Please HELP interpret my Idealscope image

[turtleridge]

Here''s another pic that was sent to me:

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 10/25/2007 8:14:06 PM
Author: turtleridge
Garry, can you go into a little more detail why you like this stone while most will not? Does this mean that my stone is far from ideal? I ask because I don''t plan on upgrading in the future so I want to be confidant that this stone has classic beauty that will last my lifetime.

Read this carefully - it was written by me, but with the help and opinions taken into account of quite a fw regulars here who do not totally agree with me.
I would say that stones like this one should be preferred by people older than 40 with normal eyesight (that means they can not look very close up).
It will be stunning if you look at it as your drive the car.
But if you want to lay in bed on your back and examine your ring from very close up (as i know several ladies do) then you might prefer a slightly deeper stone.

 

[hgau999]

Gary,

Sorry to butt in but I had quick question on what depth percentage and crown angles would you draw the line between deep and shallow stones?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 10/26/2007 12:45:33 PM
Author: hgau999
Gary,

Sorry to butt in but I had quick question on what depth percentage and crown angles would you draw the line between deep and shallow stones?

under 34 crown for 55-57% table under 32.5 60% table
under 40.6 pavilion if the crown angle is less than 35. <--- more important than crown angle.
Personaly Id have this one checked for contrast issues up close being 40.6 with a shallow crown it might or might not be an issue.

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Date: 10/25/2007 3:57:18 PM
Author: turtleridge
If someone can find a better stone with the following criterias, maybe I will just move past this drama altogether:


1. Excellent cut

2. D-F color

3. 3.00 ct (or 2.80 and above with good spread)

4. SI1 (completely eye clean)

5. Under $43K

ok, toughy.

hows this?

its a 3.12ct and $42.9k its a whiteflash ACA . Depth %: 61.1
. Table %: 55.9
. Crown Angle: 34.6
. Crown %: 15.3
. Pavilion Angle: 40.7
. Pavilion %: 42.9
. Girdle: Thin to Medium
. Measurements: 9.43-9.44X5.77

will attached the IS image in the next post.

 

[Lord Summerisle]

 

[Lord Summerisle]

oops forgot to attach

 

[gontama]

Date: 10/26/2007 4:57:52 PM
Author: Lord Summerisle

Date: 10/25/2007 3:57:18 PM
Author: turtleridge
If someone can find a better stone with the following criterias, maybe I will just move past this drama altogether:


1. Excellent cut

2. D-F color

3. 3.00 ct (or 2.80 and above with good spread)

4. SI1 (completely eye clean)

5. Under $43K

ok, toughy.

hows this?

its a 3.12ct and $42.9k its a whiteflash ACA . Depth %: 61.1
. Table %: 55.9
. Crown Angle: 34.6
. Crown %: 15.3
. Pavilion Angle: 40.7
. Pavilion %: 42.9
. Girdle: Thin to Medium
. Measurements: 9.43-9.44X5.77

will attached the IS image in the next post.

This WF was too good to believe at $42.9K ... Wish its color were F .... Nice diamond nontheless.

 

[turtleridge]

ok, toughy.

hows this?

its a 3.12ct and $42.9k its a whiteflash ACA . Depth %: 61.1
. Table %: 55.9
. Crown Angle: 34.6
. Crown %: 15.3
. Pavilion Angle: 40.7
. Pavilion %: 42.9
. Girdle: Thin to Medium
. Measurements: 9.43-9.44X5.77
I agree--beautifully cut stone! Now, if only I can get something similar in a colorless group and no fluorescence for the same price

! Thanks for the suggestion, Lord Summerisle.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 10/25/2007 9:19:27 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 10/25/2007 8:14:06 PM
Author: turtleridge
Garry, can you go into a little more detail why you like this stone while most will not? Does this mean that my stone is far from ideal? I ask because I don''t plan on upgrading in the future so I want to be confidant that this stone has classic beauty that will last my lifetime.

Read this carefully - it was written by me, but with the help and opinions taken into account of quite a fw regulars here who do not totally agree with me.
I would say that stones like this one should be preferred by people older than 40 with normal eyesight (that means they can not look very close up).
It will be stunning if you look at it as your drive the car.
But if you want to lay in bed on your back and examine your ring from very close up (as i know several ladies do) then you might prefer a slightly deeper stone.

Silly me - I forgot to paste the link
http://diamonds.pricescope.com/ideal.asp

 

[Lord Summerisle]

Date: 10/26/2007 5:15:15 PM
Author: gontama
This WF was too good to believe at $42.9K ... Wish its color were F .... Nice diamond nontheless.

i know, why it was a toughy - when i did a search, anything higher than G colour was approching $100k
hence i put that one on and left the colour off to let the diamond speak first, i mean, what does I colour mean? what does it look like in real life? is it a mind thing to be going for an D E F, or just what others have said to go for?

but it also highlights possibly how good the ones your looking at are, in terms of price

 

[gontama]

Date: 10/27/2007 1:57:11 PM
Author: Lord Summerisle

Date: 10/26/2007 5:15:15 PM
Author: gontama
This WF was too good to believe at $42.9K ... Wish its color were F .... Nice diamond nontheless.

i know, why it was a toughy - when i did a search, anything higher than G colour was approching $100k
hence i put that one on and left the colour off to let the diamond speak first, i mean, what does I colour mean? what does it look like in real life? is it a mind thing to be going for an D E F, or just what others have said to go for?

but it also highlights possibly how good the ones your looking at are, in terms of price

You are very findnig a nice stone for the OP. After my post, I was thinking to ask the OP about the possibility of changing the color requirement because this diamond looks very good, really, and is within the budget. If the I color can be accepted, the beauty is guaranteed. It is not that easy to find something similar to this one both in cut and size. But the OP clarified that she wants a colorless stone so I will not bother any more.

I imagine most people would see the color of an I color diamond, espeically from the profile view, and especially for a large stone like this. But they may be perfectly ok with it, and may even like warm feeling of the stone. They have own taste. The fire may comes with the stone's color (I do not know).

With $42-43K, one can expect something like 2.3-4 ct F/VS superideal. E color may be possible. But may be difficiult to go over 2.5ct.

With the price I paid for the 1.86GV1, I could have got well over 2ct I color stone. The size difference is immediately noticeable, which is good, but I know my partner is intolerant (not sensitive though) to the color. So I stayed with G. But I myself, while loving D/E, am willing to go for I/J large well cut stone.

 

[Sharon101]

Wow, the collective knowledge on this board is mind blowing!!!!

 

[turtleridge]

Hi everyone, I am back with the stone I think I want to purchase. The symmetry is graded Good by GIA so I am aware that I will not see the hearts and arrows. I want to make sure that light return, scintillation, and fire all very good so please let me know if you think this is a nice stone or not. Here are the specs:

9.32-9.36 x 5.63
3.01 ct
Color: F
Clarity: SI1
Cut grade: Very Good
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Fluorescence: faint

Table: 58%
Total depth: 60.3%
Crown angle: 34.1
Pavilion angle: 40.8

 

[turtleridge]

Here is a 40x magnified photo:

 

[turtleridge]

I realize it is Friday and many people may have left for the weekend, but if any of the experts are available and online right now, I''d appreciate some feedback on the idealscope as this diamond is on hold and the vendor would like to know my answer as soon as possible.

HCA score is 1.1 and received Excellent in all categories but I would like some experienced idealscope interpreters to give me the thumbs up before making the purchase final.

Thank you for your time!

 

[Lord Summerisle]

I think at this stange.. the best bet is to see it yourself.

the ideal scope looks fine, its not a perfect arrows picture, but your not to expect it, because its not being sold as such, and i dont think you''ll beable to notice it when you have it in your hand.

Its alot of money your planning on spending (about my annual wage!) so best to see it. WF has an excellent returns policy.
the angles and table combination will give the diamond a certain personality which may or may not be to your taste, and you may well fall in love at the first sight, or you may not (having built your hopes up too much) it scores well, i''m sure its a sparkler.

 

[turtleridge]

Thanks, Lord Summerisle. I''m just trying to figure out if a well-cut non H&A stone can produce just as much light return, brilliance, etc. as a certified H&A stone? Can a person tell the difference with the naked eye (no loop or magnification) between a H&A stone and one that is not?

I realize I am spending a lot of money on this diamond, but if I were to go for a H&A stone of the same size in the colorless range it wouldn''t be affordable.

Can anyone tell me what I would be sacrificing if I am to go with this stone?