thoughts on this stone

[Christina...]

Ok, I'm reluctant to post the report but I'll give you all the info. Am I going to have to worry about obstruction is will the c/p angles offset each other in this case?

depth 62.3
table 55
crown 36
pav 40.4

lgf 80
ugf50
polish vg
sym vg



EDIT: HCA is .9

 

[Dreamer_D]

Is this a modern RB?

I think you need an IS or see it in person. It looks like it is an FIC, which means lots of fire and less white light return. THe longer lgf might help out with the possible under table issues. Good potential.

 

[yssie]

Ok, I'm reluctant to post the report but I'll give you all the info. Am I going to have to worry about obstruction is will the c/p angles offset each other in this case?

depth 62.3
table 55
crown 36
pav 40.4

lgf 80
ugf50
polish vg
sym vg



EDIT: HCA is .9

Ags of report? GIA I assume.
Clarity? Post plot diagram if lower than VS

Trouble is GIA rounds crown to 0.5deg and pav up to 0.2deg. If this stone is a 36.3/40.4 avg with tight variance it could be a beauty - exactly my kind of stone! If they rounded both crown and pav up though, or those averages represent a large range of measurements around the stone, it might not be a winner after all. And you know that we need more info to be able to say anything about that

ETA: I agree w/ Dreamer - best to see this thing in person. Disagree re LGF - I would much rather shorter in this case, and have more pav surface area at a steeper angle.

ETA: that 50 is star - GIA does not specify UGF - unless you have a scan?

 

[Christina...]

Yep, it's a MRB. I was thinking the same with the lgf but it's a GIA stone so it could be as low as 77.5 right? I prefer fire to white return but I do NOT want a dark stone. I suppose most of my viewing will be at half an arms length anyway, so may not be an issue.

Mostly I was just wondering if it was worth an IS, trying to buckle down and settle on something. Garrys article and the subsequent agreement but others has got me thinking I should move on something sooner rather than later!

 

[Christina...]

Ok, I'm reluctant to post the report but I'll give you all the info. Am I going to have to worry about obstruction is will the c/p angles offset each other in this case?

depth 62.3
table 55
crown 36
pav 40.4

lgf 80
ugf50
polish vg
sym vg



EDIT: HCA is .9

Ags of report? GIA I assume.
Clarity? Post plot diagram if lower than VS

Trouble is GIA rounds crown to 0.5deg and pav up to 0.2deg. If this stone is a 36.3/40.4 avg with tight variance it could be a beauty - exactly my kind of stone! If they rounded both crown and pav up though, or those averages represent a large range of measurements around the stone, it might not be a winner after all. And you know that we need more info to be able to say anything about that

I actually thought of you while I was checking it out. I was doing some research and saw that you preferred a higher crown and shallower pav. I prefer a stone with lots of color too. I'll post the report minus the number....things seem to be getting snatched up and inventory seems a bit low lately. It actually looks like a good SI2 but I'll wait to get your opinion.


report coming right up!

 

[Christina...]

sorry for the delay, had some trouble posting.

edit: removed more info, really worried about lurkers!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Longer lgf might not be the ideal in terms of making it an FIC, but in my experience longer lgf makes for a brighter looking stone -- less "dark" arrows and so less contrast, but more white light looking overall. That could compensate for the other features. But this is all mostly nit picking. You need an IS and see it in person to know how you feel about it. If it is a GIA Ex then most likely it is fine

ETA; Just saw its a VG and an SI2. Proceed with caution, get all necessary information. This is a riskier prospect. I would also say don't rush based on pricing scares.

 

[Christina...]

Ok, I'm reluctant to post the report but I'll give you all the info. Am I going to have to worry about obstruction is will the c/p angles offset each other in this case?

depth 62.3
table 55
crown 36
pav 40.4

lgf 80
ugf50
polish vg
sym vg



EDIT: HCA is .9

Ags of report? GIA I assume.
Clarity? Post plot diagram if lower than VS

Trouble is GIA rounds crown to 0.5deg and pav up to 0.2deg. If this stone is a 36.3/40.4 avg with tight variance it could be a beauty - exactly my kind of stone! If they rounded both crown and pav up though, or those averages represent a large range of measurements around the stone, it might not be a winner after all. And you know that we need more info to be able to say anything about that

ETA: I agree w/ Dreamer - best to see this thing in person. Disagree re LGF - I would much rather shorter in this case, and have more pav surface area at a steeper angle.

ETA: that 50 is star - GIA does not specify UGF - unless you have a scan?

oops! I meant star.

 

[Christina...]

Longer lgf might not be the ideal in terms of making it an FIC, but in my experience longer lgf makes for a brighter looking stone -- less "dark" arrows and so less contrast, but more white light looking overall. That could compensate for the other features. But this is all mostly nit picking. You need an IS and see it in person to know how you feel about it. If it is a GIA Ex then most likely it is fine

ETA; Just saw its a VG and an SI2. Proceed with caution, get all necessary information. This is a riskier prospect. I would also say don't rush based on pricing scares.

The VG was my concern as well, the SI2 less so, but I think I might go ahead and as for the IS and an evaluation. Do you think that it would make sense in this case to get a sarin too?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Longer lgf might not be the ideal in terms of making it an FIC, but in my experience longer lgf makes for a brighter looking stone -- less "dark" arrows and so less contrast, but more white light looking overall. That could compensate for the other features. But this is all mostly nit picking. You need an IS and see it in person to know how you feel about it. If it is a GIA Ex then most likely it is fine

ETA; Just saw its a VG and an SI2. Proceed with caution, get all necessary information. This is a riskier prospect. I would also say don't rush based on pricing scares.

The VG was my concern as well, the SI2 less so, but I think I might go ahead and as for the IS and an evaluation. Do you think that it would make sense in this case to get a sarin too?

The IS and your own eyes will tell the tale, but if they can get a sarin it does not hurt.

 

[Christina...]

I think it might actually be an ogi, not sure, but either way, I'm sure the IS will give me the info that I really need, along with the evaluation. Guess all I can do now is keep my fingers crossed. Cross yours too ok?

 

[Laila619]

Hi Christina,

I have a diamond almost exactly like this one, with a small table, high crown (36.4 degrees) and shallow pav (40.4). It is a real sparkly little fire ball, but every once in a while it does look a little darkish. I think you should request an Idealscope and see what it looks like. Could be a real beauty.

 

[Christina...]

Thanks Laila! I just emailed with a request for images. Yah! I really like a stone with lots of fire, so I'm hoping that this might be the one. The spread is a bit smaller than what I really wanted but, I'm not sure that I will really see the difference. I was hoping to get closer to 7mm and this one is about 6.8mm. someone told me that's about the difference of two sheets of copy paper, so visually probably not a big enough difference to not proceed if it comes back with a good IS.

 

[yssie]

Thanks Laila! I just emailed with a request for images. Yah! I really like a stone with lots of fire, so I'm hoping that this might be the one. The spread is a bit smaller than what I really wanted but, I'm not sure that I will really see the difference. I was hoping to get closer to 7mm and this one is about 6.8mm. someone told me that's about the difference of two sheets of copy paper, so visually probably not a big enough difference to not proceed if it comes back with a good IS.

I have my fingers crossed too!

The inclusions by the girdle at the edge of the kite facet are perfectly placed to cover with a prong, the ones under the star not so - so when you look at it in-person those are the ones you'll want to worry about re. clean to your specifications. The report pic is too low-res on my screen to tell what they are - just looks like a blob to me!

With the small table & high crown you've got a bit more crown height than other stones - these types do usually face up a bit smaller than other proportions types. Me, I'm happy to sacrifice a wee bit of spread for the coloured light, I adore stones like this

 

[Dancing Fire]

Thanks Laila! I just emailed with a request for images. Yah! I really like a stone with lots of fire, so I'm hoping that this might be the one. The spread is a bit smaller than what I really wanted but, I'm not sure that I will really see the difference. I was hoping to get closer to 7mm and this one is about 6.8mm. someone told me that's about the difference of two sheets of copy paper, so visually probably not a big enough difference to not proceed if it comes back with a good IS.

about 1.21ct? i love these kind of specs.. don't see one everyday.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Thanks Laila! I just emailed with a request for images. Yah! I really like a stone with lots of fire, so I'm hoping that this might be the one. The spread is a bit smaller than what I really wanted but, I'm not sure that I will really see the difference. I was hoping to get closer to 7mm and this one is about 6.8mm. someone told me that's about the difference of two sheets of copy paper, so visually probably not a big enough difference to not proceed if it comes back with a good IS.

about 1.21ct? i love these kind of specs.. don't see one everyday.

No not that one, but Christina I think you should look at the one DF is talking about.

 

[Christina...]

DF: Yes it's a 1.2

Yssie: It was just confirmed to be an exception SI2, the inclusions are well to the outside and prongable and the one on the table is well hidden, I should not see anything from within 4-6 inches. (my definition lol) I just sent a list of things for the GG to address for me, specific if the stone will have any obstructions issues and if so from what distance. I also asked that they clarify why it was graded very good by GIA because it appears to be within (barely) AGS criteria for excellent,of course different grading criteria but if I'm missing something obvious, I want to know. I also asked for a sarin and was told yes that they could get me one but it might hold up the idealscope image and the further evaluation of the stone and that he didn't feel a sarin was necessary given that I would receive the other two. I'm still worried though because of how GIA rounds the numbers and it appears that this stone could go either way...thoughts?

Dreamer: I'm not sure which one DF is talking about...did I miss something? EDIT: oh wait...was he talking about lailas stone and you wanted me to take a look at Lailas first? I'm sorry I thought that DF was saying that he liked the specs on the one I posted...been a long day, I'm wiped!

 

[ariel144]

Christina,
I have no knowledge of all those numbers and facet %'s etc. on RB"s, but I do recall a video that Jon did on GOG on RB's and he did state that the difference from EX to VG is so very slight. Seems it was one of his very early videos on choosing a RB diamond and looking at the HCA and he showed how some low HCA scores were not necessarily the best performing stones...there is an angle (?) or something that GIA does not measure that they have found to be integral to determining a great performing RB and that is what they look for in the GOG lab.

That guy does more for educating consumers on diamonds than anyone on the planet. Want to buy from him when I'm ready.

Hope this is the one for you.

 

[Dreamer_D]

DF: Yes it's a 1.2


Dreamer: I'm not sure which one DF is talking about...did I miss something? EDIT: oh wait...was he talking about lailas stone and you wanted me to take a look at Lailas first? I'm sorry I thought that DF was saying that he liked the specs on the one I posted...been a long day, I'm wiped!

JA has two almost identical diamonds for sale, the one you like and are asking about here that is 1.2ct and another of almost identical specs that is 1.21ct that DF likes. You should look at both of them. The one DF likes is $400 more but the inclusions look good and the cut jus tas promising IMO.

 

[Christina...]

Christina,
I have no knowledge of all those numbers and facet %'s etc. on RB"s, but I do recall a video that Jon did on GOG on RB's and he did state that the difference from EX to VG is so very slight. Seems it was one of his very early videos on choosing a RB diamond and looking at the HCA and he showed how some low HCA scores were not necessarily the best performing stones...there is an angle (?) or something that GIA does not measure that they have found to be integral to determining a great performing RB and that is what they look for in the GOG lab.

That guy does more for educating consumers on diamonds than anyone on the planet. Want to buy from him when I'm ready.

Hope this is the one for you.

I'm not as hung up on the fact that it's a VG cut as I am that the angles are unique and with GIA current grading system, it could fall in either direction...spectacular...or ho hum. Some GIA EX are crap and some VG are worth an extra look, so with caution I've started looking at other cut grades and decided not panic about what the report says. However, there are A LOT of crappy VG out there too and a year ago I wouldn't have been able to spot the differences, it's arguable if I can now, . So I guess if I was a first time buyer I would be much more comfortable with GIA ex or AGS0, but now I'm looking for a bargain, so I thought I'd spread my wings some.

 

[Christina...]

DF: Yes it's a 1.2


Dreamer: I'm not sure which one DF is talking about...did I miss something? EDIT: oh wait...was he talking about lailas stone and you wanted me to take a look at Lailas first? I'm sorry I thought that DF was saying that he liked the specs on the one I posted...been a long day, I'm wiped!

JA has two almost identical diamonds for sale, the one you like and are asking about here that is 1.2ct and another of almost identical specs that is 1.21ct that DF likes. You should look at both of them. The one DF likes is $400 more but the inclusions look good and the cut jus tas promising IMO.

The one with the shallower crown? or steeper pav? the shallower crown one was snatched up.

 

[Dancing Fire]

DF: Yes it's a 1.2


Dreamer: I'm not sure which one DF is talking about...did I miss something? EDIT: oh wait...was he talking about lailas stone and you wanted me to take a look at Lailas first? I'm sorry I thought that DF was saying that he liked the specs on the one I posted...been a long day, I'm wiped!

JA has two almost identical diamonds for sale, the one you like and are asking about here that is 1.2ct and another of almost identical specs that is 1.21ct that DF likes. You should look at both of them. The one DF likes is $400 more but the inclusions look good and the cut jus tas promising IMO.

DD
i didn't know there was a 1.21ct with almost the same identical specs.. i was just guessing the weight on Christina's stone..

 

[Dancing Fire]

DF: Yes it's a 1.2

Yssie: It was just confirmed to be an exception SI2, the inclusions are well to the outside and prongable and the one on the table is well hidden, I should not see anything from within 4-6 inches. (my definition lol) I just sent a list of things for the GG to address for me, specific if the stone will have any obstructions issues and if so from what distance. I also asked that they clarify why it was graded very good by GIA because it appears to be within (barely) AGS criteria for excellent,of course different grading criteria but if I'm missing something obvious, I want to know. I also asked for a sarin and was told yes that they could get me one but it might hold up the idealscope image and the further evaluation of the stone and that he didn't feel a sarin was necessary given that I would receive the other two. I'm still worried though because of how GIA rounds the numbers and it appears that this stone could go either way...thoughts?

Dreamer: I'm not sure which one DF is talking about...did I miss something? EDIT: oh wait...was he talking about lailas stone and you wanted me to take a look at Lailas first? I'm sorry I thought that DF was saying that he liked the specs on the one I posted...been a long day, I'm wiped!

i do.. i'm a sucker for small table with an high crown = lots of "FIRE"..

 

[Christina...]

DF: Yes it's a 1.2

Yssie: It was just confirmed to be an exception SI2, the inclusions are well to the outside and prongable and the one on the table is well hidden, I should not see anything from within 4-6 inches. (my definition lol) I just sent a list of things for the GG to address for me, specific if the stone will have any obstructions issues and if so from what distance. I also asked that they clarify why it was graded very good by GIA because it appears to be within (barely) AGS criteria for excellent,of course different grading criteria but if I'm missing something obvious, I want to know. I also asked for a sarin and was told yes that they could get me one but it might hold up the idealscope image and the further evaluation of the stone and that he didn't feel a sarin was necessary given that I would receive the other two. I'm still worried though because of how GIA rounds the numbers and it appears that this stone could go either way...thoughts?

Dreamer: I'm not sure which one DF is talking about...did I miss something? EDIT: oh wait...was he talking about lailas stone and you wanted me to take a look at Lailas first? I'm sorry I thought that DF was saying that he liked the specs on the one I posted...been a long day, I'm wiped!

i do.. i'm a sucker for small table with an high crown = lots of "FIRE"..

YAH!! I was hoping that you would come back and clarify. I'm waiting on the sarin, IS and evaluation, though I've already been told that it's an exceptional SI2! Do you think that it got knocked by GIA because of the crown angle? They base their score on the worst measurement correct?

 

[chon79]

Looks like a nice stone Christina! I am hoping for alot of fire in my BGD diamond

 

[Dancing Fire]

DF: Yes it's a 1.2

Yssie: It was just confirmed to be an exception SI2, the inclusions are well to the outside and prongable and the one on the table is well hidden, I should not see anything from within 4-6 inches. (my definition lol) I just sent a list of things for the GG to address for me, specific if the stone will have any obstructions issues and if so from what distance. I also asked that they clarify why it was graded very good by GIA because it appears to be within (barely) AGS criteria for excellent,of course different grading criteria but if I'm missing something obvious, I want to know. I also asked for a sarin and was told yes that they could get me one but it might hold up the idealscope image and the further evaluation of the stone and that he didn't feel a sarin was necessary given that I would receive the other two. I'm still worried though because of how GIA rounds the numbers and it appears that this stone could go either way...thoughts?

Dreamer: I'm not sure which one DF is talking about...did I miss something? EDIT: oh wait...was he talking about lailas stone and you wanted me to take a look at Lailas first? I'm sorry I thought that DF was saying that he liked the specs on the one I posted...been a long day, I'm wiped!

i do.. i'm a sucker for small table with an high crown = lots of "FIRE"..

YAH!! I was hoping that you would come back and clarify. I'm waiting on the sarin, IS and evaluation, though I've already been told that it's an exceptional SI2! Do you think that it got knocked by GIA because of the crown angle? They base their score on the worst measurement correct?

i don't know maybe other members can explain the GIA rule.