princess cut - table/depth - please look at the stats of this diamond

[joebenz]

i was looking at this diamond below

Carat weight: 1.17

Cut: Very Good

Color: H

Clarity: VS1


Depth %: 64.2%

Table %: 69%

Symmetry: Very good

Polish: Excellent

Girdle: Thin to medium

Culet: None

Fluorescence: None

Measurements: 6.11x5.95x3.82 mm

Length/width ratio: 1.03


i noticed that most diamonds i looked at have depth/table ratio in the 70s...and many of them, the table was less than depth. is this one that i listed good or bad? feel free to comment on any other aspects of the diamond as well. thank you for your help.

 

[Kaleigh]

I'm guessing this is a princess cut???? You didn't mention the shape. It's ok happens all the time!!

ETA: sorry you did in the title, my mistake!!!!

 

[AChiOAlumna]

Date: 6/23/2005 12:21:59 AM
Author: kaleigh
I''m guessing this is a princess cut???? You didn''t mention the shape. It''s ok happens all the time!!

ETA: sorry you did in the title, my mistake!!!!

kaleigh...it says princess cut in the title of the thread....it''s okay...it happens all the time!!

(sorry...I''m getting tired!!)

 

[joebenz]

so....any comments? pleaaaaaaaaaaase.

 

[IrishEyes]

Honestly, I think it looks good! Yes, many times you see people going for the table being smaller than the depth, but if you look under the tutorial section with the charts on fancy diamonds here on PS, you''ll see that your table is only slightly bigger. I think it''s fine!!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

The problem is that we do not have sufficient information to give an opinion. We either need a Sarin-measurement (or OGI for that matter) of the stone, with at least some details about crown and pavilion angles and depth.

Another option is an Idealscope-view, which can also give some idea.

All I can say, is that I am not wild about the total depth of this stone. According to me, it is way too shallow. If you could get some more info, I could more easily show this.

Live long,

 

[joebenz]

i wish i could get more info but this is all i had since i''m finding this diamond online. so would it be better to see a depth closer to 70%?

 

[Rhino]

Date: 6/24/2005 2:07:58 PM
Author: joebenz
i wish i could get more info but this is all i had since i''m finding this diamond online. so would it be better to see a depth closer to 70%?

Just knowing the depth and table info is moot informatoin. I agree with Paul regarding the depth HOWEVER I have seen beautiful princess cuts with this depth but ONLY when the tables were smaller.

A careful analysis of the new cutting guidelines from AGS, to get optimal performance from princess cuts ... your chances DECREASE as the table gets bigger in size ... particularly greater than its total depth.

If you can''t get any data/information other than what you have ... PASS. Because the chances of this being a performer are slim.

 

[RockDoc]

As of the current moment GIA doesn''t give a cut grade.

GIA doesn''t report any information about the light return of the diamond.

I''d suggest looking for an AGS Princess Report.

They do issue a cut grade, and it is based on far more than just numbers.
They take tilt, obscuration, contrast, light return and more into consideration when assigning the cut grade.


Even having crown height, angles and pavilion depth, it won''t guarantee you will have a great looking stone.


Rockdoc

 

[pinkee]

word of advice, just be careful with a princess cut, the corners could chip, mine did when resetting it. the gemologist who replaced my stone and who works with insurance companies is seeing more and more chipped princess stones... if you want square buy one with cut corners... I actually went round because he said it will never go out of style and will always keep its value better and if you want a square look have it set in 4 prongs and there are so many styles of settings/prongs which can make a round look square!