The Search is On, Your Opinions Requested!

[LBasil]

Hi everyone!

After dreaming of a solitaire for many a moon, the time is finally here - I am quite excited, but also a little overwhelmed! After reading up on the 4 C''s

and spending a long time perusing the forums here, I think I am looking for an Ideal, I, S1 (or better, price permitting), 1.9+ Round stone. I''m trying to stick to a budget of $14K or less.

I have been concentrating on the inventory at James Allen, since they seem to have the most competitive pricing and are well liked at PS. I found this one earlier today (http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1254699.asp) with the following specifications:

Carat weight: 2.05
Cut: Ideal
Color: I
Clarity: SI1
Certificate: AGS

Depth: 61.9%
Table: 56.0%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: 1.5%-3.8%
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 8.17*8.14*5.05


Does this seem like a good choice? (I do have a concern that the certificate that they currently have up isn''t the correct one, but I can contact them about that and hope that the info listed is correct) Any input is welcome, and greatly appreciated!

 

[Lorelei]

Hi Basil,

Just fixing the link....

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1254699.asp

Yes the report is the wrong one, notify them and ask for the correct details then we can go from there.

 

[LBasil]

Hi Lorelei! Thanks for your reply, I have received the AGS report for this one, and see the following information:

AGS Ideal, I, SI, 2.057


Table 56.2%

Crown Angle 34.7

Pavilion Angle 40.9

Crown 15.2%

Pavilion 43.2%


Let me know if any additional information would be helpful


(Apparently both the GIA and AGS reports are for the same stone, which adds to my confusion a bit!)

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/20/2009 3:59:12 PM
Author: LBasil
Hi Lorelei! Thanks for your reply, I have received the AGS report for this one, and see the following information:

AGS Ideal, I, SI, 2.057


Table 56.2%

Crown Angle 34.7

Pavilion Angle 40.9

Crown 15.2%

Pavilion 43.2%


Let me know if any additional information would be helpful


(Apparently both the GIA and AGS reports are for the same stone, which adds to my confusion a bit!)

Looks good, if you could add the star and lower girdle facet percentages please that would help, also the grade setting inclusions such as clouds, feather etc.

 

[LBasil]

Thanks again, sorry for the bother - hopefully I can get all info in this time!

Star 53

Lower Girdle 74

I also see these numbers along the right hand side of the AGS report:

15.2% (Face)

1.5%

43.2%

The AGS report doesn''t have much regarding the inclusions, but the GIA indicates several crystals and a cloud, plus some needles closer to the edge.

 

[stone-cold11]

Looks promising. Request an Idealscope image from JA.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/20/2009 4:55:21 PM
Author: LBasil
Thanks again, sorry for the bother - hopefully I can get all info in this time!

Star 53

Lower Girdle 74

I also see these numbers along the right hand side of the AGS report:

15.2% (Face)

1.5%

43.2%

The AGS report doesn''t have much regarding the inclusions, but the GIA indicates several crystals and a cloud, plus some needles closer to the edge.

All looks good thank you and you are no bother! Idealscope is the next step.

 

[LBasil]

Hello!

I received the Idealscope image for this stone, and attached it to this post (let me know if there is a better way for everyone to view it)

It looks to me like a better than average cut, but I am not sure! We have until end of day tomorrow to decide. (I am planning on a plain solitaire band for the setting)

Thank you again in advance!

 

[outatouch0]

let me test what I believe I have learned here as PS and see if more experienced members concur

You need to see the "upside down" idealscope image to see the "hearts" which is a bit more crucial for the light return. Also, the hearts involve more facets therefore are more difficult to be done correctly.
Am I correct?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/25/2009 3:00:33 PM
Author: outatouch0
let me test what I believe I have learned here as PS and see if more experienced members concur

You need to see the 'upside down' idealscope image to see the 'hearts' which is a bit more crucial for the light return. Also, the hearts involve more facets therefore are more difficult to be done correctly.
Am I correct?

You are right, hearts images are taken face downwards and are used to judge the overall cut precision along with images of the arrows, one of the experts often says " its all in the hearts..." so these images are very important. Hearts and arrows patterning are created by top optical symmetry, this is not the same as lab graded physical symmetry. Also the overall proportions are very important, if these are within good range in particular the crown and pavilion angles, this is what drives the light return of a diamond. Also you can find some of the branded h&a diamonds we see routinely here have both top optical symmetry and very effective overall proportions. Conversely you can have diamonds where the optical symmetry isn't great and therefore don't show neat and precise h&a patterning, but if these stones have effective proportions the light return ( fire, brilliance, scintillation etc) can still be excellent. In order to get the best of both worlds the branded h&a offer not only top performance and visual h&a patterning.

Read more on h&a below. As you will notice, just because a diamond shows h&a patterning doesn't mean it will automatically be considered a " true" h&a cut.


http://diamonds.pricescope.com/hna.asp

Lbasil the IS image looks good!