Please help me choose between these 2! size vs. quality

[bearsfan72]

I think I''ve finally narrowed it down (after previously narrowing it down) to these two diamonds, I''m having a hard time deciding between the quality of the first one and the larger size of the second. Should I be concerned about the table % of this first stone if it is a "premium" cut according to James Allen. Which one would you choose? After adding a setting the first one would be $1960 and the second would be $1832.

James Allen
Shape: Princess
Carat weight: 0.72
Cut: Premium
Color: G
Clarity: SI1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 72.2%
Table: 75%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Thick to very thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 5.08*4.85*3.50
Ratio: 1.05

From Blue Nile
Carat weight: 0.58
Cut: Very Good
Color: E
Clarity: VS2

Depth %: 74.2%
Table %: 65%
Symmetry: Good
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Medium to thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 4.67x4.58x3.40 mm
Length/width ratio: 1.02

 

[jaz464]

Actually, I think the tables are too big on both diamonds. Have you seen either? I'm guessing you have not seen the BN diamond as they do not generally work that way.

Also, what is it that is most important to you? Size or cut?

 

[Garysax]

A table of 65% is too big? I agree that the 75% on the top one is not good, AND it''s bigger than the depth which supposedly can do some wonky things to cut, but... I thought 65% table was good.

 

[Jelly]

Keep looking. Say no to both and go for an ideal cut stone.

ETA: Oops, just noticed that it's a princess cut. Sorry, can't really help you on this one.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/25/2006 6:34:17 PM
Author: Jelly

Keep looking. Say no to both and go for an ideal cut stone.

ETA: Oops, just noticed that it''s a princess cut. Sorry, can''t really help you on this one.

Well, since AGS found their way about what to call ''Ideal Princess Cut'' you could say that, I guess.

 

[bearsfan72]

They both are indeed princess cuts, I know 75% but is it really that bad, should I not buy it just because of that?

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/25/2006 6:06:26 PM
Author:bearsfan72

I think I''ve finally narrowed it down (after previously narrowing it down) to these two diamonds,

That is, until you wrote this post

I''m having a hard time deciding between the quality of the first one and the larger size of the second.

If by ''quality'' you means grades... well, I am not sure I could tell you which is what between princess diamonds graded G and E under 1 ct. And if whatever makes the SI ''slightly included'' doesn''t show without magnification, that point is moot too.

Cut, is a different matter. Cut quality is something I would expect to show - and I don''t know much about that regarding either of the stones you have listed.




Should I be concerned about the table % of this first stone if it is a ''premium'' cut according to James Allen.

I don''t know what to say, because there is no simple relation between table size and brilliance - for princess cut diamonds (if for any shape). The proportions of the stone work together - and for princess cuts there are allot of details involved, That''s why there isn''t a ''CutAdviser'' for them, for example - it would simply be too hard to handle.



Which one would you choose? After adding a setting the first one would be $1960 and the second would be $1832.

My 2c

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/25/2006 6:06:26 PM
Author:bearsfan72

Which one would you choose? After adding a setting the first one would be $1960 and the second would be $1832.

How about THIS ? Size, grades and weight fit between the two options you have mentioned and there is more info on brilliance - i.e. Ideal Scope image.

 

[bearsfan72]

Valeria, thanks for your help. The diamond you''ve selected does indeed look like the best option. Does that ideal Scope look pretty good? I don''t know too much about those.

 

[jaz464]

I''m sorry, for the other diamond I looked too quickly and was actually looking at the depth

 

[bearsfan72]

Jazmine, don''t worry about it, what do you think of this 3rd diamond and it''s Ideal Scope? Thanks!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/25/2006 7:17:41 PM
Author: bearsfan72

Does that ideal Scope look pretty good? I don''t know too much about those.

Obviously it did to me, otherwise I would not have mentioned. And the reason it did is THIS - how it compares with the sample IS pictures for princess cuts.

 

[bearsfan72]

Valeria, thanks again for your help, I think this is THE diamond! But just out of curiousity what makes a good Ideal Scope image? I''ve looked a the tutorial page here and most of them looked somewhat brighter than this one, is that good or bad? Once again I have no idea. Thanks!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/25/2006 8:04:27 PM
Author: bearsfan72

Valeria, thanks again for your help, I think this is THE diamond! But just out of curiosity what makes a good Ideal Scope image?

A couple of things: lots of red, and more so lots of red at the tips and edges where usually brilliance falters in this cut. Absence of windows - large white areas, and absence of large reflector areas (black). What I like to see is an even handed mix of small patches of deeper red, pink and very little white throughout the face of the stone, much like the picture there. If the colors would be even & solid that would read as absence of contrast and scintillation. In the picture above the white rim towards the right side of the table remained to be explained, so to speak - but that looks very much like glare - reflection off the face of the stone - because it follows the contour of a crown facet (unlike any secondary reflection IS pictures catch). Sometimes princess cuts are asymmetrical - with one side of the pavilion cut at slightly different angles. This one seems to have some of that (the ''pattern'' of black & red patches is not quite precisely symmetric, as in a kaleidoscope) - but only very little - judging from the examples given on Ideascope.com and others posted by sellers. Most princess cuts I have had the pleasure to meet, were allot worse - optics wise. The very small ones (well, it is easier to find a bag of 10 pointers to look at than a bag of 1 carat princess cuts!) are disaster - a true menagerie of awful optics. So... an image like this one is quite refreshing, so to speak.

Usually I try to ''guess'' how the picture was taken - if the background, lighting or ... good Old Photoshop had contributed somehow. I have to say that much of this is difficult for me and although I ''torture'' pictures with various software quite often, the results can easily be good enough to fool myself

So that, I wouldn''t know what to say about except that the seller has great reputation and seems to have better ways of selling diamonds than faking IS pictures

Besides, the IdealSCope is not sold by them, and you can get one and reality check their posting - IMO, this should be good to keep things real.

even if I didn''t know who the seller was.

Sure enough, this is a rookie''s opinion, just like any other. I am not an expert, and I hope none of my previous posts implied that much

Hope this helps

 

[bearsfan72]

Here''s a picture of the diamond under 30x magnification, should I be worried about the size of this inclusion even though it''s an SI1?

 

[bearsfan72]

..and here is some more measurements, let me know what you guys think!