shape
carat
color
clarity

Which diamond is better and why?

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

Lonestar66

Rough_Rock
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
10
I have 2 oval diamonds to choose from. I''d appreciate as much detailed info as anyone can give me. I want a diamond with lots of fire and minimal bowtie. Here are the specs on both. The jeweler thinks the first stone is the best.

Shape and Cutting Style Oval Brilliant
Measurements 7.56 x 5.94 x 3.56
Weight 1.01 carat

Depth 59.9%
Table 61%
Girdle Slightly Thick to Very Thick
Culet Very Small

Polish Excellent
Symmetry Very Good

Clarity SI1
Color E
Fluorescence None


2nd Stone

Shape and Cutting Style Oval Brilliant
Measurements 8.06 x 5.81 x 3.49
Weight 1.07carat
Depth 60.1%
Table 53
Girdle Thin to Slightly Thick
Culet None
Polish Very Good
Symmetry Very Good
Clarity SI1
Color E
Fluorescence Faint


 
Numbers on a fancy just don''t tell the tale.

Must use eyes to take us past the pale.

Ideal scope would be nice,

Aset would be better,

Without good pictures it''s just an empty letter.

Wink with apologies to any real poets on a snowy Boise morning
 
Thanks but that was really no help. I''m concerned that one has a culet and the other has fluorescence. The length to width ratio is 1.27 on one and 1.38 on the other. I do not have pictures I do not have the diamonds in front of me. I have the info from the GIA reports.

Can someone please give me their input? Thanks!
 
I would never choose a fancy without pictures at least. And seeing it in person is even better. Are these online diamonds? If so, ask the vendor for pictures. If they can't get you those, I would look elsewhere. Can't know if there is a bow tie without pictures.

Very small culet and faint flouro are nothing to worry about. L/W ratio is personal preference. You have to know if you like a skinny oval or a fatter one.
 
Date: 1/20/2007 11:15:37 AM
Author: Lonestar66

Thanks but that was really no help.
actually, it was!
you cannot judge fancy cuts by numbers alone. pictures are good, idealscope images are better, aset would be the best.

Date: 1/20/2007 11:15:37 AM
Author: Lonestar66

I''m concerned that one has a culet and the other has fluorescence.
''very small'' culet is not significant. you will not notice it
''faint'' fluorescence means you can''t see it. fluorescence does not become noticable until you get to at least ''medium''.
both are just *cya* comments on the report. they are insignificant but they have to be reported. nothing to be concerned about at all.

Date: 1/20/2007 11:15:37 AM
Author: Lonestar66

The length to width ratio is 1.27 on one and 1.38 on the other.
you will have to see each to know what you prefer.

Date: 1/20/2007 11:15:37 AM
Author: Lonestar66

I do not have pictures I do not have the diamonds in front of me. I have the info from the GIA reports.
you need to see them in person and decide which looks better to you. if you can''t do that, you need to get more info as stated above.
2.gif

numbers from the reports don''t give enough info.
 
My fiance has seen them in person. I haven''t and can''t get there to see them, so I''m relying on what he says (they all look the same to him) and the information from the GIA reports.

The only grade on cut that the jeweler gives is that they are "well-cut."
 
Wink was right -- you really need to see these. I don't know anything about the specs for Ovals, but the difference in the table sizes jumps out to me. I would assume that would impact the way each stone looks. Also, the length to width ratio is a matter of personal preference, whether you like them a little longer and more narrow or a litter "fatter" in the middle. I usually stay away from "very think" girdles unless it is just in one very small part of the girdle. And, be sure to ask if they are both eye clean, and for more information on the inclusions.

I would ask the jeweler to send you some pictures -- both just normal pics of the stones so that you can see their shapes, and an idealscope or aset picture so that you can get some input on performance here.

As far as the fluoresence goes, I wouldn't worry about that at all. Faint shouldn't make any difference, and fluoresence is not a bad thing in most cases.
 
Date: 1/20/2007 11:24:13 AM
Author: belle
fluorescence does not become noticable until you get to at least ''medium''.
You may be able to notice faint flouro. as my diamond has it and is a distinct violet color in direct sunlight.
 
With all due respect, you got an opinion from a well regarded expert - insufficient data.

They are both SI1s, do you know if they are eye-clean?

I''m obviously a beginner in diamonds, but I''ve already learned (from this site) that GIA (or other) reports do not begin to tell the whole story - even for rounds, and fancy shapes are even more tricky.

If this is the data you have (and can get) it''s a question of whether you trust the jeweler, if yes go with his opinion, if not ask for more info or look elsewhere.
 
Yes, they are both eye clean
 
for faancy shapes you can not beat an ASET where you hold the stone in tweezers and rock it from side to side
 
Date: 1/20/2007 11:12:50 AM
Author: Wink
Numbers on a fancy just don''t tell the tale.

Must use eyes to take us past the pale.

Ideal scope would be nice,

Aset would be better,

Without good pictures it''s just an empty letter.

Wink with apologies to any real poets on a snowy Boise morning
Well said Wink.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Top