Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

really quick help

boston_jeff

boston_jeff

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
633
Hey everybody -- hope you are having a great holiday season!

I am back with a request for a quick favor on a small round brilliant that I am going to buy sight unseen so I want to get confirmation that people think I am on the right track. FYI, the D/IF is on purpose for sentimental reasons...

Four options:

#1 (front runner)
Carat weight: 0.26
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 61.4%
Table %: 55%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavialian Angle: 40.6
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 4.17 x 4.13 x 2.55 mm
Clarity Comments: Surface Graining (assume this is not a big deal?)

#2
Price: $829
Carat weight: 0.23
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 61.0%
Table %: 56%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavialian Angle: 40.8
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 3.97 x 4.00 x 2.43 mm
Clarity Comments: None

#3
Price: $850
Carat weight: 0.23
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 61.7% [getting too deep?]
Table %: 55%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavialian Angle: 40.8
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 4.01 x 3.96 x 2.46 mm
Comments: Minor details of polish are present

#4
Carat weight: 0.23
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 60.4%
Table %: 58%
Crown Angle: 34
Pavialian Angle: 40.8
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 3.96 x 3.99 x 2.40 mm
Clarity Characteristics: Extra Facet
Comments: Minor details of polish are present
 
Could you run the HCA numbers for us? Do you have IS or ASET pics?
 
All look promising from the numbers. What is it going to be use for?
 
HCA numbers:

#1: 0.7; Ex/Ex/Ex/Vg
#2: 1.2; Ex/Ex/Ex/Vg
#3: 1.3; Ex/Ex/Ex/Vg
#4: 1.1; Ex/Ex/Ex/Vg

No IS or ASET pictures from the vendor(s).

It is actually probably never going to be set, but if so would be in a pendant.

Thanks!
 
I would go with #1 then. #1 might be a little iff as a ring stone, might have obstruction issue depending on the rounding of numbers, but is quite safe for a pendant stone, observer not likely to be close enough to cause any obstruction issue.
 
Thanks, Stone Cold. Anyone else?
 
If you're going for a D-IF, I'd go for #2. Why have a "perfect" diamond if the polish isn't perfect too? That is, if dirt or lotion gets trapped in the surface graining, it might look extra dirty (even cloudy), which would defeat the purpose of a D-IF, IMO.
 
i vote #1

if you aren't going to set it, whatcha doing with it? intrigued.....
 
Thanks both --

If any of my old helpers could jump in I would really appreciate it! I guess it's between #1 or #2 now... I'd prefer to go with #1 for the extra spread if people do no think surface graining will be an issue ...
 
That's the problem -- no pix. Call the vendor and ask where the surface graining is, maybe that will help.
 
i would choose from #1 or 2. Nothing leaps out at me as an issue with #2. You might ask the vendor about the surface graining in #1. If you are looking for a perfect stone, #2 seems to fit the bill :))
 
You didn't mentioned who graded each of the stones (GIA / AGS / EGL / IGI). Definitely relevant information.
 
tweep - numbers look like all GIA.

I like 1, too - all of them have the 'right numbers', 1 is the biggest ;))
 
Yes, GIA for all.

Anyone have a view as to whether surface graining should give me any pause?
 
If it's on the table, that would stop me. If it's somewhere else, it might not be a big deal. Better call and ask where it is.
 
Just heard back from Blue Nile -- can't get any additional information on the surface graining --

Anybody else on whether they think there is a risk that the surface graining could impact the stone under no magnification? Is there a real risk that it could make the stone get "cloudy" when it gets dirty as suggested above?

Thanks so much, and Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays!
 
Hi Jeff,
I wouldn't worry about surface graining on a .26ct diamond that will be viewed without magnification. All diamonds are attracted to oils/grease and will subsequently get dirty-regardless of surface graining. Good luck!

ps-surface graining is caused by irregularities in the crystal structure-not a result of poor polish
 
Thanks Erika, that's really helpful --

I guess because the stone is likely not going to be set and therefore handled by hand I was worried that the surface graining would exacerbate the problem (or would otherwise affect performance), but I'm hearing that is not the case so I will probably will go with that as the additional .2 mm in spread is nice.

Best,
Jeff
 
boston_jeff said:
Hey everybody -- hope you are having a great holiday season!

I am back with a request for a quick favor on a small round brilliant that I am going to buy sight unseen so I want to get confirmation that people think I am on the right track. FYI, the D/IF is on purpose for sentimental reasons...

Four options:

#1 (front runner)
Carat weight: 0.26
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 61.4%
Table %: 55%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavialian Angle: 40.6
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 4.17 x 4.13 x 2.55 mm
Clarity Comments: Surface Graining (assume this is not a big deal?)

#2
Price: $829
Carat weight: 0.23
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 61.0%
Table %: 56%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavialian Angle: 40.8
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 3.97 x 4.00 x 2.43 mm
Clarity Comments: None

#3
Price: $850
Carat weight: 0.23
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 61.7% [getting too deep?]
Table %: 55%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavialian Angle: 40.8
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 4.01 x 3.96 x 2.46 mm
Comments: Minor details of polish are present

#4
Carat weight: 0.23
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 60.4%
Table %: 58%
Crown Angle: 34
Pavialian Angle: 40.8
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 3.96 x 3.99 x 2.40 mm
Clarity Characteristics: Extra Facet
Comments: Minor details of polish are present
Click to expand...

You are trying to buy a "mind clean" stone, so I choose #2 as well. Less likely to show darkness when viewed up close, Tolk Pavilion Angle. No surface graining. It would be nice to see the IS images of these stones but perhaps that is not possible.

What are the Star% and LGF% for #1 and #2 from the GIA report.
 
#1 (front runner)
Carat weight: 0.26
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 61.4%
Table %: 55%
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavialian Angle: 40.6
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 4.17 x 4.13 x 2.55 mm
Clarity Comments: Surface Graining

Star %: 55%
LGF %: 75%

#2
Price: $829
Carat weight: 0.23
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 61.0%
Table %: 56%
Crown Angle: 33.5
Pavialian Angle: 40.8
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence:None
Measurements: 3.97 x 4.00 x 2.43 mm
Clarity Comments: None

Star %: 50%
LGF %: 80%
 
I'd go for #1 since it's the biggest. At this carat weight, small differences in mm size may actually make a visual difference, whereas they probably won't at larger carat weights.
 
Anything in the Star%/LGF% that make someone prefer #1 or #2?
 
#1 Will have bigger fatter arrows. You will see larger flashes or it will be darker depending on how close you are viewing and the rounding of the agnles on the report.

I still think #2 is safer and may be brighter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top