what do you all think about this diamond worth?

[fongrx7]

last night, I was looking at this diamond: GIA certed
measurement: 6.18-6.25x4.02
weight: 1 carat
depth: 64.7% table: 61%
Girdle: med-very thick, facted
polish: good
sym: good
Forl: none
Color: F
Clarity: VVS2

don''t have any other information. wonder how much you think it worth? do you think $6500 is good price?

thanks

 

[derekinla]

----------------
On 3/1/2004 12:16:28 AM fongrx7 wrote:

last night, I was looking at this diamond: GIA certed
measurement: 6.18-6.25x4.02
weight: 1 carat
depth: 64.7% table: 61%
Girdle: med-very thick, facted
polish: good
sym: good
Forl: none
Color: F
Clarity: VVS2

don't have any other information. wonder how much you think it worth? do you think $6500 is good price?

thanks----------------

With a depth of 64.7%, the diamond is cut VERY DEEP. Furthermore, I'm not a big fan of the the med to very thick girdle which means that there is extra weight that goes unseen in the vertical dimension. Putting this altogether, the diamonds faces up like a 0.9 carat diamond! Unless the VVS quality has some symbolic value, I would recommend you look at "eye clean" SI or VS qulaity stones to maximize your dollar. Remember, the MOST important determinent of visual performance will be cut! When it comes to "bling bling", cut is KING!!! When it comes to evaluating cut in a RB diamond, you need to know the crown and pavillion angles. You can take a diamond cut tutorial by clicking here.

Good luck!

 

[Mara]

In this case you are overpaying for the VVS rating, which doesn't make sense because you could save a large amount of $, and go VS and still not see a thing with your naked eye.

No one else will know either. I would even suggest SI1 if it's eye clean. It's a misconception that you have to have this really great clarity or else the stone will not be clear. That's not true at all. There are some amazing SI1 clarity stones out there, and alot of vendors carry eye-clean ones, so you can save even more and definitely keep that F color--which in my opinion may be more important than clarity. People see color more readily.




The cut on this stone is not good, as Derek pointed out. Stick with depths under 63...more likely under 62 for the most part. Table is large as well, so this probably is a steep deep combination which means you are losing alot of the diamond's diameter, also in the thick girdle as well. Stick with tables from around 54-58.




I would definitely keep looking. For me this stone would not even be an option. For $6500 you can get something like an F SI well-cut 1.05ctw stone, with H&A or similar great cut. Don't settle for less than what you SHOULD be getting!! Drop that clarity and up that cut quality. Cut quality is what makes the diamond sparkle anyway.

 

[Rhino]

With an average diameter around 6.2mm you can get a .9xct diamond that will be far superior in brilliance/fire/scintillation and look just as large if not moreso.

 

[valeria101]

The picture juts fit too well to pass posting it... (source)

Not that some buyers would not go for the piece in the middle, but I would not assume you would want high quality rough

 

[Nicrez]

Ana, what is the 1.2 cut like? What the heck is going on there?!




Hey Fongrx7, if the F VVS is a cultural thing, I say that it is fine. Mara's right that you technically could get away with a lower color and clarity in round stones, they mask so much when well cut that all you see is sparkle.




If you stickwith color and clarity levels as are, I still think the depth level is too deep as the rest say. You may want to keep looking for a shallower stone, and try to find something at about a 6.5mm diameter which is the optimal for a 1ct...or go lower as Rhino says to save money and stay within budget. Good luck!!!

 

[chris-uk04]

As a good rule of thumb a diameter of a 1 carat stone should be about 6.50mm (+/ 0.05mm). Carat is only weight. Also look at the diameter too. With the high depth and thick girdle, the stone should have been smaller if it was cut better, but there's the magical 1 carat mark that every gf wants.

For example here's a 0.924 E VS2 for $5585. It has a diameter of 6.30mm.

You can lower you quality grades a bit too, in order to gain size. If you put a F VVS2 and a G VS2 next to each other, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

 

[Mara]

The picture that Ana posted could use a bit of explanation. Let me attempt it...

The 1.20 is the rough diamond before it's cut.


The .65 is a horribly cut probably steep deep diamond.


The .50 is a well cut probably H&A type stone.




The point there is that out of 1.20c rough you can cut something like the .65c horribly cut stone for $2500...or a .50c well-cut stone for $2000 in retail. Most cutters would cut the .65c horrible cut stone and sell it through maul for more $$and no one is the wiser, and hey they have a heavier diamond right?




But the .50c is the same diameter as the horribly cut diamond (looks the same size) and cheaper. Point IMO is that you should not always just go by carat weight, but look at diameter and cut as well. Plus it could save you some $$.




This point is best illustrated when all people want to do is meet the 1ctw mark..not realizing that sometimes a .90c will look 100% better and just as big as a maul 1ctw for less $$. They can even tell people it's a 1ctw and no one would even know, since there are enough people wearing the crappy cut 1ctw diamonds out there that look the same size.

 

[fongrx7]

thanks for the inputs, people.

this diamond is from a people claims as a local whole seller. and the price of the diamond is reduced to $5700. but I don't think that I would take that one. I rather pick a good cutting one with the same money.

ummm, it seems like cutting is most important factor we should consider.