Should I buy this Princess?

[nightswimming]

I found these princess cut diamonds at a store in Canada and was wondering if I should buy either. Your thoughts are very important, and I appreciate them! Thank you so much for your help! Basically, which one is a better stone for the money, and are either of these "the stone" for an engagement ring.
Here is its information:

1.04 ct
H color
SI1
Very Good cut
5.43x5.58x1.02
depth 74.3%
table 64.9%
girdle 4.3%
crown height 11.5%
very good optics
$3,999

OR do you think that this is a better stone to buy?

.91 ct
F color
VVS2
very good cut
5.42x5.30x3.91
Depth 74%
Table 67.8%
Crown Height 9.9%
very good optics
$4,299


Thank you so very much for your help.

Leo

 

[Colored Gemstone Nut]

----------------
On 11/29/2003 6:58:56 PM nightswimming wrote:











I found these princess cut diamonds at a store in Canada and was wondering if I should buy either. Your thoughts are very important, and I appreciate them! Thank you so much for your help! Basically, which one is a better stone for the money, and are either of these 'the stone' for an engagement ring.
Here is its information:

Hi NS,

I assume the measurements on the 1st stone was 4.02 rather than 1.02?

I have attached the results for both stones as I ran them through the Diamond Cut Grading Charts on Dave Atlas's website...The is just a preliminary determing factor for possible good candidates. Each stone should be examined on an individual basis because you need to take factors into account like visual perception besides just going off the numbers...I think you have 2 good stones...

If you could see them side by side you might want to go with the one that speakes to you..If you would even venture to purchase an ideal-scope it can further aide you in your purchase by showing leakage points and areas where light is being lost.

I would take into account the H color and si-1 clarity in the first stone. Princess cuts will show inclusions more readily if centered in the table area and the color might be more evident in fancy shapes vs. traditional ideal cut round brilliants. See if you can notice a difference. If your willing to sacrifice size the second stone is definitely whiter and has a more appealing clarity...

 

[valeria101]

Hi!
The second stone is of strykingly better quakity as far as color and calrity are concerned. The cuts are good according to industry standards (as seen above), however, the depth of these two is HUGE compared to a RBC, so the stone face up smaller. This is not mandatory for princesses. There are enough wll cut ones with depth below 70%, and this is where I would seek some improvement. If you are not after some symbolic grades and do not see a glaring difference between H and F, then why choose stones with such different color and clarity grades? How about a middle ground piece ? Would you consider buying from an online seller to get more choices?

 

[nightswimming]

Thank you both for your thoughts.

quote " If your willing to sacrifice size the second stone is definitely whiter and has a more appealing clarity..."

>>The mm or spread of the stones is very similar. the ct weight is only less. Woudlnt both stones with the same mm dimensions or spread appear the same, even though the ct weight is different? For example, the 2nd stone is .13 ct smaller - but the mm are similar (5.43x5.58 versus 5.42x5.30)? Am I confused or is this a good assumption? Instead of paying for the ct weight of the first stone, I can get the second stone, at a lower ct weight, but with better clarity and color.Is this good thinking or am I wrong?


Ive been looking online, and from what I have seen these stones are the best quality ones Ive found for the price. The ones I saw online, the numbers arent good = ie: table higher then depth, or the spread (mm) being too small. These seem to be the biggest stones I can find for the best price and best quality.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 11/29/2003 9:51:01 PM nightswimming wrote:


The mm or spread of the stones is very similar. the ct weight is only less. Woudlnt both stones with the same mm dimensions or spread appear the same, even though the ct weight is different? ----------------

Right...total depth influences spread (i.e. visible surface) the most. So deeper stones appear smaller than their shallower peers.

 

[valeria101]

THIS is bigger for the money...

But this is only an example: there are quite alot of stones ranking between the two you have posted. Did you use the search on Pricescope at all?

 

[nightswimming]

I did use pricescope. But I wasnt happy with the results. The numbers werent good, or the price was too high, or the size (mm) was too small. There was one stone I was toying with online recently- what are your thoughts? How does it compare with the other 2?


Shape: Princess
Carat: 0.94
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 71.3
Table: 69
Crown Angle: 32.1
Crown %: 8.3
Pavilion Angle: 59.8
Pavilion %: 59.9
Girdle: Very thin to slightly thick
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Measurements: 5.62-5.40X3.85

 

[Colored Gemstone Nut]

NS,




Respectfully, I don't think it would be fair to compare these stones without comparing the idealscope photos of the other candidates....




The image looks pretty good...

 

[valeria101]

The pic looks rather well, althogh factors like lighting conditions and such, and the fact that I am not a professional photographer do not help. The image may show average symmetry... or some angle in the position of the stone, or both. The only deposit of such pictures online I know of is GOG's. And having thosse numbers for princess cuts does not help much in absence of a recognized receipe to interpret them In short: I agree with Josh, plus, I would be quite careful how to interpret the pictures too!

 

[nightswimming]

Well, thats the thing, as the store Im looking at the first two, they dont have the ideal scope images. Should I go then with the third stone, because at least the idealscope image is good? The numbers on the third stone arent class 1a
(I belive its a mix of 1a and 1b).

 

[valeria101]

Tha's no saying that the scope pics of the first too would be worse. But if you are in a hury, the third lookds right. If the price is right and the time is tight... why not?

PS buyers have already found a couple of vendors which provide idealscope images upon request (Josh lists them somewhere...). But it would take some more time to maximize looks, size and price further.

 

[Colored Gemstone Nut]

I say get yourself an idealscope..

 

[nightswimming]

So the third stone is a better stone, even though the numbers dont fit into class 1a/ideal cut as do stones #1 and #2? Is this based on idealscope only?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 11/29/2003 11:18:03 PM nightswimming wrote:

So the third stone is a better stone, even though the numbers dont fit into class 1a/ideal cut as do stones #1 and #2? Is this based on idealscope only? ----------------

Those cut criteria are not designed to guarantee light reurn.

If light return is what you are after, numbers help little. If you have that ideal scope (as suggested above) it is of little use unless you get to shift through a bunch of princess cuts. At best looking at stones you could reject really poor light reflectors, but the process might be time consumming unless you get lucky right away (as with the stone above).

 

[nightswimming]

So what is your recommendation? The third stone: does it look like a great stone? Do the numbers look good? Should I get it shipped to me to see it? I wont be able to compare it to the other 2 however, side by side. Based on numbers, and the ideal scope of #3, should I go for #3? Or stick with stone #1 and #2?

 

[Colored Gemstone Nut]

----------------
On 11/29/2003 11:18:03 PM nightswimming wrote:





So the third stone is a better stone, even though the numbers dont fit into class 1a/ideal cut as do stones #1 and #2? Is this based on idealscope only?
----------------

Nightswimming,

Before you make a purchase for thousands of dollars I would recommend you get the other 2 diamonds verified by a third party..

Val has some good points about the Atlas Cut Grading Charts, but chances are these 1st 2 stones may very well be great performing stones..Don't take a stab in the dark just because you don't have an idealscope image of the other 2 stones and rush to judgement on the third.

If you have some time shop around some more and compare...If you can't access idealscope images you can deal with sites that do...

 

[Rhino]

Actually that idealscope image of that stone isn't so hot. There is alot of leakage and alot of areas of weak light return within that stone.




Of all the stones you listed the 1.04ct is the one that sounds the most promising with regards to proportions. Ie. Nice crown height and table/total depth measurements. However there are 2-3 other critial elements that need to be known regarding the numbers and that is the pavilion and crown angles. Also when these people say "very good optics" what do they mean by that and how do they prove or justify it?




See if you can get crown/pavilion angles on that 1.04ct and I'll let you know if it's a red or green flag.




Rhino

 

[valeria101]

Oups! I was still writing when Rhino's post got in...surely his help is best.

---------
The info available is not enough for a precise comparison. Even leaving that scope pic aside, I'd choose the third stone for it's better depth than stone 1 (and 2) and more reasonable clarity than stone 2 (to avoid whatever premium there is on that VVS grade). The third stone is not a perfect square, but the variation should not be obvious at all. The hint at better light return from that photo is an added perk, for what it is worth. However, just the availability of that red picture without terms of comparison does not help either choosing among these stones or settling the third stone. The picture does reveal some small amount of lickeage, but, since the color areas are unevenly distributed and the cut has good symmetry, I suspect the picture looks to good to be true. A more precise light return diagnostic may reveal (at least I expect it might) some lesser performance.

 

[nightswimming]

Unfortunately I dont have the pavilion and crown angles on #1 or #2 as the store, from what I wrote down at least, didnt provide them. What should the crown and pavilion angles be that would make it a good stone? What about #2, as it scores all class 1a? No good?

Oh, in regards to optics, Im not sure about the tools they used, but the first two stones are the stores "signature cut series" so they said that they have extrordinary brilliance compared to other stones they sell.

 

[canadiangrrl]

Get an Ideal-Scope.

There's a link on the top of this webpage. If you can't get the angles, it's your best bet for checking light leakage at the source.