Newbie Seeks guidance

[ggallina]

I am a new buyer seeking some advice. I have been searching for a very good oval stone between 2.5 and 3.0 Carats for a few months. I have self-educated-probably excessively--at sources like Pricescope.

Today while shopping at some B&M stores we happened upon an interesting find./www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

The GOOD: GIA Cert. 2.92 Carats, F, SI1 (hard to see by me at 10X). Subjectively, this was a truly gorgeous stone--and we''ve looked at about a dozen similar ones./www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

The BAD: Depth 57.0%, Table 49%./www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

The indifferent: Good polish, Good symmetry, No culet. /www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Price-$20,000 Exact for Cash/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Concerns: Is this ''average'' cut too expensive? Will I (to my own eyes) notice the difference in a better cut? /www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Quandary-- This is a rather unique size and I believe the price jumps at over 3 carats; also, she doesn''t want an oval that''s too ''fat'' (round) or too long (like marquis) and this one is well proportioned. And again the benefit of B&M is you can see the diamond and this particular one is stunning./www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]>

Any input is greatly appreciated. I am a first-timer and wary of being beaten.

 

[valeria101]

This is one BIG 3 carat stone... given the depth and your indication that this is not a stone with extreme proportions (so the 57% depth actually means a shallow stone, since the width is not much smaller than the length and the depth % is counted relative to width).

Price is nice too... And it is not possible to relate those numbers to a fully grounded estimate of brilliance - as you know.

However, I would be very amazed to find the one shallow and remarcably brilliant oval right out of the first dozen

Not that it could not happen! There is no practical way I know of to get an idea of how effective the cut of one such stone is without having inspected hundreds of stones with various proportions. This is why that puny $30 worth Iscope is a rather nice shopping tool... I would think.

Of course, you may not be in favor of higly brilliant diamonds - quite a few people are not and prefer fiery old cuts instead. This one stone with it's little depth and very small table seems quite unusual, and you are the only one to have seen it!

Just my 0.2, of course.

PS: I just happened to remember THIS oval - yet another piece with tiny table. It is quite abit smaller than your mark, but what I wanted to point out is the Bscope animation on th ebottom of the page. The like of this one would probably be the lest brilliant an oval might get - in my opinion - with no excuse required. Still an electronic 0.2, I am affraid. I am rather warry of 'good deal' stones - usually the seller knows better why the stone is a good deal!

 

[diamondsman]

The right ratio for an oval should be around 1:1.50LxW.
The depth and table around the 60's+/-, with these dimentions you should have a nice looking stone, I don't recommend stones that are chunky(fat),or with small tables as these stones usually look smaller than their size,and also look like a lapsided round stone.

check the web go on different sites for prices and for the above criterias.

good luck

 

[valeria101]

Just in case...

2.74cts, F-SI1, AGA 1A, (19k) (this ia also listed by DCD)

3.1cts, G-SI, AGA 'fine', 20k

I bet even the 3.1 is 'small' comapred with your stone (because of depth)

The VG symmetry on the first may show by comparison (since 'good' is quite a diverse category to start with). Light remais unknown.. and either of these two have more mainstream proportions. With known brilliance the critical factor, I would ask for Iscope pics on both (or any posted stone, actually)if it looks reasonably tempting (which they may not).

I might be an extreme case, but remembering how my own taste evolved once I actually got through many dozens of gems instead of a few, I would not consider a first sight pleasant look as decisive - all diamonds are nicer than glass after all