what is the difference?

[cruise182]

Looking to buy a 1.0 Princess Ideal cut diamond. Found 2 that look good but there is 1,000 difference. What is the difference?
Item Code: 2738128
Price: $5,802.00
Report: GIA
Shape: Princess
Carat: 1.02
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 73.1
Table: 69
Girdle: TN-M
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: No
Measurements: 5.63-5.47X4.00
Length/Width: 1.03

Next
Item Code: 2797038
Price: $4,859.00
Report: GIA
Shape: Princess
Carat: 1.00
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 74.2
Table: 67
Girdle: M-
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Culet: None
Fluorescence: No
Measurements: 5.39-5.35X3.97
Length/Width: 1.01


HELP what m I missing??

 

[headlight]

Well, for starters, the one that is more money is a more colorless stone by one color grade, and also it should face up bigger because of its measurements (not as deep cut).

 

[alexah]

Mainly - the more expensive one is an "F". It's also .02cts bigger & faces up bigger because it's not as deeply cut...

Edited to read: headlight beat me to the punch

 

[cruise182]

First off my apologies for not introducing myself to the great people at the Pricescope boards!! My name is Trevor and I am in the market for a 2nd engagement ring!! The first experience well.....how do I say....DIASTER!! new nothing and didn’t learn anything prior to buying. Bought a horrible 3/4ct solitaire that was just plain BAD. Well 10 years latter and the diamond has come out of setting so here I am with the Idea to buy the wife a new 1.0-1.10 ct Princess cut diamond. I would love to buy her a beautiful princess with as much beauty that 4500-6000 will buy. I have learned a tremendous amount of information from lurking on the boards but my head is spinning and I need to wrap this up shortly as the wife is expecting her ring back. Any help would be great and I prefer to buy online. Oh and if you have any ideas for the old diamond that would be great too. I was thinking about having it put into a custom made pendent of some sorts. Thanks for all the great info.....\


I guess my Origonal question is ....Is the more expensive diamond worht that much more....or are neither good picks??? Thanks

 

[alexah]

Hi Trevor!

Great to have you here!

The stones you chose have great potential... I actually like the G better, as I prefer (visually) a smaller table. Also, thin girdles make me a bit nervous on a princess (tho only if the thin portion is in the corner(s)).

Doing a quickie search, I also like the potential of this 1.03 E VS2. I'm also likin this 1.18 G VS1...

I think making a pendant out of the other diamond is a terrific idea!

 

[valeria101]

Nothing near 65% depth and 6mm ?

Here's one G-Si1 and a H-SI1 with a pristene inclusion plot (clouds and pinpoint inclusions too small to plot).

Both sound tempting. The stats on GCAL reports are enough to call both these AGA 1B ("premium cut") besides BN's signature. And the pictures do not hurt either, IMO.

 

[valeria101]

Awaiting that long due Ideal Scope refference chart for princess cuts... how about the ones below? These are all around the usual 75% depth (give or take) and 5.7mm (also the 'norm' vs. the average 6mm of less deep cut ones). Prices below 5k, high color and clarity (see notes below pictures) and the Ideal Scope signatures below. Still better to see these than just table and depth, as far as I know.

Should we vote?

 

[cruise182]

Thanks for all the great response. Quick question....What is blue nile signature?? Also will the near 65% depth look that much better then the 75% depth at a better clarity? I also thought that you wanted the table to be less then the depth. I guess this is wrong? Thanks

I LIKE # 1

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 10/2/2004 7:25:21 AM cruise182 wrote:



What is Blue Nile signature??

will the near 65% depth look that much better then the 75% depth at a better clarity?

I also thought that you wanted the table to be less then the depth. I guess this is wrong?

---------------

The first one is easy: "Blue Nile signature" is the "Signature Collection" - a set of diamonds classified as top cut and sold at a premium by Blue Nile.

The other two Qs are not that easy...

In two words, well, I have no particular preference for 65% depth versus 75% or for the "table less than depth" rule. Both are just rough ways to start guessing if a princess cut may have great brilliance when only numbers (no pictures, no light return tests) are available. Both depth and table size have something to do with the size of the stone (surface that is). However, the size is already on the cert - so there is no need to 'guess it' by any other means than, well, just reading.

So, for the five princess cuts above the size and Ideal scope images were up there. The Iscope is far better at telling light return than a rule by numbers ( such as the "table less than depth"). S0, I went for the better type of information.

I am curious why you found #1 appealing. The Iscope shows allot of light lickeage (at a loss of brilliance, they say) and some contrast. Not your expected red & black with ever so little white one may expect for a fine fancy cut. This, at least as much as Ideal-scope.com says about the tool.

My vote went to the last two, for what that's worth.

 

[cruise182]

Where did you get these diamonds from? The prices seem good too!! I am just spinning over all there is to know!! Thanks for all the help.

 

[valeria101]

Those come from the "Expert Selection" at Whiteflash.

There aren't all that many non-branded princess cuts presented via Ideal Scope. This is exactly what the 'expert selection' is all about.