Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Need to pick one... pulling my hair out!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
M

MarkP1

Rough_Rock
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
39
Hi everyone,
I have three diamonds to pick from... I'm being picky, but it's a huge decision for me.
I need to let the retailer know which two I would like them to ship in so that I can take a look.
Please help me determine which two of the three below. On paper they all look to be very nice.
Does anything stand out? Thank-you very much for your help.

Diamond #1
Round, 1.06, F, VS1
HCA: 1.8
AGA: 1A
Combined AGS0 & GIA Excellent: Both Yes (from PDF chart John posted)

Depth - 62%
Table - 55%
C.A. - 34.5
C.H. - 15.5%
P.A. - 41
P.D. - 43%
Star Length - 55%
Lower Half - 75%
Girdle - Med.
Culet - None
Polish & Symmetry - Excellent
Fluoro. - None


Diamond #2
Round, 1.07, E, VS1
HCA: 1.7
AGA: 1A
Combined AGS0 & GIA Excellent: Both Yes (from PDF chart John posted)
Depth - 60.6%
Table - 56%
C.A. - 34.5
C.H. - 15%
P.A. - 41
P.D. - 43%
Star Length - 50%
Lower Half - 75%
Girdle - Thin
Culet - None
Polish & Symmetry - Excellent
Fluoro. - None
Comments: Surface & Internal Graining not shown


Diamond #3
Round, 1.08, F, VVS2
HCA: 1.0
AGA: 1A (C.A. - 1B)
Combined AGS0 & GIA Excellent: No (from PDF chart John posted)
Depth - 61.5%
Table - 56%
C.A. - 33.5
C.H. - 14.5%
P.A. - 41
P.D. - 43%
Star Length - 55%
Lower Half - 75%
Girdle - Med. - Sl. Thick
Culet - None
Polish & Symmetry - Excellent
Fluoro. - Faint
Comments: Additional pinpoints not shown

Thanks again.
 
they all have great potential but since you would have to see #2 to determine what effect the internal/external surface graining would have, i would say nix that one. it''s not worth bringing in, just to make that determination. especially since the other two look like they could be great and you don''t have that issue.

i would go for #1 & #3.
 
Thanks Belle!

I am curious to hear what others think.
 
Mark, all 3 have great potential.

I expect #1 and #2 to look more similar to each other, since the crown height on #3 is lower: Perhaps a little more fire in #1 & #2 and a little more brightness in #3.

Sometimes graining, pinpoint or clouds are ID'd on a report for sake of thoroughness, but if they're listed as 'not shown' on a GIA report it means they're non-issues (the exception may be clouds in an SI2). Belle is very considerate - and is being cautious on your behalf - but in this case there should be nothing to worry about.
 
#1 or #2 given just those 3 options and the limited info.
With the c/p angles of #3 id want a lgf of 80% not 75%
Do you have IS images?
 
Thank-you for the feedback.

Unfortunately, I do not have Ideal-Scope images.
I guess my only concerns, and the reason why I am looking for advice is (possible negatives of each stone):

Diamond #1 - Depth of 62%
Diamond #2 - Internal and Surface graining
Diamond #3 - AGA Class 1A (but C.A. - 1B) & it does not fall on the "Combined" AGS0/GIA Excel. chart from John.

Thanks John for your comments on "graining"/"pinpoints"/etc.
 
1-Not a big deal to me, as the angles are good.
3-Is in GIA EX grade, and as long as it''s not a steep/deep combo, it can still be a good thing.
 
#3 should not be a steep/deep (C.A. - 34.5, P.A. - 41, P.D. - 43.5%)


The other thing that is holding me back from eliminating #3 is that it got an HCA score of 1.0
 
Thanks for everyone''s help. I appreciate it.
Still not sure which two I''ll ask to be brought in... I''ll do a little more reading.
 
I think I''d want #1 and #2. Why not take the two that qualify as AGS0? Since John said the graining is a non-issue for #2, I might just take #2 over both of the others.
 
I''d pick #2. I like the numbers. The internal graining is a non issue. And, most likely the spreader (face up bigger) of them all.

If I were to pick two, then probably #2 & #1.

What are the prices attached to each? Are they all 6 1/2 dozen of the other?
 
Thanks "diamondseeker2006" & "fire&ice" for your opinions.

Can someone please clarify this for me...
Originally I used the PDF charts that John posted previously to determine (based on Table) if the diamonds were "Combined AGS0 + GIA Excel."
Both #1 and #2 came back as "yes" - AGS0

Last night I put the proportions for each into HCA and neither fell within the "white box" therefore neither according to HCA is AGS0???

Why is this?

Thanks.
 

Attachments

What white box are you talking about?

That said, please don''t pull your hair out!
2.gif
Honestly, these are some fine stones.
 
When you run the HCA with your proportions... the results are plotted on the color grid. A certain area is outlined in white and it states above the grid that if your plotted point falls within the white box it''s considered AGS0 for that table %.
 
Mark - don''t stress about this. The diamonds you have chosen have great numbers. They are just that: Numbers.

The cutting guideline charts AGS provides are for manufacturers... They are a prediction only, and can vary depending on level of detail. For instance, here is the broad GIA/AGS comparison chart you are referring to. In broad terms the numbers on your diamond may qualify for AGS0 (and GIA EX).

AGS_CGL_Example0.jpg
 
Here is another published AGS cutting chart. On this chart the 34.5/41 combo is also predicted for AGS0.

(copyright 2006 AGS, used with permission)

AGS_CGL_Example1.jpg
 
mark,
the white box identifies ags0 candidates. there is much more that goes into giving the ags0 grade than just numbers. only diamonds that are actually graded ags0 can be termed as such. the hca estimates where these diamonds may fall within the system based on angles but it can't be considered completely accurate. especially with boderline angle combinations.
2.gif


eta: ....der! i see sir john is alread covering this. and, as usual, with much more detail.
20.gif


thanks sir john!
 
Yet another with more detail. This is a guideline chart for near-8mm stones. The 34.5/41 combo is borderline on this one. Again, it's a prediction.

(copyright 2005 AGS, used with permission)

AGS_CGL_Example2.jpg
 
Thank-you everyone!

Especially John over the past couple weeks.
You have been a huge, HUGE!!!! help in this learning process.

Take care,
Mark
 
And for near-6mm stones. On this chart 34.5/41 is outside AGS0. Again, it''s a prediction.

These are all broad indicators. Details of optical symmetry, minor facet configuration, overall depth, etc. come into play in the actual analysis. The only way to be certain a diamond is AGS0 is to submit it to AGS for the actual light performance grade.
 
honestly you have gone as far as you can with numbers.
Either need more info or just buy one or move to a vendor that provides enough information that your comfortable with your purchase or have one of them sent to an independent appraiser or to you to look at in person.
 
The last thing to remember is that you're working from GIA reports - so the numbers are a bit rounded. You may actually have 40.9 PA on diamonds #1 and #2. It's not enough to stress over
1.gif
because you're going to SEE them. You have 3 very promising candidates... Don't stress anymore, just choose 2 and check 'em out.
2.gif
 
Date: 8/26/2006 12:42:56 PM
Author: MarkP1
Thank-you everyone!

Especially John over the past couple weeks.
You have been a huge, HUGE!!!! help in this learning process.

Take care,
Mark
Click to expand...
Hey Mark, it''s what we''re all here for. Think of everyone in this thread as your support group!

I have to run and catch a flight to GIA Symposium. Let us know what you decide.
 
Sounds great!
Yesterday I ordered an Ideal-Scope and I think I have enough info. now to make the right decision.

Thanks again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top