Ring upgrade continued... more diamond sizes!

[sledge]

Here is the GIA report. I put the numbers into the HCA calculator & I think it came out ok. What do you think??

Have you seen this stone in-person, or just going off the computer?

Only reason I ask is because this is what is referred to as a 60/60 stone, meaning the depth and table sizes are both near 60%.

Some people love the way a 60/60 style diamond looks as it will throw more white light than rainbow light (fire/sparkle). Advantages are it will appear very white, and size up large for the weight due to the large table size.

I am not as well versed on these so I will defer to others with more technical knowledge. I know I searched for more info earlier and a thread by @SimoneDi popped up. It appears she had one and loved it. She may have some more valuable feedback.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/60-60-vs-ideal-mrb-proportions-–-is-beauty-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder-can-one-cut-fit-all.232226/

I would say that just because it's a 60/60 stone does not mean it's bad. It's just more of a matter of style preference.

FYI, using the data available it appears this stone does have potential to fall in an ideal category for the table size and CA/PA combo, as evidenced below. Obviously it would be great to have an ASET or IS image to confirm but that may not be available.



Also, when you were doing the computer renderings of the stone size on your fingers, did you take into account ACTUAL dimensions of this particular stone? I'm only asking because a "typical 0.91ct stone" will size up smaller than one with a table this large. It may not be much, but with a size 2.5 finger, we saw how 1ct made you feel it was "too big".

I'd hate to see you go through all the pain to pick this stone, and then that be an issue.

Also, did you intentionally target a 60/60 stone? Or was this coincidence?

If you want a modern round brilliant (MRB) stone I like to use the following criteria:

• 54-57 table
• 34-35 crown angle
• 40.6-40.9 pavilion angle
• 60-62.5 depth

As I spend more time looking at diamonds I am learning I prefer a 54-55 table, 34.5 CA and 40.7-40.8 PA.

 

[Happytobemrsg]

Have you seen this stone in-person, or just going off the computer?

Only reason I ask is because this is what is referred to as a 60/60 stone, meaning the depth and table sizes are both near 60%.

Some people love the way a 60/60 style diamond looks as it will throw more white light than rainbow light (fire/sparkle). Advantages are it will appear very white, and size up large for the weight due to the large table size.

I am not as well versed on these so I will defer to others with more technical knowledge. I know I searched for more info earlier and a thread by @SimoneDi popped up. It appears she had one and loved it. She may have some more valuable feedback.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/60-60-vs-ideal-mrb-proportions-–-is-beauty-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder-can-one-cut-fit-all.232226/

I would say that just because it's a 60/60 stone does not mean it's bad. It's just more of a matter of style preference.

FYI, using the data available it appears this stone does have potential to fall in an ideal category for the table size and CA/PA combo, as evidenced below. Obviously it would be great to have an ASET or IS image to confirm but that may not be available.



Also, when you were doing the computer renderings of the stone size on your fingers, did you take into account ACTUAL dimensions of this particular stone? I'm only asking because a "typical 0.91ct stone" will size up smaller than one with a table this large. It may not be much, but with a size 2.5 finger, we saw how 1ct made you feel it was "too big".

I'd hate to see you go through all the pain to pick this stone, and then that be an issue.

Also, did you intentionally target a 60/60 stone? Or was this coincidence?

If you want a modern round brilliant (MRB) stone I like to use the following criteria:

• 54-57 table
• 34-35 crown angle
• 40.6-40.9 pavilion angle
• 60-62.5 depth

As I spend more time looking at diamonds I am learning I prefer a 54-55 table, 34.5 CA and 40.7-40.8 PA.

Thank you so much for your post. The photos I have posted show the actual stone, not a computer generated one. We stuck the stone on top of my original set to get an idea of what it might look like. So I have seen the diamond in person & really loved it.

I don't know anything about choosing a diamond beyond the 3 Cs so this is all very new to me! The diamond was picked by my jeweller (DH & I have worked with him for many years). So I apologise for the silly questions:

Because it is 60/60 will of face up larger than 0.91ct? Is there a way of finding out what size carat it looks the equivalent to? Is the main worry based on the angles that the diamond will lack fire & sparkle? That's important to me. Yes it was lovely & white when I saw it. Is a modern round brilliant different from a round brilliant?

 

[purplesilk]

I'm not sledge, but I'll try to answer to your questions:

• round brilliant and modern round brilliant are synonymous;
• based on Whiteflash inventory, if your diamond was an ACA/superideal it should weight betweeen 0.93ct and 0.94 ct;
• I tend to prefer 60/60 diamonds for what sledge said, but I wouldn't recommend a 61% table to someone who hasn't good eye for diamonds;

• I found this very interesting https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/60-60-diamonds-with-33-41-angles.205800/
• if you trust your eyes, go for the 0.91 ct diamond you seem to love so much.

Best regards,
purplesilk

 

[OoohShiny]

Ideally you'd have the option of looking at the 60/60 diamond side-by-side with a small table / high crown diamond that was close to 'super ideal' specs, to determine if you preferred more white light (60/60) or coloured fire (small table/high crown) and make a fully-informed decision, but if you've seen the stone and it does appeal to you visually (and it scores well on the HCA, which it does) then I don't think you should worry too much - it should perform well, it's just a different 'flavour' to other angles etc.!

 

[sledge]

I'm not against a 60/60. I just want you to know they can react differently than stones with smaller tables and angle combos. From what I'm seeing on the charts, this stone should be well cut and possibly ideal depending how GIA averages and rounded their data. This is why I drew a bigger box, to help account for my guess where cut could land. It's a primitive method but gets close.

At this point I would put the stone on hold. Ask for an idealscope or ASET image and try to share with us so we can help you confirm all is good. Since it's a local jeweler he may not offer an image but let you look at these scopes at his store in which case we can try to prep you ahead of time on what to look for when doing so.

Alternatively you could buy your own scopes and look yourself and/or snap pics and post.

Reading a little of the thread @purplesilk posted, I noticed @John Pollard and @Karl_K got involved who are both very smart on how angles play together. I am hoping one or both, along with @rockysalamander, will drop by and comment.

I did find comfort in this since you have 61 table, 33/41 angles and 80 LGF:

RE this thread's title: 60, 41, 33 coupled with (typical) 80+% lower halves can be a terrific combination.

Expanding on Karl's comment I'd add that in well-made cases both have fire, it's just different character. An optimized Tolk at 56, 40.8, 34.5 with LHs around 77% will generally produce larger colored flashes in a given condition, while the 60, 41, 33, 80+ will show smaller flashes. It's a by-product of VF size and refraction through the crown, which relies on configuration.

Assuming both diamonds have top, consistent craftsmanship across all 57 facets, the 60-60's colored flashes can be more intense where there are very bright and direct light sources, such as a jewelry showroom. In places with less direct lighting the Tolk's configuration produces more visible fire events due to the larger dispersive fans created by wider mains and higher crown.

As far as the size, if you used actual dimensions or pics of the 0.91 that is all that matters. Just with larger tables a stone of the same weight will have slightly larger spreads. Your finger being so small and you being so sensitive I was concerned you used an average or typical dimensions.

 

[Happytobemrsg]

I'm not sledge, but I'll try to answer to your questions:

• round brilliant and modern round brilliant are synonymous;
• based on Whiteflash inventory, if your diamond was an ACA/superideal it should weight betweeen 0.93ct and 0.94 ct;
• I tend to prefer 60/60 diamonds for what sledge said, but I wouldn't recommend a 61% table to someone who hasn't good eye for diamonds;

• I found this very interesting https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/60-60-diamonds-with-33-41-angles.205800/
• if you trust your eyes, go for the 0.91 ct diamond you seem to love so much.

Best regards,
purplesilk

Ideally you'd have the option of looking at the 60/60 diamond side-by-side with a small table / high crown diamond that was close to 'super ideal' specs, to determine if you preferred more white light (60/60) or coloured fire (small table/high crown) and make a fully-informed decision, but if you've seen the stone and it does appeal to you visually (and it scores well on the HCA, which it does) then I don't think you should worry too much - it should perform well, it's just a different 'flavour' to other angles etc.!

I'm not against a 60/60. I just want you to know they can react differently than stones with smaller tables and angle combos. From what I'm seeing on the charts, this stone should be well cut and possibly ideal depending how GIA averages and rounded their data. This is why I drew a bigger box, to help account for my guess where cut could land. It's a primitive method but gets close.

At this point I would put the stone on hold. Ask for an idealscope or ASET image and try to share with us so we can help you confirm all is good. Since it's a local jeweler he may not offer an image but let you look at these scopes at his store in which case we can try to prep you ahead of time on what to look for when doing so.

Alternatively you could buy your own scopes and look yourself and/or snap pics and post.

Reading a little of the thread @purplesilk posted, I noticed @John Pollard and @Karl_K got involved who are both very smart on how angles play together. I am hoping one or both, along with @rockysalamander, will drop by and comment.

I did find comfort in this since you have 61 table, 33/41 angles and 80 LGF:



As far as the size, if you used actual dimensions or pics of the 0.91 that is all that matters. Just with larger tables a stone of the same weight will have slightly larger spreads. Your finger being so small and you being so sensitive I was concerned you used an average or typical dimensions.

Thank you all SO MUCH. You are so knowledgeable & much of this is going straight over my head. I can secure the diamond by putting a deposit down but I wouldn't have thought it be returnable. They are a very small jeweller so I couldn't just put it on hold. I'm so tempted to just go with my gut & how it made it feel in person. The calculations you have all kindly done for me hasn't shown up any major concerns, it just seems as though this little beauty will have more white/less rainbow flashes (if I have understood correctly) but there will still be some rainbow.

I did have another question. My current ring has 4 prongs which I really don't like. I assumed I would go with 6, but are 8 prongs possible on a 0.91ct? How would it look? 8 prongs are so pretty & vintage looking

 

[OoohShiny]

8 prongs might overwhelm a 0.91ct - have a look on the James Allen website for rings with 8-prongs, because they should have videos of different size stones in them if they have sold any of them recently

I would be tempted with 6 prongs myself, and have them dainty/'pointy', if you know what I mean?

 

[purplesilk]

Yes you got it, 60/60 diamonds tend to show more white flashes than rainbow flashes.

If dainty, 8 prongs can work beautifully with a 0.91 ct:
take a look at bling addict elegant solitaire - her diamond is 0.78 ct -
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/show-me-your-8-prong-settings.80220/
A couple of years ago I saw one carat diamond in a setting very similar to the CVB Dahlia: just splendid!
Super simple and dainty: https://www.etsy.com/it/listing/466...h_query=oec white sapphire&ref=sr_gallery-1-5
Best to you,

 

[purplesilk]

Just curious: did you have the chance to look at the 0.91 ct only under the store lights?Is it eye clean?

 

[msop04]

I don't think I'd go with 8 prongs unless they were very tiny and perfectly executed. I believe 6 prongs would be perfect.

 

[Happytobemrsg]

Oooooo the etsy one is beautiful

 

[Happytobemrsg]

Just curious: did you have the chance to look at the 0.91 ct only under the store lights?Is it eye clean?

I looked at it under store lights & outside on a cloudy day. I saw lots of rainbow inside the store, not so many outside - makes sense now! Definitely eye clean. When I looked at it with the magnifier I saw one tiny white spot

 

[purplesilk]

Fine!

 

[Happytobemrsg]

My jeweller is closed today so will give him a call tomorrow to get the GIA report for the 1ct. I want to do that so I can definitely rule it out (really worried about DSS!!). Providing the stats don't outperform the 0.91ct I will be putting down my deposit!

Sorry I'm new here: Once we get down to the details of the redesign do I post that here in Rocky Talk? Or SMTB? I really want some input from the other experts! (btw I've decided to go with 6 prongs)

 

[FinleysMom]

.91

 

[OoohShiny]

My jeweller is closed today so will give him a call tomorrow to get the GIA report for the 1ct. I want to do that so I can definitely rule it out (really worried about DSS!!). Providing the stats don't outperform the 0.91ct I will be putting down my deposit!

Sorry I'm new here: Once we get down to the details of the redesign do I post that here in Rocky Talk? Or SMTB? I really want some input from the other experts! (btw I've decided to go with 6 prongs)

To me, Rockytalky is for works in progress, SMTB is for completed items

 

[Happytobemrsg]

I'm still trying to understand this diamond so hoping @purplesilk @sledge @OoohShiny Can help me.

I just read this on whiteflash:

"As the table gets bigger, the surface area of the crown is diminished and crown facets become smaller. Since crown facets are instrumental in producing fire (colored sparkles), a 60/60 will usually not display as much fire as a well cut diamond with a fuller crown."

I remember looking at the 0.91 & thinking the facets seemed smaller than those on the 1ct. In complete layman terms (because that's all I know!), under the store lights it looked like lots of tiny bits of rainbow glitter rather than the bigger bits of rainbow in the 1ct. Now, is that because the 0.91ct is a 60/60 diamond??? Because I remember preferring the tiny flashes vs the bigger ones.

 

[OoohShiny]

There are a few pages in the Knowledge section that may be interesting

https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-table-size
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/60-60-proportioned-diamond
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-crown-and-pavilion

The way I think of it is that light hitting a diamond facet at certain angles will refract, but if the light rayes are too perpendicular (like hitting the table after bouncing off a pavilion facet), it will just pass straight through without refracting (because it's like light passing straight through a window), which means it has less chance of dispersing.

The Crown facets increase the opportunity for dispersion to take place, which increases the opportunity for the (rainbow) dispersion fans to increase in size and be larger than your pupil size, which means that you are more likely to see more coloured fire

IIRC larger tables (e.g. 60%+) will reduce the size of the crown facets (because there's only so much space from side to side!) and lower crown angles (such as 33%) will also reduce the size of the crown facets (see the blue and orange wire diagrams in the earlier link).

I think the 0.91 has a 'smaller facets' look because the Lower Girdle Facets (as described here: https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/anatomy-of-round-brilliant-diamond) are 80%, which means that they are longer than other options and are therefore 'skinnier', which makes the reflected light look more 'splintery'. 75% LGFs are much wider and create 'fat' arrows, which increase the opportunity for fire (75 vs 80 shown here: https://www.pricescope.com/communit...s-diamond-likely-display.240687/#post-4337266), so a 60/60 stone with a 33% crown angle and 80% LGFs (as yours is) has pretty much everything that will increase white light return and reduce coloured fire, I believe!

If I understand it correctly, that does mean that the stone can look brighter - ultimately neither is 'right' or 'wrong' because it is personal taste what you prefer As long as you make the decision in full awareness of the options, that is all we can ask for!

 

[purplesilk]

My jeweller is closed today so will give him a call tomorrow to get the GIA report for the 1ct. I want to do that so I can definitely rule it out (really worried about DSS!!). Providing the stats don't outperform the 0.91ct I will be putting down my deposit!

Sorry I'm new here: Once we get down to the details of the redesign do I post that here in Rocky Talk? Or SMTB? I really want some input from the other experts! (btw I've decided to go with 6 prongs)

Wise decision!!!
If this is going to be your one and only upgrade, take your time to decide if you will really be forever satisfied with the 0.91...or is the 1 ct tempting you?

I was in your shoes some years ago and I went for 1.01 ct F IF , no matter if it wasn't a smart choice according to the PS standars - overkill color and overkill clarity, not smart to hit the one carat because of the price jump associated with the full carat - I learnt so much on this board but I don't live in Pricescope - I live in the old Europe - I made an informed decision and I'm sure I won't upgrade.
Best to you,
purplesilk