shape
carat
color
clarity

Should I ? 2.50 G SI1 XXX

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by tigertales, Jan 9, 2019.

  1. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    Looking at this diamond. It's beautiful, but I have some concerns about the numbers. I know it's got that 41% pavilion angle thing going on. Is that always an issue? What should I expect performance wise? Any concerns about light leakage under the table?

    Here are the stats:
    G SI 1 GIA XXX
    Table 58%
    Depth 62.9%
    Crown angle 35.5%
    Pavilion angle 41.2%
    Thin to medium girdle.
    no culet
    no fluorescence


    Also, it's Hearts and Arrows. So, I suppose it's a sacrifice in brilliance for the novelty of the cut. ( They say, anyway...maybe I'm wrong).
    Thanks!
     
    


    


  2. doberman
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,404
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    by doberman » Jan 9, 2019
    I have never seen a true hearts and arrows stone without an AGS report. That may be just the luck of the draw, but I wouldn't want to pay a premium for HnA wuthout an AGS report.

    And no, you don't sacrifice briliance at all, which is the point of the cut - to maximize it. But that's why I'd want an AGS repoort detailing light performance.
     
    Wewechew likes this.
  3. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    20190109_152634.jpg
    Well, I do have this from another lab report EGL USA
     
  4. Wewechew
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,158
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    by Wewechew » Jan 9, 2019
    It is absolutely not a H&A diamond... the HCA is 4.7.
     
    kipari, lovedogs, jp201845 and 2 others like this.
    


    


  5. doberman
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,404
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    by doberman » Jan 9, 2019
    Runs screaming from the room:-o

    To quote one of my favorites: "How about NO, Scott?!"
     
    kipari, ratatat, caf and 2 others like this.
  6. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    lol...yeah, because of the lab, or the picture?
     
  7. Wewechew
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,158
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    by Wewechew » Jan 9, 2019
    all of it
     
  8. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    so tell me, what's wrong with the H and A ?
     
  9. jp201845
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    164
    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2018
    by jp201845 » Jan 9, 2019
    Crown Angle and Pavillion Angle are not complimentary to each other and probably have light leakage. Add a 62.9 depth which is way too deep. That is why you have an HCA score of 4.7 @ Wewechew I would pass.
     
    lovedogs and Wewechew like this.
  10. tyty333
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    20,377
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    by tyty333 » Jan 9, 2019
    H&A has to do with the optical symmetry. You can have an H&A without ideal angles.

    OP...you have the angles marked in percent. Angles should be in degrees. Table and depth should be in percent.
     
    


    


  11. LightBright
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    455
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    by LightBright » Jan 9, 2019
    In addition to angles not being complementary for optimal light performance, both angles are steeper than optimal (a steep deep stone). Plus deeper than normal depth means this diamond’s cut is storing carat weight top to bottom, so diameter is likely smaller than a well cut 2.5. There could also be painting or digging going on to reach that magic carat weight (from the ASET, it looks like it).

    You will be paying the premium for a 2.5 carat diamond but not seeing that translate into diameter size.
     
    lovedogs and jp201845 like this.
  12. Wewechew
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,158
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    by Wewechew » Jan 9, 2019
    Very true the H&A have to do with symmetry... I guess we use H&A so interchangeably with "ideal cut" I spoke incorrectly.
     
  13. Wewechew
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,158
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    by Wewechew » Jan 9, 2019
    Why don't you try to sell your original diamond yourself? You would end up getting more for it than you would trading it in.
     
    tigertales likes this.
  14. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    Oh, sorry about that! I forgot to include the measurements, and yes, angles, not percentages on crown and pavilion.
    so, the 2.5 measures 8.63 x 8.57 x 5.41
     
    LightBright likes this.
  15. MissGotRocks
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    11,216
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    by MissGotRocks » Jan 9, 2019
    A 2.5 should measure around 8.80 so you see that it faces up much smaller than that. Definitely a steep/deep stone and you can be assured of some light leakage. I would definitely pass on this one.
     
    


    


  16. crbl999
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    447
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    by crbl999 » Jan 9, 2019
    That diamond was cut for weight. A well cut 2.5 ct should be closer to 8.7X-8.8X mm. I would pass on that stone.
     
    LightBright and lovedogs like this.
  17. tyty333
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    20,377
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    by tyty333 » Jan 9, 2019
    What Aset?
     
  18. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    Steep and deep is right. I said that to the jeweler and he said, well, cuts preferences change all the time...blah blah blah.

    really pretty rock, though, surprisingly.
     
    LightBright likes this.
  19. Rhino
    Ideal_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    6,223
    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2001
    by Rhino » Jan 9, 2019
    Based on the rounded measurements and assuming virtually picture perfect optical symmetry these are the likely results. It could have a Hearts pattern with clefts but ASET and IS show extraneous leakage under the table.

    ASET.jpg
    HA.jpg HEARTS.jpg IS.jpg
     
  20. Wewechew
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,158
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    by Wewechew » Jan 9, 2019
    They can be. A stone doesn’t have to be ideal to have a personality and be beautiful.
     
    LightBright and tigertales like this.
  21. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    Think of the beautiful old mine cut, or even transition cuts...technically wonky and all over the place, but serious light catchers.
     
    blueMA, LightBright and Wewechew like this.
  22. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    Oh Hi Jonathan! Thanks for that! You are 100% correct about light leakage under the table. In certain lights it's very apparent, in others, doesn't show at all. But, yes, that, I would say is the flaw I first noticed, and amazing you caught it to a technical "T".

    I was just studying your YT video on this related subject of hearts and arrows variations...mine seems to fall into the first category ( on a good day) :

     
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2019
  23. Wewechew
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,158
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2017
    by Wewechew » Jan 9, 2019
    I know. My original engagement ring is an early round brilliant and is deep and flat. It’s still a beautiful stone though.
     
    tigertales and LightBright like this.
  24. LightBright
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    455
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    by LightBright » Jan 9, 2019
    Sorry I thought the little visual diagram from the EGL report that shows “hearts and arrows” was an ASET. What is that picture called?
     
  25. jp201845
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    164
    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2018
    by jp201845 » Jan 9, 2019
    Idealscope I think
     
    LightBright likes this.
  26. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    My original little engagement ring...gads....47 points! was so beautiful people would cross the room to see it. And guess what, after all these years, and now that I know more, it turns out it was a J VS2or SI1, and the cut...oh hells no...the table was slanted, not even level, it was deep, and the girdle was brutted and feathered. So go figure!
    I loved it. HE picked it out, and that's all I cared about.
     
    blueMA likes this.
  27. LightBright
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    455
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    by LightBright » Jan 9, 2019
    It was probably an antique cut (slanted table, deep with bruted feathered girdle). They can be amazing!
     
    blueMA and tigertales like this.
  28. tigertales
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    268
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2015
    by tigertales » Jan 9, 2019
    I know this is unrelated in a way, but I'd love to start a thread featuring pics and info of "Beautiful diamonds that fall outside the Ideal" I'm pretty new here, so don't know if there's already been a post like this...what do you think?
     
    LightBright likes this.
  29. foxinsox
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,639
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2015
    by foxinsox » Jan 10, 2019
    I feel you need to post a few picture of this pretty please!
     
  30. Karl_K
    Ideal_Rock
    Trade

    Messages:
    8,000
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    by Karl_K » Jan 10, 2019
    Who did the lab report has nothing to do with being h&a.
    My wifey's diamond is graded by GIA and has the nicest looking h&a images.
    It just happens that a lot of the h&a dealers but not all on PS also use AGSL lab reports with them.
     

Share This Page