Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

need your expert advice on two diamonds

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

universalmoe

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
5
Hello, I am new to Pricescope and would appreciate your help in evaluating the value-for-money (and any other comments) for the below two diamonds. My initial budget was $6,000 (all amounts in Canadian dollars). The setting for both rings would be the same: Platinum, Solitaire, 4-prong (Tiffany setting), and it will cost me an additional $500.

Loose Diamond 1:

Cut - Very Good
Clarity - VS2
Color - G
Carat - 1.01
Cost: $6,000
Appraiser: Gemscan

Loose Diamond 2:

Cut - Very Good
Clarity - SI (1)
Color - F
Carat - 0.91
Cost: $4,600
Appraiser: GIA

Is it worth paying an additional $1,400 for an extra 0.1 carat, with better Color but lesser Clarity, and of course, the greater comfort derived from a GIA-appraised diamond?

Thanks very much for your help!
 

Lorelei

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
42,064
Date: 2/1/2009 12:24:08 AM
Author:universalmoe
Hello, I am new to Pricescope and would appreciate your help in evaluating the value-for-money (and any other comments) for the below two diamonds. My initial budget was $6,000 (all amounts in Canadian dollars). The setting for both rings would be the same: Platinum, Solitaire, 4-prong (Tiffany setting), and it will cost me an additional $500.

Loose Diamond 1:

Cut - Very Good
Clarity - VS2
Color - G
Carat - 1.01
Cost: $6,000
Appraiser: Gemscan

Loose Diamond 2:

Cut - Very Good
Clarity - SI (1)
Color - F
Carat - 0.91
Cost: $4,600
Appraiser: GIA

Is it worth paying an additional $1,400 for an extra 0.1 carat, with better Color but lesser Clarity, and of course, the greater comfort derived from a GIA-appraised diamond?

Thanks very much for your help!
Welcome!

We need more info please, I assume these both have GIA reports? Can you post the following for each diamond please -

depth %
table%
crown and pavilion angles
girdle thickness
diameter measurements

Then we can go from there.
 

universalmoe

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
5
Thank you Lorelei for responding...the 0.91 carat is GIA, while the 1.01 is a local Canadian appraiser: GemScan.

I have asked the jeweller for the additional measurements you suggested, and will hopefully post them here by tomorrow evening.
 

Lorelei

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
42,064
Date: 2/1/2009 12:22:50 PM
Author: universalmoe
Thank you Lorelei for responding...the 0.91 carat is GIA, while the 1.01 is a local Canadian appraiser: GemScan.

I have asked the jeweller for the additional measurements you suggested, and will hopefully post them here by tomorrow evening.
You are most welcome and I will keep an eye out for them!
 

universalmoe

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
5
Hi everyone (including of course Lorelei!),

Here are more detailed specs, I would love your comments as soon as possible as I need to make a decision in the next couple of days!

Loose Diamond 1:
Cut - Very Good
Clarity - VS2
Color - G
Carat - 1.01
Depth: 62%
Table: 60%
Crown %: 14.5
Pav %: 44.5
Culet: None
Flouresence: None

Cost: $4,900 USD
Appraiser: Gemscan

Loose Diamond 2:
Cut - Very Good
Clarity - SI (1)
Color - F
Carat - 0.91
Depth: 59.6%
Table: 64%
Crown %: 11.5
Pav %: 43
Culet: None
Flourescence: None

Cost: $3,800 USD
Appraiser: GIA

By the way, I put these through the Cut Adviser and the 0.91 came out as Very Good while the 1.01 came out as Good.

I think I can negotiate a bit with my jeweller.

Look forward to your comments...
 

Lorelei

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
42,064
Hi there!


Do you have the actual angles for each from the GIA reports please rather than the percents? The second has a very large table, so I would try to find one with one which is smaller, for example around 54- 58% or a maximum of 60% if you like the larger tabled look. The first diamond scored badly on the HCA, so I would pass on that one. The second came up with a warning that a fish eye might be a possibility, so personally I would pass on both of these diamonds.

http://diamonds.pricescope.com/fisheye.asp

These numbers below might help you to find a well cut round.

depth - 60 - 62% - although my personal preference is to allow up to 62.4%
table - 54- 57%
crown angle - 34- 35 degrees
pavilion angle - 40.6- 41 degrees
girdle - avoid extremes, look for thin to slightly thick, thin to medium etc
polish and symmetry - very good and above


note - with crown and pavilion angles at the shallower ends ( CA 34- PA 40.6) and steeper ( CA 35- PA 41) check to make sure these angles complement in that particular diamond - eyeballs, Idealscope, trusted vendor input - check as appropriate!

And from expert John Pollard.

As the above implies, configurations depend on each other. A little give here can still work with a little take there.



With that said, here's a "Cliff's Notes" for staying near Tolkowsky/ideal angles with GIA reports (their numbers are rounded): A crown angle of 34.0, 34.5 or 35.0 is usually safe with a 40.8 pavilion angle. If pavilion angle = 40.6 lean toward a 34.5-35.0 crown. If pavilion angle = 41 lean toward a 34.0-34.5 crown.



GIA "EX" in cut is great at its heart, but it ranges a bit wider than some people prefer, particularly in deep combinations (pavilion > 41 with crown > 35).



 

John Pollard

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
3,559
I can make some predictions based on the info given Lady Lorelei.


Loose Diamond 1:
Cut - Very Good
Clarity - VS2
Color - G
Carat - 1.01
Depth: 62%
Table: 60%
Crown %: 14.5
Pav %: 44.5
Culet: None
Flouresence: None
Given girdle near 1.2% -
CA 36.0 degrees
PA 41.8 degrees


Loose Diamond 2:
Cut - Very Good
Clarity - SI (1)
Color - F
Carat - 0.91
Depth: 59.6%
Table: 64%
Crown %: 11.5
Pav %: 43
Culet: None
Flourescence: None
Given girdle near 3.3% (check the thickness) -
CA 33.0 degrees
PA 40.7 degrees, which will read as either 40.6 or 40.8 on a GIA report due to rounding
 

Lorelei

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
42,064
I thank thee Sir John!
 

universalmoe

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
5
Thanks very much guys...

Now, the only thing I''m thinking is, the 1.01 diamond appears to be priced very well at US $4,720 (I just negotiated with him one last time and it''s the absolute lowest he''ll go). He''s also giving me a Platinum solitaire ring for US $300.

For this price, what do you think of the value-for-money for the 1.01 carat?

Thanks again!
 

JulieN

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
13,324
The 1.01 seems to be poorly cut. Neither of them would be considered ideal.
 

Lorelei

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
42,064
Date: 2/2/2009 8:45:43 PM
Author: JulieN
The 1.01 seems to be poorly cut. Neither of them would be considered ideal.
I agree, this is a steep deep diamond going by the angles, it will leak light and look dark in some lights, it won't be the best performer so I would definitely pass on that one. The second is better but has a large table so I am not keen on that one either.
 

universalmoe

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
5
Thank you very much for your help Julie and Lorelei!

I have told the jeweller that I pass on the 1.01 and will consider the 0.90. I''ve given him some ranges for the depth, table, CA and PA, and asked him to find me something that fits these ranges and we can go from there.

If you can suggest another way of going about this, please let me know, I''m all ears.

Thanks again, you are saviours -)
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Three-stone engagement ring upgrade
    Three-stone engagement ring upgrade
    Vintage OEC Bracelet
    Vintage OEC Bracelet
    June’s Birthstone Trinity
    June’s Birthstone Trinity

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top