Thoughts On This One?

[temple]

The specs are:
Round Cut
Weight: 1.21ct
Depth: 56.8%
Table: 65%
Crown: 29.5 degrees
Pavilion: 41.1 degrees
Girdle: Thing to slightly thick
Culet: 0.8%
Finish: Good/Good
Clarity: VVS2
Color: E
Fluorescence: None

GIA certified, quote is at $9500.

I''m scared of the table, but am a beginner. Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Kaleigh]

I think you made a mistake posting the depth and the table. Should be the other way around?

 

[bearman49]

I would stay away from this stone even if the numbers were backwards. Too deep or too shallow depending on which way you read the nubmers.

 

[temple]

No they''re correct.....probably not a good sign methinks?

 

[Kaleigh]

This one is a no go!!!

 

[Kaleigh]

Do you need help with internet vendors, or is this from a B&M?

 

[valeria101]

That about as good as a spready diamond can get... I think

It would be great to have an Ideal Scope image to look at given the unusual proportions (unusual relative to the AGS0 "usual" around here that is). The price tag is a bit much for "sight unseen" too.


I would expect that one to look a bit larger than an "ideal" cut of the same weight. But then, the girdle appears thicker and that might just "wipe out" any such advantage. What is the diameter ?

The price seem in line with F-VS1 H&A cut (which should present some advantage, unless your taste decides it does not). The color & clarity "drowp" would not make any difference to me. But that''s just me, of course.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 3/3/2005 8:38:32 PM
Author: kaleigh
I think you made a mistake posting the depth and the table. Should be the other way around?

either way the specs don''t look good on this one.don''t know which is worst 65% depth or table

 

[Maxine]

The table must be 65, based on crown angle and pavillion depth.....

 

[valeria101]

Since this set of numbers doesn''t have too many fans... Here''s why I didn''t say it''s "bad"

 

[Kaleigh]

DF,
I totally agree, just responded a little too quickly!! That trigger finger gets the best of me. You are absolutely right.!!!

 

[temple]

Guess I need to learn the "lingo" a little

That about as good as a spready diamond can get... I think

"Spready"? What dat mean?

It would be great to have an Ideal Scope image to look at given the unusual proportions (unusual relative to the AGS0 "usual" around here that is). The price tag is a bit much for "sight unseen" too.

I would expect that one to look a bit larger than an "ideal" cut of the same weight. But then, the girdle appears thicker and that might just "wipe out" any such advantage. What is the diameter ?

7.097 Girdle is 1.69%

The price seem in line with F-VS1 H&A cut (which should present some advantage, unless your taste decides it does not). The color & clarity "drowp" would not make any difference to me. But that''s just me, of course.

"Drwop"?

 

[temple]

B&M

 

[Maxine]

So, Ana it would have the spread or diameter of a diamond of what size????

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

The stone has a fairly good pavilion angle, which contributes to the return of white light, hence a very good score on that part of the HCA.

The crown however is extremely thin, with a very low crown angle, in order to get the table as small as possible, and still ending up with a way too large table. Result, almost no fire or scintillation.

On the other hand, with total depth being low, you have a higher diameter than with a well-cut stone, and it will definitely be noticeable, if you put it on a table up-side-down next to an ideal. If you will see that higher diameter in normal viewing conditions, remains a big question mark, since it is highly probably that light leakage around the girdle will make this stone look smaller than it actually is.

On top of that, GIA only gave it Good on Polish and on Symmetry, so one can expect negative effects on performance on account of both these issues.

Therefore, if cut (or light performance) is of any interest to you, I would not consider this stone. If however, you prefer to have the higher colour and clarity, and do not care about cut, then this might be a good choice for you.

Live long,

 

[valeria101]

Date: 3/3/2005 8:52:21 PM
Author: temple

''Spready''?

= diameter larger than expected for AGS0 proportions and given weight. In this case, diameter is 7mm and that corresponds to what one "ideal" round of 1.25cts should be. I didn''t know the actual size (=diameter) of your stone when I called it "spready". The relatively shallow cut doesn''t seem to have delivered a large-looking stone after all.



''Drwop''?
= typo (darn!), stand-in for "drop".


All in all, Paul says it all allot better than I could