opinions pls

[poopie]

Hi everyone,
need some quick assist in a loose stone I am considering.
after a little ring browsing the girlfriend has fallen in love with the look of a round 2ct stone.
It looks perfect on her and I want to give her that wow factor without breaking the bank.

Am considering the following stone:
2ct round brilliant GIA cert
I/SI2
very good cut / polish / symmetry
depth: 60.7
table: 55
crown angle: 34
pavilion angle: 40.8
girdle: thin - med
strong blue fluorescence

The inclusion plot shows only a feather, it is visible @ 5 O-clock in the photos. The pricescope vendor states it is quite unnoticeable and does not pose any integrity issue.
Scored hca of 0.9 with an excellent for light, fire & scintillation.
It is slightly over my intended budget but after much searching it seems to fit the bill for sparkly, white-ish, eyeclean-ish stone. I''ll try to attach an image... sorry very new to this.

consider or pass?
Suggestions much appreciated.

 

[yssie]

Now those are some skinny arrows!

 

[poopie]

^^^ I thought that too!!!
Is that really a bad thing now?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/21/2010 3:31:10 AM
Author: poopie
^^^ I thought that too!!!
Is that really a bad thing now?

I personally like thin arrows, but those are particularly thin, what does it say for lower girdle facet percent on the GIA report?

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 4/21/2010 5:13:04 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/21/2010 3:31:10 AM

Author: poopie

^^^ I thought that too!!!

Is that really a bad thing now?

I personally like thin arrows, but those are particularly thin, what does it say for lower girdle facet percent on the GIA report?

Ditto.

 

[poopie]

I attached all the measurements from the cert as I''m not sure what % you are referring to.
what does thin arrows equal?

 

[yssie]

Thin arrows = long lower girdle facet = 90% (as opposed to the 75-80ish most H&As we see are cut to)


Do you like the look? It makes for a busier" overall look and sparkle.. If I remember correctly Dee*Jay has a gorgeous stone with long lgf - hers is a big stone, though, and the size is a neutralizing factor on the "business" - you may or may not be partial to it in a smaller stone (not that 2c is small

)

 

[Dreamer_D]

Will you see this stone in person?

I recently had the opportunity to view two GIA EX cuts next to a GIA Very Good and there was a very noticable and marked difference in the light return and optics between the EX and VG grades.

 

[poopie]

Thanks for everyones responses...
I don''t find it particularly ''busy'' looking, as long as it sparkles!
I did a little reading here and some say not all excellent cuts are created equal and very good cuts can possible even outshine the former?
the HCA tool has it fall under excellent for three things, is this not a fair indicator that the stone won''t be a lemon??

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 3:00:38 AM
Author: poopie
Thanks for everyones responses...
I don''t find it particularly ''busy'' looking, as long as it sparkles!
I did a little reading here and some say not all excellent cuts are created equal and very good cuts can possible even outshine the former?
the HCA tool has it fall under excellent for three things, is this not a fair indicator that the stone won''t be a lemon??

Yssie

Dee does indeed have a diamond with long lower girdle facets, you remembered rightly!

The diamond in question does have long LGF''s as we knew at 90%, the overall proportions of the stone are good and it is in no way a lemon from what I can see. Can you do better? Probably but it depends on what you are after, if you want a nicely cut stone and you like this one then it could fit the bill.

 

[poopie]

Thank you for your input lorelei.
It''s a big purchase for sight unseen but it has been one of the few stones I could find that hover around the 2ct range that is feasible for the wallet! She wants the finger coverage and sparkle, and she seems to be fine with all the I color stones we have seen. I''m going to cross my fingers!
who is this Dee you speak of?

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

I fear that I have to add my 2 cents.

90% lower girdle facets are not long, I would consider them actually unusual. I really cannot remember when I last saw such a stone.

As such, the ''rules'' that most here are used to do not really apply. It will not look more busy, because the difference in angle between the main facets and the LGF''s is so low that they are about the same.

Also, remember that where considering the main facet-angle with ''normal'' LGF''s can work, a case like this where the angle of the facets covering most of the stone''s reflecting surface are off does not lend itself to even the simple use of the HCA.

Looking at the pics, what struck me was the weird looking center of the stone. Since it is weird, I do not like it, but that does not mean that it is not attractive.

Live long,

 

[AprilBaby]

My first thought was the same as Paul, the center looks funny. Will that cause light leakage?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 11:42:57 AM
Author: poopie
Thank you for your input lorelei.
It's a big purchase for sight unseen but it has been one of the few stones I could find that hover around the 2ct range that is feasible for the wallet! She wants the finger coverage and sparkle, and she seems to be fine with all the I color stones we have seen. I'm going to cross my fingers!
who is this Dee you speak of?

When ' long' is mentioned for these LGF as Yssie says this is in comparison to many of the other diamonds we see here with LGF's of around 75 - 80% and yes it is unusual.

[/url]and if I remember rightly her stone's LGF's are in the area of 85%

As to what to do, look at some other diamonds in comparison, try some Hearts on Fire or AGS0 from Jareds and see how this one compares and which you prefer. It might be that looking at some other diamonds might mean you prefer a finer cut, or that this one is in fact the one.

 

[CharmyPoo]

Can''t comment on the rest but what is that flower looking like thing in the middle? I have never seen anything like it before. I thought maybe some funky culet but the gia plot shows none.

 

[Lula]

The stone in question is not a hearts and arrows cut, like Dee*Jay''s. So the comparison isn''t meaningful.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 12:09:14 PM
Author: sarap333
The stone in question is not a hearts and arrows cut, like Dee*Jay's. So the comparison isn't meaningful.

Is her stone a h&a? I could have sworn it wasn't, I need to go back and check. But it wasn't posted with the intention of it being an actual comparison anyway, just to show her stone also has a higher LGF percentage.

I just looked back and it is not a h&a.

 

[Lula]

Date: 4/22/2010 12:13:22 PM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/22/2010 12:09:14 PM

Author: sarap333

The stone in question is not a hearts and arrows cut, like Dee*Jay's. So the comparison isn't meaningful.

Is her stone a h&a? I could have sworn it wasn't, I need to go back and check.

You're right, Lorelei, her stone falls outside strict hearts and arrows range, if I remember right (hearts would have clefts).

But this stone cannot be compared with a diamond with longer lgf's like Dee*Jay's, if I'm understanding Paul's comments correctly, because this stone's pavilion is cut differently. So in essence, the effect of the longer lgf's is negated -- again, if I'm understanding Paul's comments correctly.

ETA: It seems Paul is also cautioning that the HCA cannot be used reliably with a stone with a pavilion cut in this fashion.

But it does seem that an IS image would tell you something about this stone's performance -- I've seen stones like this posted on GOG's site, usually termed "traditional symmetry" or something like that, GIA graded, with IS images.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 12:19:18 PM
Author: sarap333

Date: 4/22/2010 12:13:22 PM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/22/2010 12:09:14 PM

Author: sarap333

The stone in question is not a hearts and arrows cut, like Dee*Jay's. So the comparison isn't meaningful.

Is her stone a h&a? I could have sworn it wasn't, I need to go back and check.

You're right, Lorelei, her stone falls outside strict hearts and arrows range, if I remember right (hearts would have clefts).

But this stone cannot be compared with a diamond with longer lgf's like Dee*Jay's, if I'm understanding Paul's comments correctly, because this stone's pavilion is cut differently. So in essence, the effect of the longer lgf's is negated -- again, if I'm understanding Paul's comments correctly.

Sara, Dee's ring was not meant to be posted as an actual comparison in anyway, just to show another diamond with thinner arrows as the OP asked about her stone. Also you are correct that Dee's diamond would not be considered a ' traditional' h&a as the hearts would almost certainly have clefts, Jon at GOG sells these types and calls them modified h&a.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 11:42:57 AM
Author: poopie
Thank you for your input lorelei.
It''s a big purchase for sight unseen but it has been one of the few stones I could find that hover around the 2ct range that is feasible for the wallet! She wants the finger coverage and sparkle, and she seems to be fine with all the I color stones we have seen. I''m going to cross my fingers!
who is this Dee you speak of?

Also if you are open to buying online and give us an idea of budget and your other requirements, we could have a look around to see what else is out there that might suit you?

 

[Lula]

Date: 4/22/2010 12:25:00 PM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/22/2010 12:19:18 PM

Author: sarap333

Date: 4/22/2010 12:13:22 PM

Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/22/2010 12:09:14 PM


Author: sarap333


The stone in question is not a hearts and arrows cut, like Dee*Jay''s. So the comparison isn''t meaningful.

Is her stone a h&a? I could have sworn it wasn''t, I need to go back and check.

You''re right, Lorelei, her stone falls outside strict hearts and arrows range, if I remember right (hearts would have clefts).


But this stone cannot be compared with a diamond with longer lgf''s like Dee*Jay''s, if I''m understanding Paul''s comments correctly, because this stone''s pavilion is cut differently. So in essence, the effect of the longer lgf''s is negated -- again, if I''m understanding Paul''s comments correctly.

Sara, Dee''s ring was not meant to be posted as an actual comparison in anyway, just to show another diamond with thinner arrows as the OP asked about her stone. Also you are correct that Dee''s diamond would not be considered a '' traditional'' h&a as the hearts would almost certainly have clefts, Jon at GOG sells these types and calls them modified h&a.

Thanks for the clarification, Lorelei

To the original poster, it could be a nice stone, just cut differently from what we tend to see around here (hearts & arrows). But its cut is not top notch, and cut is what makes a stone sparkle. But if your girlfriend has seen this stone, and likes it, and would rather have a large stone, and also if the price is right, this could be a good stone for you. But if you want to compare it to some other diamonds in your price range, just ask, and the posters here will give you lots of suggestions.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 1:48:30 PM
Author: sarap333

Date: 4/22/2010 12:25:00 PM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/22/2010 12:19:18 PM

Author: sarap333

Date: 4/22/2010 12:13:22 PM

Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/22/2010 12:09:14 PM


Author: sarap333


The stone in question is not a hearts and arrows cut, like Dee*Jay''s. So the comparison isn''t meaningful.

Is her stone a h&a? I could have sworn it wasn''t, I need to go back and check.

You''re right, Lorelei, her stone falls outside strict hearts and arrows range, if I remember right (hearts would have clefts).


But this stone cannot be compared with a diamond with longer lgf''s like Dee*Jay''s, if I''m understanding Paul''s comments correctly, because this stone''s pavilion is cut differently. So in essence, the effect of the longer lgf''s is negated -- again, if I''m understanding Paul''s comments correctly.

Sara, Dee''s ring was not meant to be posted as an actual comparison in anyway, just to show another diamond with thinner arrows as the OP asked about her stone. Also you are correct that Dee''s diamond would not be considered a '' traditional'' h&a as the hearts would almost certainly have clefts, Jon at GOG sells these types and calls them modified h&a.

Thanks for the clarification, Lorelei

To the original poster, it could be a nice stone, just cut differently from what we tend to see around here (hearts & arrows). But its cut is not top notch, and cut is what makes a stone sparkle. But if your girlfriend has seen this stone, and likes it, and would rather have a large stone, and also if the price is right, this could be a good stone for you. But if you want to compare it to some other diamonds in your price range, just ask, and the posters here will give you lots of suggestions.

Welcome m'' dear!

 

[Dancing Fire]

odd looking stone indeed,plus an unfinished girdle.

 

[poopie]

Thank you for all the discussion around this!
who knew there were so many factors to consider.
I definitely want to take up the offer for suggestions.
She tried many shapes and sizes and we both agreed the 2ct range suited her fingers the best. However my budget of 11k for the stone doesn''t hold up to many stones in that range. Hoping to find something very well or ideally cut. As eyeclean as possible. We are open to I colors (with blue fluorescence to hopefully make it whiter), perhaps J''s... though we''ve never seen any at jewelers. Hearts and arrows are nice but not at the forefront for selection.
I''m hoping to find a loose stone in the next couple of weeks, I want to get this ball rolling!!!

 

[Dreamer_D]

I just wanted to comment that your screen name makles me chuckle. I call my one year old son "Mr. Poopie."

 

[poopie]

haha!
my future wife is the seed that landed on this pile of **** and blossomed into a beautiful flower... hence the nickname POOPIE

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 4:22:10 PM
Author: poopie
haha!
my future wife is the seed that landed on this pile of **** and blossomed into a beautiful flower... hence the nickname POOPIE

Well thanks for the explanation, I must admit I was wondering where your name came from....