matter of taste, after all.

According to the AGA chart, the stones on your list hardly justify the name (and price) for "premium cut". You may wander at this point what are the AGA good for - since only a few princess cuts get into the better categories... However, I still think that higher crowns and smaller tables make princess cuts more attractive, and. more importantly, more brilliant.

Since brilliance (light return & all) seems to be a rather more straight forward quality criteria for a diamond, I would always prefer to have some direct analysis of the optics of the stone I ma buying, rather than just some numbers. There is no recipe to turn numbers into a prediction of light return for princess cuts, after all. From what I know, DBOF (Diamond Brokers of Florida) and GoodOldGold list princess cuts with such cut quality reports. there are others, too...

 

[valeria101]

That post was getting long already... but here's more.

From your choices of color, clarity and size, I imply that you might be looking for a square princess cut, 1-1.1 cts, H-I color, VS clarity, with a good cut, which, fo me meas, depth and table below 65% (at worst up to 70%) with table % < depth %, polish and symmetry "good" or better.

I would add to these: good light return..

So, how about:

1.08 G VS1 (GOG) (deeper a bit, but with good optics already sorted out)

And three at Whiteflash (if any of these looks interesting you may want to ask about their IScope pictures....)

1.01 F VS2
1.14 H VS2
and
1.05 F VS2

Also, a perfectly square piece at DBOF caught my attention. I cannot get a link, but the specs were: 1.03cts, G, VS1, 5.63-5.63, depth 69.60%, table 71%, polish VG, symmetry VG, price 5265... Lige GOG, this store also provides optical analysis on their premium princess cuts (called "Brilliant Fire Princess") although I am not sure wether/ when this could be made available for this particular stone.

I did let the color and clarity grades to vary more, since locating nicer cut parameters did not really leave me a lot of options to list otherwise... and I do not know your budget either!

I hope this helps...

 

[strmrdr]

I would be cautious of a thin girdle and avoid anything lower that eliminates 2 of the original ones posted.
Thin girdles on princesses are just too delicate.
There was an article linked her a while back about some insurance companies were talking about not insuring princess diamonds with girdles under med.
They were getting too many claims for chipped and cracked stones with thin girdles.

 

[EdSkinner]

I have looked at the cut parameters of these stones. In order to determin the cut grade you need the crown height. If the crown height, girdle thickness and full depth are ok, then it is assumed that the pavilion is ok. Stone #1 is in the running with a 2b table and a 1a to 2a range depth. But you need the crown height and girdle thickness to figure the grade. #2 should be out of the running because of the girdle. Princess cuts chip very easily especially at the points. And that is where the most pressure is applied when setting. #3 looks good, 1a depth and table, but then again you need the crown height. #4 should be in the running, depth is 1a-2a table 2b, but may be problem with girdle. #5 is no better than 3a because of the table and may be worse once you find out what the crown height is. It is unreasonable to try to compare rounds and princess cuts. They are 2 different animals. In general a princess cut is deep with a spread table because you are supposed to see the reflections of light off of the pavilion facets. An ideal round table of 58% really cuts down your viewing area. And since they are traditionaly deep the 1 ct. princes will spread smaller than a 1 ct round ideal.