Please help me find a beautiful EC stone??

[lovinsparkles]

Hi all,

I''ve been searching for a lovely emerald cut stone and am getting overwhlemed! I understand some of the more basic search critera that I''m looking for (color: F/G, carat: 1.2-1.4, clarity: as low as S1, if eye clean, price: 6000-8000, cut: ideal), but I''m not sure what to make of some of the others (table? depth? girdle? cutlet?). I looked at a few in person with at a B&M store, but when I asked about some of the other criteria, she didn''t seem to want to go beyond color and size! So I''m hoping some of you more informed diamond lovers could help me figure out what I''m looking for with regard to the rest. It''s hard to do online comparison shopping without knowing what criteria to look for! So specifically, here are my current questions, if anyone has thoughts on any of them, I would be grateful:

1. What table/depth is good for an emerald cut? What does a bad one look like, compared to a good one? My understanding is that if it''s too deep, some of the carat weight is wasted there and it won''t look so big. Is that the point?

2. Polish and symmetry: I''m sticking to Excellent/Very good. Is this a smart strategy? What detrimental effect would lower p/s look like on an EC?

3. Girdle: I *think* I''ve read that too thin is bad, but everything else is OK?

4. Cut: I have noticed that different vendors use different terms for their top ranked cut. I''ve read on PS that cut is the most important factor in terms of a good looking stone. So if I stick to the top kind on a given site, am I in good shape?

5. Is S1 a reasonable option for an EC stone, or will inclusions always be too obvious due to the step cut? I remember the seller telling me that I should stay in the VS2 or above range with an EC...

Finally, here are some I''m considering (I''ve only found images available at James Allen, so that''s what I''m posting here). Do your trained eyes see anything I should be concerned about? I''m just such a beginner it''s hard for me to tell. (Is it better when they look more light or dark in the middle? If the picture doesn''t look crisp, could that just be a photography error, or is that a sign of a badly cut stone?). Here we go:

1. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1138539.asp

2. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1137107.asp

3. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1107238.asp

4. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VVS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1142559.asp

Thanks so so much for any instruction/advice you could offer! I really appreciate it!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/8/2008 2:03:59 PM
Author:lovinsparkles
Hi all,

I've been searching for a lovely emerald cut stone and am getting overwhlemed! I understand some of the more basic search critera that I'm looking for (color: F/G, carat: 1.2-1.4, clarity: as low as S1, if eye clean, price: 6000-8000, cut: ideal), but I'm not sure what to make of some of the others (table? depth? girdle? cutlet?). I looked at a few in person with at a B&M store, but when I asked about some of the other criteria, she didn't seem to want to go beyond color and size! So I'm hoping some of you more informed diamond lovers could help me figure out what I'm looking for with regard to the rest. It's hard to do online comparison shopping without knowing what criteria to look for! So specifically, here are my current questions, if anyone has thoughts on any of them, I would be grateful:

1. What table/depth is good for an emerald cut? What does a bad one look like, compared to a good one? My understanding is that if it's too deep, some of the carat weight is wasted there and it won't look so big. Is that the point? Depth doesn't indicate face up size in the same way as it does round diamonds, here is a chart you can use as a guide, but don't get hung up on the numbers otherwise you could miss out on some beautiful diamonds. You can't judge an EC properly by the proportions, detailed photos and preferably ASET images are crucial for judging appearance and cut quality. Here is the chart - http://diamonds.pricescope.com/fnc2.asp

2. Polish and symmetry: I'm sticking to Excellent/Very good. Is this a smart strategy? What detrimental effect would lower p/s look like on an EC? Don't write off diamonds with good for both, as you won't notice any difference between good and above with the naked untrained eye. Unless you absolutely have to have VG or above as part of your ' package,' then you could miss out again on some lovely diamonds by limiting your options. Good is often seen in fancy shapes for polish and symmetry.

3. Girdle: I *think* I've read that too thin is bad, but everything else is OK? In the case of very thin, extremely thin then a trusted vendor can advise, it could be a tiny section of the girdle measured in microns and not an issue, conversely it could be, so a vendor or appraiser can help you there. Thin is generally fine to medium, slightly thick to thick - avoid extremes.

4. Cut: I have noticed that different vendors use different terms for their top ranked cut. I've read on PS that cut is the most important factor in terms of a good looking stone. So if I stick to the top kind on a given site, am I in good shape? No, vendor applied labels such as Ideal Cut, Premium Cut etc are sometimes used loosely and are no guarantee of a well cut diamond! Evaluate each stone on it's own merits and proportions.

5. Is S1 a reasonable option for an EC stone, or will inclusions always be too obvious due to the step cut? I remember the seller telling me that I should stay in the VS2 or above range with an EC...It is very rare to find an eyeclean SI in step cuts, look for VS or better for clarity.

Finally, here are some I'm considering (I've only found images available at James Allen, so that's what I'm posting here). Do your trained eyes see anything I should be concerned about? I'm just such a beginner it's hard for me to tell. (Is it better when they look more light or dark in the middle? If the picture doesn't look crisp, could that just be a photography error, or is that a sign of a badly cut stone?). Here we go:

1. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1138539.asp

2. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1137107.asp

3. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1107238.asp

4. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VVS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1142559.asp

Thanks so so much for any instruction/advice you could offer! I really appreciate it!

I would also recommend you trying to view some EC's in person to get a feel for what you like such as shape, colour tolerances etc. As for the JA diamonds, the pic isn't loaded for the last diamond, the first one looks nice, I am not keen on the others. I would ask for more photographs of any diamond you like if you are ready to purchase and also Idealscope images. IS isn't as useful as ASET for fancy shapes, but it could be of some use, so ask JA if they could provide these.

 

[bgray]

The well cut EC is not that easy to find. please read the fancy cut guide under KNOWLEDGE (up above) for cut grade parameters

the table should be no bigger than 66/67, depth 66 or less (to minimize buying stone you cant see!) and symmetry and polish are not key factors. (good or better is sufficient)while a plus to have VG or better it doesnt mean the stone will be well cut and the polish grades are harder to achieve on step cuts. and the crown height should be 10% or higher 11/12 /13 is ideal but even 9% can sill be fine

my EC is an eyeclean vs2 and good symm/good polish. it is otherwise as optimally cut for an EC as you can get. i used to be stuck on those factors too...........and bought and sold several stones with better clarity, color, polish and symmetry before i ended up with the stone i have now which is a fabulous stone in every way.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/8/2008 7:23:04 PM
Author: bgray
The well cut EC is not that easy to find. please read the fancy cut guide under KNOWLEDGE (up above) for cut grade parameters


the table should be no bigger than 66/67, depth 66 or less (to minimize buying stone you cant see!) and symmetry and polish are not key factors. (good or better is sufficient)while a plus to have VG or better it doesnt mean the stone will be well cut and the polish grades are harder to achieve on step cuts. and the crown height should be 10% or higher 11/12 /13 is ideal but even 9% can sill be fine


my EC is an eyeclean vs2 and good symm/good polish. it is otherwise as optimally cut for an EC as you can get. i used to be stuck on those factors too...........and bought and sold several stones with better clarity, color, polish and symmetry before i ended up with the stone i have now which is a fabulous stone in every way.

I would stay under 65 on the table but keep in mind that a 68% emerald cut can have greater spread than a 65% depth one with the same l/w ratio.
Especially if the 65 is cut with bad p3 angles and over steep p2 angles.

http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/60/1/Performance-and-the-p3-facets%2c-a-discussion-about-step-cut-diamonds.aspx

Well cut ones are hard to find as the vast majority are not well cut.
When buying online I would first try the vg/vg polish symmetry stones but if a vendor has a g/g on stock so they can eyeball it in person I would consider it.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/8/2008 2:03:59 PM
Author:lovinsparkles

1. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1138539.asp need an IS but not loving it but might be ok


2. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1137107.asp need an IS to confirm it but this one looks excellent for the longer narrow type


3. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1107238.asp either a bad picture or a bad stone


4. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VVS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1142559.asp no picture so no way to tell


Thanks so so much for any instruction/advice you could offer! I really appreciate it!

 

[bgray]

these two might be promising:

whiteflash

Item Code 15759713 16777543
Shape Emerald Emerald
Carat 1.21 1.31
Color G G
Clarity VS1 VS1
Measurements 7.35-5.40X3.40 7.33-5.31X3.45
Table % 61 61
Depth % 63 65
Polish Very Good Very Good
Symmetry Good Good
Girdle TN-STK -TK
Culet None None
Fluorescence Faint None
Certificate GIA GIA
Sarin Report
IdealScope
Aset
Price $6,220.00 $7,385.00

 

[lovinsparkles]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone. It was very helpful, but, Wow -- this is tough!

I was thinking of using a local jeweler so that I could see them in person, but when I page through their inventory in the size/color I''m looking for, very few meet the recommended table/depth. Bummer.
http://www.dimendscaasi.com/diamonds/default.asp

bgray, I appreciate the suggestions from Whiteflash and I will look into those stones.

I know Whiteflash gets high marks around here. My problem was that when I tried to look at their inventory, there were very few EC''s in my ranges with high star markings. The Whiteflash person that I talked to said that was just because they didn''t have all the info for those stones. But that does make it tricky to review them or know what to ask to see more of. Is it really possible that ones currently rated as one or two Whiteflash stars might still be worth looking at?

Also, generally, how much can you trust a vendor (ex. someone at Whiteflash) to pull well cut stones for you to review? Are they pretty reliable about that? As a novice, I''m looking for some guidance from the vendor...

Thanks again so much for the insights.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/8/2008 7:41:56 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/8/2008 2:03:59 PM
Author:lovinsparkles

1. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1138539.asp need an IS but not loving it but might be ok


2. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1137107.asp need an IS to confirm it but this one looks excellent for the longer narrow type


3. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1107238.asp either a bad picture or a bad stone


4. http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VVS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1142559.asp no picture so no way to tell


Thanks so so much for any instruction/advice you could offer! I really appreciate it!

I am not keen on this one....

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/8/2008 10:46:24 PM
Author: lovinsparkles
Thanks for the feedback, everyone. It was very helpful, but, Wow -- this is tough!

I was thinking of using a local jeweler so that I could see them in person, but when I page through their inventory in the size/color I'm looking for, very few meet the recommended table/depth. Bummer.
http://www.dimendscaasi.com/diamonds/default.asp

bgray, I appreciate the suggestions from Whiteflash and I will look into those stones.

I know Whiteflash gets high marks around here. My problem was that when I tried to look at their inventory, there were very few EC's in my ranges with high star markings. The Whiteflash person that I talked to said that was just because they didn't have all the info for those stones. But that does make it tricky to review them or know what to ask to see more of. Is it really possible that ones currently rated as one or two Whiteflash stars might still be worth looking at?

Also, generally, how much can you trust a vendor (ex. someone at Whiteflash) to pull well cut stones for you to review? Are they pretty reliable about that? As a novice, I'm looking for some guidance from the vendor...

Thanks again so much for the insights.

Let WF be your guide, they have an excellent rep here - as to the star ratings this link explains it if you can read it, the print isn't very clear for some reason.....

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds_info/t/all_about.aspx?articleid=349&zoneid=21

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/9/2008 5:28:06 AM
Author: Lorelei

I am not keen on this one....

Im curious why?
When its not tilted it will have near perfect patterns....
Its only downside is its a bit deeper than some but in the good range.
It is tilted to the back and left by around 5 degrees each in the picture.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/9/2008 9:53:09 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/9/2008 5:28:06 AM
Author: Lorelei

I am not keen on this one....

Im curious why?
When its not tilted it will have near perfect patterns....
Its only downside is its a bit deeper than some but in the good range.
It is tilted to the back and left by around 5 degrees each in the picture.

It looks better in the bigger pic. I found it to have overly dark uneven areas/ bands to my eyes, but it does look better in the enlarged photo.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/9/2008 10:11:02 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 9/9/2008 9:53:09 AM

Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/9/2008 5:28:06 AM

Author: Lorelei


I am not keen on this one....

Im curious why?

When its not tilted it will have near perfect patterns....

Its only downside is its a bit deeper than some but in the good range.

It is tilted to the back and left by around 5 degrees each in the picture.

It looks better in the bigger pic. I found it to have overly dark uneven areas/ bands to my eyes, but it does look better in the enlarged photo.

ah ok, thanks.
That is mostly the picture I think to about 85% certainty on my part.
I'm working on my next article on patterns and it made me curious if there was something in that particular style that was turning people off or just the bad picture.
Since I respect your opinion I thought I would ask.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/9/2008 10:20:30 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/9/2008 10:11:02 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 9/9/2008 9:53:09 AM

Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/9/2008 5:28:06 AM

Author: Lorelei


I am not keen on this one....

Im curious why?

When its not tilted it will have near perfect patterns....

Its only downside is its a bit deeper than some but in the good range.

It is tilted to the back and left by around 5 degrees each in the picture.

It looks better in the bigger pic. I found it to have overly dark uneven areas/ bands to my eyes, but it does look better in the enlarged photo.

ah ok, thanks.
That is mostly the picture I think to about 85% certainty on my part.
I''m working on my next article on patterns and it made me curious if there was something in that particular style that was turning people off or just the bad picture.
Since I respect your opinion I thought I would ask.

Thanks Storm, I got where you were coming from so I tried to describe what I was seeing as accurately as I could

 

[EmeraldCutQuest]

Hello lovinsparkles:

Welcome to the wonderful world of ECs!

Having gone through the same process earlier this year, I know how overwhelming this can all be.

A few things to add:

-- With fancy cuts, such as ECs, you HAVE to see the stone (or at least initially have an expert -- cutter or gemologist -- at the vendor see it for you).

-- The legth-to-width ratio is something I did not see mentioned. This makes a huge difference to the look-and-feel of the stone/ring. It is STRICTLY a personal and cosmetic issue. Do you like a ''squarish'' EC (ratio close to 1.0) or a ''longish'' one (ratio close to 1.5+)? My preference was for something in the 1.2 to 1.4 range.

-- I bought through WF -- great service, professional advice, knowlegeable staff. Customized setting.

-- If it would help you see pictures and specs of the EC that I ended up getting, you can see it here (skip the first post, if you wish):

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/all-she-wanted-was-a-cat-ring-pictures.86356/

Good luck!

--ECQ. (no longer)

 

[strmrdr]

Here is a l/w ratio chart if it helps.

 

[lovinsparkles]

Thanks Emerald Cut Quest! Your stone is beautiful (and the story was great too)! You are right about the L/W ratio being important. I *think* I like around a 1.3 ratio on my hand (thanks for the chart Strmrdr -- I definitely favor the 1.3-1.4 range on that).

Following the suggestions I''ve heard, I''m working with WF right now to find some suitable options. All of your thoughts and recommended stats have been a big help for me narrowing things down. As soon as I find something promising, I''ll be back with pics for more feedback...

Thanks again!

 

[lovinsparkles]

Hi again emerald cut experts

Thanks for all the previous help, it really helped me narrow down the search. Now, I''d love to get your thoughts on an emerald cut stone I''m considering. Here are the specs, followed by pictures. Please tell me if you think this is a good one! I think it looks pretty but I am a novice and am going to be buying before seeing in person, so I''d love your thoughts!

Carat 1.40
Color F
Clarity VS1
Measurements 7.3 x 5.69 x 3.75 mm
Depth Percentage 65.9 %
Table Percentage 62 %
Girdle M-
Culet N
Polish EXCELLENT
Symmetry VERY GOOD
Fluorescence NONE

 

[lovinsparkles]

IS for this stone:

 

[lovinsparkles]

sarin report attached. (will post magnified pic when i figure out how to resize it).

 

[lovinsparkles]

magnified pic attached. I would love to hear what you think -- a winner or keep looking? Any glaring problems? Thanks!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I''m no expert, but that stone looks beautiful to me!!!

 

[lovinsparkles]

One other possibility I''m looking at is a bit bigger/pricier, but the picture looked pretty to my eyes. Thoughts on this one? All I have is these stats and the magnified pic (pic at link). I like the idea of the medium florescence -- do you see any detriment to this from the pic, or can you only tell in person? Besides having better color and size, how does this stack up to the other one?

D, 1.51 carat, VS2
. Report: GIA
. Shape: Emerald
. Carat: 1.51
. Depth %: 66.5
. Table %: 62
. Girdle: STK
. Measurements: 7.37-5.73X3.81
. Polish: Very Good
. Symmetry: Very Good
. Culet: Very Small
. Fluorescence: Medium Blue
Ratio: 1.29

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/D-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Emerald-Diamond-1180657.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131

 

[dani13]

Im lovin that stone, ls!!! The numbers look good, and I adore its shape!!!! Im sure others will chime in, but it looks like a winner to me!!!

 

[strmrdr]

In not loving either one.
The WF stone is overall darkish in the IS and ASET and the JA stone has bad p3 angles.

 

[lovinsparkles]

Date: 9/18/2008 10:00:49 PM
Author: strmrdr
In not loving either one.
The WF stone is overall darkish in the IS and ASET and the JA stone has bad p3 angles.

Hmm. What is the impact of the darkness on how the stone will look in real life? Less sparkly or something? I don''t know enough about those tests to know what they are supposed to mean in real life...

I appreciate the analysis. Do you think I should keep looking? I don''t need a *perfect* stone, just one that looks clear, white, symmetrical, and pretty in person.

And thanks diamondseeker and Dani -- appreciate the input!

 

[dani13]

Date: 9/18/2008 10:31:11 PM
Author: lovinsparkles

Date: 9/18/2008 10:00:49 PM

Author: strmrdr

In not loving either one.

The WF stone is overall darkish in the IS and ASET and the JA stone has bad p3 angles.

Hmm. What is the impact of the darkness on how the stone will look in real life? Less sparkly or something? I don't know enough about those tests to know what they are supposed to mean in real life...


I appreciate the analysis. Do you think I should keep looking? I don't need a *perfect* stone, just one that looks clear, white, symmetrical, and pretty in person.


And thanks diamondseeker and Dani -- appreciate the input!

You know what, ls, (and in all due respect, Karl), you honestly have to see these stones with your own eyes- you yourself are the best indicator of whether the stone will work for you or not. Numbers/scopes/images are great tool to help evaluate a diamond and eliminate the dogs, but imo, the best tools are your own eyes. When we bought my EC, we worked with a trusted vendor who helped us using his skills as a diamond professional to pick the best stone for us, with our input of course. Bottom line: you need to evaluate these stones in person- you are going to drive yourself crazy trying to find a "perfect" diamond on paper, and that's sometimes a really hard thing to do!!!

Best of luck with your search!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/18/2008 10:31:11 PM
Author: lovinsparkles

Date: 9/18/2008 10:00:49 PM

Author: strmrdr

In not loving either one.

The WF stone is overall darkish in the IS and ASET and the JA stone has bad p3 angles.

Hmm. What is the impact of the darkness on how the stone will look in real life? Less sparkly or something? I don''t know enough about those tests to know what they are supposed to mean in real life...


I appreciate the analysis. Do you think I should keep looking? I don''t need a *perfect* stone, just one that looks clear, white, symmetrical, and pretty in person.


And thanks diamondseeker and Dani -- appreciate the input!

They are indicators the final decision is your eyes.
Personally I would keep looking as I like the indicators to look a bit better before spending money on getting one sent to me.

 

[dani13]

Date: 9/18/2008 11:26:27 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 9/18/2008 10:31:11 PM

Author: lovinsparkles

Date: 9/18/2008 10:00:49 PM


Author: strmrdr


In not loving either one.


The WF stone is overall darkish in the IS and ASET and the JA stone has bad p3 angles.

Hmm. What is the impact of the darkness on how the stone will look in real life? Less sparkly or something? I don''t know enough about those tests to know what they are supposed to mean in real life...



I appreciate the analysis. Do you think I should keep looking? I don''t need a *perfect* stone, just one that looks clear, white, symmetrical, and pretty in person.



And thanks diamondseeker and Dani -- appreciate the input!

They are indicators the final decision is your eyes.

Personally I would keep looking as I like the indicators to look a bit better before spending money on getting one sent to me.

That''s true, Karl. If you think this stone is not even remotely a potential winner, its not worth it for her to pay $$ to have it sent to her for her to see herself. You''re the expert!!!

 

[Lorelei]

The WF diamond looks better on the actual pic than IS or ASET, not keen on the JA EC.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 9/19/2008 10:13:40 AM
Author: Lorelei
The WF diamond looks better on the actual pic than IS or ASET, not keen on the JA EC.

The difference is the head shadow and the angle of the lighting.
The head shadow of the IS and ASET simulates different viewing distances which is why different areas go dark.
A diamond with head shadow issues will often look better in off axis lighting.
In this case the higher than the stone(top is brighter in regular picture) and the stone responds different than when the lighting is strait on.
Real world lighting is often off axis so they can look good a lot of the time but in specific situations they will look like the IS/ASET and it drives me bonkers because that is the position that is best to admire the patterns.
There is something weird in the WF ASET setup with step cuts because the obstruction comes out looking black instead of blue, the IS shows it clearly as obstruction not leakage.
ASET with back lighting would look totally different than the WF ASET pictures with step cuts.
I look at the reds and greens in ASET then look at the IS to see what the black in the WF ASET pictures represents.