Opinion appreciated for the cut of this stone

[Shaunsp]

Dear PriceScope members,

I've been looking for a nice stone for the engagement ring for a while and my jeweler brought me this one a few days ago. The parameters look promising though the table seems to be on the large side, and the crown angle may be on the shallow side (inferred from the discussion I read in this forum). I would appreciate your opinion on this one:

Shape: Round
Measurement: 8.81-8.87x5.20mm
Carat: 2.43
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
GIA: 3Ex
Table: 60%
Depth: 58.7%
Crown angle: 33
crown height: 13%
Pavilion angle: 41
Pavilion height: 43.5%
Girdle 2.5% Thin - medium (faceted)
Star facet: 55%
Lower Girdle Facet: 80%
Culet: none
Fluorescence: faint

The stone looked brilliant and lively, though no dark arrows with naked eyes. I don't have a Idealscope image. It gives a HAC score of 1.2, so I guess it can be a candidate. But the proportions don't quite fit into the Super Ideal Cut range discussed on PriceScope, though the cut is rated Excellent according to GIA tables and Ideal according to AGSL tables. I read about how Brilliance Ideal Cut don't show H&A. So does it mean that this is a BIC and no H&A doesn't mean the cut is inferior? Is it simply a personal preference (in which case I shouldn't be bothered with not being able to see the arrows) or having the H&A is the absolute indication for the best cut?

Thanks for your inputs !

 

[foxinsox]

Is the depth correct? Depth: 58.7%

 

[rockysalamander]

The proportions are really not typical. Its not short and wide with a relatively flat crown. That is why it is so spready for its weight. Its intriguing, but only worth pursing if you can get an ASET or IS image (preferably ASET in this case). What about this do you like?

Do you want to post your budget and wants to see what we can find?

Here are the typical parameter PS uses for GIAXXX stones. XXX is very wide and includes everything from so so cut to amazing. Think of XXX as being the first filter. The below is a second filter. The HCA Tool or AGSL Proportion chart is a third. We use these to narrow the field of diamonds to those likely to have goo performance. We then confirm that with ASET or IS images.

Depth 60-62.3 %
Table 54-58%
Pavilion 40.6-41 degrees
Crown 34-35 degrees (sometimes up to 35.5ish with idealscope image)

 

[Shaunsp]

Is the depth correct? Depth: 58.7%

Yes, the depth is 58.7%.

 

[Shaunsp]

The proportions are really not typical. Its not short and wide with a relatively flat crown. That is why it is so spready for its weight. Its intriguing, but only worth pursing if you can get an ASET or IS image (preferably ASET in this case). What about this do you like?

Do you want to post your budget and wants to see what we can find?

Here are the typical parameter PS uses for GIAXXX stones. XXX is very wide and includes everything from so so cut to amazing. Think of XXX as being the first filter. The below is a second filter. The HCA Tool or AGSL Proportion chart is a third. We use these to narrow the field of diamonds to those likely to have goo performance. We then confirm that with ASET or IS images.

Depth 60-62.3 %
Table 54-58%
Pavilion 40.6-41 degrees
Crown 34-35 degrees (sometimes up to 35.5ish with idealscope image)

Thanks, rockysalamander! I am a newbie to diamonds and just feel the stone has live to it when I looked at it. It is quite sparkly.

 

[jadesilver]

Thanks, rockysalamander! I am a newbie to diamonds and just feel the stone has live to it when I looked at it. It is quite sparkly.

Did you look at it under natural light (next to a window w no store lights on it) or in jewelry store lighting?

 

[Shaunsp]

Did you look at it under natural light (next to a window w no store lights on it) or in jewelry store lighting?

Yeah, I looked at it under natual light next to a window. It is very bright and sparkly though mostly white color sparkles (sorry, lack of words to describe it). Under the typical store light, it shows incredible colorful sparkles.

 

[rockysalamander]

Yeah, I looked at it under natual light next to a window. It is very bright and sparkly though mostly white color sparkles (sorry, lack of words to describe it). Under the typical store light, it shows incredible colorful sparkles.

Will they give you an ASET image? I worry that the angles suggest a stone that could be dark/grey under more normal light. Under the store lighting, everything looks good. I need one of those lights to just follow me around.

What has your girl said she wanted? What is her profession? What kind of setting and what size finger does she have?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yes, my question would be, is a large size diamond the most important thing to her? This one has a large diameter because of the way it is cut. Most of us here have gone with the ideal cut parameters, but someone who has never seen one might not know the difference. If size is her first priority, I think it would be fine. It's not what I'd personally choose, though.

Do you want us to price check for you? If so, tell us what they are asking. You may be able to negotiate a lower price if we can find similar stones for less.

 

[Shaunsp]

Will they give you an ASET image? I worry that the angles suggest a stone that could be dark/grey under more normal light. Under the store lighting, everything looks good. I need one of those lights to just follow me around.

What has your girl said she wanted? What is her profession? What kind of setting and what size finger does she have?

they don't have a ASET image to share. The stone is quite sparkly (icy) under the natural light, not dark/grey, which is why I kinda like it even though the numbers don't fit into the ideal cut parameters.

 

[Shaunsp]

Yes, my question would be, is a large size diamond the most important thing to her? This one has a large diameter because of the way it is cut. Most of us here have gone with the ideal cut parameters, but someone who has never seen one might not know the difference. If size is her first priority, I think it would be fine. It's not what I'd personally choose, though.

Do you want us to price check for you? If so, tell us what they are asking. You may be able to negotiate a lower price if we can find similar stones for less.

Thanks guys for your inputs! I would probably prioritize the size more than she does I just don't know whether giving up the ideal cut parameters for a stone that looks large and, honestly, quite appealing to my (untrained) eyes is worthy.

 

[rockysalamander]

Thanks guys for your inputs! I would probably prioritize the size more than she does I just don't know whether giving up the ideal cut parameters for a stone that looks large and, honestly, quite appealing to my (untrained) eyes is worthy.

Then I would buy my own ASET and loupe and take photos for posting here. Just do a bit of reading out to take a photo through the loupe with your cell phone. I really prefer ASET over IS for these angles since you have to buy your own.

https://datlas.com/ideal-scope-store/aset-kit/

 

[Shaunsp]

Thanks for all your help, guys ! I guess I just felt a little paranoid seeing all the macro shot of stones showing the dark arrows as a proof for ideal cut. Do you really see that in real life in stones cut with the ideal cut parameters ?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The arrows are not dark in real life. They only look dark in images if the camera set-up is too close or something. But yes, I can see the optical symmetry in the stones I have. If you'd tell us your budget, we could show you some examples of stones you could compare.

Here's a comparable stone in super ideal cut. Is your stone significantly less expensive? Cost factors into this somewhat. But I, personally, would go for a smaller ideal cut stone over a larger one that isn't.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3947727.htm

 

[Shaunsp]

The arrows are not dark in real life. They shouldn't look dark in images unless the camera set-up is too close or something. But yes, I can see the optical symmetry in the stones I have. If you'd tell us your budget, we could show you some examples of stones you could compare.

I'd say the budget is 30k~ish

 

[Shaunsp]

The arrows are not dark in real life. They only look dark in images if the camera set-up is too close or something. But yes, I can see the optical symmetry in the stones I have. If you'd tell us your budget, we could show you some examples of stones you could compare.

Here's a comparable stone in super ideal cut. Is your stone significantly less expensive? Cost factors into this somewhat. But I, personally, would go for a smaller ideal cut stone over a larger one that isn't.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3947727.htm

That's a beautiful stone ! But yeah this one is significantly more expensive.

 

[TreeScientist]

I'm no expert, but isn't the OP's original stone fit more within the classic 60/60 parameters (low depth, wide table, shallow 33 degree crown)?

A well-cut 60/60 diamond will have a lot of brightness (aka super white, almost mirror effect, in direct light) and great spread at the expense of scintillation and fire. Some people adore the brightness of the 60/60 cut, and some would rather have a more well-balanced stone typical of todays ideal cut diamonds. This definitely boils down to personal preference. You should look at both cuts under different lighting conditions and determine which you like best.

Also, it is my understanding that 60/60 diamonds are difficult to get right, meaning the cut really has to be spot on for them to perform well. Hence why everyone is saying you should definitely get ASET and IdealScope images for this stone prior to purchasing.

 

[rockysalamander]

I'm no expert, but isn't the OP's original stone fit more within the classic 60/60 parameters (low depth, wide table, shallow 33 degree crown)?

A well-cut 60/60 diamond will have a lot of brightness (aka super white, almost mirror effect, in direct light) and great spread at the expense of scintillation and fire. Some people adore the brightness of the 60/60 cut, and some would rather have a more well-balanced stone typical of todays ideal cut diamonds. This definitely boils down to personal preference. You should look at both cuts under different lighting conditions and determine which you like best.

Also, it is my understanding that 60/60 diamonds are difficult to get right, meaning the cut really has to be spot on for them to perform well. Hence why everyone is saying you should definitely get ASET and IdealScope images for this stone prior to purchasing.

Its kinda neither a "ideal" range nor a 60/60. *I* consider a stone 60/60 when the table and depth are 59-61. With good angles, they can return white light and be quite bright. But, they lack fire which is often desired by people. @HappyNewLife has recently upgraded from ther true 60/60 to a WF ACA and can offer some thoughts on her experience with a 60/60 and firey ACA. In this case, the not quite there depth and table, compbined with the very low crown angle makes me concerned. Some stones with numbers like them tend to grey-out and look pretty lifeless. Add the rounding of GIA angles and the could be better or really worse. So, that is why I would personally only consider a stone like this with ASET to see more about the volume of light return.

 

[TreeScientist]

Personally, if I had that budget, I would not try to maximize size at the expense of cut. 30K is already going to get you a large stone. At that size, a few extra mm will not make a difference (hell, your girlfriend might not even want a stone that big haha).

For 30K, I would recommend looking at these two:
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3639112.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3933870.htm

Plenty big, eye clean, and WhiteFlash's A Cut Above diamonds are some of the best performers on the market. The SI1 has a crystal on the table, but it's transparent so won't be visible unless you look at it right in front of your face.

 

[ringo865]

Too-Shallow stones can get fish eye. Not a good thing.

 

[Karl_K]

Working for a vendor I am more limited than I once was but for the sake of correctness, I am going to address some of the points raised.

a: hca does a pretty good job of weeding out fish eyes and this is not likely one.
b: run the variables in the GIA rounding through the HCA if there are questions.
c: 58.7% depth is within the range of a well cut 60/60 style diamond, it is a very spready diamond.
d: 33-34 crown angles with a 41 pavilion are in a sweet spot of 60/60 style diamonds and can also get AGS0.
Gia rounded 80% lgf% is the right range for the combo. Under 33 crown angle I consider a bit shallow so the GIA rounding can be problematic here.

I agree with not making a call remotely without some sort of image to look at.

60/60 style diamonds can have awesome fire in lighting conductive to fire, they will however display fire in fewer lighting conditions than a modern ideal cut.

 

[Shaunsp]

Working for a vendor I am more limited than I once was but for the sake of correctness, I am going to address some of the points raised.

a: hca does a pretty good job of weeding out fish eyes and this is not likely one.
b: run the variables in the GIA rounding through the HCA if there are questions.
c: 58.7% depth is within the range of a well cut 60/60 style diamond, it is a very spready diamond.
d: 33-34 crown angles with a 41 pavilion are in a sweet spot of 60/60 style diamonds and can also get AGS0.
Gia rounded 80% lgf% is the right range for the combo. Under 33 crown angle I consider a bit shallow so the GIA rounding can be problematic here.

I agree with not making a call remotely without some sort of image to look at.

60/60 style diamonds can have awesome fire in lighting conductive to fire, they will however display fire in fewer lighting conditions than a modern ideal cut.

Thanks a bunch for the comments! I’ve learned so much from this community ! Guess i’ll Keep looking. Or I might leave the decision to the girl The stone does look appealing to my untrained eyes. Another thing I like about it is that there is no inclusion under the table which makes it a really nice eye clean stone even with a large table.

 

[Shaunsp]

The HCA returns :
Light return: excellent
Fire: excellent
Scintillation: very good
Spread: excellent
Score: 1.2

 

[ac117]

I really like this stone treescientist recommended: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3933870.htm
I also really like this one: https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD8692
Slightly over $30k and dropping down to I color would get you this super ideal with 9mm spread: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3932394.htm
https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD7630
https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/...-diamond-bfg-785248#!prettyPhoto[gallery2]/0/

A few other nice options:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...h-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3432528 (would prefer a super ideal choice above for the same price but just giving you options)
Another nice 60/60 option: https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...h-color-vs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3669569

 

[HappyNewLife]

Its kinda neither a "ideal" range nor a 60/60. *I* consider a stone 60/60 when the table and depth are 59-61. With good angles, they can return white light and be quite bright. But, they lack fire which is often desired by people. @HappyNewLife has recently upgraded from ther true 60/60 to a WF ACA and can offer some thoughts on her experience with a 60/60 and firey ACA. In this case, the not quite there depth and table, compbined with the very low crown angle makes me concerned. Some stones with numbers like them tend to grey-out and look pretty lifeless. Add the rounding of GIA angles and the could be better or really worse. So, that is why I would personally only consider a stone like this with ASET to see more about the volume of light return.

Yeah, there really is no comparison between my ideal cut 60/60 and my ACA. The fire it throws and the depth of sparkle is unreal.

 

[Shaunsp]

Yeah, there really is no comparison between my ideal cut 60/60 and my ACA. The fire it throws and the depth of sparkle is unreal.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts

 

[WinkHPD]

Thanks a bunch for the comments! I’ve learned so much from this community ! Guess i’ll Keep looking. Or I might leave the decision to the girl The stone does look appealing to my untrained eyes. Another thing I like about it is that there is no inclusion under the table which makes it a really nice eye clean stone even with a large table.

Shaun, to really know what both of you like best, you might ask your retailer to bring in a top cut diamond. Then you will be able to buy with much more confidence and not be second guessing yourself. This is too much money to get wrong. You might also want to ask your retailer what his trade in and buy back policies are.

Wink

 

[Shaunsp]

Thanks, Wink!