It seems to me that assuming that both have the same density that the .816 stone would be better becuase more of the stone would be visible in a setting. Is this theory correct?
The stone will look bigger diameter wise because it is. But whether or not your eye will catch the difference is another story. Would be interested in knowing more about the dimensions (table, depth etc) of the stone as that will give people a chance to respond on each stone beyond just which one will look bigger. Stone #1 could be cut a little too deep resulting in some carat weight loss in the pavilion, or stone #2 could be a little shallow resulting in slighty larger spread (visual enlargment to the eye). Do you have more info?
If I were buying from these two diamonds, I would probably buy the .816 but there is no way you can see the difference in size and it is highly unlikely you can see the difference in brilliance. I am just using the information given here.
Both sound and look pretty good actually! So if all else is the same (color, clarity, and price) then I would definitely go for the larger diameter diamond, why pay for an .83c stone when you can get an .81c stone that looks slightly bigger that will look amazing?
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.