Opinions on this Emerald Cut

[emerald4menow]

I'm okay with the J color and florescence, but wondering if the other properties are going to leave me disappointed. This is the perfect length (more than 8mm is my goal)... My budget is $9500 or less if you have other ideas.

Shape: Emerald
Carat weight: 1.68
Cut: Excellent
Color: J
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 62.7%
Table: 66.0%
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Good
Girdle: Extremely thin to thick
Culet: Small
Fluorescence: Medium blue
Measurements: 8.30*6.01*3.77
Ratio: 1.38

I'm particularly worried about extremely thin girdle....

 

[emerald4menow]

Bump.... anyone? Please?

 

[emerald4menow]

There's also this one, slightly smaller but perhaps a bit better?

SKU 38256059
Diamond Weight 1.3800
Price $7,590.00
In-House SKU 105323
Price Per Carat $5,500.00
Cut Grade Good
Color I
Clarity VVS2
Depth % 63.7
Table % 73
Carat Weight 1.38
Symmetry Very Good
Polish Very Good
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick
Culet No+Culet
Fluorescence None
Measurements 7.78 X 5.42 X 3.46
Shape EMERALD
Certificate GIA

 

[Christina...]

Do you have an image of the diamond? Step cuts are hard to purchase based on numbers alone. Can you get an ASET image as well?

I don't usually like a step cut that has a bigger table than it does depth. I'd be more excited about this stone if the table was 62.7 and the depth was 66. You will also have to have a gemologist or appraiser determine how much of the girdle is very thin. It could be that a very teeny portion of the girdle is very thin and the rest is thick...or vise vera. It's also going to be important to know where on the girdle is thin, you don't want it to be on the delicate corners as they are more prone to chipping and breaking.

I wouldn't consider your second choice at all.

Gypsy or Karl K should be around later today, they are both amazing at evaluating step cuts and they will be very helpful in guiding you.

 

[Gypsy]

Really can't tell you whether it is a keeper or a discard from the information posted. We need at least on good picture of the stone head on.

1st one. I personally would want better than good on symmetry. With stepcuts 'good' on symmetry is frequently not good. The diamond is shallow. With step cuts that's not an auto disqualify but it is something to be aware of. The table is okay, but with that depth I'd be worried about crown height. If the crown height is over 10-11% it might be okay. But otherwise it's a pass. I would not want a diamond with an extremely thin girdle, and the fluctuation is too much. You can ask if it's only very thin in one or two spots, if that's the case it might be okay. But again I personally wouldn't want it. Only thing this stone has going for it from the specs is the medium fluorescence.

Overall, the specs have too many issues for me to say-- pursue it. If you can't get a picture I think it's too risky a choice to take a chance on. But again, as it is an EC there is a slim chance it could still be lovely.

Second one. Again a shallow stone. This one has a bigger table than the last to boot. So again crown height is a concern. Better symmetry and girdle though. This one is a better risk. But again... a picture is what is really needed. If you put a gun to my head and made me chose I'd feel better about this one if the crown height is more than 10-11% (but for reference I find that the nicest step cuts have crown heights over 14%).

Let me see if I can find anything nicer for you.

 

[Gypsy]

Okay so...

8mm in length is pushing it for your budget unless you get one with a really high length to width ratio and I didn't find any great candidates in that department. The nicest stones I found in budget are much shorter than what you want. So I'm posting the nicest ones I found that are longer in length. But if you are willing to compromise on the length issue there are nicer stones out there.

Probably the best performing one for your desired specs (long length): http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1364285.asp Got a few issues. But is nicer than 90% of what's out there. Still it is the shortest of the three I am posting for you.

This one is borderline because of the depth being shallow (and the table is larger than the depth) and the pic is odd BUT it shows some potential so it MAY be worth pursuing to get an ASET IF the gemologist has nice things to say: http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1455819.asp Also get a Sarin for the crown height on this one (that's to check to see if the larger table is causing glassiness). But it is the longest one I found that looks decent.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-VS2-Very%20Good-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1442645.asp Again has a couple issues but might be worth an ASET.

Here's what I'd do. I'd ask JA to have one gemologist pull all three. And tell you which one they recommend of the choices there. You want the brightest stone with the least dead facets, eyeclean with good fire and a nice crown height. THEN once you know which one the gemologist recommends, get an ASET of that one. I don't want you to burn through all your ASETs on these (JA only allows you three ASETs total, so use them wisely).

 

[Gypsy]

And finally. THIS is why we need pictures with Emerald Cuts.

From the numbers on the first stone I would have auto disqualified the sucker (which is what I wrote above). Too many things wrong. BUT-- http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/J-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1442599.asp Here's the picture.

Interesting stone. From that picture it's got potential and it's worth pursuing. IF three questions get answered by the gemologist:

FIRST: How much of the girdle is very thin and where on the stone are the very thin parts (and how are planning on setting it).
Second: why is the symmetry only "good"?
Third: Have a Sarin run on it and get the crown height.

Get those questions answered and then have it pulled with the three I posted above and have the gemologist comment on the performance and brightness compared to the other diamonds above.

The price is great for the size. I suspect from the very old certificate (1999) that this was a trade in stone. So it might be a great find if it works out. Put it on hold while they are evaluating it.