Thoughts on this 1.40 ct (60% table)

[c87]

Hi --

1.40 GIA, G, SI1, Excellent, appx 7.3 mm

Depth: 59.7%
Table: 60%
Crown Angle: 33.0°
Crown Height: 13.0%
Pavilion Angle: 41.0°
Pavilion Depth: 43.5%
Star Length: 50%
Lower Half: 80%
Girdle: Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted (3.5%)

I have heard good and bad things about a 60% table and I'm curious to see where this one falls. You guys are the pros with numbers, so I wanted to see your opinions on this 60% table diamond. From what I've read, the members of this forum generally prefer 53-57% tables.

 

[c-k]

I happen to like a 60/60 type stone, but I would recommend anyone see it in person in all light, bright, spot, sun, dim etc...I have one and love it. I would be sure to also compare to a more Ideal cut stone. Many don't like these stones, you may or may not. The HCA shows it at 1.4 so has potential.

 

[c87]

I happen to like a 60/60 type stone, but I would recommend anyone see it in person in all light, bright, spot, sun, dim etc...I have one and love it. I would be sure to also compare to a more Ideal cut stone. Many don't like these stones, you may or may not. The HCA shows it at 1.4 so has potential.

Thanks, do you think the HCA should provide some comfort that this will be a "good" 60/60 stone? Any 60/60 bad characteristics that I should look for when viewing this specific diamond? Thanks.

 

[c87]

Very close to getting this, sight unseen (with return policy, of course). Now, I just don't want to lose sleep!

 

[Andelain]

Very close to getting this, sight unseen (with return policy, of course). Now, I just don't want to lose sleep!

When you do, take it someplace that has AGS0 stones and compare. Hearts on Fire, Jared Peerless, etc.

 

[c87]

So, HCA yields a score under 2, the diamond falls into AGS Ideal (based on tables), the GIA cut is excellent. Presumably, is there really anything that should disappoint me?

 

[c-k]

So, HCA yields a score under 2, the diamond falls into AGS Ideal (based on tables), the GIA cut is excellent. Presumably, is there really anything that should disappoint me?

The GIA cut of excellent, the facets are averaged, then all the numbers rounded, that is why you need to see the stone in person. A good return policy is important.

 

[marymm]

So, HCA yields a score under 2, the diamond falls into AGS Ideal (based on tables), the GIA cut is excellent. Presumably, is there really anything that should disappoint me?

Likely, no, nothing should disappoint you, but maybe - in no small part it depends on you, your expectations, your diamond knowledge, and the degree to which you will inspect this diamond. I think it will be a beautiful stone with a solid performance. But you should still inspect it closely from every angle, and in all the various lighting conditions the stone will likely be in (especially your house and workplace).

Each diamond is unique, even if the numbers are exactly the same - you may find this 60/60 diamond is gorgeous to your eyes in every light; or you may find although you love white light return, you don't prefer it over fire (60/60s tend to show more white light return and less fire, relatively speaking, as opposed to Tolkolwsky ideal-cuts which show a balance of white light and fire); similarly, you may find you prefer the profile of a diamond with a smaller table and higher crown than 60/60s have; or even that this particular star/lower girdle facet combo is not to your preference.

High probability this will be a bright and brilliant stone with great spread - you can always have an independent appraiser look at it and give you a professional and objective opinion.

(All that said, I love me a well-cut 60/60 - I do have a slight preference for light return over fire and I appreciate the greater face-up size)

 

[c87]

Thank you! I used the picture below (from another thread) as sort of a guide as to what I could expect from a 60/60 stone compared to a modern ideal cut. The 60/60 is on the left. I showed my girlfriend and after studying both, she said she preferred the light return of the left-most diamond. NOW, I'm hoping the diamond I receive looks as good as the one below because in my opinion, it's a gorgeous looking diamond.

Another question, should the setting affect light performance? The setting I have chosen is a 3 sided pave with a 4-pronged basket.

 

[Ashleigh]

You can't use a single picture to determine what flavor of diamond your gf likes. You need to compare diamonds in different lighting conditions. Since you can't really go to a jewelry store and borrow their diamonds for comparison in different lighting environments, it's best to go with a vendor who is willing to compare diamonds of different flavor for you in a video so that you can decide.

 

[c87]

You can't use a single picture to determine what flavor of diamond your gf likes. You need to compare diamonds in different lighting conditions. Since you can't really go to a jewelry store and borrow their diamonds for comparison in different lighting environments, it's best to go with a vendor who is willing to compare diamonds of different flavor for you in a video so that you can decide.

Understood, the point was to more or less draw a high-level conclusion on large table diamonds vs. modern ideal cut diamonds based on what I have read on this forum (large table = more light return, wider spread vs modern ideal = more fire, contrast).

 

[marymm]

Thank you! I used the picture below (from another thread) as sort of a guide as to what I could expect from a 60/60 stone compared to a modern ideal cut. The 60/60 is on the left. I showed my girlfriend and after studying both, she said she preferred the light return of the left-most diamond. NOW, I'm hoping the diamond I receive looks as good as the one below because in my opinion, it's a gorgeous looking diamond.

Another question, should the setting affect light performance? The setting I have chosen is a 3 sided pave with a 4-pronged basket.

OP - a setting should not affect a well-cut diamond - in particular 4-prong basket heads are quite open and will not affect performance.

And, just my opinion, I do think your pic above showing a 60/60 and Tolkowlsky side-by-side is pretty spot-on in showing the face-up difference in that specific lighting environment between those 2 specific diamonds... that said, it is a single static photograph and doesn't actually show your diamond, so it is really smart you are having the stone sent to you loose so you can confirm it performs well and that you and your GF find it pleasing to the eye. Good luck, and I hope you post pics of the stone once it is in your hands!

 

[c87]

Thanks a lot, everyone! Another question: based on the specs in my original post, is the fish-eye effect a concern here? I can't quite tell based on my research what criteria a fish-eye effect diamond would fall into?

Is this something the GIA would notice and downgrade for?

 

[ame]

I am someone who would NOT go for a 60% table. Anything above a 57% is, for me, an immediate rejection. I also don't usually take a GIA Excellent grade very seriously, as their net for what falls into "Excellent" is HUGE. I prefer to look at the angles.

 

[c87]

I have a loupe, but is there another tool or tools I should invest in before I receive the diamond? I guess I'm more concerned of it being mind clean and eye clean right now haha!! Or, is a loupe and a keen eye sufficient?

 

[treasurehunter]

No fisheye concern pavilion depth causes fish eye , table enhances that effect but the pav depth is fine

 

[c87]

So, I found a diamond on JA that has very similar specs and angles to the one I will get, and I had a question about the black circle that appears in the center of the table. Is this normal? Also, is this a "fair" representation of how mine will perform visually? Yeah, I know this is a mass-generalization, but just wondering.

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.30-carat-f-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-89274

 

[c87]

Am I correct in thinking that a 60% table isn't likely to yield hearts and arrows like an ideal Tolk cut?

 

[c87]

Sorry, I keep posting as I thoughts come up, but are feathers shown on this GIA report (I cant quite tell) and if so, are they in places where durability would be a concern?

 

[c87]

Update: I received the diamond. I absolutely love it. Very bright, a ton of brilliance, and the picture I posted earlier is a fair representation of a 60% table for sure. BUT, when the diamond is closer than appx 8 inches away and I move it back and forth slightly, some inclusion is catching my eye. It's not that easy to see.

Now, I'm wondering if I want to give up everything I love about it and hunt for an VS2. I thoroughly love it and LOVE the 60% table. You guys/gals have any advice so an inclusion like this? It doesn't really drive me nuts, and you have to be looking for it. However, it is in the table. I can see how someone could say it is eye clean vs not eye clean.

Otherwise, it is stunning, white, brilliant. I don't want to give it up! Question is will it drive me or my gf nuts (I think it will bug me more, haha).

 

[MarionC]

Update: I received the diamond. I absolutely love it. Very bright, a ton of brilliance, and the picture I posted earlier is a fair representation of a 60% table for sure. BUT, when the diamond is closer than appx 8 inches away and I move it back and forth slightly, some inclusion is catching my eye. It's not that easy to see.

Now, I'm wondering if I want to give up everything I love about it and hunt for an VS2. I thoroughly love it and LOVE the 60% table. You guys/gals have any advice so an inclusion like this? It doesn't really drive me nuts, and you have to be looking for it. However, it is in the table. I can see how someone could say it is eye clean vs not eye clean.

Otherwise, it is stunning, white, brilliant. I don't want to give it up! Question is will it drive me or my gf nuts (I think it will bug me more, haha).

One thing I've noticed...once I have a diamond in-hand I often fall in love. You open the box, see the beauty and there you are. We get so attached to that one stone.
Maybe a little window shopping around town, diamond in tow. See if it's "the best", then you can make up your mind completely, once and for all.

 

[c87]

These were taken with a phone, albeit one with a great camera, but let me know your thoughts if you can draw any conclusions. The inclusion that I referred to is in the table (dark crystal perhaps). She loves it, ,and really doesn't think the inclusion is too big of deal (to be honest, i have had some trouble spotting it out of office type lighting and at 10 inches it disappears even knowing it's there). Her criteria are size, and shine of course.

The only other concern I had was the "additional clouds not shown" on the GIA report. Now I haven't noticed any when viewing with loupe but want to make certain I'm not overlooking an hazy diamond.

EDIT: I'm sure there are fingerprints all over it.

 

[JulieN]

So, I found a diamond on JA that has very similar specs and angles to the one I will get, and I had a question about the black circle that appears in the center of the table. Is this normal?

The black circle gets bigger as the pavilion angle gets steeper, or as the table gets bigger.

Your stone looks fine, doesn't look like it has any major problems, so long as you paid less for it than a Tolkowsky style with tight symmetry.

I think it is very funny your first picture the focus is on "TAX RETURN"

 

[c87]

So, I found a diamond on JA that has very similar specs and angles to the one I will get, and I had a question about the black circle that appears in the center of the table. Is this normal?

The black circle gets bigger as the pavilion angle gets steeper, or as the table gets bigger.

Your stone looks fine, doesn't look like it has any major problems, so long as you paid less for it than a Tolkowsky style with tight symmetry.

I think it is very funny your first picture the focus is on "TAX RETURN"

I paid $10.8 k. We compared some 60/60 stones (online pictures) vs. Tolkowsky, and she generally preferred the brightness of the 60/60 and that's exactly how I'd describe the one I received. I'm not sure the inclusion is enough to drive me up to VS2 (i'd rather not keep playing roulette with SI1s) and sacrifice size (perhaps going down to 1.30 range). I know it wouldn't be a great size difference, but I think we're cheating our main search criteria if we keep knocking down size (started at 1.5). Granted, the diameter on my stone of 7.28 is comparable to a 1.5 face up.

Oh, and the tax refund wasn't as much as the diamond

 

[JulieN]

Congrats!

 

[Mainer]

This has been a really helpful post for me. I had some of the same questions.