The First Round of Possibilities

alechope · Oct 27, 2003

1) G, SI 1, 0.913 Ct.
Measurments 6.27 - 6.30 x 3.82 mm
Proportions
Depth 60.8%
Table 57%
Girdle 1.0-1.4F
Culet PT
Crown Angle 34.2
Pavilion Angle 40.9
Finish
Polish IDEAL
Symmetry IDEAL
Fluorescence N
$4280

2) H, SI 1, 0.88 Ct.
6.12x6.14x3.83
Depth 62.5
Table 57
Girdle Med to Sl. Thick., Faceted
Culet None
Crown Angle 35.0
Pavilion Angle 41.0
Finish
Polish Excellent
Symmetry Excellent
Fluorescence None
$3434

3) G, SI 1, 0.87 Ct.
6.12x6.14x3.78
Depth 62.0
Table 55
Girdle 1.47% - 2.12%
Culet 0.7%
Crown Angle 34.5
Pavilion Angle 40.6
Finish
Polish Ideal
Symmetry Ideal
Fluorescence None
$3860

alechope · Oct 27, 2003

And a couple more:

1)
Report: AGS
Shape: A Cut Above H&A
Carat: 0.852
Color: F
Clarity: SI1
Depth: 61.7
Table: 57
Crown Angle: 34.1
Crown %: 14.6
Pavilion Angle: 40.9
Pavilion %: 43.2
Girdle: 1.0%to1.6% Faceted
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Culet: Pointed
Fluorescence: Negligible
Measurements: 6.07-6.10X3.76
$3816

2)
Report: AGS
Shape: A Cut Above H&A
Carat: 0.970
Color: I
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 61
Table: 57
Crown Angle: 34.7
Crown %: 14.9
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Pavilion %: 42.9
Girdle: Faceted 0.8% to 1.3%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Culet: Pointed
Fluorescence: Negligible
Measurements: 6.39-6.40X3.90
$4258

3)
Color Grade G
Clarity Grade SI1
Weight 0.957
Measurments 6.31 - 6.34 x 3.92 mm
Proportions
Depth 61.9%
Table 56%
Girdle 0.9-1.7
Culet PT
Crown Angle 34.1
Pavilion Angle 41.0
Finish
Polish IDEAL
Symmetry IDEAL
Fluorescence N
$4588

Mara · Oct 27, 2003

Alot of choices there...what are your priorities and requirement criteria? e.g. is cut #1 priority or are you looking for the best balance between cost, cut and carat weight or ?? Telling us this may help us to give our two cents and have it be most relevant to what you are looking for.

Giangi · Oct 27, 2003

I really like the 0.970 I/VS 2 A Cut Above... Great numbers and it will face up just as big (or even bigger) as most 1 caraters...

magna2 · Oct 28, 2003

They all appear to be nice looking stones with very good cuts (all in the ideal range). However the numbers would suggest that the H/SI1 is less of a performer than the rest.

Not knowing what your main criterion is, it is hard to recommend one over the other. However, personnally, I would choose the 0.97 Ct ACA diamond.

alechope · Oct 28, 2003

I'm sorry, I stupidly forgot to include my criteria (from a previous thread) with this collection. Stupid of me!

Anyway, i apologize. I am looking for high, high quality, as my girlfriend's father is a gem grader for GIA (not that I wouldn't want to get a very nice stone for her, mind you -- it's just a bit different to know that well-trained eyes are going to be looking it over. I'm sure you understand!).

My budget is in the range of the stones -- between $4000 and $4500 -- and what I was looking for was one that would look really good -- a very nice cut -- that was pretty colorless (at least I, maybe H) and really eye clean (I have good vision, so even little visible inclusions bug me, plus then there's the discriminating father...), so at worst SI 1. The size? Something that looks nice and substantial -- ie, over 0.8 carats -- but I've got no particular hangups there.

Again, sorry for forgetting to add this to this new post. Thanks for the comments so far!

magna2 · Oct 28, 2003

If you are going for the highest quality, the choice would still be the 0.97 ct I/VS2 ACA diamond. With a VS2, you have less to worry about it not being eye-clean. Also, it gets you closest to 1 ct (it still is consider a 1 ct diamond since it falls within +/- 0.05 of 1 ct).

And with a ACA diamond, you are sure to get a nice H&A pattern to impress the future in-law.

ccuheartnurse · Oct 28, 2003

I'd choose the VS,I, .97. The price seems right & the stone fits your criteria perfectly. Remember, although your gf's father works for GIA, she doesnt. An I is probably going to be very white to her.

So, go ahead & order the diamond already! haha NOW you have to pick a ring.

Judy

canadiangrrl · Oct 28, 2003

My preference would be either of the G SI1's, or the I VS2. I wouldn't worry too much about an SI1 of this size.

aljdewey · Oct 28, 2003

If either of the G, SI stones are truly eyeclean, either of those would be my first pick. It's not a huge difference in price from the I stone and raises 2 color grades .... which may be very noticeable in her circle of family.

If not, then the .97 I, VS 2 would be my second choice.

I also concur that the numbers on the H, SI stone don't look as promising as the other stones.

alechope · Oct 28, 2003

Alright, I'm getting more info from the companies about both the G SI, 0.913 ct, and the I VS2 0.97 ct. diamonds.

I tend to lean towards the latter, since it looks pretty darn impressive in all areas save color, and with that well-cut of a diamond, the consensus here is that the color at I will be scarcely noticable, if at all. Right? And color has no affect on brilliance, fire, etc, yes?

I just have a feeling that in the long run, knowing it's a "1 ct. diamond" might just mean a bit more than knowing that it could've been faintly noticably whiter. Further comments from folks? You guys are so great.

Mara · Oct 28, 2003

Hmm well my two cents is to go with an ACA stone over a regular ideal. Why? Because as you note, her dad works for GIA..and a typical 'ideal' may not be something super special to him. However, something like a 'super ideal branded' A Cut Above stone may turn his head a bit. I'm not saying that regular 'ideal' stones are not as good as ACA's or anything like that...but from a 'perception' perspective, as you noted you are trying to really impress her dad with the stone you choose, doing something like that may make him think...wow this guy really went out and found an amazing stone and did his homework.

I think the 'I' will face up pretty white, esp in an ACA stone...PQ saw a J vs an H ACA and said that the difference was very minimal. So you should be fine with an 'I' and the HCA score is great, and the price is excellent. Plus then you have VS designation which is kind of fun too (e.g. nothing there for his grader eyes to pick up without mag!). Plus as others noted, you have the 'almost 1c' --it's definitely closer than all the other stones.

The G SI ACA stone looks pretty decent as well too, the HCA score was 1.5 though it got more VG's than EX's...probably due slightly to the pav angle--but if you want a G stone...and the ACA designation, that may be an option.

Lastly, have WF pull the stones you are considering and compare them to each other...Brian the Cutter does this with customers and there may be things he sees as positives or negatives in each stone, things that may help you make a decision if you decide an ACA stone.

Good luck..all seem like excellent stones, great eye!

alechope · Oct 28, 2003

Thanks for the the continuing help!

Will the fact that I'm going to have the stone set in yellow gold also tend to reduce how yellow the I color seems?

Mara · Oct 28, 2003

yes yellow gold will help mask a yellow tint to a stone....

alechope · Oct 28, 2003

I've got some pictures of the G / SI 1 stone. It looks pretty nice! I'm waiting on more information for the I / VS2, which apparently is returning from AGS soon. Thanks for the continuing aid!

alechope · Oct 28, 2003

more...

alechope · Oct 28, 2003

still more...

alechope · Oct 28, 2003

last..

pqcollectibles · Oct 28, 2003

Comments on the pics you posted.

I wouldn't worry about the inclusion. Keep in mind that is a magnified pic and no one wears a loupe over their diamond.

But,.... There is light leakage evident in the IS pic and a couple of the arrows aren't quite true. That diamond will probably be a good performer, but not the absolute best among the group you listed.

Go with the I ACA from White Flash. ACA's have next to no light leakage and perform beautifully. And, YES, an I color ACA will face up white even if you set it in white gold or platinum!

Hawkeye · Oct 28, 2003

Nice pictures!
PQCollectibles, I disagree with you on two points:
1) If you refer to the Ideal-Scope reference chart, this picture looks exactly like the one used as an example of excellent light return and 2) looking at the Ideal Scope picture, it seems evident that the arrows are "true", but appear the slightest bit off in the blue arrows picture probably because the stone was not placed 100% straight when taking the picture. Maybe the photographer felt rushed while trying to deliver within the 45 minute standard of this forum. LOL

Mara · Oct 28, 2003

The arrows look pretty darn good to me...how exactly are they 'not true'....maybe I am blind!

That stone looks very good!! Would love to see those pictures compared to the ACA you are considering to make further comparisons. Also agree that the SI inclusions are pretty darn good--won't be visible.

aljdewey · Oct 28, 2003

Maybe it's just the pic, but the top heart in the IS image looks a tad smaller than the others.....

spicolicpa · Oct 28, 2003

I think the Arrows in the blue pic looks skewed in the first pic but perfect in the second...might be the angle of the shot? ..Ask an expert though.

I am feeling a bit like a walking advertisment but for your peace of mind call Barry at Superbcerts and see what he has in your price range, I found value there.

I like your decision to go Ideal Cut and there is a proportionally enourmous amount available through this and related web-resources.

I have to chuckle about buying a diamond for the woman of your dreams that OH BTW is also a "almost" certified expert. Kinda ups the Antee a bit!

pqcollectibles · Oct 28, 2003

Well,.... I was referring to the arrows on the upper right hand side. Kinda 1:00 and 3:00 positions. The spear portions are a bit off center of the shaft part on those 2. Could be photography??

I remember seeing IS pics of other diamonds with discussions that "darker" was better. This IS pic is a bit on the "faded" side. If I am wrong, I stand corrected and do apologize for leading anyone in the wrong direction.

Mara · Oct 28, 2003

Its important to note that with IS images, lighting plays a huge part. I have seen IS images that look washed out when in fact the lighting was just very bright when the photo was taken. It's really hard to gauge from a picture of an IS in my opinion unless you know the light is consistent. Say across one vendor who takes IS images...like GOG or WF...their images would be easier to compare against each other rather than other vendors who may use different light sources.

So in these cases online when people post for comparison, I just look mostly for white leakage...since that is OBVIOUSLY not just the light!

pqcollectibles · Oct 28, 2003

Mara, you are always there to bail a poor soul out!

Lighting is most definitely a possibility on the IS pic! It is easier to compare when pics are done by one Vendor.

alechope · Oct 29, 2003

While I'm waiting on that VS2 / I, here's another stone:
Color Grade G
Clarity Grade SI1
Weight 0.957
Measurments
6.31 - 6.34 x 3.92 mm
Proportions
Depth 61.9%
Table 56%
Girdle 0.9-1.7
Culet PT
Crown Angle 34.1
Pavilion Angle 41.0
Finish
Polish IDEAL
Symmetry IDEAL
Fluorescence N
$4588

alechope · Oct 29, 2003

And the hearts...

alechope · Oct 29, 2003

The Ideal Scope & Arrows (I have more pics, but since there are getting to be a lot pictures on this thread, I'll not put them up unless y'all think I need to)

magna2 · Oct 29, 2003

----------------
On 10/29/2003 9:56:09 AM alechope wrote:

While I'm waiting on that VS2 / I, here's another stone:
Color Grade G
Clarity Grade SI1
Weight 0.957
Measurments
6.31 - 6.34 x 3.92 mm
Proportions
Depth 61.9%
Table 56%
Girdle 0.9-1.7
Culet PT
Crown Angle 34.1
Pavilion Angle 41.0
Finish
Polish IDEAL
Symmetry IDEAL
Fluorescence N
$4588----------------

The stone is nice but not a true H&A. So if you aim to impress, stick with a super ideal H&A diamond.

The First Round of Possibilities

Rough_Rock

Sponsored By:

Related topics:

Rough_Rock

Super_Ideal_Rock

Ideal_Rock

Shiny_Rock

Rough_Rock

Shiny_Rock

Brilliant_Rock

Brilliant_Rock

Ideal_Rock

Rough_Rock

Super_Ideal_Rock

Rough_Rock

Super_Ideal_Rock

Rough_Rock

Rough_Rock

Rough_Rock

Rough_Rock

Ideal_Rock

Rough_Rock

Super_Ideal_Rock

Ideal_Rock

Shiny_Rock

Ideal_Rock

Super_Ideal_Rock

Ideal_Rock

Rough_Rock

Rough_Rock

Rough_Rock

Shiny_Rock