Please help me choose between these 2 Cartier rings!

[curious_tim]

You chose the 61/59 in your visual over the other one, right? that's all that matters.

Yes, that is the one that is being chosen, I was just worried there would be a lot of leakage from the cut of this diamond, based on a lot of negative 60/60 threads I've read here on PS.

 

[curious_tim]

Sorry, I was out of town for a couple of days and did not forget you! I was unclear, did your ask for the GIA reports on all the VS1-2 stones above? Have you made a decision? Either of the original two stones is okay. Most of us here would choose the cut of the first one, but for the average person who isn't a diamond OCD person, I am sure they wouldn't really care!

No problem at all DS, I was worrying (probably needlessly on the weekend which one to go with, in case Cartier doesn't allow anymore exchanges once they mount the loose stone onto the ring), hence I didn't want to choose a bad performing diamond!

I did ask about the VS1 & VS2 stones at the boutique, but none of them were within the range of the measurements you suggested (below), hence they all scored HCA rating of 4 or more.

table: 54-58
depth: 60-62.3
crown angle: 34-35.0
pavilion angle: 40.6-41.0

For the loose stone with the 59 table, I noticed the other measurements (depth, crown/pavilion angle) were within your range, just the table was larger, will this impact the cut quality? I am still confused with why so many people prefer steeper crown angles and deeper pavilion angles.

My main concern is if there could potentially be a lot of leakage from this stone, or turn out looking like one of the ugly 60/60 extreme examples here: https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/60-60-proportioned-diamond

Thanks a lot for replying and all the advice so far, it's helped me enormously.

 

[JulieN]

Your numbers don't predict strong leakage, HCA would tell you if it did. The HCA of the H is 2.0, which is very good. And you preferred it over the G, also a GIA EX with good HCA score. So it passes the test.

That 60/60 page only says that 60/60 is not sufficient to be beautiful. it does not preclude 60/60 from being beautiful.

 

[curious_tim]

Your numbers don't predict strong leakage, HCA would tell you if it did. The HCA of the H is 2.0, which is very good. And you preferred it over the G, also a GIA EX with good HCA score. So it passes the test.

That 60/60 page only says that 60/60 is not sufficient to be beautiful. it does not preclude 60/60 from being beautiful.

I kind of wished I could get an idealscope image and post it here for all to check and advise, however this is not practically possible if buying from Cartier. That would clear my doubts once and for all, this 59/61 stone may be an excellent/ideal cut.

I'm definitely more relieved knowing that there won't be a great deal of leakage, and may well be worrying needlessly here- especially if a normal person cannot tell the difference between the 2 stones I am comparing, apart from the size.

 

[CharmyPoo]

Unfortunately, this is the trade off when buying from a big brand name. You can go buy your own idealscope and take a look yourself. You can buy them here - http://www.ideal-scope.com.

 

[curious_tim]

I have been doing some more reading into BIC, FIC and TIC.

Based on the proportions of the stone below, does it fall between a Brilliant ideal cut and Tolk ideal cut?
Or is it definitively a BIC? Is table % the only determinant or does crown angle also play a part?

I read on this link: http://diamond-cut.com.au/23_bicfic.htm
BIC - crown angle less than 32.5
TIC - crown angle between 32.5-35.5
FIC - crown angle more than 35.5

Round Brilliant
Measurements: 7.08 - 7.10 x 4.31mm
1.33ct, H, VVS1
60.8 Depth
59.0 Table
35.0 Crown Angle
40.8 Pavilion Angle
Girdle: Medium, Faceted (3.5%)
Cutlet: None

I am still confused on the table/depth measure and if CA has more influence on whether it is a BIC or TIC.

 

[JulieN]

It is a TIC.

 

[WillyDiamond]

Curious Tim.......by any chance when you were in the Cartier store did you see their "Destinee" setting? Looks like a round stone with pave around it, looks amazing. Wanted to know your thoughts. thanks.

 

[jmarshall]

I know you are set on cartier, but if a retailer told me that they would not give me an idealscope image on a 25 thousand dollar purchase, I would tell them to shove it. JMO.

 

[CharmyPoo]

Curious Tim.......by any chance when you were in the Cartier store did you see their "Destinee" setting? Looks like a round stone with pave around it, looks amazing. Wanted to know your thoughts. thanks.

I have seen it at the store. It is a very nice setting but I will be honest - the pave on Leon Mege and Steven Kirsch is better and more refined. I actually took some photos - I loved the display.





Close-up

 

[SB621]

Curious Tim.......by any chance when you were in the Cartier store did you see their "Destinee" setting? Looks like a round stone with pave around it, looks amazing. Wanted to know your thoughts. thanks.

I have seen it at the store. It is a very nice setting but I will be honest - the pave on Leon Mege and Steven Kirsch is better and more refined. I actually took some photos - I loved the display.

Pretty much agree with this. I was in Cartier over the holidays and took the Destinee out of the case to compare to my VC ring. It was pretty and differences were subtle. I wish I had taken pictures but it was Thanksgiving weekend and the placed was packed.

 

[WillyDiamond]

Curious Tim.......by any chance when you were in the Cartier store did you see their "Destinee" setting? Looks like a round stone with pave around it, looks amazing. Wanted to know your thoughts. thanks.

I have seen it at the store. It is a very nice setting but I will be honest - the pave on Leon Mege and Steven Kirsch is better and more refined. I actually took some photos - I loved the display.





Close-up

Thanks for the heads up

 

[bunnycat]

I know you are set on cartier, but if a retailer told me that they would not give me an idealscope image on a 25 thousand dollar purchase, I would tell them to shove it. JMO.

Most retail stores don't have idealscopes. However, it was mentioned several time earlier in the thread that a person can easily buy one for minimal cash and take an IS image yourself then the question is easily cleared up. I have one and find it very handy.

 

[curious_tim]

Curious Tim.......by any chance when you were in the Cartier store did you see their "Destinee" setting? Looks like a round stone with pave around it, looks amazing. Wanted to know your thoughts. thanks.

Sorry for the late reply WillyDiamond. Yes, I did see the Destinee setting there, the diamond looks more flat on the ring once you have it on the finger, whereas the Solitaire is more raised, but depends on personal taste since the Destinee also looks nice with the smaller diamonds around it.

I'll go for the Destinee if your gf prefers the more decorative look, but either way you can always exchange if you are going for a surprise proposal with the ring.

 

[curious_tim]

I just read a thread here where many people said table size of 59 wasn't very good at all:
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/which-rb-would-you-choose-55-and-59-table.184714/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/which-rb-would-you-choose-55-and-59-table.184714/[/URL]

Specifically, the post in the thread from "TC1987" does concern me a fair bit as the ring that I have ordered has a table % of 59:

quoting TC1987's post
"If you have a very large table, the table facet is so large that you get brilliance or table glare, or perhaps fire out toward the perimeter of the diamond, because the big table leaves less room for the star, bezel, and upper girdle facts that make most of the fire. (The facets surrounding the table cause dispersion.) The % crown (crown height) tends to also be lower with such stones, and those diamonds might also have a shallow pavilion, and might have some head obstruction issues.

The "ideal" proportions give more fire all the time, not just out at the rim or at a tilt, because taller crown, smaller table, and more of the star / bezel / upper girdle facets are visible from the top."

Does it also depend on the other proportions- CA 35, PA 40.8 as well? Or will this stone definitely look dull and lifeless, with little fire? Have to wait for the stone to be set, so cannot do much now, but am worried that it will look a lot worse than the original one (table % 56) when we pick it up. I hope the difference in fire (or more glare) wont be too obvious to the naked eye of a normal person.

I would be upset if the stone turns out unattractive given that it rated 3 Excellents from GIA. Have you seen any stones with a table size around 59 but still found it to look good (lot of brightness and fire)? I have read a lot of posts from RockDimaond about the 60/60 diamond, but am not sure if this stone I am getting falls into the same category.

 

[CharmyPoo]

I think we already shared with you that all EX EX EX GIA are not made equal. If you do a search, you will also find that many regular PSers often disagree with Rock Diamond/David/DBL's opinions.

 

[Niel]

has your girlfriend really understood that fact? You seem very concerned about the performance of the stone, and have learned a lot from this site. Has she? Is she aware of the differences in even one triple EX to the next? i dont want to bring up the "dont go with cartier" comments again, but you seem to want a stone that Cartier isnt delivering. Does she realize this fact as well? She seems willing to give up size for the name, is she fully aware she might be giving up performance for the name as well? if so, then I would just go with the one the knowledgeable people her on PS have recommended and get on to the engagement.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

My current diamond has the same angles and a 58 table. It is a beautiful stone. Ideally I would rather have a 55-56 table, but you are talking to people here who have an obsessive interest in diamonds and very particular taste. The average girl out there is just going to be thrilled to be engaged and probably has never even heard the words "crown angle" much less know what it means! That explains why almost all of us would rather have a more perfectly cut stone than the brand name for an ering. I do buy other designer jewelry, though.

 

[curious_tim]

I think we already shared with you that all EX EX EX GIA are not made equal. If you do a search, you will also find that many regular PSers often disagree with Rock Diamond/David/DBL's opinions.

Agree with you that there is often debate with RD's posts on 60/60, the more threads I'm reading here on PS, the more I find on just how wide the spectrum is on a 3EX GIA rating vs AGS0.

has your girlfriend really understood that fact? You seem very concerned about the performance of the stone, and have learned a lot from this site. Has she? Is she aware of the differences in even one triple EX to the next? i dont want to bring up the "dont go with cartier" comments again, but you seem to want a stone that Cartier isnt delivering. Does she realize this fact as well? She seems willing to give up size for the name, is she fully aware she might be giving up performance for the name as well? if so, then I would just go with the one the knowledgeable people her on PS have recommended and get on to the engagement.

I think what started with trying to find a good balance with the 4C's within my budget from Cartier has turned into an obsession with nitpicking between two different stones. I have learnt a tremendous amount from this site, thank you to all PSers that have shared your knowledge and given me great advice. To answer your question, she is willing to forgo on the size and color/clarity for the brand name, so whilst I know I wont find the 'ideal' stone from Cartier, I will try and find the best one that I can, within my budget. Also agree that I should get to the most important part!

 

[curious_tim]

My current diamond has the same angles and a 58 table. It is a beautiful stone. Ideally I would rather have a 55-56 table, but you are talking to people here who have an obsessive interest in diamonds and very particular taste. The average girl out there is just going to be thrilled to be engaged and probably has never even heard the words "crown angle" much less know what it means! That explains why almost all of us would rather have a more perfectly cut stone than the brand name for an ering. I do buy other designer jewelry, though.

Thanks DS for being so patient- while I knew very very little about diamonds before, with all the readings I have done on PS in the last few weeks, I may have built my own OCD! If your diamond has the same angles and only difference is on the table (58 v 59), hopefully that extra 1% wont detract the stones appearance!

If the average Mr and Mrs Jones out there wont be able to tell the difference between a 56 vs 59 table with the naked eye (both with same crown and pavilion angles), then all this worry is obviously needless! Plus, it's not like my gf will compare to another diamond side by side once she wears it.

I just got concerned again when reading TC1987 and others post in earlier threads about how bad a large table could be- with glare, leakage and less fire. This made me think the stone I've chosen may be bad. But i suppose every stone is different, and I wont know it until I see it.

After all this research, I can finally understand why so many PSers do prefer to choose their own super ideal (or perfectly cut) stone, over the brand name.

 

[CharmyPoo]

I don't really know how much more we can help you with your situation. If you want the "perfect" diamond, it does exist with Cartier but just not right now with your options. If you want to wait, they may be able to find one for you. You are buying the brand name and all she cares about is the brand name .... so ... I guess does all this nit picking actually matter to her if she may not be able to tell the difference? I just helped someone buy a diamond with a massive table and his girlfriend LOVES it.

I think the most nit picky people can pick apart Cartier's workmanship. I am one of them. My friend's Cartier ring is wonky. I have seen bad pave work on the ballerina. Anyways ... I am not going to deny I like brand names especially purses but just not for e-rings.

 

[ejchoi2006]

Hello,

I am a new member who got helped by this website in making a decision on my ering... I recently bought a cartier 1895 ering. My now fiance had set his mind on cartier and let me choose within 1895. i have seen many rings and went through the similar process and couldn't decide. My only advice for shopping at cartier is to stick to your budget. In my case, the rings started to look similar to me after all, and it seems like making a difference only in your perception, at lease around a 20k-30k budget in cartier (H-G, 1.25 - 1.4ct). I ended up choosing a ring that was a much lower price than my fiance's budget, and I am happy with it.

 

[SMC]

Hello,

I am a new member who got helped by this website in making a decision on my ering... I recently bought a cartier 1895 ering. My now fiance had set his mind on cartier and let me choose within 1895. i have seen many rings and went through the similar process and couldn't decide. In my view, it is all about perception at the end and how much money you are willing to spend. My only advice for shopping at cartier is to stick to your budget. After all, the rings started to look all similar to me, and it seems like making a difference only in your perception, around a 20k-30k budget in cartier (H-G, 1.25 - 1.4ct). I ended up choosing a ring that was a much lower price than my fiance's budget, and I am happy with it.

Congrats! Do you mind posting the diamond specs and sharing some pictures of your ring? There doesn't seem to be very many 1895 photos available on this forum.