Newbie looking for advice

[diamond_eh]

Hi all,

I'm a newbie who's been reading some posts here and there. I got a quote for a diamond, and just wondering if it checks out. I've read a few posts about a high table % and am a bit concerned.

Here are the specs I jotted down:

Cert: GIA
Shape: Princess Cut (square modified brilliance)
Clarity: VS2
Colour: F
Weight: 0.91
Polish: Good
Table: 77%
Dimension: 5.26 x 5.15 x 3.87
Depth: 75.1
Flouresence: Faint

Quoted price: ~ US$4500 (Correction i made an error in converting currency)
Note: includes band and 2 smaller 0.20ct diamonds of approx same quality.

Also, I've got the GIA#, how can I get the report ?

Thanks,

 

[slyons29]

Hi there -- though I am no expert at all, when looking at square diamonds a good rule to follow is the 65/65 rule -- depth and table should not exceed 65%. The stats you posted below seem to be much higher. You mentioned a band with .20 carats of diamonds, is the stone mounted? Have you viewed the stone out of the mounting? If it is, you should ask to have the stone removed from the setting to have it graded separately. You should also ask for a Sarin report or megascope report from the seller.

Good Luck!

 

[bearman49]

Seems like a very good price. The price may be reflective of the table size which may lead to a very shallow crown, which is the part of the diamond above the girdle which is the outermost part of the stone.

The faint flourescence may also be affecting the price.

I agree that a little smaller table may be nicer and try to find one with no flourescence.

the bearman

 

[diamond_eh]

What is the significance of the 65/65 rule ???
I'm just wondering if going past this 65/65 rule really detracts from the brilliance of the diamond. I'm no expert, and so when viewing this diamond against a small .77ct VS1 G diamond I was not able to see much difference other than the size (but I also didn't have depth/table values on this diamond).

The side stones (0.20) would be mounted, whle the center stone would only be mounted after appraising. I'll ask to get those separately appraised as well.

Thanks

 

[alexah]

----------------
On 10/2/2004 12:28:31 PM slyons29 wrote:

Hi there -- though I am no expert at all, when looking at square diamonds a good rule to follow is the 65/65 rule -- depth and table should not exceed 65%.
----------------

Welcome to PS, diamond_eh

Don't worry about a 65/65 "rule" for squares - sounds like some kind of fred cuellar bs (just guessing)?

Here's the deal, your eyes are the most important judge of the stone - have you shopped around a lot & did this stone grab you? Was it fiery & sparkly not only in the jewelers lights but also in other venues (if not, ask the jeweler if you can look at it in different lighting & outside).

As far as cut rules, fancies are tough to pin down. Generally speaking, you should look for a table that's smaller than depth & a crown height of >10%. I try to keep the depth close to 70 but up to 75 is still considered in the 1A range. Have you looked at the AGA cut chart? LINK

 

[diamond_eh]

Thanks for replying alexah,

ok so i checkd out the link you posted, and see that and table% of 77 falls under the 2B Class. I think I'm reading this chart wrong.

So for a square princess cut, a table of 77% and a depth of 75% are ok ?

I've seen other diamonds, and well I'm stil an amature when it comes to noticing the differences that aren't obvious, which is why I'm trying to use the numbers and specs to back up my decision.

Thanks again for your help.

 

[alexah]

Maybe that chart's not so clear... the actual chart is on www.gemappraisers.com. click on AGA cut grade (left side of the screen) & select princess from the drop down.

BTW, the stone you posted does have 2B depth & table...

Edit: When I was looking for my princess, I too narrowed the field using the numbers... and then let my eyes be the final judge

 

[quaeritur]

I know nothing about princess cuts, but as far as the fluorescence goes, faint fluor will affect neither the price nor the appearance of the diamond

.

 

[diamond_eh]

I jotted down the GIA number. How can I get the GIA report ?

 

[alexah]

The only info you're missing from what you jotted that'll actually be listed on the GIA report is symmetry and girdle (try to stay away from princess cuts w ex thin or v thin girdles, esp if the thin area(s) is in the corner(s)).
To get the crown height # (and pavillion/crown angles), you'd need to ask your vendor to get a sarin report on the stone.

I believe you'd need to ask your vendor for a copy of the GIA report if you're still interested in obtaining one. Of course, the vendor will give you the report if you buy the stone...
I know if you call EGL USA & they've graded a stone, they will tell you the report # is in their database, but I don't think GIA does this...

 

[denverappraiser]

----------------
On 10/2/2004 11:20:15 AM diamond_eh wrote:


Also, I've got the GIA#, how can I get the report ?

Thanks,

----------------

The vendor should supply you with the report if you buy the stone. They should also be willing to let you see a copy of it prior to your purchase. GIA will sell you a duplicate but why would you want one if you don't own the stone?

Neil Beaty, GG ISA
Independent Appraisals in Denver

 

[slyons29]

A Sarin report will give you the rest of the information you need to decide if this stone is well cut.

As for the 65/65 rule, it is not necessarily what every individual diamond buyer/owner requires. However these are the GIA specs for a Class II square or rectangle cut. To be considered a GIA class II diamond, any square or rectangular cut must have a table between 53-65% and a total depth of 56-65%. Based on the GIA Class of cuts, the original diamond you were asking about would be a GIA Class IV. A GIA Class IV diamond will only return appx. 32% of the light that enters it, whereas a Class II will yield an 88% light return. You may be more interested in size than sparkle, in which case a stone that does not follow these rules would be fine.

As for alexah's comment on "fred cuellar bs", last time I checked, GIA was still considered to be the industry leader in lab grading, so if these are the stats that they require for a Class II, I would think following them or staying close to them, would yield an excellent diamond.

Of course, we're all entitled to our opinion and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Good luck in your search.

sl

 

[alexah]

----------------
On 10/4/2004 7:07:23 PM slyons29 wrote:


As for the 65/65 rule, it is not necessarily what every individual diamond buyer/owner requires. However these are the GIA specs for a Class II square or rectangle cut. To be considered a GIA class II diamond, any square or rectangular cut must have a table between 53-65% and a total depth of 56-65%. Based on the GIA Class of cuts, the original diamond you were asking about would be a GIA Class IV. A GIA Class IV diamond will only return appx. 32% of the light that enters it, whereas a Class II will yield an 88% light return. You may be more interested in size than sparkle, in which case a stone that does not follow these rules would be fine.

As for alexah's comment on 'fred cuellar bs', last time I checked, GIA was still considered to be the industry leader in lab grading, so if these are the stats that they require for a Class II, I would think following them or staying close to them, would yield an excellent diamond.

sl----------------

That's interesting sl - would you purty pls send me the link to the GIA cut chart for princesses, as I was unable to find it on their website

I did, however, find that the first few google links to the "65/65 rule" took me to Fred's website & book (on Amazon)... and, incidentally, it says it's for rectangular cuts

 

[diamond_eh]

Thanks for all the great info everyone!

I'm the type that likes to research things to death before buying anything. In this case I think I'd go nuts, as ther seems to be a whole lot more under the surface of the 4 C's and even more below that (table%, depth% etc.)

I guess my only concern now is, for that price is it a good deal, or should it be considerably less ?

If it was a Class II, how much more would (should) the price increase ?

Thanks again everyone.

-> seems i made an error in calculating the currency. So it's US$4500 for the package (princess specified above, with two smaller side stones and the white gold band)

 

[slyons29]

Hi there --

This debate on classes got me thinking further and digging into alot of research. After getting alot of mixed information, I decided to go directly to a source close to GIA to find out what the deal was about the classes. Let's just say I learned alot and realized the previous information I posted was skewed to one opinion.

Below is an excerpt from an e-mail I received from this source,

"When you are looking for a fancy shape diamond, a square or emerald, for instance, you need to forget everything you have learned about cuts . . .there are a few things to look for, like making sure that the stone looks bright, with no dark areas, and on the grading report, you want to make sure that the symmetry is Good or better. This will tell you that everything is fairly well lined up."

I then asked a specific question about Class Cuts and this was the response:

"GIA does not have any cut grades at the moment. When we eventually have a cut grade, we want it to be fair and accurate, and it will not be based solely on the proportions of the diamond... the 'light performance' of the diamond will also be taken into consideration, as well as other factors. We have not even started work on developing a cut grade for fancy shapes."

So...............

you learn something new everyday and not every source is accurate. Hope your diamond hunting is going well.

sl