Penny for your thoughts

[Ereeg]

• 1.42 I SI1 eye clean
• Length:7.27
• Width:7.32
• Depth:4.35
• Total Depth:59.63%
• Table percent:61
• Crown height:12.5
• Girdle (from):Medium
• Girdle (to):Slightly thick
• Polish:Excellent / Very Good
• Symmetry:Excellent / Very Good
• Crown angle:33
• Pavilion depth:43.5

• Tab Percent: 2A
• Crown Angle: 1B
• Crown Height: 2A
• Pavilion Depth: 1B
• Girdle: 1A
• Depth: 1A
• Polish: 1A
• Symmetry: 1A
• TotalGrade: 2A

I understand the table at 61 is larger than the depth at 59.7. But this fits into AGS ideal I believe as well as GIA excellent.What do you think?

 

[whitewave]

Can we see a pic or anything?

 

[lovedogs]

I'm pretty sure it wouldn't fall into AGS ideal based on those angles and table being bigger than depth. Numbers don't look good....do you have any pics?

 

[Ereeg]

I have a pic I’ll post later, but iPhone pics don’t seem good to me. I took it myself. Looks pretty and sparkly in person. HCA was 1.6 I believe.

The local jeweler said don’t believe the internet ideal numbers snd they are outdated (table 54-57,depth 61-62.4, CA34-35, PA 40.6-41).

I’m trying to pick without having the WF,BGD, H and A on hand to contrast. So it’s a toughy!!

 

[lovedogs]

HCA wouldn't even let me calculate.

 

[lovedogs]

I have a pic I’ll post later, but iPhone pics don’t seem good to me. I took it myself. Looks pretty and sparkly in person. HCA was 1.6 I believe.

The local jeweler said don’t believe the internet ideal numbers snd they are outdated (table 54-57,depth 61-62.4, CA34-35, PA 40.6-41).

I’m trying to pick without having the WF,BGD, H and A on hand to contrast. So it’s a toughy!!

The local jeweler is wrong, and trying to sell you a much inferior stone. Sorry to be blunt, but this vs the ACA literally isn't even close.

 

[whitewave]

Is this an uncertified stone?


@rockysalamander

 

[Ereeg]

It’s Gia excellent.

 

[Ereeg]

You can be blunt. That’s why I’m here. I pulled up the HCA earlier and one I have my phone with the pics I’ll upload GIA and picture. I’m not needing H and A, just a good looking diamond

 

[lovedogs]

You can be blunt. That’s why I’m here. I pulled up the HCA earlier and one I have my phone with the pics I’ll upload GIA and picture. I’m not needing H and A, just a good looking diamond

Totally understand. But given the numbers, I'd be shocked if this stone performed anywhere close to the ACA. Maybe under the Jewelers lights it looked good, but table being bigger than depth isn't good, and it seems like the girdle is way too thin to be safe.

Edit. I don't know how you calculated HCA, bc I entered the values you gave and it wouldn't work bc the girdle is too thin and unsafe.

 

[sledge]

What is the actual pavilion ANGLE of this stone? Your initial post showed 43.5 PERCENT, which should put the angle around the 41-42 mark. FYI, things get wonky at 41.2 pavilion.

Either way, we need the angle to tell more.

And the part about ideal cut parameters being outdated and is utter BS and a dishonest play of the jeweler to make a sale of his stone.

 

[sledge]

Totally understand. But given the numbers, I'd be shocked if this stone performed anywhere close to the ACA. Maybe under the Jewelers lights it looked good, but table being bigger than depth isn't good, and it seems like the girdle is way too thin to be safe.

Edit. I don't know how you calculated HCA, bc I entered the values you gave and it wouldn't work bc the girdle is too thin and unsafe.

The girdle being too thin doesn't make sense to me. From the initial post it's supposed to be medium to slightly thick which is where you want to be.

Is there additional numbers I'm missing that shows a different girdle thickness?

My guess is you entered 43.5 as the pavilion ANGLE, where it appears to be the PERCENT.

 

[Karl_K]

The local jeweler is wrong, and trying to sell you a much inferior stone. Sorry to be blunt, but this vs the ACA literally isn't even close.

The jeweler is just drinking the ags/gia cool aid.
GIA teaches that any number system but theirs is outdated.
AGS teaches that any number based system but their ags gold is outdated.

True enough that is is not close to a modern super ideal.

I'm am not a fan of the large table/low crown combo even if the pavilion is not over deep, they can be bright in the right light but lack life in my opinion.

 

[kmoro]

You can be blunt. That’s why I’m here. I pulled up the HCA earlier and one I have my phone with the pics I’ll upload GIA and picture. I’m not needing H and A, just a good looking diamond

H&A is not just a gimmick. Your jeweller is either lying or doesn’t know what he’s talking about; math and physics do not get outdated. If you do some more research on H&A, you’ll know more than your jeweller and understand how it indicates excellent symmetry. There are diamonds without perfect H&A that still have excellent symmetry, but unless you are an expert, a good H&A pattern is one of the best indicators, imo, of a “good looking diamond.”

All diamonds sparkle, but the difference can be noticeable, as you can see from the videos here ... which diamond would you rather buy? Will knowing that the diamonds will never be side-by-side be enough for you to be happy with the less sparkly diamond?

https://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/diamond-fire-1568.htm

 

[Dancing Fire]

I'm am not a fan of the large table/low crown combo even if the pavilion is not over deep, they can be bright in the right light but lack life in my opinion.

Yup, I'd run away from this type of stones.

.
I have yet to see a well performing stone with large table + a flat top .

 

[lovedogs]

What is the actual pavilion ANGLE of this stone? Your initial post showed 43.5 PERCENT, which should put the angle around the 41-42 mark. FYI, things get wonky at 41.2 pavilion.

Either way, we need the angle to tell more.

And the part about ideal cut parameters being outdated and is utter BS and a dishonest play of the jeweler to make a sale of his stone.

Ah, that's why it didn't work! Duh.

 

[Ereeg]

Table: 61
Depth: 59.7
PA: 41
CA: 33

Attached are some pics of it I took on my phone which I didn’t zoom in enough I’m sure, the HCA score, and the GIA.

 

[whitewave]

It’s my opinion that you can do better. I also don’t care for the flat top

 

[lovedogs]

It’s my opinion that you can do better. I also don’t care for the flat top

I don't like this one at all either.

 

[Ereeg]

But is it bad? What would you pay for it curious!?

Thank you so much this is helpful

 

[lovedogs]

But is it bad? What would you pay for it curious!?

Thank you so much this is helpful

Honestly I just wouldn't buy it period. Obviously if someone offered it to me for like 1K or less I probably would, but otherwise I would feel like it was a lot of money for a stone that would't perform as well as other options in budget.

 

[Ereeg]

Besides the larger table,What don’t you like about it? I’m trying to learn about crown angles and pavilion angle so any comments on those would be most beneficial!

 

[lovedogs]

33 is lower than we would recommend in a crown angle, but not a deal breaker. 41 is higher than we'd recommend for pav angle, but also not a deal breaker. They are complimentary, which is good. But the biggest deal breaker for me is the table being larger than depth. Plus, we don't have ASET/IS images to get info about light performance, so the numbers by themselves say "no" to me.

 

[Ereeg]

33 is lower than we would recommend in a crown angle, but not a deal breaker. 41 is higher than we'd recommend for pav angle, but also not a deal breaker. They are complimentary, which is good. But the biggest deal breaker for me is the table being larger than depth. Plus, we don't have ASET/IS images to get info about light performance, so the numbers by themselves say "no" to me.

OK thank you for that. I will see if they have any imaging they can do. I’m not sure if brick and mortar jewelers really do that as I’ve never seen it offered…

 

[sledge]

As with all diamonds, precision faceting comes into play. Even with the best proportions in the world, you can have a crap diamond if it's not well precisely cut. We saw this the other day on a stone with very ideal proportions: 56 table, 34.5 crown & 40.8 pavilion. That is near Tolk perfection but had a big leakage spot at the 9 o'clock position.

The problem is that any GIA report is never going to provide true confirmation on that faceting. You will need things like an ASET, IS and/or H&A images to confirm light performance & symmetry.

FYI, as table size increases the upper girdle facets decrease. And the upper girdles is where rainbow light (fire) is produced. Effectively big tabled stones reduce upper girdle facets, so it starves out the fire. The bonus is you get more white light. The inverse is also true. Smaller tables = larger upper girdle facets = more fire (and less white light).

Additionally shallow crowns produce more white light, and less fire. Obviously too steep a crown and you have some other negative effects, but crowns in the 34-35 range provide a nice range of fire. Being fire driven I prefer 34.5 to 35 myself.

In all cases you need to have complimentary angles. What does this mean? Basically as light enters the crown it reflects on the pavilion. If the angle is right it bounces back to the top of the diamond. If not then the light leaks out and you get a stone that looks dark (if too deep) or dull & lifeless (if too shallow). Generically speaking, you want an inverse relationship -- steep crown/shallow pavilion or shallow crown/steep pavilion. This stone having a 33/41 angle combo is somewhat complimentary in the fact it's shallow crown/steep pavilion but IMO the crown is too shallow.

Obviously, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. But I would question the beholder if they've seen an array of well cut and poorly cut diamonds to properly define beauty. Sometimes the prettiest or best thing we've seen only gets that rating because our eyes haven't seen better.

 

[ringo865]

I notice that you keep asking why and how the stones at Whiteflash are better than your jeweler’s stone. A many people have chimed in, even eliminating a couple of the WF stones, with comprehensive reasoning as to why they are better.

Not many people on this diamond forum are fans of flattop stones that are wider than they are tall. Continually asking for confirmation of whether that means to not buy this stone isn’t productive. If you have a relationship with your jeweler that you think you’re going to hurt his feelings by buying a “better” stone from somewhere else - mind you, WF has a very generous upgrade policy which would allow you full purchase price toward any diamond $1 more at any time - you need to evaluate that.

Your jeweler is in business to make a sale. His feelings don’t get hurt... his bankroll might, but that’s not your problem.

What do you want more? For a guy to like you, or a beautiful diamond (several of which have been analyzed here for you and recommended over your B&M guy’s stone) that you can upgrade 42 times if you want.

Not trying to sound harsh, but this isn’t the kind of purchase you want to make emotionally. Remove the emotions... it’s business.

Which stone is best for you with regard to value, size, cost, clarity, color, upgrade policy, etc. Neither seller has “feelings” about this transaction, nor should you. Buy the best one within your budget, and that is the one you will be happiest with. I’m following along on your adventure!

 

[Ereeg]

Ok I got you. And to be honest when I started posting here I wasn’t really considering online. Now I’m like most of the way convinced just an anxious guy about to potentially spend many thousands on the Internet! I’m sure you can relate?

I’ve also found this one. The size is really nice… It’s a premium select what do you guys think of this?

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4001980.htm

 

[kmoro]

Ok I got you. And to be honest when I started posting here I wasn’t really considering online. Now I’m like most of the way convinced just an anxious guy about to potentially spend many thousands on the Internet! I’m sure you can relate?

I’ve also found this one. The size is really nice… It’s a premium select what do you guys think of this?

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4001980.htm

I love it! 55 table, 34.5 CA, 40.8 PA ... doesn’t get much better than that ,.. get it on hold & buy it! And WF with excellent policies to boot!

 

[Ereeg]

I love it! 55 table, 34.5 CA, 40.8 PA ... doesn’t get much better than that ,.. get it on hold & buy it! And WF with excellent policies to boot!

Yay!!! I’ll give WF a call tomorrow and ask for side by sides of the ones below. But the 1.39 is nice!! I’m wondering why the stone Is only premium select and not expert or ACA if the measurements are perfect. Must’ve been something they picked up on the hearts and arrow?

Here are the final 3 contenders.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4089366,4065507,4001980

 

[ringo865]

Ok I got you. And to be honest when I started posting here I wasn’t really considering online. Now I’m like most of the way convinced just an anxious guy about to potentially spend many thousands on the Internet! I’m sure you can relate?

I’ve also found this one. The size is really nice… It’s a premium select what do you guys think of this?

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4001980.htm

Yes i can relate!! I have a friend who is a jeweler - like an actual friend - and at first it was super hard for me thinking i was like cheating on him when I’d buy jewelry from other places than from him. Then, when he would tell me that my “whatever new thing” was really nice, ask for all the stats, and admit that he couldn’t have “done it for that” (meaning sell, not buy), I started feeling less like I was hurting his feelings and now I trust my eyes (which pays off in the wallet department).

And YES! That WF stone is amazing!!! Put it on hold ASAP! (Plus their PS line is also eligible for their upgrade program, which hopefully you won’t need/want to use for a couple of years )