Please help me choose

[ABCD123]

I am trying to decide between the following two stones. Any thoughts?

Diamond A:

Stone shape: Round
Carat Weight: 0.92
Cut: Very Good
Color: E
Clarity: SI1
Certificate type: GIA
Depth %: 63.3
Table %: 57.0
Symmetry: Very Good
Polish: Very Good
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick - Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Strong
Measurements: 6.22 x 6.17 x 3.92 millimeters
Length-to-width ratio: 1.01

Diamond B:

Stone shape: Round
Carat Weight: 0.91
Cut: Very Good
Color: G
Clarity: SI1
Certificate type: GIA
Depth %: 63.1
Table %: 63.0
Symmetry: Very Good
Polish: Very Good
Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick - Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.16 x 6.11 x 3.87 millimeters
Length-to-width ratio: 1.01

 

[JulieN]

3371 G SI2 http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/round-ideal-cut-cut-diamond-136245.htm

 

[mybest]

I Like the second one. Stay away from strong Fluorescence

 

[JulieN]

Second one is a fisheye.

What''s wrong with strong fluoresence?

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 11/13/2006 6:04:20 PM
Author: mybest
I Like the second one. Stay away from strong Fluorescence

I don''t like either stone. mybest, many stones that have strong blue fluorescence can be gorgeous. You don''t want to generalize here. They have to be judged on a stone by stone basis.

 

[mrssalvo]

I don''t like either stone either, both are too deep for me..

 

[jayreneepea]

Those are some deep diamonds you got there!! I don''t think I''ve ever seen a table that large before!!

Experts, how come the stones aren''t measuring small for their weight with being deep?

 

[Kim N]

Date: 11/13/2006 6:43:13 PM
Author: jayrenay9
Those are some deep diamonds you got there!! I don''t think I''ve ever seen a table that large before!!

Experts, how come the stones aren''t measuring small for their weight with being deep?

They are measuring small for their weight. A well-cut 0.91 could face up 6.27 mm, and a well-cut 0.92 could face up 6.30 mm.

 

[jayreneepea]

Date: 11/13/2006 6:58:06 PM
Author: Kim N

Date: 11/13/2006 6:43:13 PM
Author: jayrenay9
Those are some deep diamonds you got there!! I don''t think I''ve ever seen a table that large before!!

Experts, how come the stones aren''t measuring small for their weight with being deep?

They are measuring small for their weight. A well-cut 0.91 could face up 6.27 mm, and a well-cut 0.92 could face up 6.30 mm.

Oh ok, thanks. I was comparing it to the one Julie suggested. .90cts 6.19-6.23X3.82. I expected these deep ones to face up even smaller than they do.

 

[gemologic]

You don’t need strong fl in an E, it’s a discount…

With regards to the G, the GIA won’t give an excellent cut grade outside of 57.5% - 63% depth, so again it’s a discount and with the 63% table it doesn’t get better.

Also, you didn’t mention a cut grade on the GIA cert so you either omitted it or it is probably not there which means a pre 2006 cert. If you want to buy the best diamond you want to have access to fresh inventory, usually less than 6 months. If they still have it after that it is probably a dud.

Whatever you choose, make sure you get a final inspection from a really good diamond appraiser. Ask them for their opinion on the 5 C’s (the 5th is dollars & cents) before you show them the cert or how much you are being asked.

 

[:)]

I don't like the numbers on either stone and would pass on both. Some people prefer strong fluoro (usually of the blue nature!), and actually seek it out. Some feel that colorless stones with blue fluoro really pop. It is a personal choice. If the fluoro is strong, then you should make sure to have the vendor eyeball it to make sure it is not milky appearing - a rare but possible occurrence in a strongly fluorescent stone (experts on here will note that it occurs in only a handful of thousands of diamonds they see a year). There are some beautiful threads on here with beautifully fluorescent stones owned by PSers.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/13/2006 8:10:19 PM
Author: gemologic

You don’t need strong fl in an E, it’s a discount…

With regards to the G, the GIA won’t give an excellent cut grade outside of 57.5% - 63% depth, so again it’s a discount and with the 63% table it doesn’t get better.

Also, you didn’t mention a cut grade on the GIA cert so you either omitted it or it is probably not there which means a pre 2006 cert. If you want to buy the best diamond you want to have access to fresh inventory, usually less than 6 months. If they still have it after that it is probably a dud.

Whatever you choose, make sure you get a final inspection from a really good diamond appraiser. Ask them for their opinion on the 5 C’s (the 5th is dollars & cents) before you show them the cert or how much you are being asked.

Your new around here so im not gonna chew you out too bad but that kind of promotion by appraisers ticks me and others off.

63% table being better? huh? Thats a landing strip not a table.

strong fl, some people seek it out, sure its a price break but there is nothing wrong with it.

old certs being duds? Please fill me in on where that comes from?
There are awesome diamonds on the PS vendors websites with 1 year old certs that are among the top .5% of diamonds in the world when it comes to cut.
Some stones sell quick others take a while.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/13/2006 5:09:32 PM
Author:ABCD123
I am trying to decide between the following two stones. Any thoughts?

neither is worth buying in my opinion.
You can find much better stones.

 

[ABCD123]

Thanks for the help. After reading the comments, I think I will look a little further.

 

[Kaleigh]

If you give us your budget, we will be more than happy to help you find some awesome stones.

 

[gemologic]

I might be new around Pricescope but I was chewed out by 47th St a long time ago so you can be as tough on me as you like.

I didn’t say that a 63% table was excellent, get your facts straight.

With regards to FL, I think it is good for H and under. Over that you need to start discounting on a gradual basis.

You are so wrong about fresh certificates. I appraise daily for guys that are buying $8/30,000 diamonds from the street or the Internet and the certificates are mostly less than 6 months old.

Fresh is best, the older the certificate the longer the diamond has been around.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/13/2006 10:47:02 PM
Author: gemologic

You are so wrong about fresh certificates. I appraise daily for guys that are buying $8/30,000 diamonds from the street or the Internet and the certificates are mostly less than 6 months old.

Fresh is best, the older the certificate the longer the diamond has been around.

Here is a diamond with a 2 year old cert that i'd buy in a heartbeat,
care to tell us whats wrong with it in your eyes?

http://goodoldgold.com/diamond/2157/

 

[JulieN]

Big discounts for going to I color or SI2 clarity:
http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/round-ideal-cut-cut-diamond-12295

But if neither I nor SI2, this one gets discounted for good polish, vg symmetry, and non Tolkowsky proportions (could still be a fine stone for the price!) also has the plus of being a bit spready:
http://www.dimendscaasi.com/diamonds/diamonddetail.asp?src=pricescope&stocknum=15404897

Another option is to look between .85-.90
http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?pid=LD00336490
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131&item=936539