Vintage cuts at pawn shops

[shady71]

Date: 6/16/2009 9:11:22 PM
Author: Allison D.


Shady, WOW! Gal, it looks like we may be stone twins now.

Stone twins... ROFL

I received confirmation from GIA today that they received my stone so hope to have grading results by late next week some time. Sure hope I am not disappointed

 

[shady71]

Update on my GIA report: I had posted on Rocky Talky regarding the GIA rep''s verbal comment that the stone was VS2 "potential". Another rep eventually explained that the stone is VS2 in it''s current condition, which are all surface issues, but it is potentially an "IF" stone if recut/polished according to the additional plot that was sent. Here are the full specs:

Shape: Old European Brilliant
Weight: 2.12 carat
Color: S-T range
Clarity: VS2
Length: 8.10
Width: 7.78
Depth: 5.01
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Fair
Flourescence: None
Girdle: Medium to Very Thick
Culet VLG
Depth 63.1
Table 52
Comments: Feather, Chip, Cavity, Indented Natural, Natural

I have been pondering what to do for weeks now. I am leaning toward leaving it as is and just sending it off to James Myers for the setting to be made. But there is a tiny voice nagging at me to recut/polish to go for the IF (that would be cool) But it is probably a very foolish thing to do, aside from the cost, I would lose diameter, may likely go below 2ct. It is already eye clean, all the blemishes are at the edge and will be going into a bezel anyway. I''m so confused

 

[Lovinggems]

Date: 7/22/2009 8:29:12 PM
Author: shady71
Update on my GIA report: I had posted on Rocky Talky regarding the GIA rep''s verbal comment that the stone was VS2 ''potential''. Another rep eventually explained that the stone is VS2 in it''s current condition, which are all surface issues, but it is potentially an ''IF'' stone if recut/polished according to the additional plot that was sent. Here are the full specs:

Shape: Old European Brilliant
Weight: 2.12 carat
Color: S-T range
Clarity: VS2
Length: 8.10
Width: 7.78
Depth: 5.01
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Fair
Flourescence: None
Girdle: Medium to Very Thick
Culet VLG
Depth 63.1
Table 52
Comments: Feather, Chip, Cavity, Indented Natural, Natural

I have been pondering what to do for weeks now. I am leaning toward leaving it as is and just sending it off to James Myers for the setting to be made. But there is a tiny voice nagging at me to recut/polish to go for the IF (that would be cool) But it is probably a very foolish thing to do, aside from the cost, I would lose diameter, may likely go below 2ct. It is already eye clean, all the blemishes are at the edge and will be going into a bezel anyway. I''m so confused

I vote against recut/repolishing, it''s spectacularly gorgeous as it is.

 

[somethingshiny]

I heartily vote against recut!! That stone is beautiful and you would be doing yourself a great disservice by "making it better." With vintage stones, the numbers don''t matter as much as the look. I''d send it to be set and enjoy it!!

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 7/22/2009 8:29:12 PM
Author: shady71
Update on my GIA report: I had posted on Rocky Talky regarding the GIA rep''s verbal comment that the stone was VS2 ''potential''. Another rep eventually explained that the stone is VS2 in it''s current condition, which are all surface issues, but it is potentially an ''IF'' stone if recut/polished according to the additional plot that was sent. Here are the full specs:

Shape: Old European Brilliant
Weight: 2.12 carat
Color: S-T range
Clarity: VS2
Length: 8.10
Width: 7.78
Depth: 5.01
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Fair
Flourescence: None
Girdle: Medium to Very Thick
Culet VLG
Depth 63.1
Table 52
Comments: Feather, Chip, Cavity, Indented Natural, Natural

I have been pondering what to do for weeks now. I am leaning toward leaving it as is and just sending it off to James Myers for the setting to be made. But there is a tiny voice nagging at me to recut/polish to go for the IF (that would be cool) But it is probably a very foolish thing to do, aside from the cost, I would lose diameter, may likely go below 2ct. It is already eye clean, all the blemishes are at the edge and will be going into a bezel anyway. I''m so confused

For me, this would be the most compelling reason not to have it repolished.

If you''re going to bezel it anyway, there''s absolutely no sense losing weight, especially when it could affect the value if the stone dips below the 2ct mark.

Vintage stones are loved largely because they *aren''t* perfect, so it would seem to be losing a bit of character in the pursuit of perfection.

 

[marcy]

I am so sorry I read this thread because now I will go wandering around pawn shops now. Like I need another place to look for jewelry.

Allison, you are my hero - carrying around jewelry cleaner.

I have some at work, in our 5th wheeler and my overnight bag but I haven''t carried it around in my purse yet.

 

[shady71]

Date: 8/3/2009 12:02:22 AM
Author: Allison D.

For me, this would be the most compelling reason not to have it repolished.

If you''re going to bezel it anyway, there''s absolutely no sense losing weight, especially when it could affect the value if the stone dips below the 2ct mark.

Vintage stones are loved largely because they *aren''t* perfect, so it would seem to be losing a bit of character in the pursuit of perfection.

You are all, of course, correct that I should leave the stone as is, and I will. I am currently having another ring resized and adding a horseshoe sizer so as soon as I resolve my sizing issue (big knuckle syndrome) I will send the stone off to James Meyers to start on the setting.

 

[PawnShopHustler]

I love pawnshops.

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 8/3/2009 11:19:04 PM
Author: shady71

You are all, of course, correct that I should leave the stone as is, and I will. I am currently having another ring resized and adding a horseshoe sizer so as soon as I resolve my sizing issue (big knuckle syndrome) I will send the stone off to James Meyers to start on the setting.

Woo-Hoo! Cant'' wait to see the finished product!

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 8/3/2009 12:29:00 AM
Author: marcyc
I am so sorry I read this thread because now I will go wandering around pawn shops now. Like I need another place to look for jewelry.

Allison, you are my hero - carrying around jewelry cleaner.

I have some at work, in our 5th wheeler and my overnight bag but I haven''t carried it around in my purse yet.

*blush*

Marcy, all I can say in my defense is, it''s a sickness. LOLOL

 

[ericad]

And remember too, that with a repolish there''s always the risk of damage or complete loss on the cutter''s wheel (very slight risk, but a risk nonetheless). I don''t believe insurance would cover that, so with any repolish, the benefit must outweigh the risk. I really only recommend repolishing antique diamonds when there''s a sizeable chip, abraded facets, or other things that either visually impair the stone or put the diamond at risk for further damage. And I''d hate to see the stone drop below 2 carats.

 

[LGK]

I had the exact same choice to make: I have an OEC that grades as VS2 because of a chip on the girdle, but would be an IF if recut.

I kept it intact. I can't see the chip, and I'm not reselling the stone, so I just don't care enough to risk breakage or weight loss.

GORGEOUS stone btw. And lovely price. (I'd call it an OEC- small table, larger culet, OEC type facets.)

 

[shady71]

Thanks everyone for supporting my decision to leave as is. I spoke to James Meyer today about starting on the setting, I will be shipping the stone in the next week or so. I almost hate to part with it, even temporarily. I have been opening up the paper each evening to admire it in low lighting and am just blown away at how it performs. All the while terrified I am going to drop it and be searching for it for days

I am embarking on another OEC recut, but will start a new thread on that one.