What do you think of this oval?

[JenStone]

With all the "So when are you getting married?" questions, the "Poor you" looks I get from people when they find out we''re still not officially engaged, and the unexpected financial problems, I''m starting to think that maybe we should just cut our budget.

I saw this oval on the James Allen website just now and it really spoke to me:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=1004865

I know with fancies, you need to see it in person. But how do the specs look? I really like the magnified image. I don''t mind the slightly thick girdle or the faint fluorescence. But does just a "Good" symmetry subtract from the cut of a diamond?

However, the GIA cert does not seem to have as much information on it as other certs I''ve seen (for example, I can''t find the crown height). Why is this?

Thanks!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/16/2007 5:33:31 PM
Author:JenStone
With all the ''So when are you getting married?'' questions, the ''Poor you'' looks I get from people when they find out we''re still not officially engaged, and the unexpected financial problems, I''m starting to think that maybe we should just cut our budget.

I saw this oval on the James Allen website just now and it really spoke to me:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=1004865

I know with fancies, you need to see it in person. But how do the specs look? I really like the magnified image. I don''t mind the slightly thick girdle or the faint fluorescence. But does just a ''Good'' symmetry subtract from the cut of a diamond?

However, the GIA cert does not seem to have as much information on it as other certs I''ve seen (for example, I can''t find the crown height). Why is this?

Thanks!

Well, it is very interesting with the 6 pavillion mains rather than the traditional 8. That means that longitudinally the stone will be bisected by junctions but horizontally by facets (traditional ovals have facets at both 3 AND 6 o''clock) but I wonder how an oval would look with modern brilliant faceting so the whole stone is on equitorial lines like a modern cushion, but with an oval shape. There would be no bowtie... hmmm........ I wonder if anyone has seen one of these??

Anyway, its a pretty stone, definitely gonna have a bowtie look, but a clean one. Hopefully one that pulls in a lot of color!

 

[Miranda]

I like it!!!! I don''t know how you feel about bowties, but, this stone will probably have one. You will have to see how noticeable it is. From what I understand a stone with a 1:2 (rovalish) or 1:3 ratio will help to eliminate this. I don''t mind bowties, but, some folks are more sensitive. What kind of setting are you considering?

 

[JenStone]

Thanks, Cehrabehra and Miranda! From my understanding of bowties, all ovals have one - it''s just that some are less/more apparent than others. Is that true?

Aside from 1:2 to 1:3 ratios, would a more deeper cut help with the bowtie at all?

To answer your question, Miranda, I''m leaning toward an oval center stone with pear sidestones.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/17/2007 9:08:01 AM
Author: JenStone
Thanks, Cehrabehra and Miranda! From my understanding of bowties, all ovals have one - it''s just that some are less/more apparent than others. Is that true?

Aside from 1:2 to 1:3 ratios, would a more deeper cut help with the bowtie at all?

To answer your question, Miranda, I''m leaning toward an oval center stone with pear sidestones.

if you found an oval like the one I discribed with the facet junctions along equitorial lines, it wouldn''t have a bowite... and if you can find one with only 6 pav mains you might just be able to find the other!!

 

[Miranda]

Wow Cehra''s really technical! To answer your question - No, a deeper cut (from what I''ve seen) emphasizes a bow tie. I really like ovals in the 58% to 62% depth range. I was at Tiffany''s a couple of months ago and they had the most divine 2.3 oval that had a 58% depth and just shy of a 1:3 ratio. It was fantastic with a very minimal bowtie.

 

[FireGoddess]

Date: 4/17/2007 9:08:01 AM
Author: JenStone
Thanks, Cehrabehra and Miranda! From my understanding of bowties, all ovals have one - it''s just that some are less/more apparent than others. Is that true?

Aside from 1:2 to 1:3 ratios, would a more deeper cut help with the bowtie at all?

Yes, all ovals, pears, marquise stones have a bowtie. Some are more or less apparent. As for the deeper cut - I have seen deep stones with little bowtie - and some shallow cuts with strong bowtie. Others have seen the opposite. I tend to go on stone by stone basis.

 

[JenStone]

I have a love/hate relationship with the James Allen website. I love the huge number of pictures they have of their diamonds. But I hate how I spend so much time scrutinizing all of them!

Anyway I found two more ovals I really like (at least, from the pictures). Any comments would greatly be appreciated.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=860831
Oval Brilliant
1.21 ct, F, VS1
7.76*5.98*3.89
Ratio: 1.30
Depth: 65.1%
Table: 56%
Polish: Good
Symmetry: Good
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
(A slight bowtie seems to be noticeable in the magnified image)


http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=130&item=892266
Oval Brilliant
1.50 ct, G, SI1
8.25*6.25*4.30
Ratio: 1.32
Depth: 68.8%
Table: 56%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Good
Girdle: Slightly thick to very thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Strong
(This one seems a bit deep but I love the magnified image! How will the depth effect the overall brilliance of the diamond?)

As always, thank you!

 

[kellyfish]

I think I like the first one! Interesting facets! Looks pretty from the pic and faces up nicely, too.