What do you think of this diamond?

[Dreamer_D]

How does this rock look? http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-78266.htm#

For those who hate links

:

. Carat: 1.168
. Depth %: 61.6
. Table %: 55.3
. Crown Angle: 34.7
. Pavilion Angle: 40.7
. Lower Girdle %: 77
. Measurements: 6.76-6.78X4.17
. Light Performance: 0
. Polish: Ideal
. Symmetry: Ideal
. Culet: Pointed

HCA: 1.1, TIC
Eye clean

Any reservations? The only thing that jumps out at me is the very small table. I always thought this meant FIRE but is it too small?

 

[Dreamer_D]

IS:

 

[kcoursolle]

The table isn''t too small at all, it''s a very beautiful stone! I wouldn''t worry about a thing!

 

[stone-cold11]

Nope, nothing wrong with that stone.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Great!

Will this look much bigger than a .80ct?

 

[strmrdr]

table is fine.
One set of upper girdles is a bit messed up but not enough to be visible.
This is best seen in the ASET but is visible in the IS.
Not the best ACA I have ever seen data for.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 4/14/2009 6:59:50 PM
Author: strmrdr
table is fine.
One set of upper girdles is a bit messed up but not enough to be visible.
This is best seen in the ASET but is visible in the IS.
Not the best ACA I have ever seen data for.

Well I am not so savvy that that will bother me, I think, and the price may reflect this in addition to the color grade... I am going for size mostly

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/14/2009 7:55:17 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 4/14/2009 6:59:50 PM

Author: strmrdr

table is fine.

One set of upper girdles is a bit messed up but not enough to be visible.

This is best seen in the ASET but is visible in the IS.

Not the best ACA I have ever seen data for.

Well I am not so savvy that that will bother me, I think, and the price may reflect this in addition to the color grade... I am going for size mostly

thats kewl
its just a comment if it was a huge downgrade I would say so.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 4/14/2009 7:57:54 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 4/14/2009 7:55:17 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 4/14/2009 6:59:50 PM

Author: strmrdr

table is fine.

One set of upper girdles is a bit messed up but not enough to be visible.

This is best seen in the ASET but is visible in the IS.

Not the best ACA I have ever seen data for.

Well I am not so savvy that that will bother me, I think, and the price may reflect this in addition to the color grade... I am going for size mostly

thats kewl
its just a comment if it was a huge downgrade I would say so.

I totally appreciate your comments! My current stone is an ES and 0.80ct numbers as follows:

Report: AGS
. Shape: Round Ideal Cut
. Carat: 0.810
. Depth %: 60.4
. Table %: 56.2
. Crown Angle: 34.8
. Crown %: 15.2
. Star : 53
. Pavilion Angle: 40.7
. Pavilion %: 42.8
. Lower Girdle %: 77
. Girdle: Thin
. Measurements: 6.06-6.07X3.66
. Polish: Excellent
. Symmetry: Excellent
. Culet: Pointed
. Fluorescence: Negligible

Images can be seen here: http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-684411.htm

How do you think this new stone will compare to my current in terms of optics? ETA Although I am going for size I def don't want to sacrifice performance.

 

[strmrdr]

similar performance level as your old one.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 4/14/2009 8:40:33 PM
Author: strmrdr
similar performance level as your old one.

Thanks Storm, I can live with that, I really love my current stone. For education''s sake, what effect does the "messed upper girdles" have on the stone''s performance?

 

[Lorelei]

Dreamer, its a great rock !!!!