Proportions Confusion

[weddedbliss]

I am looking into an AGS0 with a platinum document (the one that shows the computer generated light performance), and it all looks great. HOWEVER, the HCA is only 3.1. There is also a picture of the diamond and it looks fine on the vendor's site. The proportions are 63 depth, 55.8 table, 40.8 pavillion, and 35.7 crown. The report is recent.

I'm wondering if this is a poor performer even though it is an AGS 000 (cut, polish, symmetry) and looks good from a still photo. There is no chance of seeing it in person first, but it's at a much better price than branded H&A. I don't care about branded, but I don't want sparkle and brilliance to be compromised. Please advise.

That being said, do you think I could get better proportions within AGS0 and still avoid the premium ascribed to branded H&A, or is this about the best I could do without getting a branded H&A, performance and appearance-wise?

 

[stone-cold11]

Post the full grading report, or at least the AGS report number and the carat weight on the report.

Also, is there idealscope image for the stone?

 

[yssie]

Ditto SC - a pic or more info will be more helpful.

HCA and AGS use different metrics for their "highest cut grade" evaluations - so sometimes there will be a disconnect between what the two perceive as "best". The crown/pavilion combo is reducing HCA score here, but depending on what range went into those averages, and the stone's optical symmetry, it may well be lovely, visually!

AGS does not consider optical symmetry in its cut grading - AGS0 light performance tells you nothing about H&A patterning.

 

[weddedbliss]

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/K-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1353910.asp


I don't think I will end up getting this one, but I'd still like opinions.

 

[stone-cold11]

Looks good, request an idealscope image from JA if interested.