Please help me decide between 2 RBs

[killerb]

Hey there - first time poster. Fantastic forum and users. Can you all help me choose among these? Any other information you need? I don''t have any pics readily available unfortunately. Thanks!

1) Diamond 1
Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.98
Color: F
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: GIA

Depth: 58.7%
Table: 61.0%
Polish: Exc
Symmetry: Exc
Girdle: Thin to Medium (faceted) 3%
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 8.19x8.26x4.83
Crown 32
Pav 41

2) Diamond 2
Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.80
Color: F
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: GIA

Depth: 61.9%
Table: 55%
Polish: Exc
Symmetry: Exc
Girdle: Medium (faceted) 3%
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 7.81x7.84x4.84
Crown 35
Pav 40.8

 

[stone-cold11]

#1 maybe good, good spread but large table has slightly different look than near-tolk.
#2 probably good, but need IdealScope image to see if there is leakage present with that crown and pavilion combination, due to averaging and rounding of angles by GIA.

 

[Lorelei]

At first glance I prefer the second, but I would really like an Idealscope image for that angle combo. Have you seen these diamonds in person or are they with an online vendor? The first diamond is rather shallow, you can find a better balanced diamond perhaps as this one would tend to be bright and brilliant but fire or coloured light could be down some.

 

[killerb]

On the 1st, the table and depth measurements are correct - I know, not the norm.

Here is a pic for the 1st one:

 

[killerb]

Still the first one

 

[Ellen]

1 would be a definitive no.

 

[killerb]

Have seen them both in person but I''m a novice of course and they both look good to me - though the large table % does make the 1st one look different.

Are we allowed to discuss price here? 1st one is roughly 10% more expensive.

I''ve requested the idealscope image on the 2nd one too. Thanks for your help!

 

[killerb]

Ellen, why do you say that?

 

[Lorelei]

It has a definite leakage ring around the table, so this diamond will not perform as well as it should - in other words light is escaping from the diamond, where it should be reflected back to your eye.

Maybe this will help, here is a tutorial on how to read Idealscope images.

http://www.highperformancediamonds.com/index.php?page=education-performance

Yes you can mention price, thats fine.

 

[stone-cold11]

Lorelei, that is more like obstruction issue than leakage for #1. Black is obstruction.

Quite a bit a black there. Obstruction means that if you look at the stone closely, nearer than 10 inch from the stone, the stone is likely to go dark, like what you see in the IS image. From afar it can still be bright and shinny.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 5/20/2009 11:54:41 AM
Author: Stone-cold11
Lorelei, that is more like obstruction issue than leakage for #1. Black is obstruction.

Quite a bit a black there. Obstruction means that if you look at the stone closely, nearer than 10 inch from the stone, the stone is likely to go dark, like what you see in the IS image. From afar it can still be bright and shinny.

I don't know...I was debating this one but the ring around the middle looks more like poor cut leakage to me - both leakage and obstruction can show in an IS as black/ dark areas or a ring. I can see the potential for obstruction on the IS also. The main thing is it not a great cut and a better one can be found I am sure.

 

[killerb]

Yikes, okay sounds like definite no on #1. Will post #2 pics when I get them.

Also, for stones of this paramater, what do you all think I should be getting on price? I''m around 17-18k - just want to know whether by shooting for low price, I am ending up with poor quality stones....

 

[stone-cold11]

I am seeing in-house round stone of ~1.8c G VS2 priced around 18-20k. F VS2 slightly over 20k.

But should be possible to find 1.8c F VS2 very well cut stone for your budget. Example, http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1200121.asp This looks good.

Report

Anyway, just wait for the IS of the 1.8c stone to come in, it probably is good.