Radiant help needed -Help me choose- pics included

[happyscrapper40]

Please help me decide on these 2 stones.
Here is a pic of the first one.

Radiant Rectangular Mod. Brilliant
1.80
H VS1
8.51 x 6.49 x 4.14

 

[happyscrapper40]

Here is the diamond

 

[happyscrapper40]

Ideal scope for

H VS1 1.80

 

[happyscrapper40]

aset pic for

1.80 HVS1

 

[happyscrapper40]

The second stone pics to follow

1.80 F SI1
8.26 x 6.18 x 4.25

 

[happyscrapper40]

Radiant diamond
F SI1 1.80

 

[happyscrapper40]

Ideal scope
1.80 F SI1

 

[happyscrapper40]

Aset image for
1.80 F SI1

 

[happyscrapper40]

INCLUSION and FACET STRUCTURE INFORMATION


The first stone 1.80 H VS1 inclusions are Crystal, Needle, Pinpoint. The facet structure is different than I have seen in a radiant. It has more facets and looks like a starburst pattern. Anyone familiar with this? Please explain!

The second stone 1.80 F SI1 inclusions are Feather (healed, next to the girdle), crystal, cloud, indented natural. Comments-- Addtional clouds are not shown.


Thanks for looking. Your comments are welcome.

 

[jfo]

Happyscrapper40,
Hi there. I don''t claim to be an expert on radiants, but I am a radiant owner and lover myself. I just wanted to give you my 2 cents worth. I think the 1.80 H VS1 looks better to my eye. Radiants are rather diverse in cut and I think that the patterns can differ quite a bit from radiant to radiant. I have a square radiant, for example, and the cut/facet pattern is different than both patterns of the two diamonds you posted on.

That said, the starburst pattern looks better to me. I''m sure there are others on this forum that could give you a much better explanation of why the facet pattern is different or a better assessment of the images, but I also would suggest providing more specs in terms of table, depth %. Have you been able to see these radiants in person? I do know that numbers don''t always tell the whole story with fancies, especially radiants... if you can, try to get your hands on these guys and see which ones speaks to you!

 

[happyscrapper40]

Hi,
thanks for your comments.
I have not seen the stones in person. I have decided to trust WF as my vendor and they have been great answering all of my questions, they also have a 10 day inspection return policy.

The depth and table are listed in the Sarin reports for each stone in the previous posts.

The H VS1 Depth 63.8% Table 67% Ex-Polish VG-Symm L/W Ratio 1.33

The F SI1 Depth 68.37% Table 65% Ex-Polish VG-Symm L/W Ratio 1.31


MORE COMMENTS PLEASE!

 

[happyscrapper40]

Where is everyone?

I''d really like to hear from you. I''m dying here, and I''m starting to look like this little blue smiley

I have to decide soon, so PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.

Thanks

 

[JulieN]

Cut quality is about the same.

I like the angle of the corners on the F and...F>H, so I''d go with the F.

 

[fullojoy]

both of these stones are particularly long and narrow. Visit http://www.gemappraisers.com/shapePickerNew.asp so that you can see what that ratio looks like. There isn''s a radiant there, but look at the emerald to show you what a ratio in the 1:30''s looks like.

If this link doesn''t work, go to the accredited gem appraisers website, then to diamond education and shape selector.

 

[diagem]

Date: 10/31/2007 2:16:56 PM
Author: happyscrapper40
Hi,
thanks for your comments.
I have not seen the stones in person. I have decided to trust WF as my vendor and they have been great answering all of my questions, they also have a 10 day inspection return policy.

The depth and table are listed in the Sarin reports for each stone in the previous posts.

The H VS1 Depth 63.8% Table 67% Ex-Polish VG-Symm L/W Ratio 1.33

The F SI1 Depth 68.37% Table 65% Ex-Polish VG-Symm L/W Ratio 1.31


MORE COMMENTS PLEASE!

I kinda prefer the smaller table and the bit higher crown height..., and an F is always better than an H (if the SI is truly eye-clean).

 

[happyscrapper40]

Hi Joy,

Yes, the stone is a rectangular radiant. I do like the look of that l/w ratio.
I am having a 3 stone ring custom made with trapezoid side stones, so I think it will look very good.
I have slightly long fingers, and my ring size is 7 1/2 ish (depending on the weather).
I tried princess and square radiant rings on and it just did not look good on my finger.

 

[happyscrapper40]

Hi,
Bob at WF looked at both of the stones together and said they both look white with no visible difference in color. Also, the H sparkled more. It has more facets.
The F has a feather inclusion, and it is not 100% eye clean. I am upgrading from my pear ring of 25 years with a visible bow tie and it does bother me. So, I am leaning toward the H. The price isn''t bad either.

 

[diagem]

Date: 10/31/2007 6:53:22 PM
Author: happyscrapper40
Hi,
Bob at WF looked at both of the stones together and said they both look white with no visible difference in color. Also, the H sparkled more. It has more facets.
The F has a feather inclusion, and it is not 100% eye clean. I am upgrading from my pear ring of 25 years with a visible bow tie and it does bother me. So, I am leaning toward the H. The price isn''t bad either.

Good for you...
Only one comment..., more facets on a Diamond does not always mean more sparkle

 

[diagem]

Date: 10/31/2007 7:28:01 PM
Author: Ideal Trilogy
no argement with the second one

Welcome to PS...


What Type Diamonds were you cutting for Tiff''s? If you dont mind me asking?

 

[happyscrapper40]

Hi I T,

What is it that you prefer stone #2 over stone # 1 ?

Thanks for your input.

 

[happyscrapper40]

Date: 10/31/2007 8:45:23 PM
Author: happyscrapper40
Hi I T,

What is it that you prefer stone #2 over stone # 1 ?

Thanks for your input.

Can''t find "Ideal Trilogy"''s post. It was here earlier. Strange!!!

 

[Sharon101]

Ok, my opinion, probably worth what its costing you....but anyway....As a casual observer, with no real technical knowledge I would choose no. 1. To my untrained eyes, the `pattern` looks pleasing. Keep in mind I like a crushed ice look, it appeals to me, especially if there are miles of it!!!! Now, even though I love randomness & a non symetrical pattern in a diamond, the no.2 seems wonky and off centre to me. It doesnt appeal to me in the photo anyway.

As a bonus no. 1 has a bigger spread and no clouds.

I am guessing that irl they might look way different, but from the photos I choose no. 1!!!

 

[happyscrapper40]

Thanks for your input Sharon.

WF said it did have more sparkle

and I do like the "crushed ice" look.

 

[Ideal Trilogy]

in reference to the second stone F SI1 over the H VS1
In value the F SI1 is 4-6% is more valuable in book value
it is larger in spread and is more in demand world wide at the moment
a fact that will have this diamond appreciate faster in value with time
if the SI1 is not noticeable to the naked eye I would jump on it

 

[happyscrapper40]

What about the facet pattern of the H? Is that not a common and desireable cut for a radiant?
After looking at all of the data on the H, what makes this stone desireable or less desireable?

For the F, other than costing over $1500.00 more, with all the data included, what makes it a better stone? I do not plan to sell in the future, are you referring to appraisal?
The stone is not 100% eye clean.

I''m just trying to figure it all out, thanks for your help.

 

[MrNyceGuy]

I''d say.......get a #1 with no mayo, extra cheese and a medium coke. If they have curly fries, get those over the regular ones. Or better yet, some chicken nuggets with BBQ sauce. Or, you could just go with diamond #1 which is almost as yummy. I''d go with the food, but that''s just cause it''s lunch time.

 

[happyscrapper40]

Date: 11/1/2007 1:06:34 PM
Author: MrNyceGuy
I''d say.......get a #1 with no mayo, extra cheese and a medium coke. If they have curly fries, get those over the regular ones. Or better yet, some chicken nuggets with BBQ sauce. Or, you could just go with diamond #1 which is almost as yummy. I''d go with the food, but that''s just cause it''s lunch time.

Too funny!!! Thanks for bringing food into the topic and making me laugh.

This diamond stuff is stressing me out!

Now you''ve made me hungry. Lets eat!

 

[Sharon101]

Date: 11/1/2007 10:47:27 AM
Author: Ideal Trilogy

in reference to the second stone F SI1 over the H VS1
In value the F SI1 is 4-6% is more valuable in book value
it is larger in spread and is more in demand world wide at the moment
a fact that will have this diamond appreciate faster in value with time
if the SI1 is not noticeable to the naked eye I would jump on it

How is the F a bigger spread, I thought it was the opposite!!!

 

[Ideal Trilogy]

i have made a mistake #1 is spredier and if you are not looking to resale you diamond in the future go with #1
its larger in looks and will face up like a G color once set in platinum or white gold

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Sharon, you know, I''d be inclined to just wait. There are plenty of other radiants to look at. I personally would favor the F stone except for the clarity situation. I have heard many times on here that more color can be seen in stones other than ideal rounds. So an F or G might really be appealling in a radiant...but that''s just a guess as I haven''t had the opportunity to compare them in real life!