Table % - Emerald Cut, please help!

[outsidethebox]

This is my first post though I''ve been doing quite a bit of looking, this is quite an informative website! Some background:

My husband and I are in the process of replacing my (beautiful) Emerald cut diamond. My original was lost (sickening to really think about) about 12 weeks ago - our theory is our youngest (2) flushed it down the toilet.

Moving on, we are looking to replace it as close as we can get. What we had was this:

7.61 x 5.01 x 3.11mm
1.09 carat
Depth: 62.1%
Table: 68%
Girdle: Thin to Medium
Culet: None
Polish: VG
Symmetry: G
Clarity: VVS2
Color: F
Florescence: None

I LOVED my diamond. I received tons of compliments on it. I especially loved the longer, rectangle shape of the diamond. That said, going into this replacement mode I thought I wanted exactly what I had. This is what we now have on hold from JewelryZone.com:

7.54 x 4.99 x 3.04mm
1.06 carat
Depth: 60.9%
Table: 74%
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Polish: VG
Symmetry: VG
Clarity: VVSI
Color: E
Florescence: None

To me, these diamonds are pretty similar, better in some aspects but I started to do some research on what "table" actually means and while I am still not clear on what it means in terms of how it affects the look of the diamond, what I''m reading is the 74% is too high. Is this for an Emerald cut also or is what I''m reading referring to stones like rounds?

And I also read the depth should be higher than the table %? Is this also correct for an Emerald cut?

I was happy with my original stone, but I didn''t really know anything else and I just wonder how the table % on this new diamond will affect the look of it? My original stone was 68% table and this one is 74%, is that going to be a big difference?

Thank you for your help, I hope I was clear in what I''m asking. And the table issue aside, does this new diamond look like a good stone?

Thanks!

Melissa

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 12:49:07 PM
Author:outsidethebox
This is my first post though I've been doing quite a bit of looking, this is quite an informative website! Some background:

My husband and I are in the process of replacing my (beautiful) Emerald cut diamond. My original was lost (sickening to really think about) about 12 weeks ago - our theory is our youngest (2) flushed it down the toilet.

Moving on, we are looking to replace it as close as we can get. What we had was this:

7.61 x 5.01 x 3.11mm
1.09 carat
Depth: 62.1%
Table: 68%
Girdle: Thin to Medium
Culet: None
Polish: VG
Symmetry: G
Clarity: VVS2
Color: F
Florescence: None

I LOVED my diamond. I received tons of compliments on it. I especially loved the longer, rectangle shape of the diamond. That said, going into this replacement mode I thought I wanted exactly what I had. This is what we now have on hold from JewelryZone.com:

7.54 x 4.99 x 3.04mm
1.06 carat
Depth: 60.9%
Table: 74%
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Polish: VG
Symmetry: VG
Clarity: VVSI
Color: E
Florescence: None

To me, these diamonds are pretty similar, better in some aspects but I started to do some research on what 'table' actually means and while I am still not clear on what it means in terms of how it affects the look of the diamond, what I'm reading is the 74% is too high. Is this for an Emerald cut also or is what I'm reading referring to stones like rounds?

And I also read the depth should be higher than the table %? Is this also correct for an Emerald cut?

I was happy with my original stone, but I didn't really know anything else and I just wonder how the table % on this new diamond will affect the look of it? My original stone was 68% table and this one is 74%, is that going to be a big difference?

Thank you for your help, I hope I was clear in what I'm asking. And the table issue aside, does this new diamond look like a good stone?

Thanks!

Melissa

Hi Melissa and welcome!

I am so sorry to hear what happened.....

Some ' traditional ' style EC's have larger tables so it needn't be an issue necessarily but trying to buy these shapes without images is really buying blind as I often say and the table size is very large on this stone. This can mean the diamond can look glassy and this can impact performance. As to visible difference between this one and your last diamond, its a guessing game I am afraid with so little info.

I am not familiar with this vendor, can they supply images such as ASET and photographs? If not, I would seriously consider working with a vendor that can supply images and can help you make a good selection, check out the vendors below.

www.goodoldgold.com

www.whiteflash.com

www.engagementringsdirect.com

The depth and table really only give a chalk outline of the stone, even if the depth and table are within good range there is PLENTY that can go wrong and if you don't have images, no way of knowing what sort of diamond you will end up with.

www.jamesallen.com

With the depth and table ratios, normally we look for the table size being less than the depth but it isn't an absolute rule, a stone with a larger table can work if the angles and faceting are good and the crown height is there, here are some basic guidelines as used by our resident step cut expert Karl K, but do bear in mind they are suggestions and not a rule.

depth - 70% and below
table - 65% or less
crown height - 10% and above ( a Sarin or Helium scan can get this value)
polish and symmetry - preferably very good and above, ' good' symmetry needs careful evaluation to make sure there are no issues.

Lastly, if you like, give us an idea of your budget and other preferences and we could look around to see if there are any EC's that might suit you?

 

[outsidethebox]

Thanks for your reply. Honestly, until I started lurking around this site a couple days ago I didn''t realize that through an online diamond company one could view pictures of a potential diamond. When my huband bought my EC 8 years ago it was through this JewelryZone.com and he felt he received such excellent service that we automatically went back to that place this time. And truly, their customer service is remarkable. But we have not been offerend pics of the diamond. Nor do I think he has access to them. If I understand correctly, he buys them from what he calls a "cutter" who is in possession of the diamond now. Is this bad practice? I never thought of it before, but the owner himself has never seen the stone. Hmm....

Our budget is $6k and this diamond is going to cost $5800. There is a return policy.

Question though, I have also noticed much said about crown/pavillion percentages. How is that determined? Can I determine that % from the numbers I have?

Thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/22/2010 1:55:25 PM
Author: outsidethebox
Thanks for your reply. Honestly, until I started lurking around this site a couple days ago I didn''t realize that through an online diamond company one could view pictures of a potential diamond. When my huband bought my EC 8 years ago it was through this JewelryZone.com and he felt he received such excellent service that we automatically went back to that place this time. And truly, their customer service is remarkable. But we have not been offerend pics of the diamond. Nor do I think he has access to them. If I understand correctly, he buys them from what he calls a ''cutter'' who is in possession of the diamond now. Is this bad practice? I never thought of it before, but the owner himself has never seen the stone. Hmm....

Our budget is $6k and this diamond is going to cost $5800. There is a return policy.

Question though, I have also noticed much said about crown/pavillion percentages. How is that determined? Can I determine that % from the numbers I have?

Thanks!

Its quite likely the JewelryZone vendor gets the diamonds as many vendors do, from the virtual listings. This means the stone is owned by the cutting house/ supplier and is up for sale with many different vendors. This can give multiple vendors a shot at the sale without them having to invest in millions of dollars of inventory. The trouble with this is that if the vendor doesn''t physically see the stone and can''t provide images, that its a guessing game as to what the diamond is actually like, and for me when making a purchase of this magnitude, its too risky.

With the crown and pavilion angles, this relates more to round diamonds than fancy shapes.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi Melissa,
So sorry to hear about your diamond being lost.
We have a little guy too, and when he finds something valuable, it seems like his mission to hide it- or destroy it!

The table is the largest facet on the diamond- the flat one on top.

My advice would be to find a vendor that does have good digital photos of the stones they offer.

Personally, I don;t agree with the guidelines Lorelei posted- nor do I think it''s productive to micro- analyze these things.
You don''t have to become an expert on diamonds- which is not going to happen by reading an internet forum in any event- to successfully buy a really well cut stone, at a great price.
My advice is to expend your efforts researching and choosing your vendor.

 

[outsidethebox]

Can you all off the top of your head think of some good online places to look? I''ve looked on whiteflash and james allen. Any others?

Thank you!

 

[Rockdiamond]

HI Melissa,
As a seller myself, I can''t comment on other sellers.
But that is what I''d focus on, if I was a consumer.

 

[outsidethebox]

Ack! Sorry, I see some have been listed earlier. I''ll go and look now!

 

[emeraldlover1]

Hi Melissa. I think you can get a very simlar stone to your first one with virtually the same ratio and even get something a little bigger with your budget through one of the suggested vendors above. Just a quick search and it looks like ERD as access to a few in your price range with similar features. Of course I would call for pictures. I would never buy an EC without at least a few pictures from different angles or witout seeing it in person. Good luck!