Was this diamond graded under the new AGS system?

[justinislooking]

So... I''m actually probably going to go with a bigger stone. I found a sweet deal on an AGS0 .57ct, but decided that with my setting, I probably need to go with a bigger stone. I found a .77 ct AGS0 for a sweet deal too... it was actually a little mispriced.

Here are the specs:
Shape and Style: Round Brilliant
Measurements: 5.89 - 5.92 x 3.66 mm
Cut Grade: AGS Ideal 0
Light Performance: 0
Proportion Factors: 0
Finish: 0
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Color Grade: AGS 1.5 (G)
Clarity Grade: AGS 5 (SI1)
Carat Weight: 0.778
Fluorescence: Negligible
Comments:

Table: 54.3%
Crown Angle: 34.1
Crown Height: 15.5%
Girdle: Faceted, 1.4% to 3.9%
Pavilion Angle: 40.7
Pavilion Depth: 42.8%
Star Length: 51%
Lower Girdle Length: 77%
Total Depth: 62.0%
Culet: Pointed

It was graded on August 28, 2006. This diamond was graded under the new AGS standards right? I am going to be getting some ASET and IS photos on Tuesday. If the stone is truly eye-clean, like I was told, it will probably be my girlfriend''s diamond for real this time. It gets really solid numbers on the HCA, so I am counting on something special.

 

[stone-cold11]

I think so. Do you have the scan of the report?

 

[justinislooking]

I do, but its blurry. I'll attach a copy. I can't tell whats going on with the inclusions at all from the report, but I have been told its eye-clean. I'll be pretty excited if this works out.

 

[strmrdr]

yes it is the new system

 

[stone-cold11]

Ya, that should be the performance based cut grading system.

Good luck

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/24/2009 9:07:16 PM
Author: strmrdr
yes it is the new system

Ditto, the diamond looks good Justin.

 

[justinislooking]

Okay, here are the ASET, IS, Sarin, etc. for the diamond. The diamond is *slightly* deeper than originally anticipated. I am worried because it is 62.2% which is greater than 62%, but I think someone (Lorelei?) said it can go as high as 62.4%.

This thing looks bangin' to me.

 

[justinislooking]

40x

 

[justinislooking]

IS

 

[justinislooking]

ASET

 

[Lorelei]

Definitely bangin' Justin! 62.4% is my cutoff for depth, some are stricter and won't go past 62% but I have seen many great diamonds which go past 62% so in order to not miss out on those I make that my cutoff. The depth is fine in this diamond, it looks great!

 

[justinislooking]

Looking at the 40x, at the end of the 7 or 8 o'clock arrow, it seems that the diamond isn't smoothly cut on the girdle. It has a small wave on the edge. I know it will not be noticeable in person, but is this going to cause a problem. I am particularly worried about it chipping. It might just be caused by the resolution of the image and the light refraction within the diamond.

Also, is the black line at 3 o'clock an inclusion?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/29/2009 7:18:03 PM
Author: justinislooking
Looking at the 40x, at the end of the 7 or 8 o''clock arrow, it seems that the diamond isn''t smoothly cut on the girdle. It has a small wave on the edge. I know it will not be noticeable in person, but is this going to cause a problem. I am particularly worried about it chipping. It might just be caused by the resolution of the image and the light refraction within the diamond.

Also, is the black line at 3 o''clock an inclusion?

I wouldn''t think that area will cause a problem Justin, remember the pic is greatly magnified and I see no reason why that area would be particularly prone to chipping. Ask WF about that dark line on the arrow and if it is visible in reality.