opinion regarding idealscope image

[turtledazzle]

First time poster, here. Thank you all so much for the wealth of information -- I never could have learned so much in such a short amount of time without this site.

I've attached (I hope -- I had to save it as a jpg to get the file size down ... hope it worked) an idealscope of a diamond I am considering, and wanted to get some others' opinions on it. I'm concerned about the light gray/light pink areas in the table. What do you all think?
It has an HCA of 1.9 (ex,vg,vg,vg). It is an SI1 (I am awaiting a reply regarding how "eye clean" it is), ideal cut, with ideal polish and ideal symmetry.

Also, the AGS report that was emailed to me is from September 2003. Should I be concerned that it is so old?

Thanks in advance!

 

[belle]

looks like a steep/deep. are the crown/pavilion angles around 35.0/41.4?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/1/2006 5:10:48 PM
Author: belle
looks like a steep/deep. are the crown/pavilion angles around 35.0/41.4?

No Belle - it is near 35 / 41.

This is an example of a stone that will look wonderful even though there is a tiny bit of leakage in the IS image.
This leakage is partial - and will not effect the stone. (It will not be slow to dazzle)

Read this first post on this link https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/simple-science-is-shallow-or-deep-better.44007/ Turtledazzle

 

[FireGoddess]

I'm a fancy cut girl, but I'm *trying* to learn more about this round brilliant thing.

The steep deep comment belle, is that because of the ring ('of death') area in the center of the idealscope image - which would look like a dark area of the stone in certain lighting?

ETA after seeing Garry's post - would a steep deep look more light pink/white in an IS?

 

[turtledazzle]

The crown angle is 34.5, and the pavilion angle is 41.0. The table is 57%, and the depth is 61.9%.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/1/2006 5:17:19 PM
Author: turtledazzle
The crown angle is 34.5, and the pavilion angle is 41.0. The table is 57%, and the depth is 61.9%.

Do you have the full sarin numbers?
Have them check that its the right image for that diamond.

 

[turtledazzle]

Date: 5/1/2006 5:55:25 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 5/1/2006 5:17:19 PM
Author: turtledazzle
The crown angle is 34.5, and the pavilion angle is 41.0. The table is 57%, and the depth is 61.9%.

Do you have the full sarin numbers?
Have them check that its the right image for that diamond.

OK, I am going to show my ignorance a little bit now. On the AGS report, it shows the diagram of the diamond with all of the percentages and angles. Did these come from a Sarin analysis?

Table - 57%
Total Depth - 61.9%
Crown: Depth - 14.7%, Angle - 34.5
Pavilion: Depth - 43.3%, Angle - 41.0
Girdle: 1.7 - 2.2%, faceted
Culet: Pointed

Does 1.7-2.2% correspond to medium-slightly thick for the girdle?
Will the pointed culet matter (in comparison with "none")?

Anyone have an opinion on the September 2003 AGS report? Is this considered old?

Thanks!!!

 

[strmrdr]

yea 2003 is a little old, Id wonder where it had been all that time.

a full sarin report would have the angle range of the facets at a min and one listing all the facet angles would be better.