Please Help me choose between these two Diamonds

[soontomarry2]

I am looking for a round ideal cut diamond in the 1.2-1.4 carat range for $9,000. My girlfriend tells me NOT to go over 1.5 carat weight because the diamond is going in a setting with a large halo:
(Verragio 7033 Image: https://www.kranichs.com/product_images/Verragio@3614_M_VE-ins-7033_M.jpg)
And she feels that a 1.5 ct diamond or larger will look too big and goofy on her 5.0 size fingers. Maybe she has a point?


Anyway, at this point, I am considering the following two round diamonds:

1.23 H VS2 H&A
$8,020
Pavilion Angle: <40.92
Crown Angle: <34.08 (AGS cert says: 33.9??? )
Depth: 60.96%
Table: 56.55%
Link:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/7017/

The slightly high pavilion angle and low crown angle worry me.




Here is the other choice:

1.22 G VS2 H&A
$9,364
Pavilion Angle: <40.69
Crown Angle: <34.61
Depth: 62.29%
Table: 55.20%
Link:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/6403/

The large depth worries me and this goes a touch over my budget, but that's ok.




Which of these two would you choose & why? Would you suggest any others?
Goodoldgold.com's policies and reputation are the kind that will make me sleep easy at night, but I am open to other good online vendors.

Any other comments are more than welcome!

 

[Lula]

The images for both of them look great. Really nice diamonds -- you can't go wrong with either one in my opinion.

Unless you want the higher color of the G, I'd go with the slightly less expensive H.

And reserve it right away if you're interested in it! (It puts the diamond on hold for you).

ETA: Sounds like you've made great progress, soontomarry! If GOG can source the setting you want from Veraggio, I think you'd be wise to stick with them.

 

[henearly89]

They both look good. Slightly off center? but not enough to make any visual difference. GOG is a great company.

 

[stone-cold11]

Idealscope image for both stone looks good, you do not have to worry about the HCA score.

Crown and pavilion angles are just fine, nothing wrong with the depth too.

 

[soontomarry2]

Thank you for the encouraging replies!

Just for my piece of mind, what sort of deviations, no matter how slight, can I expect with the slightly shallow crown of the first choice or the larger total depth of the second choice? Also, where does this extra depth in the second choice come from, above the girdle or below?

 

[Chase035]

It looks like the added depth comes from the girdle itself. Slightly Thick - Thick?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 3/7/2010 11:01:34 PM
Author: soontomarry2
Thank you for the encouraging replies!

Just for my piece of mind, what sort of deviations, no matter how slight, can I expect with the slightly shallow crown of the first choice or the larger total depth of the second choice? Also, where does this extra depth in the second choice come from, above the girdle or below?

You can expect nothing visible to your eyes beyond the usual individual variations in diamond "personality". They are both great diamonds and getting too wrapped up in the minutia is exatly that at this point -- focussing on the trees without seeing the forest

If you call GOG Jon might be able to make a video of the two diamonds to allow you to pick that way. But they will look identical to you

BUT all that said, I would take the H -- she faces up larger by .10mm and she is less expensive by a large margin.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/7/2010 8:54:24 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Idealscope image for both stone looks good, you do not have to worry about the HCA score.

Crown and pavilion angles are just fine, nothing wrong with the depth too.

* nods*

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 3/7/2010 11:01:34 PM
Author: soontomarry2
Thank you for the encouraging replies!

Just for my piece of mind, what sort of deviations, no matter how slight, can I expect with the slightly shallow crown of the first choice or the larger total depth of the second choice? Also, where does this extra depth in the second choice come from, above the girdle or below?

Not much visual difference except for sligthly smaller diameter of 0.1mm. The extra depth comes from the slightly thicker girdle and a slightly higher crown offset a little by the slightly shallower pavilion of the G stone.

 

[soontomarry2]

I''m considering one other stone from another online vendor. There don''t have the stone in house and consequently can''t supply ASET or Idealscope images, but they were able to get a hold of the AGS certificate. This one is significantly cheaper than the other two and all things being equal, spending less it good

)

It''s values:
1.307 G SI1
Dimensions: 7.12*7.19*4.38
Pavilion Angle: Crown Angle: Depth: 61.2%
Table: 56.3%
HCA score: 1.5 EX/EX/VG/VG

Attached is it''s Cert

How does this compare to the others above? I know this will be taking a significant drop in clarity but I was assured by the cutter that it is 100% eye clean. I''m a little worried about the variation between the two width dimensions: 7.12 & 7.19. Also, in the AGSL computer generated light perofmrance map, it seems there is a far drop in light performance in the top right of the diamond.

What do you all think?

 

[stone-cold11]

report did not attached. Can you give the AGS report number?

Numbers are promising but it is not comparing apples to apples as the GOG stones are H&A stones and backed by buy back/upgrade policies, so that is rising the price some.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Ask GOG to call the diamond in. They will run their usual analysis on it and will be able to asnwer your questions. The images on the AGS cert are not as reliable as an IS image because they are cmputer simulations rather than an actual image of the diamond.

But in my experience, if a diamond is an AGS0 and scores well on the HCA, it is a good diamond. The Is is the icing on the cake though.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 3/8/2010 12:16:12 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
report did not attached. Can you give the AGS report number?

Numbers are promising but it is not comparing apples to apples as the GOG stones are H&A stones and backed by buy back/upgrade policies, so that is rising the price some.

Yes. The former point does not affect optics, it is about symmetry and cut precision, and that may not matter to you (it would not matter to me). Before calling the diamond in, check with GOG re: whether the diamond would qualify for their various policies. I don''t think it would, in which case I would look eslewhere or stick with one of the original contenders.

 

[soontomarry2]

The Certification number is: AGS-01040399370001

Does AGS have a website where reports can be looked up?

When GOG calls a stone in and runs an analysis, what more do they do beyond all the images posted on their website?

Thanks again for your help.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 3/8/2010 12:23:46 PM
Author: soontomarry2

The Certification number is: AGS-01040399370001

Does AGS have a website where reports can be looked up?

When GOG calls a stone in and runs an analysis, what more do they do beyond all the images posted on their website?

Thanks again for your help.

They do just this. Which means you ge ta thorough assessment of the diamond''s optics. But again, you will need to ask how outside stones relate to their policies. Usually they are not included in the same way that in house diamonds are included, which have passed strict tests to be bought for the in house inventory. This diamond may not pass those tests.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 3/8/2010 12:23:46 PM
Author: soontomarry2

The Certification number is: AGS-01040399370001

Does AGS have a website where reports can be looked up?

Thanks again for your help.

Yap,
http://www.agslab.com/verify_diamond_grading_report.php

Can''t get the report, the carat weight does not match the report. Can you check again?

 

[soontomarry2]

You''re right, I''m sorry Stone-Cold, the weight is 1.368 ct.

 

[soontomarry2]

Date: 3/8/2010 12:26:07 PM
Author: dreamer_d

Date: 3/8/2010 12:23:46 PM
Author: soontomarry2

The Certification number is: AGS-01040399370001

Does AGS have a website where reports can be looked up?

When GOG calls a stone in and runs an analysis, what more do they do beyond all the images posted on their website?

Thanks again for your help.

They do just this. Which means you ge ta thorough assessment of the diamond''s optics. But again, you will need to ask how outside stones relate to their policies. Usually they are not included in the same way that in house diamonds are included, which have passed strict tests to be bought for the in house inventory. This diamond may not pass those tests.

I''m sorry dreamer_d, I miss understood you, you are suggesting that the diamond can have the GOG full analysis if I go with them for the setting. This is a good idea, I''ll contact them about this.

 

[stone-cold11]

Here is the report.

http://www.agslab.com/pdf_sync_reports/1040399370001-PLDQR.PDF

the ASET looks fine, maybe just some weird things happening with the scan to produce the green on the 1 o''clock arrow.

But the feather looks amazing... No grade setting though. Definitely need to get someone trusted to look at that.

 

[Lorelei]

Thanks for the report StoneCold!

The diamond looks good, I am wondering if those areas drawn on the plot are in fact clouds and that the ---- didn't scan properly when the report was uploaded. To be safe, definitely get an expert to evaluate the stone in person if you buy it, I think I can see the feather on the underside by the girdle of the diamond at 10 o'clock, can't tell for sure though as the mark is faint.