Please give opinions on specs please

[RIVEROAKS]

Opinions please on dimensions etc..

measurements 9.52 x 9.47 x 5.8 mm

proportions v.good
depth 61%
table diam 61%
crown height 14%
pavilion depth 44%
girdle medium
finish excellent
SI1 - H - 3.17ct Round


Do these proportions make for a nice bright diamond etc.

Thanks

 

[Nicrez]

Hey there Riveroaks! nice to see you back. I thought we scared you off after Corvette guy came in and started to take over your thread a while back!




Is this a round stone? I put it in the HCA and it's a "5.9...good only if price is your main criterion"...I have never seen a 61/61...




Have you seen this stone? Is there something wrong with how I entered it? Someone else try...?!

 

[RIVEROAKS]

Thats for sure... My last posting was a mess! Let's try and keep it to the point this time. And yoes it's round!
61 61 was no mistake!

Thanks

 

[pqcollectibles]

You really wanna get crown and pavillion angles on this diamond from a Sarin. Using the HCA with % that are rounded won't be as accurate as angles will be. Could be a great diamond and should have a larger than carat weight appearance. Can't really say based on the info you gave.

Have you seen the diamond in person??

 

[RIVEROAKS]

Have not see it yet but wanted some feedback first. So it sould be OK is what you are saying?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/24/2004 5:40:48 PM RIVEROAKS wrote:

Have not see it yet but wanted some feedback first. So it sould be OK is what you are saying?----------------

Not too many would consider a HCA score close to 6 desirable... This is not saying that the stone is definitely not worth looking at, but the respective score is a red flag in demand of further inverstigation. At leats in my opinion. It could be that this stone may not compare favorably in terms of light return with an ideal cut. However, this score is only as good as the numbers available.

As far as I can say, the best way to tell wether this score means much to you is to see some "ideal cut" stones and see wether their look is allot to miss for you. The current piece is most likely a different story...

 

[Rhino]

Let's not coddle this guy...




If you are looking for a very brilliant diamond you will DEFINETELY not find it in an HCA of 5.9. That diamond will have TERRIBLE leakage.




My .02

 

[Rhino]

Here is a DiamCalc example of what you most likely have here. All the white you see under the table and around the sides is light leakage. There should be hella more blacks but they are washed out with the reds so little (intense) light is exiting perpendicular to the crown.




/idealbb/files/riveroaks01.gif




Advice on this one is simple. PASS.

 

[RIVEROAKS]

Based on the information I have given ...What would be the value of this stone?

 

[diamondsman]

the value on such a stone is a bout $23,800.00+, given all the limited info you have given, And assuming that it's certified by G.I.A.
The numbers are not that bad,I would have liked to see a stone with a smaller table,but ..... this is not bad at all.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/24/2004 3:53:19 PM RIVEROAKS wrote:




Do these proportions make for a nice bright diamond etc.


----------------

Now I see the key word here! 'Nice' - maybe, 'bright' - not really: just to sum up.

No idea what VG finish and proportions mean, since we do not know the standard on which these words are based. There are plenty of stones good at other things (fire, scintilation, elegant shapes) but light return and people buy them all the time. Ideal cut rounds will always be 'brighter' though.

The average price per carat for EGL certified stones in this weight is 6,400 for the stones listed here at least - and there is enough of them.

The closest match would read:
weight: 3.12 cts, H, SI1, depth=62.9%, table=61%, cert:EGL, girdle:t-stkf, culet:no, polish & symmtry:vg, fluorescence:no, size: 9.23*9.28*5.83, price per carat:$6212, total price: $19381.

Another close match (THIS), listed by several sellers, is labeled "Ideal Cut" by Whiteflash ( a notch less than their H&A brand, but nice enough). The price per carat: $6213$ and total $19447.

I would consider and EGL stone like this, but with a good HCA score quite a desirable bargain: a stone discounted for the lab's name, but with promising optics. Not too many of those, I suspect. The same specs on a GIS or AGS cert brings the listed price per carat around 8k. You be the judge...

 

[Rhino]

It should be one of the cheapest 3ct H SI1's you find on the net. Regarding it's actual value there are a ton of variables (with regards to it's clarity, color, cut, which lab graded the diamond, etc.) that can go into play. An assessment that can not be determined without *seeing* the stone.

----------------
On 3/24/2004 9:48:40 PM RIVEROAKS wrote:





Based on the information I have given ...What would be the value of this stone?
----------------

 

[pqcollectibles]

If the DiamCalc that Rhino ran for you is any where near the ballpark, when you see the diamond it might have a dark area just under the table in the center. The DiamCalc rendering shows a circle of light leakage that will appear like a darkened or dead spot in the center of the stone. Light enters from the top and goes right out the bottom of the diamond.

 

[RIVEROAKS]

How can EGL rate the proportions as very good if they are so poor?

 

[Giangi]

I guess this stone was graded by EGL in Antwerp. If it's so, there's a set of recognized proportions here in Europe used by the top labs --HRD and IGI-- and by the EGL, even though they all have slight variations. A 'very good' in proportions means: table somewhere between 53-66%, crown 30.7-37.7' or 11-16%, pavilion 41.5-45% or up to 42.2', girdle thin to slightly thick.

 

[Giangi]

BTW, do a search on the topic 'EGL Antwerp'. You'll find some not so good surprises.

 

[RIVEROAKS]

Right you are it is from antworp... Is that a bad thing!

 

[valeria101]

Antwerp or not (is has been said that GL US is better than the other EGLs), these standards are based on different considerations than AGS or HCA has in the background. I suspect the logic is more in line with the principles behind the AGA cut grades system, where the overall aspect of the stone is taken into account with much less emphasis on light return. HCA and AGS do take into account the aditional aestetic considerations ( banning excess depth, overly thock girdles, poor symmetry and such) AND light return. Because of the strict parameters needed to quaify the optical properties of the diamonds, the tollerance for cut parameters under AGS cut grading are relatively strict. Furthermore, the HCA refines these optics further even among AGS0 stones.

So? As long as one defines a convenient clasification system, anything can be #1 ! It is all in the definition of those grades and what they stand for. Unfortunately, it seems that considering all this is not exactly easy shopping - not that diamonds are cheap and not worth the effort

Would I consider EGL's system too 'loose' according to the above? I guess this is your call to judge. Again, whatever the other grading has to say is best demonstrated comparing stones. Overall, I am not convinced that cut diamonds are meaningless unless they have the best possible light return, but round stones are indeed the best suited shape for top optics, so it is harder to make an excuse for them, in my opinion.

If cut quality and brilliance are not your priorities, this whole discussion is meaningless, of course.

 

[diamondsman]

E.G.L'S in general are known to be a little more lienient than G.I.A & AGS,In their grading of color and calrity,but...cut is cut, measuremants are approx.the same by all labs.
If you are concerned about the cut, the stone has got a bigger table and that might give it a bigger look from the top,If you can give us the top measurments,I would be able to know if the stone has the diameter of a 3.17 cts.

 

[fire&ice]

Unless this stone is priced around 11-14k and price was a motivating factor, I would not consider it at all.