Thoughts on this round??

[Axis091870]

Any thoughts on these stats? I know the table is large, but the spread is great and it faced quite nicely. The diamond is from a B&M, so I know the price isn''t as low as it could be online. Also, I apologize for not having the crown and pavilion angles- Thanks!

HRD Cert info:
Weight: 1.29
Color: E
Clarity: SI1
Depth: 57.5%
Table: 64%
Crown: 12%
Pavilion: 43%
Girdle: 2.5%
Cullet: None
Symmetry: Very Good
$8400

 

[Rhino]

Hi Axis,

Thanks for the question. You have a stone here that for the most part will be a heluva performer in direct light conditions but will more than likely suffer in diffuse light conditions due to too much head obstruction (blockage of light due to head shadow as you peer into the face). If you are after a stone that has better fire than brilliance (or has a more attractive appearance in direct light than diffuse light) these proportions will produce such a stone. There are sets of proportions that will get ya the best of both worlds though.

 

[valeria101]

Jonathan gets the in and out of it... but the cost still is the same as for ideal proportions H&A. Any reason why not ?

Have you see it ? That large table is not likely to hide whatever makes this one "SI1".

The idealistic options I was talking about are either this or this. Admitedly, the flat-er crown of the initial choice adds about 0.2 of a milimeter to the diameter - but that is really, really subtle IMO. If there was an 1.3 carat AGS0 with those grades around, the 10 points extra would make the size difference for what that matters.

 

[Axis091870]

Thanks for the replies- I really appreciate the info! I have seen it in person several times and like the way it performs. I''ve compared it to a few Tolkowsky cuts, and for some reason, just feel drawn to this stone... it does look great outdoors (in both sunny and overcast conditions- not sure if there''d be a difference) but does lack a bit in diffuse lighting as Rhino mentioned. I honestly think it''s the table size that I like... I''ve read a few posts about people thinking they''re "crazy" for liking a larger table, so I guess I shouldn''t be too concerned! As for its SI1 rating, it''s very eye clean. I''ve probably looked at a dozen or so SI1 stones in person from the top labs that had a HUGE variation in clarity.... I was honestly amazed at how obvious some of the inclusions looked on the stones (and how minor some of the others appeared), so I''m pretty happy with how this one looks. I''ve been doing so much research at this site, at GoodOldGold, and in person at several jewelers, but I may finally be at that realization point where all that really matters is if I like how the stone looks and if she''s gonna love it...


Anyway, thanks again for the input. This is a great site with some very helpful people.

Chris

 

[Patty]

What are the measurements on the stone?