thoughts on this report?

[nholagi]

https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=2195763607&s=1550761830055

hi, I don't have any other images other than this report. I know everyone here like images and all but without those, can you comment on these number?
thanks.

 

[skypie]

Doesn't look great. Table is a tad big at 58% and the pavilion angle is too steep...also may be a touch deep too.

 

[lovedogs]

https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=2195763607&s=1550761830055

hi, I don't have any other images other than this report. I know everyone here like images and all but without those, can you comment on these number?
thanks.

I wouldn't go with this. Angles aren't complimentary, and the Pav angle is over 41 which isn't recommended. Especially without more images, this is a no.

 

[nholagi]

Thanks @lovedogs and @skypie. that's also what I though, I just needed a confirmation.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

It's a little unusual to see a diamond of high internal clarity with an external characteristic as prominent as the indented natural. It will likely be quite eye-visible if not covered by a prong. Bezel setting would be a good choice for a diamond like this.

 

[blueMA]

It's a little unusual to see a diamond of high internal clarity with an external characteristic as prominent as the indented natural. It will likely be quite eye-visible if not covered by a prong. Bezel setting would be a good choice for a diamond like this.

Yes unusual indeed. That IN will look like a big chip. So clear otherwise, except clouds are not shown.