OEC--whaddya think about this one?

[kathleenmv]

Calling SurfGirl, FacetFire and all of you other OEC aficionados!

I know it''s hard to tell online, but what do you think of this OEC? It''s a .96 K/I1.

Now then...I''ve owned two J/I1 stones (one Jubilee and one H&A) and have been cool with the color and clarity. The vendor of this stone claims it''s eye-clean (and the cert doesn''t look too scary, although that doesn''t always mean much). I''m a wee bit nervous about the K color as I''ll be putting the stone in a micro pave halo, BUT my real question is the cut.

Can you tell from the cert (or the picture, if I''m successful in posting it) if the cut is good? What should I be looking for?

Thanks for your help! I''m totally in the dark here.

 

[Siamese Kitty]

I''m definitely not an expert, but I think this stone looks lovely!

As for the lower color with a micropave halo, I really think it "works" with an older cut stone and makes the piece more unique. Is this an upgrade or RHR?

 

[kathleenmv]

Ergh. I can''t seem to figure out how to make the file size small enough on the lab report.

Here''s a bit of information, if that''s at all helpful:

GIA lab report
Old European Brilliant
.96ct
6.33-6.49x3.74mm
K
I1
Table: 53
Depth: 58.9
Culet: Slightly large
Girdle: Thin-Medium
Polish/Symmetery: Good/Good
Comments:
Additional twinning whisps not shown
Surface graining not shown
Crown angles greater than 35 degrees

I wish I could attach the lab report because I''d love help identifying the inclusions. Looks to me like three needly-looking twinning whisps. Or maybe they''re feathers?? Can''t quite tell.

Anyway...does this information suggest whether or not this stone has a good cut? Gosh, I feel clueless!

Thanks for the help!

 

[kathleenmv]

Hi Siamese Kitty! Thanks for your speedy reply.

Well, at first I was looking at OECs for my mom. Then she cooled off on the idea, and now I''m hot on it! It''d be for a right hand ring.

I''m thinking about putting it in this setting (crossing fingers it attaches--I''m so bad at this!):

 

[chrono]

It looks pretty nice but the picture is a wee too dark to make out all the facets (and location of the inclusions). Any brighter pics, and a side view would be appreciated too.

 

[kathleenmv]

Hey Chrono,

Good idear. I''ll ask the vendor for brighter pictures and see if that sheds any light (no pun intended).

Love your OEC/setting, by the by. Always been one of my faves. WF for the stone, right?

 

[chrono]

Thanks for the compliment. Yes, WF sourced the stone from a virtual database for me.

 

[surfgirl]

Well, I can definitely see quite a lot of inclusions and it''s hard to say how noticeable they''d be in real life. Also, the middle is a bit odd and it''s difficult to tell how it really looks. I really think one should see an old cut before buying. Can you have it pre-screened by WF, then sent to you for approval? If it was me, I''d want to see it in person. Also, maybe WF can call it in and re-photograph it and you can get a better idea? It looks like it could be a lovely stone with a lot of scintillation, but it''s difficult to tell because then I look at the center and it looks a bit off balance (Not very symmetrical) so I''m just not sure based on this photo.

 

[kathleenmv]

Hi SurfGirl!

Thanks for the feedback. Your gorgeous stone/ring is an inspiration to me. To...die...for.

The more I look at the photo, the more it looks inclusion-y (made up word) to me. And I totally see what you''re saying about the center of the stone. Kinda funky (in the photo, anyway).

This isn''t a WF stone (I found it on a non-PS vendor''s site). I''m starting to rethink my approach. I think I might try going through GOG as I know they can source OECs. I''ve had great experiences with them, and I think they can help with the pre-screening process, as you suggested. I also know that they''ll take the time to provide photos, analysis, expertise, whatnot.

Sooooooooo...I''ll take a peek (and share) a better photograph if this vendor provides one, but I''m starting to feel less and less enthused about this particular stone.

Thanks to you both for your kindness and help! Very much appreciated.

 

[surfgirl]

kathleen, I think that''s a great strategy. Go with someone who knows old cuts very well and can analyze them for you if you cant get to them in person. While I think the above stone could have potential, it just looks like a festival of inclusions to me. I dont know...I think you can find something better. Keep us updated on this same thread so we can compare and contrast anything new with the one above...And enjoy the search!

 

[kathleenmv]

Thanks for the reality check. Think I''ll give GOG a call and start the hunt. The stone I found is uber-affordable, but I my list of reservations keeps growing.

I''ll definitely letcha know what happens next.

Again, thanks to you all for the replies/advice!

 

[FacetFire]

While I do agree with SurfGirls impression of this stone, I''m not quite ready to write it off. Can they get you any additional photos? It could just be an odd photo. What kind of budget are you working with?

 

[kathleenmv]

Hi FacetFire! Thanks for your input.

You know...I did ask the vendor for additional photos, but she didn''t seem too interested in providing them. She basically reiterated that the stone was eye-clean and told me that I could buy it and return it within two weeks if it wasn''t for me. That kind of scared me off. I guess I like a lot of info up front before I commit to a purchase, but maybe I''m being too restrictive.

Budget...I''d like to keep it under $4K for the stone, if I can. I know I''m not going to get anything huge for that, but I''m hoping I can get something with enough size that the OEC''s uniqueness is apparant. I figure the halo will help give it a larger look, too.

Any additional feedback, comments, ideas are more than welcome! I''m all ears. And THANKS for your reply!

 

[Hest88]

Well, I love the look of those chunky facets, and it seems to be a bright stone from the picture---but OTOH it behooves a jeweler to photograph a stone to maximize its appearance. Who know what it really looks like under normal circumstances? I would also want to make sure it''s truly eye-clean, since magnified like that the inclusions look pretty prominent. What is their policy for an inspection period?

 

[kathleenmv]

Hi Hest88,

Thanks for the reply!

Their inspection period is two weeks, so not too bad.

I agree that it''s pretty hard to tell how prominent the inclusions are IRL with the photo. I''ll see if I can get the vendor to provided another pic.

One other thing...A lot of this vendor''s stones have GIA reports. Some say the stones are OECs, but others say round brilliant, although they look a bit different from the RBs I''ve seen. What''s the deal with that? Anyone know? Also...is "fair" symmetry something to avoid? Or is that just the nature of many antique stones (cut pre-laser and whatnot)? I haven''t a clue.

Thanks!!

 

[chrono]

Date: 7/22/2007 5:19:44 PM
Author: kathleenmv
Hi Hest88,

Thanks for the reply!

Their inspection period is two weeks, so not too bad.

I agree that it''s pretty hard to tell how prominent the inclusions are IRL with the photo. I''ll see if I can get the vendor to provided another pic.

One other thing...A lot of this vendor''s stones have GIA reports. Some say the stones are OECs, but others say round brilliant, although they look a bit different from the RBs I''ve seen. What''s the deal with that? Anyone know? Also...is ''fair'' symmetry something to avoid? Or is that just the nature of many antique stones (cut pre-laser and whatnot)? I haven''t a clue.

Thanks!!

Perhaps the transitional cuts are labeled as RBs by GIA?

Many antique stones are cut by hand so their symmetry is not perfect. Many are out of round, hence the fair symmetry rating. I suppose you''ll have to judge with your own eyes as to which one speaks best to you.

 

[diagem]

Date: 7/22/2007 5:19:44 PM
Author: kathleenmv
Hi Hest88,

Thanks for the reply!

Their inspection period is two weeks, so not too bad.

I agree that it''s pretty hard to tell how prominent the inclusions are IRL with the photo. I''ll see if I can get the vendor to provided another pic.

One other thing...A lot of this vendor''s stones have GIA reports. Some say the stones are OECs, but others say round brilliant, although they look a bit different from the RBs I''ve seen. What''s the deal with that? Anyone know? Also...is ''fair'' symmetry something to avoid? Or is that just the nature of many antique stones (cut pre-laser and whatnot)? I haven''t a clue.

Thanks!!

I have not seen a GIA report which identified a OEC or transitional (as many of you call it) as an Old European Cut...
I would love to see one if anyone can post one...

Kathleen, the majority of older cut are going to be fair in symmetry..., (I think its part of their character!)

BTW..., Diamonds are not cut by laser (even in todays technology...), Laser is used in the pre-cutting stages of splitting (cleaving) or different partitions (sawing) of the Rough Diamond prior to being cut and polished by hand. Sometimes laser will be used in shaping the Diamond...

Smaller rounds can be cut by automated machines.

 

[kathleenmv]

Hi Chrono and DiaGem!

Thanks to you both for the information about "fair" symmetry. That makes sense!

DiaGem, I''ve attached an image of the GIA report for the stone I''m considering. (Kudos to Belle for the excellent tutorial in FAQs on how to shrink pictures!) I''d love to know your thoughts on the Old European designation--and anything else about the stone, for that matter!

Also, thanks for the lesson on how diamonds are cut. Shows how much I know (i.e. not much!

 

[jayreneepea]

I don''t know a thing about OEC''s (other than they''re beautiful!), but I just wanted to say that I LOVE the setting you have picked out!!!

 

[diagem]

Date: 7/23/2007 11:16:11 AM
Author: kathleenmv
Hi Chrono and DiaGem!

Thanks to you both for the information about ''fair'' symmetry. That makes sense!

DiaGem, I''ve attached an image of the GIA report for the stone I''m considering. (Kudos to Belle for the excellent tutorial in FAQs on how to shrink pictures!) I''d love to know your thoughts on the Old European designation--and anything else about the stone, for that matter!

Also, thanks for the lesson on how diamonds are cut. Shows how much I know (i.e. not much!

Well you have definitely taught me something today...
Thanks for the lesson..., this is the first time i have ever seen an Old European Brilliant...

You know the saying: You learn something everyday...

Thanks,

 

[kathleenmv]

Thanks Jayrenay9! I''ve long admired your Vatche!! In fact, it was a real toss-up between your ring and the one I posted here. And I might still change my mind--or if I could--get both. Yours is so darn beautiful.

DiaGem, sounds like the OEC designation from GIA is somewhat new, yes? Then I don''t have to worry when the other lab reports say RB? It kind of throws me, but if that''s normal I''ll just go with the flow!

 

[jayreneepea]

Date: 7/23/2007 6:52:52 PM
Author: kathleenmv
Thanks Jayrenay9! I've long admired your Vatche!! In fact, it was a real toss-up between your ring and the one I posted here. And I might still change my mind--or if I could--get both. Yours is so darn beautiful.

DiaGem, sounds like the OEC designation from GIA is somewhat new, yes? Then I don't have to worry when the other lab reports say RB? It kind of throws me, but if that's normal I'll just go with the flow!

Ah thanks Kathy!! That's always nice to hear! We must have very similar tastes, because if I had seen the setting you posted during my never ending search, it surely would have been a contender! Who's the designer?? It's always nice to plan a beautiful rhr!

ETA - I see the picture saved as a Tacori -- is it new?? I don't know how I could've missed that beauty!

 

[kathleenmv]

Hey Jayrenay9!

I do think our tastes are similar! I just love your ring. I have this obsession with square-ish halos and round diamonds, and your Vatche is deeevine! Love the silhouette and how delicate the pave is. Yummers!

I found this particular Tacori on Solomon Brothers'' website. There are a couple of variations on that ring; one sans baguettes and one that''s sort of a 3-stone situation. Maybe there are more, but those are the ones that come to mind.

My big question now is how low I can go in color without "clashing" or whatever with the halo. I know the warmer colors are part of these older stones'' charm, but not sure what I''ll like best in the setting. I''ve been told before (by a reputable PS vendor) that I shouldn''t go lower than "H" when halo-ing, but that was for a RB. Not sure if that applies with OECs, which don''t seem to show their warmth as readily. Dunno!

Thoughts?

 

[Miranda]

Well, I don''t know anything about old cuts, but I love your project idea. I would never be scared of a great I1. I especially love older cuts in warmer colors. I can''t wait to see your project unfold.

 

[kathleenmv]

Hi Miranda!

I''m with you; I''m not scared of a great I1! The two I''ve owned were beautifully cut stones with grade-making inclusions that were difficult, if not impossible, to spot with the naked eye. Gotta love that!

Thanks for the feedback on the warmer color re: old stones. I''m warming up to the idea (no pun intended!).

I''ll definintely keep y''all in the loop as things progress! Thanks for the encouragement.

 

[diagem]

Date: 7/23/2007 6:52:52 PM
Author: kathleenmv
Thanks Jayrenay9! I''ve long admired your Vatche!! In fact, it was a real toss-up between your ring and the one I posted here. And I might still change my mind--or if I could--get both. Yours is so darn beautiful.

DiaGem, sounds like the OEC designation from GIA is somewhat new, yes? Then I don''t have to worry when the other lab reports say RB? It kind of throws me, but if that''s normal I''ll just go with the flow!

K,

I am not sure (at all) the OEB identification by GIA is new...
The Diamond probably needs some ''minute details'' to fit into the OEB category...

No need to worry...

Good luck,

 

[kathleenmv]

Hi DiaGem,

Thanks for the clarification about the GIA OEB identifier. Good to know!

I have a couple of other stones up for consideration. I haven''t written off the K/I1; I''m just sort of expanding my options.

This one is a K/VS2 with a GIA report that calls it an Old European Brilliant. The report is a bit hard to read online, but looks as if the table is 48% and the depth 57% (no angles given). I know I''m not supposed to get too hung up on numbers with these antique stones, but wanted to include the information if it''s at all helpful.

Here''s an image:

 

[kathleenmv]

Nkay...The other one that caught my eye is an I/VS2. The GIA report says round brilliant, and the table and depth are 54% and 55.1%, respectively. Is that too shallow?

Here''s the image:

 

[chrono]

Date: 7/24/2007 8:45:06 AM
Author: kathleenmv
Hi DiaGem,

Thanks for the clarification about the GIA OEB identifier. Good to know!

I have a couple of other stones up for consideration. I haven't written off the K/I1; I'm just sort of expanding my options.

This one is a K/VS2 with a GIA report that calls it an Old European Brilliant. The report is a bit hard to read online, but looks as if the table is 48% and the depth 57% (no angles given). I know I'm not supposed to get too hung up on numbers with these antique stones, but wanted to include the information if it's at all helpful.

Here's an image:

I like the pattern and the teeny tiny table on this one.

Don't like the I VS2 stone. It looks modernish - maybe too shallow and table is larger.

 

[Hest88]

Ahhhhh! (Okay, I totally need a larger OMC now.)