opinion on studs please

[analyticangel]

Hi
I had asked for feedback on the following stones especially since the numbers seemed off to me to qualify for excellent GIA cut
one was very good due to girdle size John at WF commented on these
Now i have them to see in martini settings and need to either keep or return
Opinions please
STONE 1
68 H SI stone RB
GIA graded it on January 16 2007 as Excellent Cut VG POLISH VG SYmmetry
5.76x 5.80 x 3.39Depth 58.7 %Table 60 %
CA 32.5PA 41.0

STONE 2
A suggested match for studs was as follows
.68 H SI 5.73 x 5.77 x 3.42
GIA very good cut

Depth 59.5
Table 59
CA 34.0
PA 40.8
Lower half 80%


here were COMMENTS from WF


While this is a different “look” than many of the smaller-tabled stones we see on PS, the PA/CA work together for great light return. The table size and low crown will balance it toward brightness over fire. Are the lower halves at 80-85%? That would suit this configuration nicely IMO. As a point of interest the AGS cut guidelines predict this combo to receive a 1-2 in light performance (depending on how the GIA numbers are rounded, optical symmetry, minors, etc)...so both labs consider this basic configuration highly even though it’s outside the conventional 'ideal' bullseye. Nothing wrong with that.

On diamond #1: 75% LH is ok. It will have broader, less rapid flashes in its scintillation than 80%+ will in many lighting conditions. I asked this question because 75-80 is what I consider the premium range for higher crowns (when there is more fire in the balance) whereas makes with this size table and shallow crown often have 80-85, giving that brightness a more rapid scint quality. This difference is subtle and not a deal-breaker, especially if the price is right.

On diamond #2: Those primary measurements would normally receive EX. What is the girdle thickness (min/max and avg) and is there any comment regarding the cut grade on the report to explain VG?

Both of these are more shallow than we commonly see here, but the angles work. They're a hybrid of 60/60 and near-Tolkowsky and I imagine they'd be very bright on the ears. As earrings they are not perfectly matched in angles or depth, but the spread and tables are well-matched (the two most obvious factors). My priorities for matching earrings are spread-table-PA-CA-depth, in that order. These are not twins but they are better than many commercial pairings. For that matter, it is said that there's always a nose between the ears.

so now here are some pics

honest opinions welcomed

 

[analyticangel]

Here is a pic together

 

[Ellen]

Hi aa,

It's really hard to tell from photos. It looks like you have them in person?

The best test is, what do you think? Do you look at them and think, how pretty? Have you looked at them in different lighting environments? Do they sparkle?

 

[analyticangel]

Hi Ellen

Thanks for looking and answering I always read your comments
The honest answer is I am confused . They look good in natural light and in the house they are very nice BUT I think they are more brilliant than fiery if that makes sense so I am not 100% sure

I think thet were a good value ( i think) and if price out h&A in same size they would be significantly more (1000 plus) and I dont know if it is worth it



the funny thing is I started reading this forum like crazy when my BF and I started shopping together for my e-ring This forum really helped me learn alot and also i would have bought the wrong setting if not for advice I received . So we found a great stone and my dream setting and they were sent off to be set. We talked about how shopping together took away some of the romance .....so he decided when the ring came i would not see it until the "right moment" and that was almost 3 long weeks ago!!!

Anyway that stone had a perfect balance of fire and brilliance and i knew right away Of course i dont have it to compare

These are pretty , they do sparkle ......but they look more white and btright than fiery and I am trying to balance out budget and if I am being too critical if that makes any sense

When you look at the studs off the ear they are absolutely eye clean and do sparke but there is less contrast if that makes any sense



I had a really hard time taking pics........

I guess I want to know (if possible) how much more of an impression would a H&A make vs a still very good or excellent cut stud or am i way off base......

 

[Ellen]

You made perfect sense, I understand what you''re saying.

But, I''m not sure I can answer your question, as you''re the one who will wear them. What I can tell you is what I would prefer, and that is a balance of both (fire and brillance). I guess what you need to ask yourself is, do you miss the fire from them? Will it bug you?

I understand budgets though! and if you got these more to save money, but would like a good mix, I would suggest this. Get a well cut pair in a smaller size (whatever you can afford now), from someone with a good upgrade policy. I have .58 each WF ACA''s, and honestly, they really show up. I may never even go bigger, but I''m not a real size hound either. Because they''re so well cut, they just dazzle with a nice mix of both.

Can you return these if you wanted to?

 

[Fly Girl]

I suggest going to a local jeweler that carries a nice diamond line (Hearts on Fire, Lazare Kaplan, something like that) and say you are thinking of upgrading your studs and want to compare. I did that with my diamond ring, and it put my mind at ease. My guess is that these will sparkle just fine, but at least you will know and can decide what to do after that.

 

[JulieN]

I think they''re attractive.