Opinions on RB, please

[enbcfsobe]

ETA: Here are the specs on the smaller stone. HCA says 0.9 (ex-ex-ex-vg). Looks like maybe this is a better choice? Or is that too low of an HCA score? Will I even notice the size difference once it is set??

GIA (Very Good Cut)
1.07 ct G VS1
VG/EX No Fluor
6.55-6.58X4.03
Depth: 61.4
Table: 57
Crown Angle: 35.0
Crown Height: 15.0
Pavilion Angle: 40.6
Pavilion Height: 42.5
Star: 55%
Lower Half: 75%
Girdle: Med-Thk faceted
No culet
Comments:
Surface graining not shown
Symbol CMVC-556500 present on girdle


What in the world is the marking on the girdle?? Is the girdle range a problem?
This one had a clearer arrow pattern in the IS image from what I recall. Do I go back and see them both again? Should I send both to the appraiser so I'll have a professional IS image and sarin, etc.? The price will probably be close to the same as for the larger stone b/c of the clarity difference -- maybe a little less (the diff. can go to the setting).

Previously...

So...we got carried away and my BF bought even though we'd discussed checking the HCA first. I was a little overwhelmed as well, but didn't make myself quite clear. So, now we've got a Very Good all around -- 2.6, which BF is perfectly satisfied with, but I am feeling perhaps inordinately disappointed. He equates this with getting an A- on a test, or having Justin Morneau instead of Albert Pujols. I guess to some level he's right. But with all the time I've spent on PS trying to figure out how to do it just right, I feel like I've failed the PS trial-by-fire.
Based on my research the price was quite good for a B&M. The biggest problem with this seems to be the crown angle. I think I misread it when I looked at the cert in the store and thought it was 34.5. I am also concerned because the stone has an indented natural. While it took me an awful lot of effort to find with a loupe, I am concerned after reading some of the info on here with regards to the dangers of these.
Bottom line is we can only get store credit (for 30 days), which is fine at this point -- they designed a custom setting that I am very excited about and I am confident that they will look for stones until I find what I want (even if they think my obsession with angles is a little much). I just need to figure out if it is worth going back to square one. This stone looked good through the idealscope, from my amateur perspective. There was a slightly smaller one that looked a little better, and I am thinking I should ask for specs on that before going entirely back to the beginning, as I am fine with going smaller.
There's a whole lot of other emotional stuff wrapped up in the story, including my feeling of stupidity at not being able to put all my research to good use, but at this point I'd really appreciate opinions on this one and whether it is worth it to suck it up and admit we got carried away...or whether I am just overreacting??

GIA Excellent
1.32 G S11 (eye clean -- I had trouble finding the one major inclusion even with the 10X loupe even though it is in the table)
7.01-7.05X4.35 VG/EX No fluor
Depth: 61.9
Table: 57
Crown Angle: 35.5
Crown Height: 15.5
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Pavilion Height: 43
Star: 50%
Lower Half: 85%
(those last two measurements I'm not too sure of -- they are measured on the "x" axis...I think thats what they are)
Girdle: med-sl thk (faceted)

I appreciate your honest opinions.

 

[JulieN]

Well, you say there''s one that''s prettier. I''m sure they can find something just as nice without loosing size.

 

[enbcfsobe]

The other one had slightly sharper arrows, but I can''t remember the specs. That may be what I ask for first. The problem is that I really don''t feel like I can tell the difference, and that''s why I am trying to get some objective measure. They all look sparkly to me. I guess I''m just not sure whether this one will be sparkly enough, or whether it will bother me that I might have gotten one that would be more objectively perfect.

 

[whatmeworry]

Well I think you are doing great. You''re looking at diamonds with an ideal scope and loupe, using the HCA as a guide, and comparing B&M prices to online prices. Does the store have an H&A viewer for you to use? I think Gary has mentioned that 2.5 would be a fair cutoff with further refinement of the HCA. So 2.6 is nothing to scoff about and given that GIA rounds numbers, that diamond could be great. Still if you have that nagging feeling at the back of your head that you didn''t pick Albert Pujols on paper, doesn''t hurt to remove that doubt. But really pick the one you like best (number aside), just watch the lighting when you compare.

 

[enbcfsobe]

what is a fair way to compare other than the idealscope?? or does that depend on whether they are both a little deep? I think the lack of seeing them in different lighting situations is part of what''s bothering me -- for some reason at the time I didn''t insist on it, thinking the idealscope would give me sufficient information.

 

[Ellen]

Take them near a window, and different lighting if they have it. You might ask if you can take them outside, some jewelers will let you, some won''t.

 

[tanalasta]

Numbers are only part of the game. You only have to read my earlier posts (and I'm still a newbie) to realise I got too caught up with numbers. I was fixated with a crown angle of 33.5 I thought was too shallow and that the stone being shallow/shallow wasn't perfect enough. But at the end of the day, the diamond looked spectacular (and even better in a platinum setting!!!) and I was splitting hairs.

What matters is:
1. Do you love the stone?
2. Do you think it looks good to you?
3. Does the IS / light return / brilliance / fire / performance etc... look satisfactory to you.

Have a look in different lighting enviroments, both from a distance and close up. Give the stones a twirl, look at it from different angles, tilt it from side to side.

Compare it side-by-side to other stones if you want.

If you (and your partner) like it ... don't worry too much about the HCA or numbers. It's a guide to help narrow down a selection of stones... what you decide should be based upon a combination of factors. The most important is the your personal, subjective opinion. And if the stone doesn't seem too 'deep' from observation and on IS and you like it then smile Every stone is unique. Even two stones with say perfect 34.5 / 40.8 c/p angles may look different and although there's a very good chance the stones will both perform well - the numbers alone are no guarantee.

I remember somewhere reading that someone had seen 'on paper perfect' stones that were disappointing. And there are many 'not paper perfect' stones that ain't.

I have a gut feeling you should be alright though.

Don't know enough about indented naturals to make an opinion but I would think one of the pro's should chip in shortly like they usually do.

 

[enbcfsobe]

Thanks all -- I think for now I will ask the jeweler to hold both of the stones we looked at, and take another look. I'm still a little worried, and would love to hear from an expert about naturals. The jeweler recommended sending the stone to D. Atlas for appraisal if I wanted one (which I had planned to do anyway as he is local and seems awfully knowledgable!), so someone else will get to check it out, too. I just need to ratchet up my courage to call and say maybe after sleeping on it I'm not so sure. All of the sudden I'm that customer. *sigh*
The tough thing really is evaluating in person -- it is really hard for me to understand what they should look like. I can at this point tell the difference between those that seem more symmetrical (ie you can see at least parts of the star w/ the naked eye). Other than that, it is really hard to evaulate in terms of brilliance/fire/scintillation etc. I worry that this is one of those deepish stones that looks better in bright lights. At the same time, it didn't seem to be leaking any light. I wish I remembered the IS image better....

 

[enbcfsobe]

The jeweler was super-nice about my request and sent the cert for the other frontrunner. See above for specs and please comment!! Thanks again to all you wonderful PS folks!! I think both my BF and the jeweler think I am slightly batty for considering the smaller stone...

 

[Ellen]

Hmm, I would look at both through the IS again, and take your time, really compare.

Then I''d compare in different lights/outdoors.

Then pick one. As you said, you''re sending to the appraisor, so if you picked the one with the indented natural, he''ll let you know if it''s ok. If not, get the other.

While I know you want to use your all your knowledge, your eyes truly do tell in the end.

 

[enbcfsobe]

Sounds like it is going to take another visit to figure this out. I wish I could take one of you expert folks along to check it out. Any thoughts on why this is GIA VG cut, rather than EX?? Is this just one of their peculiarities with cut grading?
I guess part of it will also come down to how important that .46-.49 mm difference in diameter really makes.

Not to confuse the issue further, but...

The 1.32 is a 1B according to AGA's DIY grading. It only gets dinged for the Crown angle.
The 1.07, while it is significantly better on the HCA, is also a 1B, and gets penalized for the crown angle, pavilion depth, and heavily for the girdle.

Any thoughts on how this might reflect on which is better? Is neither really very good?

 

[whatmeworry]

I think a 1B in the AGA DIY grading actually means they both could be excellent.

 

[whatmeworry]

Looks like the engraving on the girdle is a canada mark, so if it''s a canadian diamond that may explain the higher premium.

http://www.canadamark.com/Verify.asp

Well if the merchant is willing to have Dave Atlas look at both of them, that would be great since you''re still uneasy about picking one.

 

[enbcfsobe]

Both stones are going to AGA for objective and subjective examination. I think the researcher-lawyer part of me has gone a little crazy!! But they were sooooo nice, and said they do get these kinds of calls and will to whatever I want to help me evaluate better. My jeweler definitely thinks I'm nuts, but is going along with the whole thing.

whatmeworry -- thanks for the heads up on the canadian diamond. another interesting twist!! i guess if i go with that i should make sure that i get the appropriate documentation.