Opinion on the Quality of a Particular EGL Diamond

[Mem6319]

Definitely most concerned with getting the best cut I can for the best light return. Is there a better way to search for super ideal diamonds beyond limiting my search to GIA XXX with the PS recommended ranges for table %, crown angle, pavilion angle, etc.?

 

[lovedogs]

Definitely most concerned with getting the best cut I can for the best light return. Is there a better way to search for super ideal diamonds beyond limiting my search to GIA XXX with the PS recommended ranges for table %, crown angle, pavilion angle, etc.?

Use the PS search tool and set it to only show stones with HCA "excellent". That saves tons of time and effort.

 

[ringo865]

Or AGS0 ... or Whiteflash,HPD, or BGD.

 

[Mem6319]

Would someone be able to run the HCA for those 1.4 and 1.5 carat stones? I'm still not able to run any for some reason.

My jeweler is hesitant about the 1.5 and and the 1.25 G stones because of the inclusions on the GIA reports. For the 1.5, though it's on the table, as long as it's eye clean, I would think I have nothing to worry about? The inclusions on the 1.25 appear to be at a location that might not be a huge deal, but probably would need to see the stone in order to make a final call on either of those.

He's arguing the 1.32 is a good stone, but based on the HCA, I was excluding that one from my options. Any reason to still consider the 1.32?

 

[bmfang]

Would someone be able to run the HCA for those 1.4 and 1.5 carat stones? I'm still not able to run any for some reason.

My jeweler is hesitant about the 1.5 and and the 1.25 G stones because of the inclusions on the GIA reports. For the 1.5, though it's on the table, as long as it's eye clean, I would think I have nothing to worry about? The inclusions on the 1.25 appear to be at a location that might not be a huge deal, but probably would need to see the stone in order to make a final call on either of those.

He's arguing the 1.32 is a good stone, but based on the HCA, I was excluding that one from my options. Any reason to still consider the 1.32?

The 1.32 isn’t a stone I’d consider. Yes, it’s GIA XXX but it’s a stone cut to get into the XXX proportions range rather than being a stone that has actually been cut for beauty. That plus the comment on the lab report that the VS2 clarity grade is based on clouds not shown on the plot, no thanks. Let some other mug take that stone. You can do much better.

Tough choice between the 1.4 and 1.5.

The 1.4 has no imagery available online but the numbers and the plot look very safe/good. That plus I prefer LGF between 75-77.

The 1.5 OTOH, I can’t find the cloud on the video on With Clarity so that’s a good thing. Proportions are a little on the unusual side for me but still within PS preferred range. One thing I don’t like however is 80% LGF on the lab report.

 

[lovedogs]

If your jeweler is trying to push you towards the 1.32, walk away. Chances are that he can't get the stones you want and is trying to convince you that an inferior stone (that he can access) is better. It's a stupid tactic and not one I would stand for. Honestly at this point I would forget him and shop from a trusted vendor here

 

[carcarat]

If your jeweler is trying to push you towards the 1.32, walk away. Chances are that he can't get the stones you want and is trying to convince you that an inferior stone (that he can access) is better. It's a stupid tactic and not one I would stand for. Honestly at this point I would forget him and shop from a trusted vendor here

Yes! Thank you! Agree 100%
That’s what I’ve been saying!