Opinions on a couple of princess cuts

[jaebond]

I was hoping to get some opinions on a couple of princess cuts. Originally, I had this diamond shipped to an appraiser, along with a few others, but I picked this one out of the lineup:

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond/diamond-detail/?product_id=AGS-104047574004

I got to looking around BGD's website and found this diamond which faces up much larger, but is the same price:

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond/diamond-detail/?product_id=AGS-104047236028

I e-mailed BGD and asked them to compare the two. I mostly mentioned light performance when I asked them and they came back with a resounding yes that the 1.002 was a better light performer. I'm assuming that even accounting for the sacrifice in face up size, the 1.002 is the better pick (Please let me know if you disagree!).

That brings me to this third diamond, which I have started to consider:

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond/diamond-detail/?product_id=AGS-104047574003

Given that the ASETs are extremely similar (as well as the proportions), I would assume that the light performance would be very similar. I e-mailed BGD, but haven't heard back from them yet. The dimensions on this one are in between diamond 1 and diamond 2 and it has slightly better clarity, although at that point, I'm not sure it makes much difference.

Assuming that the light performance of diamonds 1 and 3 are the same, should I go with the diamond 1 which I picked out of a lineup and I know for sure "speaks" to me? Or should I go with diamond 3 which is slightly (but noticeably) bigger, has a slightly better (although unnecessary) clarity, but costs $600 more and I didn't pick it in person?

 

[jaebond]

Does anyone have any thoughts?

 

[tyty333]

I have to say between the 2 (1st and 3rd) its a tough call.

If the first is eye-clean then *I* would knock clarity out of the equation. To me its more of...is it worth the extra cost to
gain the extra .1 mm? Can BGD send you a picture of them side by side? That might help you make your decision.

They look to be almost identical stones. Their ASET and IS images are almost identical.

I would consider it more a size thing and treat the upgrade in clarity as a bonus.

Edit - I do not like the second stone as much as the 1st and 3rd because the table is bigger.

 

[jstarfireb]

Tough call for me too. Since BGD said the second one isn't as good in the light performance department, I'd rule that one out. For the others...I don't know, but I guess I'd pay the extra money to have a stone above 5.5mm in each dimension. Or if you're pushing your budget, keep in mind that they're visually not very different, and go for the smaller/cheaper one. Or put more money toward the setting. Either way, you can't lose.

 

[jaebond]

I just heard back from BGD. They said that the 1.002 was slightly more brilliant in certain lighting conditions, but other than that the 1st and 3rd diamonds were the same. This is kind of what I was guessing (and maybe hoping a little). Given that I have seen it in person and loved it!, I am going to stick with the 1.002 even though it is slightly smaller.

It still kind of amazes me that the best cut diamond I've seen has a weight that would seem to indicate that they sacrificed some cut to keep it above 1ct.