RB stats in full

[Isabelle]

REPOST b/c I think it got lost in the old thread.

I heard back from the GIA this evening via email. I guess they actually were able to pull out the report. Here is what she told me on my diamond, including angle information:

6.78 - 6.84 X 4.16 MM

1.15 Carats

Depth: 61.1%

Table: 58%

Girdle: Thin to medium, faceted

Cutlet: Very small

Polish: Good

Symmetry: Good

Clarity Grade: SI1

Color Grade: H

Fluoresence: None

Crown angle average 34.5
Crown Height 14.5%
Pavilion Angle Average 41.6
Pavilion Depth 44.0 %

So, how''s it look on paper? I''m interested b/c it is an awfully pretty diamond in my totally objective and unbiased-in-every-way opinion...LOL (Guffaw)

 

[whatmeworry]

"on paper", no one here would have recommended it.

But I believe you if you say it''s awfully pretty. So where are the pictures?

 

[Isabelle]

You know, I knew you were going to say that! LOL In a way, I am glad b/c I think it proves what I said about diamond personalities; it really sparkles. Having said that, of course now I am depressed and will have to start shopping for my replacement diamond.

I WILL post pics if I can figure out how to get the pictures small enough. I had some trouble with that with my Legacy ring shots.

 

[whatmeworry]

Date: 3/31/2008 11:15:05 PM
Author: Isabelle
You know, I knew you were going to say that! LOL In a way, I am glad b/c I think it proves what I said about diamond personalities; it really sparkles. Having said that, of course now I am depressed and will have to start shopping for my replacement diamond.

I WILL post pics if I can figure out how to get the pictures small enough. I had some trouble with that with my Legacy ring shots.

 

[Isabelle]

LOL! Don''t think it hasn''t crossed my mind...even before you broke the bad news.

 

[LegacyGirl]

OOOO I can''t wait to see what you get!

 

[lisa1.01fvs1]

I hope this helps these #''s make the rounds around here for RB''s:

Diamond “Ideal” dimensions

table 54-57%
depth 60-62%
crown angle 34-35
pavilion angle 40.7 to 41
polish and symmetry should be at least very good to excellent


I don''t agree with "this is a dog" some of the #''s come close or are on target.

Again, you have the stone, you see it and know it''s personality. Go by what your eyes tell you. The HCA and other tools are primarily designed for virtual stones that have yet to be seen.

However, it''s always nice to have more diamonds laying around.

 

[Isabelle]

Date: 4/1/2008 12:54:34 AM
Author: lisa1.01fvs1
I hope this helps these #''s make the rounds around here for RB''s:


Diamond “Ideal” dimensions



table 54-57%

depth 60-62%

crown angle 34-35

pavilion angle 40.7 to 41

polish and symmetry should be at least very good to excellent



I don''t agree with ''this is a dog'' some of the #''s come close or are on target.


Again, you have the stone, you see it and know it''s personality. Go by what your eyes tell you. The HCA and other tools are primarily designed for virtual stones that have yet to be seen.


However, it''s always nice to have more diamonds laying around.

Lisa, thank you. I thought about it last night when I went to bed and I thought "How can THAT diamond be subpar? It is so pretty and I get compliments from strangers on it at least a few times a year." I checked some of the guides and I saw that overall the percentages were within the range that many PSers had listed. And when we got it 12 years ago, it was what we could afford. Your point about using the numbers as a guide for diamonds you have not seen is also well taken. There is always the X factor on diamonds. Maybe this one has it. But being no expert....

ANYWAY, the thing is, I would ideally like a diamond that was about 1.5 to 2.00 CTW. But I feel sentimental about my original diamond so I might custom design a ring from scratch using that center stone. One thing for sure is that my diamond solitaire setting doesn''t go with my Legacy ring. It''s yellow gold, up next to the Cartier trinity ring and then my grandmother''s wedding band next to that. Totally different look so when I wear both rings at the same time, I have antiquey Edwardian going on on the right hand, and post modern going on on the left. One of the things I was thinking about was having someone create a version of the Tiffany Ribbon Ring, but with a thin halo of diamonds going around the center stone. No sure how that would look.

 

[strmrdr]

The basic numbers come out too aprox. AGS4.
It gets kicked down for a slight ring of death that would only be visible in certain lighting.
There are far worse out there.

 

[Isabelle]

Date: 4/1/2008 10:42:20 AM
Author: strmrdr
The basic numbers come out too aprox. AGS4.

It gets kicked down for a slight ring of death that would only be visible in certain lighting.

There are far worse out there.

Thanks Storm!

 

[lisa1.01fvs1]

Isabelle,

Arrgh! Sometimes the "cut nuts" are so exacting!!!! As we progress the standards for excellence change....case in pt. OEC. (once the end all)

I love it and dislike it at the same time - I guess I embody both as I sit here and read and post away.

AGS4--also take into acct. color and inclusions (both get dinged a lot on AGS system). (nod to strmrdr)

An idealscope, Sarin, light analysis ASET indepth goobldeygook will tell the TRUE tale. But what is Truth? I like the sentimentality of your story and that you do love the stone.

Anyway, I also love the idea of the ribbon ring. I''ve always had my eye on that one.

Oh and please post pics!!!!!

 

[Isabelle]

LOL! Will do. To be honest, I read ASET, AGS, etc. it''s like a foreign language to me. But I know what looks good, so whatever the technical terms, I know junk when I see it, and vice versa. Will post pics soon. Thank you for your insight, Lisa!!