What do you think of this rock?

[cancanman]

http://www.whiteflash.com/round/Round-cut-diamond-2167658.htm#

 

[cancanman]

Here''s the idealscope image.

 

[cancanman]

Here''s the Sarin Report. Any thoughts would be appreciated. I''m close to buying this thing and making a major discretionary purpose.

 

[Lorelei]

Its a good diamond, the optical symmetry isn''t perfect but it is still a well cut stone, what is called a nice make.

 

[cancanman]

Think I should hold out for a better stone or maybe pay more to get more? I''m fairly set on this price range and my gf wants something in the 2 carat range. I guess I could scale down the color to G or something to get better cut. The GIA cut rating is very good, but the HCA rating is 0.6.

I haven''t purchased the stone yet, so now is the time to be brutally honest please!!! You can sugarcoat your thoughts after I buy it

 

[stone-cold11]

Looks ok, some slight leakage that might not be noticeable. Also some brillianteering is present I think.

Report check.

http://www2.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=14558293&weight=2.02

Yap, GIA down graded it to VG cut because of the brillianteering. Someone more knowledgeable will have to say if that is good or not. From what I understand, at this crown angle, it may not be good.

 

[yssie]

a nice clear and simple article on painting/digging

http://journal.pricescope.com/Articles/45/4/Visible-Effects-of-Painting--Digging-on-Superideal-Diamonds.aspx

 

[cancanman]

That was a good article, but I''d be lying if I told you I understand the true ramifications of brillianteering on the value of a diamond. What does seem clear is that they probably did this to ensure that it made the 2 ct mark.

Here''s another image...

 

[moneyman]

In general I think the rule is that cut is the last thing you sacrifice when buying a stone. Your wife won''t be able to visually tell the difference between 1.9 and 2.00 ct but for larger stones, cut becomes increasingly important. I don''t know anything about painting and brillianteering so I''m curious to see what others on this board say.

Wait for comments from Ellen, Lorelei, Denverappraiser, Stonecold and other frequent forum visitors before you buy this diamond. Their help and opinions will make a world of difference when shopping for a diamond. Keep in mind I know nothing about brillianteering but based on the 4 Cs and the ideascope image the price looks very reasonable, but by no means is it the buy of a lifetime so make sure you''re completely happy with it and don''t feel rushed into buying it. I will say that I have dealt with Whiteflash and I''m sure they''ll lead you in the right direction. You might want to ask your WF rep their opinion about the issue of brillianteering as well as the ASET image (which looks a little off to me, but me talking about this topic is blind leading blind lol).

 

[cancanman]

Date: 8/27/2009 4:00:04 PM
Author: Lorelei
Its a good diamond, the optical symmetry isn''t perfect but it is still a well cut stone, what is called a nice make.

Thank you for reading my post. Do you have any specific comments about the Idealscope and ASET image? I compared the images against those posted on a website and I still can''t tell if the diamond performs well in these image "tests." If I am set on a stone this size and eye clean, is this the bang I should expect for my buck?

HELP! I''m terrified that I''m about to spend this much money on something I know so little about!!!

 

[moneyman]

Don''t worry yourself too much about the diamond. It''s good enough. I doubt she''ll be able to tell the difference between this rock and something with better symmetry and cut. You''re saving $2-4k on the diamond vs an ideal 2 carat rock. No such thing as a free lunch.

 

[Ellen]

If you want some piece of mind on the cut, you could consider this one, if eyeclean. Would need an IS also. It would still face up nice and white.


http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1248356.asp

 

[cancanman]

If you disregard the issue of brillianteering and just look at the pictures ans Sarin report, what do you think about the diamond. Is it reasonable for that price or am I better off continuing to shop around? I''m sticking with Whiteflash. They have been fantastic, but I don''t want to buy this diamond if it''s a below average deal.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/28/2009 4:19:03 PM
Author: cancanman
If you disregard the issue of brillianteering and just look at the pictures ans Sarin report, what do you think about the diamond. Is it reasonable for that price or am I better off continuing to shop around? I'm sticking with Whiteflash. They have been fantastic, but I don't want to buy this diamond if it's a below average deal.

Just ask Bob at WF to give you his opinion on the diamond, it is a good make as I said before just not cut to top standards and brillianteering it isn't always a bad thing, GIA will penalize for what they see as excessive brillianteering even if it does not have any detrimental effect on the beauty of the diamond, Bob will be honest with you as to whether it is suitable for you.

 

[cancanman]

Thanks Lorelei. I talked to Bob and he thought highly of the diamond. He doesn''t think brillianteering is a problem and that it actually enhances the visual performance of this diamond. He said a few times that although it''s not a H & A diamond, it is a very nice diamond. He didn''t really get into value so I guess that''s what I''m wondering here - is it a good enough value to purchase?

I am glad I talked to Bob though, his opinions were very reassuring.

 

[yssie]

I''m going to take a shot here, and the regulars will correct any gross misstatements

I think you''re looking at a diamond that''s on the white, and brilliant side of ideal, but this is at the expense of fire. the IS shows a lot of red - edge-to-edge light return. The diamond is shallow (60% depth) - not much diamond material to enable dispersion, but also not much material for body colour to accumulate (not an issue in your F, obviously! but it could be a plus in a lower colour). The arrows are very skinny (high LGF) - these black arrows are generally fire hotspots, and thick arrows give strong, deep fire flashes while thinner arrows provide a more twinkling effect. Shallow crown and deeper pavilion combo (33.5/41) also for brilliance over fire.

My preference is for a firey diamond, and I have an FIC that just made the cut. This is, however, purely preferance. I can see a difference in performance type compared to my old (shallower) stone, so I''m going to go out on a limb and say that if you compared in person this diamond with a typical PS ideal, you will see a difference.

The only thing I''m sure about in this post - Bob has given his approval

this stone is certainly no floozy!

 

[cancanman]

Excellent! That''s exactly the kind of candor I''m looking for. Yeah, Bob did stress several times that the arrows were narrow but said it was a very nice diamond. The representitive also liked the stone. Everything they said makes me comfortable with the diamond, I''m just naturally leery of completely trusting the opinions of people with an incentive to sell you something.

Thanks again!

 

[Lorelei]

Yssie you did well!!

CC that sounds fine, I would personally trust Bob''s opinion and also you do have a 30 day return policy now I believe to make sure you are happy with the diamond.