Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Please give me your thoughts on these two options

jsb15

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
19
Both are AGS 000 with Platinum Light Performance Documents. I pulled the ASET images for each from those documents. I did see a photographic ASET on option 2 but cannot get one on option 1. Both are from reputable vendors.

1) 1.51 ct F SI1 eye clean (by report) and by my looking at high power images
table 54.0
crown 35.1
pavillion 40.5
depth 61.8
thin to medium
pointed
HCA 0.6






fsi1_1.jpg

2) 1.51 ct G VS2
table 56.1
crown 35.5
pavillion 40.8
depth 62.3
thin to medium
pointed
HCA 2.6

gvs2151.jpg


gvs21513.jpg gvs21512__1_.jpg gvs21512__2_.jpg

A GG looked at option #2 and liked it very much. He seemed unconcerned that the HCA was high enough to warrant the HCA disclaimer that it might be good if the price were right and said no one but pricescope looks at those numbers. I understand that the HCA is more an exclusionary tool. I suppose the depth helped push the number up and it seems like there are more "less bright" and "contrast" markings in the central area under the pavillion of that stone than in option #1. One strange thing about option #1 is that after having a 2012 AGS Platinum report the stone was submitted to GIA in 2015 and got the same F SI1 grade. Since it had an AGS number etched on the side the sender had a reputable report already. I wonder if someone thought it was so high an F or SI1 that they hoped it would be upgraded (and then would need to polish off the AGS laser markings and have the report amended). The sales staff said that this means nothing and perhaps they just preferred a GIA report. The G VS2 stone sells for 10% more than the F SI1 stone but that seems consistent with what I could see on the few on-line posted Rap sheets. I have used the vendor for stone #1 before and the vendor for #2 seemed very nice with loads of experience so I'm sure it is a lovely stone but once I got the PS bug looking at numbers and reflector images I may be spending too much time trying to differentiate amongst truly excellent AGS 000 stones. Nevertheless, since it looks like I can't get either stone sourced from the same vendor for a direct comparison, I humbly request your thoughts.
 

flyingpig

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
2,553
i won't take #2, just based on the actual IS. (white areas=light leakage)
It is too bad you cannot get the actual IS/ASET on #1. I would consider a stone like that based on the report and computer generated ASET alone, for a sub 1.0 carat/$5000. But for this carat weight and color..... I just cannot, unless price is highly highly attractive.

You liked #2. It is still a beautiful stone. I am not surprised you liked it. It is still AGS000 with no detrimental light leakage.. It comes down to the price.
 

jsb15

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
19
I have only seen photographic images of the two stones as of yet. I should have an IS of stone #1 which I can post later today but that vendor says they do not do ASETs on RB stones and fortunately I at least have a computer generated one. Thanks for your comments.
 

pfunk

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
770
#1. AGS000, better images, looks like shorter LGF (fat arrows), eye clean SI1 at that size is great, cheaper, consistent reports from top 2 labs, trusted vendor you have used before. That's my pick.
 

jsb15

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
19
Thanks to all who wrote in. Here is the last image I was able to obtain and it is an IS on option #1 (F SI1). fsi1151.jpg . Does this give anyone more or less confidence in the optical quality of this stone?
 

telephone89

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
3,883
I like #1. 10% is also A LOT of money, you could easily put that toward a setting.

eta- it looks totally clean. What is the SI1 grade based on?
 

jsb15

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
19
Stone #1 is from James Allen and I could see nothing on a 40X magnification rotated around. It looked cleaner to me than other VS2's viewed the same way. The gemologist said there were some feathers which were mostly very translucent at the periphery. I'm not so much troubled but perplexed as the stone having GIA and AGS certs. I asked if it looked so white that it was sent to GIA hoping to get it called an E and the gemologist said GIA was stricter on color and it was rare for AGS and GIA to differ but if they did, GIA graded color lower. I asked him if he were surprised it was an SI1 and he was OK with that too. FWIW, I asked him to compare it to two other AGS 000 stones that were a little larger and more expensive and he liked this one best so I am likely to take it. Thanks for your assistance!
 

pfunk

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
770
jsb15|1457558969|4002229 said:
Stone #1 is from James Allen and I could see nothing on a 40X magnification rotated around. It looked cleaner to me than other VS2's viewed the same way. The gemologist said there were some feathers which were mostly very translucent at the periphery. I'm not so much troubled but perplexed as the stone having GIA and AGS certs. I asked if it looked so white that it was sent to GIA hoping to get it called an E and the gemologist said GIA was stricter on color and it was rare for AGS and GIA to differ but if they did, GIA graded color lower. I asked him if he were surprised it was an SI1 and he was OK with that too. FWIW, I asked him to compare it to two other AGS 000 stones that were a little larger and more expensive and he liked this one best so I am likely to take it. Thanks for your assistance!
I think that is the right decision. It looks great!
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Something Blue
    Something Blue
    November’s Jewels Of The Weeks
    November’s Jewels Of The Weeks
    Upgrade to Five-Stone
    Upgrade to Five-Stone

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top