Opinions on EC I Am Considering

[marcy]

Is my search for an EC almost over?I am looking for an EC for a RHR and will mount it in YG.

Here are two possibilities my salesman says are my best choices in my size and price range.I told him I wanted an eye clean, G or better color, ideal cut, clean, lively and pretty stone.I don’t want to see gray, dead spots or large windows.

Which one (if any) do you like?Opinions and comments welcome.I do not have the crown height info on either one of them.Both have GIA certificates with them.

I am getting Idealscope images on Monday or Tuesday.

Diamond # 1 is a traditional rectangle EC.
E
.61 ct
Ideal Cut (so they say)
VS2
Depth: 68.9
Table: 67
Polish and Symmetry: Very Good
Ratio: 1:49
Fluorescence: Medium Blue
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick
Size: 6.11 x 4.12 x 2.84

 

[marcy]

Diamond # 2 is a square EC.Not what I was looking for but a very pretty stone and a great price.Their gemologist said the stone is gorgeous and out of this world.

G
.57 ct
Ideal Cut (so they say)
VS2
Depth: 66.6
Table: 65
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Ratio: 1:06
Fluorescence: None
Girdle: Thick, faceted
Size: 4.74 x 4.46 x 2.97

 

[strmrdr]

neither is one I would buy.

To big a table on first and second has p3 issues.

 

[marcy]

Hi Karl, I was afraid you were going to say that. What is P3 issues?

 

[chrono]

I agree with Storm. I am not fond of large tabled ECs. As for the second one, it looks sort of weird.

 

[chrono]

Date: 5/8/2009 11:00:11 PM
Author: marcyc
Hi Karl, I was afraid you were going to say that. What is P3 issues?

All I know is that there''s something wrong with the 3rd pavilion step angle.

 

[marcy]

Chrono, the second one certainly wasn''t what I was looking for but it''s so different. Kind of asscher-like but not.

 

[marcy]

Date: 5/8/2009 11:01:21 PM
Author: Chrono

Date: 5/8/2009 11:00:11 PM
Author: marcyc
Hi Karl, I was afraid you were going to say that. What is P3 issues?

All I know is that there''s something wrong with the 3rd pavilion step angle.

That might be why the price is pretty low.

 

[marcy]

I am starting to think finding a good EC around $1200 or less is going to be very difficult.

Suggestions welcome.

 

[strmrdr]

p3 info
http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/60/1/Performance-and-the-p3-facets%2c-a-discussion-about-step-cut-diamonds.aspx

 

[chrono]

http://www.whiteflash.com/emerald/Emerald-cut-diamond-2090735.htm Might be too square for slightly over $1000 for a 0.5 E VS1
http://www.whiteflash.com/emerald/Emerald-cut-diamond-2086357.htm 0.5 D VS2 also around the same price
http://www.whiteflash.com/emerald/Emerald-cut-diamond-2075574.htm 0.51 D VS2 also close to $1100
http://www.whiteflash.com/emerald/Emerald-cut-diamond-2112889.htm Another 0.52 F VS2

If you pricescope your EC, you'll get several pages of options but some are just the same stone offered by different vendors. There are tons more but all these are from a virtual database, meaning you'll have to take your chances and call WF or JA to call it in to review the stone. You will most likely have to pay a return shipping fee if you don't get the stone. However, if it turns out the stone is a dud, I think WF will not charge you the return shipping fee.

 

[strmrdr]

gog will call the first 2 in for free

 

[chrono]

Date: 5/8/2009 11:43:06 PM
Author: strmrdr
gog will call the first 2 in for free

That''s a good deal!

 

[marcy]

Karl, thanks for the great article. It was helpful.

Karl and Chrono thanks for the suggestions.

 

[marcy]

Do any of these sound promising enough to have WF look at them? I like a few of Chrono''s suggestions from WF as well.

# 1 Color F VS1
. Carat: 0.53
. Depth %: 66.2
. Table %: 60
. Girdle: M-STK
. Measurements: 5.65-3.94X2.61
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: None

# 2 Color F VVS1
. Carat: 0.51
. Depth %: 68.8
. Table %: 63
. Girdle: STK TO THK
. Measurements: 5.71-3.91X2.69
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: None

# 3 Color F VVS2
. Carat: 0.52
. Depth %: 66.7
. Table %: 60
. Girdle: M-STK
. Measurements: 5.90-3.96X2.60
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: None
. Fluorescence: None

 

[chrono]

# 1 Color F VS1
Sounds like a nice combo and worth calling in for further testing and cut information. Not overly deep, safe girdle and nice smallish table.

# 2 Color F VVS1
Not too hot about the depth being so close to 69% because as you can see, it causes this EC to be smaller than the other 2 options. The thick girdle is also hiding that additional weight. VVS1 is overkill.

# 3 Color F VVS2
Looks like something possibly worth calling but as like the above, I''d try to stretch the budget by looking for something in the VS range if possible.

 

[marcy]

Thank you Chrono. We might need a new TV now I hope that doesn''t cut in to my EC budget. I think your F VS2 suggestion above warrents a review by WF as well.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 5/9/2009 11:08:02 PM
Author: marcyc
Thank you Chrono. We might need a new TV now I hope that doesn't cut in to my EC budget. I think your F VS2 suggestion above warrents a review by WF as well.

I hope you can still get your diamond Marce! Also with depth in fancy shapes, it doesn't always relate to spread as in rounds for example as fancy shapes can hold weight in other areas, so depth isn't always a reliable indicator of face up size.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/9/2009 10:55:41 PM
Author: Chrono
# 1 Color F VS1

Sounds like a nice combo and worth calling in for further testing and cut information. Not overly deep, safe girdle and nice smallish table.


# 2 Color F VVS1

Not too hot about the depth being so close to 69% because as you can see, it causes this EC to be smaller than the other 2 options. The thick girdle is also hiding that additional weight. VVS1 is overkill.


# 3 Color F VVS2

Looks like something possibly worth calling but as like the above, I'd try to stretch the budget by looking for something in the VS range if possible.

ditto sorta... same result but the depth on 2 is fine, the surface area is very close to 1

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/10/2009 5:24:25 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 5/9/2009 11:08:02 PM

Author: marcyc

Thank you Chrono. We might need a new TV now I hope that doesn''t cut in to my EC budget. I think your F VS2 suggestion above warrents a review by WF as well.

I hope you can still get your diamond Marce! Also with depth in fancy shapes, it doesn''t always relate to spread as in rounds for example as fancy shapes can hold weight in other areas, so depth isn''t always a reliable indicator of face up size.

yep 1 above is 22.261 square mm and for 2 it is 22.32 it actually faces up just a tiny bit larger.

 

[marcy]

Thank you Lorelei and Karl. I am learning so much from your helpful tips.

Lorelei, we did buy a new TV today but I get another teaching check in about 2 weeks so I can continue my EC search. It''s doesn''t appear to be going very quickly anyway.

 

[DrDiamondsGG]

I''m not a fan of those two. The second one definitely has some keel/girdle/table alignment issues. Be careful with "ideal" terminology when dealing with GIA as it does not endorse the term. "Ideal" proportions are more accepted scientifically in round-brilliants and not in fancies. Good luck.

 

[marcy]

Thank you Jared. I know that is why it is harder to pick out a great fancy cut diamond without actually seeing them. I appreciate the information.