Opinions on this princess cut

[rpanno]

I have been lurking for quite awhile but just joined today. First of all thanks to everyone here as you have provided so much help and information regarding diamonds and rings.

I am not so worried about the setting because I know it is the right one (Ritani Endless Love for Princess cuts with Micro-Pave all the way around, here it is)

I went ahead and got the diamond from Bill as well. I really enjoyed everything he had to say about rings and life and am so glad I purchased from him. Now I just have to wait the 4 weeks for Ritani to make the ring. Anyways, on to the diamond specs. I was just worried that it may be a little deep but Bill has taken a look at it and says that it is beautiful. I''m not sure exactly what he meant but I think he said that it was a Daniel K diamond, but I thought he was a designer not a cutter.

Princess Cut
Carat: 1.22
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 75%
Table: 71%
Polish: Ex
Symmetry: EX
Length: 5.83
Width: 5.75
Depth: 4.31

And $6,250 seemed fair to me but I would appreciate your opinions.

 

[talen316]

I think you''re going to have a hard time getting anyone to give you much of an assessment on PR stone without pics, reflector images, and other more detailed dims , test results, etc.

Generally speaking, I don''t think 75% depth in and of itself on a PR stone would be considered too deep. I''ve been under the impression that the desired table range is somewhere between 62%-68%, but I believe those are just general guidelines and by no means absolutes either when it comes to fancy shapes. There doesn''t seem to be a magic formula on these dimensions for princess stones.

If you plug your approx specs into the PS price comparison search, I think you''ll find the range to be somewhere between $5800 to $7800, but without being able to compare apples to apples in terms of cut quality, the results of that search are somewhat marginalized.

If you trust the person you''re buying from to give you their honest professional opinion and you have confidence in their expertise to judge stones, then I don''t see any reason to expect why you won''t end up with a very nice stone.

I''m very much a novice on the subject matter myself, but thought I would give you my two cents based on what I''ve recently learned and experienced during my buying search since you weren''t getting any responses yet...

Good luck!

 

[rpanno]

Ok, so I know you are all done with Super Bowl parties now, so any feedback would be great.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/4/2008 12:50:03 AM
Author: rpanno
Ok, so I know you are all done with Super Bowl parties now, so any feedback would be great.

Thanks in advance!

As Talen says, it is difficult to advise without photos and cut analysis images, but if Bill says this diamond is stunning and not too deep, then I would be inclined to consider his advice as he is an expert and has the diamond.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/4/2008 7:12:27 AM
Author: Lorelei

As Talen says, it is difficult to advise without photos and cut analysis images, but if Bill says this diamond is stunning and not too deep, then I would be inclined to consider his advice as he is an expert and has the diamond.

Ditto, it''s just impossible to give much of an opinion on fancy cuts without pics. There are no hard and fast set of numbers.

The one thing I can say, is that I''ve seen many WF ACA''s with numbers much like your table and depth. It also has EX in Pol and Sym which is great. So, taking that into account, and more importantly, since a pair of eyes have given it the ok, I''d say it sounds like you have a nice diamond, going into a lovely setting!

And we want peetures of it when it''s done!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/4/2008 7:44:16 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 2/4/2008 7:12:27 AM
Author: Lorelei

As Talen says, it is difficult to advise without photos and cut analysis images, but if Bill says this diamond is stunning and not too deep, then I would be inclined to consider his advice as he is an expert and has the diamond.

Ditto, it''s just impossible to give much of an opinion on fancy cuts without pics. There are no hard and fast set of numbers.

The one thing I can say, is that I''ve seen many WF ACA''s with numbers much like your table and depth. It also has EX in Pol and Sym which is great. So, taking that into account, and more importantly, since a pair of eyes have given it the ok, I''d say it sounds like you have a nice diamond, going into a lovely setting!

And we want peetures of it when it''s done!

Hehe...peetures - love it!

 

[Ellen]

 

[rpanno]

Sorry I should have been more specific, I was referring to Bill Pearlman. The diamond does have a GIA report and as mentioned above I was told that it is a Daniel K diamond. As I have researched more, I have found out that this is solely a name on a diamond cut by a much larger company.

Also, I''m a he not a she.

Other than that thanks for the feedback. I trust Bill but but I was looking more for opinions of the depth of Princess cuts. I understand the difficulty of such a question but it seems to get quite confusing when searching. I have found many ACA princesses on WF and others on GOG that have similar tables and depths in the high 60''s while I have seen a few that have depth''s in the low 70''s. I assume that this difference can only be assessed on a stone by stone basis?

Thanks again,
Ryan

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/4/2008 11:05:09 AM
Author: rpanno
Sorry I should have been more specific, I was referring to Bill Pearlman. The diamond does have a GIA report and as mentioned above I was told that it is a Daniel K diamond. As I have researched more, I have found out that this is solely a name on a diamond cut by a much larger company.

Also, I''m a he not a she.

Other than that thanks for the feedback. I trust Bill but but I was looking more for opinions of the depth of Princess cuts. I understand the difficulty of such a question but it seems to get quite confusing when searching. I have found many ACA princesses on WF and others on GOG that have similar tables and depths in the high 60''s while I have seen a few that have depth''s in the low 70''s. I assume that this difference can only be assessed on a stone by stone basis?

Thanks again,
Ryan

Yes.

And sorry about the "she"!!