shape
carat
color
clarity

Oval 1.5-1.7 ct Under 15k?

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by Klynn19, May 18, 2019.

  1. Klynn19
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    17
    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
    by Klynn19 » May 18, 2019
    Do you think it’s possible to get a high quality oval that’s 1.5-1.7 cts for under 15k?

    I thought I found some good potentials through other online/retail vendors however was primarily focusing on the 4’s. I am familiar with preferred LTW, depth and table ratios however after just discovering these forums, it appears a lot more complicated than that while shopping for an oval. I’m a little overwhelmed now and not sure I know what I’m looking at.

    Any advice? I’ve found posts recomending a stone from August Vintage however don’t see anything on there with my preferences within that price range.

    I was color D-F, clarity F-SV1, and a very good to ideal cut. Maybe I’m asking for too much?
     
    


    


  2. LinSF
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    324
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2018
    Klynn19 and lovedogs like this.
  3. Starfacet
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    by Starfacet » May 18, 2019
    It might be worth inquiring with Jonathan at August Vintage if he has any more Opulence/Elyque ovals coming in in your size/clarity/price range.
     
    Klynn19 likes this.
  4. Starfacet
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Klynn19, Ss52 and bludiva like this.
    


    


  5. OcnGypZ
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    149
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2006
    Klynn19 and Starfacet like this.
  6. FreeDiam
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    11
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2017
  7. thebrady28
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2019
    by thebrady28 » May 19, 2019
    OP I would be seriously looking at this, it's pretty much exactly what you're looking for

    - 1.5+ tick
    - IF > VS1 it's VS2 it's VS2 you won't need any higher than this IMO I bought a SI1 eye clean
    - very good > ideal cut August Vintage ovals I believe are the only ideal ovals TICK
    - D>F color tick
     
    Klynn19 and Starfacet like this.
  8. Klynn19
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    17
    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
    by Klynn19 » May 20, 2019
    F2A6DA28-E6D7-438C-9373-EC243BCB2748.jpeg

    Thank you!! This must have just popped up at it was there when I looked Saturday morning.

    Can I ask your advice - from what I’ve researched the attached chart is the preferred percentages for depth/percentages. I’ve found a few tables and all seem to be pretty in line.

    So the August Vintage stone has a table of 45.3 so wouldn’t that be graded “Poor” and the depth I believe at 66.9 would be graded fair?

    Would you be concerned about this? The stone does look beautiful. Wouldn’t the smaller/“Poor” table % make the stone look smaller than its carat weight?
     
    Starfacet likes this.
  9. Klynn19
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    17
    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
  10. Klynn19
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    17
    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
    by Klynn19 » May 20, 2019
    1944C6AF-F746-47C7-91BF-99E1EE9D6393.jpeg
    Can I ask your advice - from what I’ve researched the attached chart is the preferred percentages for depth/percentages. I’ve found a few tables and all seem to be pretty in line.

    So the August Vintage stone has a table of 45.3 so wouldn’t that be graded “Poor” and the depth I believe at 66.9 would be graded fair?

    Would you be concerned about this? The stone does look beautiful. Wouldn’t the smaller/“Poor” table % make the stone look smaller than its carat weight?
     
    


    


  11. OcnGypZ
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    149
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2006
    by OcnGypZ » May 20, 2019
    The oval cut is a "fancy" cut. The historical cut of an oval - is not cut for light performance They leak. August Vintage set out to improve the performance of the oval cut. And they were successful. The cut has been patented and these stones are graded by AGS for performance. There is no better oval cut on the market for diamonds than August Vintage.
     
    Dancing Fire, Rhino and Starfacet like this.
  12. Klynn19
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    17
    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
    by Klynn19 » May 20, 2019
    Thank you for the reply and information. I’m going to reach out to AV. Thanks again. Do you think the smaller table makes the face of the stone look smaller?
     
    Starfacet likes this.
  13. Starfacet
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    by Starfacet » May 20, 2019
    Perfectly said!
     
  14. Starfacet
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,056
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    by Starfacet » May 20, 2019
    No, but the stone is cut slightly deeper to avoid the bow tie. But mine doesn't look necessarily smaller than a standard oval. But then, I'm a great light return junkie so I wouldn't care if I sacrificed a bit of size for sparkle!
    Here's a video of mine loose:
    https://www.instagram.com/p/BoNHSvFDgrq/
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2019
  15. Swirl68
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    141
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2018
    by Swirl68 » May 20, 2019
    Oval diamonds will vary wildly in spread. Look closely at their dimensions. Carat weight is often deceiving in ovals. Many people will often try to reach a certain dimension than carat weight.
    You might also try to determine your preferred shape oval (long and skinny vs fat, for instance). I prefer more fat ovals, so I look for L/W ratios of 1.20-1.35. A lot of people prefer to stay in the 1.35-1.50 range.

    If you google "diamond database- compare diamond shapes and sizes" you will find a tool that will allow you to compare the sizes of the different diamonds you are considering. (I'm not sure if they will allow me to link it or not.)

    Take for instance the 1.51 Elyque oval listed above (8.25x5.912x4.74) compared to the 1.5. F VVS1 (9.37x6.53x3.93) that @FreeDiam listed above.

    Screen Shot 2019-05-20 at 10.36.48 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2019-05-20 at 10.37.13 AM.png
    ETA: I messed up the pictures before so I fixed them.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2019
    FreeDiam and Klynn19 like this.
    


    


  16. Klynn19
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    17
    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
    by Klynn19 » May 20, 2019
    Wow thank you SO much. Very helpful!

    While the August Vintage may be the best option for shine and light reflection I’m not sure I want to compromise on loosing approx. 25% of the table surface.

    Thank you again very helpful tool.
     
  17. Swirl68
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    141
    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2018
    by Swirl68 » May 20, 2019
    BUT...traditional ovals often have noticeable bowties and areas of mush that do not sparkle. Finding a traditional oval with a good spread that has no bowtie and no mushy areas is like finding a needle in a haystack. Many (if not most) on this board would prefer to have a smaller appearing diamond than deal with the mushy areas and bowtie. This board is not the real world however, most in my circle would take the larger spread. It's a trade-off for sure. You just have to know your fiance's priorities.
     
    Rhino likes this.
  18. tyty333
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    20,401
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    by tyty333 » May 20, 2019
    Its not the table that you need to be considering its the overall LxW of the stone. It's not a small table that makes a stone look small, its a small LxW.
    If you're not happy with the smaller sizes of the AV ovals needed to achieve ideal light return, Jonathan at AV can help you find a traditional oval that is decent.
    Obviously, he knows a lot about ovals.
     
    Dancing Fire, Swirl68 and Rhino like this.
  19. thebrady28
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2019
    by thebrady28 » May 26, 2019
    I'm more than happy to sacrifice spread for light performance.
    My partners AV faces up so much nicer than any of her friends ovals.
    They all agreed they would prefer an AV over standard.
     
    Starfacet likes this.

Share This Page