please help judge my potential engagement ring! (ideal scope image attached)

[bluefire7]

Hi all! Thanks in advance... this site has been tremendously helpful in my search for the best diamond I could afford

I''m currently looking at a GIA ideal diamond at james allen and would like to ask your expert opinions on this ideal scope image. it scored a so-so 3.5 for HCA, (everything is "very good" except for scintillation which was only "good") so I do have my doubts.. but from what I''ve been reading, the idealscope image looks to be alright.. what do you think?

 

[Dreamer_D]

I *think* the slightly darker area in the middle is leakage. Hopefully people more adept will see this as the day progresses.

 

[jet2ks]

Looks like some mild to moderate leakage under the table. How much it would be visible in person is tough to tell because the lighting is not even--the table area needs more light under it to really make a better judgement.

 

[bluefire7]

thanks for the input! anyone else?

 

[Miss Sparkly]

Would you mind posting your budget and what size, color, clarity, etc you''re looking for? There are some great people here who could help you find a knock out of a diamond!

 

[JulieN]

it looks really nice.

can you post the full details?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 1/9/2010 2:49:03 AM
Author: JulieN
it looks really nice.

can you post the full details?

Agree, it does look really nice, the full details would be helpful please.

 

[bluefire7]

budget-wise i''m trying to stay under 5000. looking for around 1.25 carat, ideal, H color or better, and an eye-clean SI1 or SI2...

 

[JulieN]

What lorelei and i really wanted to know is the complete proportions: table, depth, crown and pav angles

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I think there is a mix up.
that does not look like the right IS for a 3.5HCA

 

[tyty333]

Date: 1/10/2010 4:21:01 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
I think there is a mix up.
that does not look like the right IS for a 3.5HCA

Well there you have it...post all the numbers (depth, table, crown and pavilion angles) so we can figure out
why it scored bad but the image doesnt look so bad (IMHO).

 

[bluefire7]

sure thing, here you go-

table%- 56
depth%- 61.9
crown angle-36º
pavilion angle-40.8º

what do you think?

 

[Stephan]

Date: 1/10/2010 4:21:01 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
I think there is a mix up.
that does not look like the right IS for a 3.5HCA

Even if painted?

 

[JulieN]

yes, I think there is a mix-up, too. picture doesn''t match the listed proportions.

 

[stone-cold11]

Can you post the actual link or at least the loupe image and the GIA report or report number?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 1/11/2010 12:45:54 AM
Author: bluefire7
sure thing, here you go-

table%- 56
depth%- 61.9
crown angle-36º
pavilion angle-40.8º

what do you think?

I do not believe this ideal-scope image is for the same stone.
I am happy to say that the image posted can have a 36 crown angle but the pavilion angle is closer to 40.3 degrres.
There is probably a little crown and a little pavilion painting on the IS image - but since I do not believe it is not the same stone - it is imaterial.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

edited

 

[bluefire7]

ahh, thank you so much all, it was the wrong idealscope image! I will receive the correct one tomorrow and update. Thanks for your help so far! Almost bought a stone based on wrong information!

 

[Stephan]

Pricescope is a great place!

Garry!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 1/11/2010 12:22:58 PM
Author: bluefire7
ahh, thank you so much all, it was the wrong idealscope image! I will receive the correct one tomorrow and update. Thanks for your help so far! Almost bought a stone based on wrong information!

ETA OK, so it was James Allen again

Someone there needs to really get it together. This is 2x in the past few weeks we have seen this happen from this vendor!

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 1/11/2010 1:14:59 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 1/11/2010 12:22:58 PM

Author: bluefire7

ahh, thank you so much all, it was the wrong idealscope image! I will receive the correct one tomorrow and update. Thanks for your help so far! Almost bought a stone based on wrong information!

Will you share the vendor? There have been recent mixups with IS images from James Allen in the past and for the information of consumers it may be helpful to know the vendor in your case too.

First post says it was JA too.

 

[elle_chris]

Date: 1/11/2010 1:14:59 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 1/11/2010 12:22:58 PM
Author: bluefire7
ahh, thank you so much all, it was the wrong idealscope image! I will receive the correct one tomorrow and update. Thanks for your help so far! Almost bought a stone based on wrong information!

ETA OK, so it was James Allen again

Someone there needs to really get it together. This is 2x in the past few weeks we have seen this happen from this vendor!

I was thinking that two. We also don''t know how many people just made a purchase based on the image without posting on PS.

James Allen is one of the vendors I use for my eternity band project. A little paranoid now.

 

[Stephan]

Just buy Bluenile then, they won''t send you the wrong picture.

I think that:
- non pricescope members don''t ask for IS picture
- the others will post it on pricescope

=> I really don''t think that JamesAllen.com did this mistake by purpose.

 

[elle_chris]

I''ve purchased from them without posting the idealscope image in the past. It looked good and I can''t decipher crown/pavilion angels from an idealscope.

But I do think you''re right. I''m sure it''s not done on purpose but it is sloppiness.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 1/11/2010 1:31:11 PM
Author: QueenMum
Just buy Bluenile then, they won''t send you the wrong picture.

I think that:
- non pricescope members don''t ask for IS picture
- the others will post it on pricescope

=> I really don''t think that JamesAllen.com did this mistake by purpose.

Of course not! Then it would be fraud, not a mistake.

And I think you are right about non PS people not asking for images. But I wonder whether other images posted on PS have been mixed up and were not identified as such. The recent issues were both "caught" because of unusual happenstance -- the first one because another PSer recognized that he has received the same IS image as another PSer, and this one because Garry is a genious

.

 

[YoungPapa]

Date: 1/11/2010 5:40:47 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

I am happy to say that the image posted can have a 36 crown angle but the pavilion angle is closer to 40.3 degrres.

There is probably a little crown and a little pavilion painting on the IS image - but since I do not believe it is not the same stone - it is imaterial.

Good eye, Garry. It''s actually a 40.5 pavilion:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1266610.asp

The correct IS for the 1.26ct F-SI2 is below.

One mistake I can forgive to volume. Two mistakes and I need to sit down and have a heart to heart with one of my staff. Please accept my apology for the mistake.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thanks Jim,
and BTW that looks like it moght be an eye clean SI2

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The reason the stone scores 3.5 on HCA is that the pavilion and probably the crown have been ever so slightly painted which lowers the leakage.
From the ideal-scope this will be a nice stone.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think it looks pretty good!

And James good for you for taking care of this.

 

[bluefire7]

thanks garry, so are you saying this is not one of those cases where I should rule out the diamond because it is not between the range of 0-2? I was previously reading on the forums about trying to stick to a 1.0 or close to it...