Which 1ct old cut would you buy and why?

[Lovesparklesparle]

Hi!

I’m looking at two old cut diamonds. There is very, very little info available from this online seller. One I believe is a 1.16 ct transitional and the other a 1ct old mine. They are from the same seller. They do allow returns but I’d rather not...

Old mines are difficult to capture in photos? I’m not too concerned about minor visible inclusions, or colour, but more about sparkle and beauty.

Which looks the best to you? Thanks

 

[lissyflo]

Are you buying with a view to keeping the ring intact? If so, the second would be a no-go for me because of the setting height. It’s personal preference, but visually and for practicality I prefer a much lower set stone.

Will the vendor provide more photos? They’re not very helpful, to me anyway. There’s no face on view of the first stone for instance, so it’s impossible to see if the facet pattern is appealing.

As you say, there’s very, very little info available from the seller, which would make me wary. Why not buy from someone else providing upfront, helpful info to start with?

 

[Lovesparklesparle]

I would keep it in the setting and then possibly remount it in my ering. No, they won’t/“can’t” provide more photos, which is strange considering many people would take the risk without more information. I would be looking at spending around $1000-$1500AUD.

The transitional measures 6mmx7mmx3.5mm. Is that too shallow?

 

[Snowdrop13]

What’s the return policy like? The price seems very low- did you mean that was how much you’d spend on the setting?

It’s really difficult to tell anything about the cut from these photos, the second stone could be a poorly cut modern brilliant, or not.

 

[yssie]

No, they won’t/“can’t” provide more photos

I can think of a few reasons...

1. They don’t own that specific stone, and will be selling you one of “like kind and quality”
(Run)

2. They know that head-on photos, or additional photo in different lighting, will highlight inclusions or damage that has not been disclosed
(Run)

3. They don’t consider indulging additions requests on a $1000+ purchase to be worth their time
(Run)

I reached out to an eBay shop about a pair of stones that looked... let’s say “interesting but too good to be true”. I did receive the additional photos I requested, but they were so blurry they could have featured beach stones. I sent a message stating that obviously they were capable of reasonably-focused photos given the specimens used in the listing, and I would be satisfied with more shots of that caliber... the reply, sans any photos of course:

“These are perfectly eye clean diamonds. Its hard to take pics of diamonds when these are sparkling too much.”


@Lovesparklesparle that pricing is simply too good to be true, if what you want is a reasonably clear, undamaged, sparkly stone; you said you weren’t too fussed about clarity but in the ranges I believe these stones would merit inclusions can and do nontrivially affect light return). There is no deal to be had here.

 

[Octo2005]

I would keep it in the setting and then possibly remount it in my ering. No, they won’t/“can’t” provide more photos, which is strange considering many people would take the risk without more information. I would be looking at spending around $1000-$1500AUD.

The transitional measures 6mmx7mmx3.5mm. Is that too shallow?

I would run from this seller! Something is very fishy, why can't they provide more photos? I can understand not having more info on the provenance, but a base appraisal should provide estimates to size/color/clarity and type of metal. I could see not wanting the added expense for a smaller fashion type piece, but these look to be sizable center stones. It is another red flag that there is not even basic info being offered.

 

[missy]

I can think of a few reasons...

1. They don’t own that specific stone, and will be selling you one of “like kind and quality”
(Run)

2. They know that head-on photos, or additional photo in different lighting, will highlight inclusions or damage that has not been disclosed
(Run)

3. They don’t consider indulging additions requests on a $1000+ purchase to be worth their time
(Run)

I reached out to an eBay shop about a pair of stones that looked... let’s say “interesting but too good to be true”. I did receive the additional photos I requested, but they were so blurry they could have featured beach stones. I sent a message stating that obviously they were capable of reasonably-focused photos given the specimens used in the listing, and I would be satisfied with more shots of that caliber... the reply, sans any photos of course:

“These are perfectly eye clean diamonds. Its hard to take pics of diamonds when these are sparkling too much.”


@Lovesparklesparle that pricing is simply too good to be true, if what you want is a reasonably clear, undamaged, sparkly stone; you said you weren’t too fussed about clarity but in the ranges I believe these stones would merit inclusions can and do nontrivially affect light return). There is no deal to be had here.

I would run from this seller! Something is very fishy, why can't they provide more photos? I can understand not having more info on the provenance, but a base appraisal should provide estimates to size/color/clarity and type of metal. I could see not wanting the added expense for a smaller fashion type piece, but these look to be sizable center stones. It is another red flag that there is not even basic info being offered.

Yes I agree with the above. Your dream stone is out there but I don’t think this is the one for all the above reasons.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Take a look at the seller mydiamondzone on ebay. They have a jewelry store in Chicago and a website called Ivy and Rose Vintage, I think. Several people have bought from them including me. They often have some nice smaller old stones at decent prices, and their magnified pictures definitely show the facet patterns.

Of these rings, the first one is not well cut, and I can't tell a think about the second one. I agree with what Yssie said, forget that seller.