Thoughts please?

[Questioneer]

Hi guys,

I am in the process of shopping for a diamond and came across one that I thought I liked. Here are the specs:

1.20 carats
I SI1 EX/EX/EX
depth: 61.0%
table: 57.0%
crown angle: 35.0
pavilion angle: 40.6
fluorescence: none

Can you guys let me know what you think?

I called the vendor and he is in the process of obtaining the Idealscope and ASET but in the meantime, he also suggested this stone to me:

1.28 carats
I VS2 EX/EX/EX
depth: 60.7%
table: 58%
crown angle: 34.0
pavilion angle: 41.2
fluorescence: faint

He has both the Idealscope and ASET for the second diamond so I am attaching them.

Any feedback is much appreciated! Thanks!

 

[Questioneer]

Idealscope

 

[Questioneer]

ASET

 

[stone-cold11]

Very slight leakage I think, looks good.

 

[jet2ks]

Ditto Stone Cold.

From the ASET it looks like it might be very tightly cut (little angle variation), which helps the overall performance. I also don''t think the very slight leakage would be in any way detectable to the naked eye.

 

[Questioneer]

Hi, thanks so much for the replies Stone-cold11 and jet2ks.

The vendor has supplied me with the Idealscope and ASET for the FIRST diamond. Can someone please tell me how they compare to the ones I''ve already posted (for the second diamond)? Theoretically, which diamond, based on the numbers provided, should perform better? The first diamond scores less than a 2 on HCA while the second diamond scores a 3.

Thank you so much!

 

[Questioneer]

ASET for first diamond.

 

[Questioneer]

Idealscope for first diamond.

 

[stone-cold11]

The first IS/ASET is better.

 

[Lorelei]

I prefer the first diamond.

 

[Questioneer]

Thank Stone-cold11 and Lorelei for your help!

Do you think the stone with the first set of Idealscope and ASET images is nice enough to purchase or should I keep looking? It scored a 3 on the HCA.

I thought the numbers on the other stone were better (and it scored a 0.9 on the HCA) but I guess that doesn''t always translate into a better diamond.

Thank so much!

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

Say again, these first two pics were for the diamond with the 41.2°-angle?

 

[Questioneer]

Date: 12/8/2009 9:24:17 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp
Say again, these first two pics were for the diamond with the 41.2°-angle?

Hi Paul-Antwerp,

yes, the first set of images are for the one with the following specs:

1.28 carats
I VS2 EX/EX/EX
depth: 60.7%
table: 58%
crown angle: 34.0
pavilion angle: 41.2
fluorescence: faint

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

ASET-pics are of such quality that they cannot be used for evaluation.

 

[Questioneer]

Hi, can you please clarify on why they''re not of a good enough quality for evaluation? Is it because they''re too small or is it something else?

 

[Paul-Antwerp]

They are not photographed correctly. One can consider symmetry, but not leakage, nor the correctness of red and green, I am afraid.

 

[Karl_K]

Date: 12/8/2009 9:24:17 AM
Author: Paul-Antwerp
Say again, these first two pics were for the diamond with the 41.2°-angle?

Actually most likely around 41.1 average and 33.8 based on the images.
Long lgf%
GIA rounding strikes again.

The images arent perfect but they are good enough in my opinion.
Biggest problem is the white balance is off.
I''d consider it.

 

[Questioneer]

Hi Paul-Antwerp and Karl_K,

thanks so much for replying -- it was very helpful! This diamond is still under consideration but the vendor is going to show me two more so I guess we shall see if I like one of those better. I''ll bring up the white balance issue and see if there''s anything that can be done to fix it.

Again, thanks!