The final two... (advice requested)

[Dummy_for_Diamonds]

Hi all,

Well, a month lurking on these forums did wonders. I''ve now found that I think I''m MORE comfortable with the internet vendors than B&M, as you have (at least the illusion of) much more control of the process.

So it''s getting ot be that time, and I think I''ve narrowed it down to two close stones.


Here''s stone A...

 

[Dummy_for_Diamonds]

and the stone A idealscope...

 

[Dummy_for_Diamonds]

Stone A''s a GIA cert, by the way.

And for stone B I''ve got detailed specs, but no idealscope...
Stone B is AGS cert,

Meas: 6.26 X6.43 x 3.81 (Is this too oval?)
weight: .92 ct

depth: 60.4%
table: 57%
girdle: thin to sthk, faceted .5% to 4.7% (too big??)
cul: pointed
pol/sym: VG/EX
Col: D
Clarity: VS2
Fluor: Neg.
Crown: 34.1 deg.
Pav: 40.1 deg

 

[Dummy_for_Diamonds]

So that''s the skinny. Both diamonds are a bit over $5k, (within 50 bucks of each other). I''ve found that in person, side-by-side I like the more colorless stones better-- Haven''t looked at a D, yet, but unless it was my eyes, I liked the E''s I''ve seen better than the F''s or G''s.

Any gotchas with these two? They seem like they''re great values, and should be beautiful stones. They''re coming into a local appraiser for me to look at soon, so any advice on what to look for in person would be welcome.

Thanks for you help and it''s been fun (I even got the "Baby''s first Idealscope" while I was at it! gotta love the toys).

--Josh

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/15/2005 5:08:28 PM
Author: Dummy_for_Diamonds


Any gotchas with these two?

NO

They''re great. Can''t wait to hear your impression. I would expect them to be very, very similar except perhaps for some fine ''personality'' details - just enough to make choice meaningful.

I wonder if color grades will still appear substantially different to you even on such well matched cuts.

 

[belle]

i am very curious to hear what you think of these two stones! please give us a report after you''ve compared them.

 

[strmrdr]

thats 2 strange stones.
honestly I dont like either one.
Pavilion is too shallow for ring use and the range is way too wide.
neither would make top grade by ags or gia.

 

[Dancing Fire]

stone A....looks like too much variation on the crown & pavil angles?

 

[Dummy_for_Diamonds]

When you say "variation" on the crown and pavilion angles -- does that mean that the report has a large margin of error, or does the actual stone vary from, e.g

crown angle 34.2 to
crown angle 35.7

--Josh

 

[strmrdr]

40.1 to 40.9 and 34.2 to 35.7 are very large and huge variations respectivaly.
The facets vary....

 

[Dummy_for_Diamonds]

Thanks Strm, that makes almost makes sense to me.

Sorry for living up to my moniker, but I''d like to try to get a geometrical picture of what that means-- does the girdle vary in thickness enough to make those different angles, or do adjacent facets on the crown (or pavilion) really have widely varing angles when they meet the girdle-- if the latter, does that mean there are rough spots where the facets don''t line up?

Thanks,
--Josh

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 11/15/2005 7:06:39 PM
Author: Dummy_for_Diamonds
Thanks Strm, that makes almost makes sense to me.

Sorry for living up to my moniker, but I'd like to try to get a geometrical picture of what that means-- does the girdle vary in thickness enough to make those different angles, or do adjacent facets on the crown (or pavilion) really have widely varing angles when they meet the girdle-- if the latter, does that mean there are rough spots where the facets don't line up?

Thanks,
--Josh

Actually, you thinking through this proves that you're not such a dummy.

The crown angles are measured at the 8 junctions where the main crown facets meet the girdle. The pavilion is treated similarly, measured where the main pavilion facets meet the girdle. I've attached a geometric picture of where those places are measured.

In this example, the crown angles average 34.5 with min and max of 34.4-34.6. The pavilion averages 41.0 with min and max of 40.9-41.1. In each case, the 'variance' between min and max is only .2 degrees. This is an example of an extremely, extremely close variance. Most diamonds range wider than this, which is not a problem if the variance is not huge and the opposites average... For instance, if the given angle was 34.5 and the min and max were 34.2-34.8: If those extremes were opposite each other on the diagram below they would 'average' out to 34.5 which is fine - as long as it was similar with other opposite pairs on the diagram.

All this said, 34.2-35.7 is indeed a huge variance, to the point that I wonder how accurate the scan was (especially as at least one facet strays far up into the 35.X zone. The ideal-scope looks ok, but I would have those numbers double-checked.

The symmetry grade indicates how well the facets meet each other and gives an idea of the external uniformity of the diamond.