Which Diamond would you buy?

[tinarie01]

Hello All,

I''m a newbie, and I''m trying to decide between these two diamonds. Here is all the information that I can find on the diamonds. Let me know if I can supply anything else:

1)
Report: GIA
Shape: Round Brilliant
Carat: 1.30
Color: I
Clarity: SI2
Depth: 60.3
Table: 57
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 7.09-7.13X4.29

Link to site GIA Certificate (may need to enlarge):
http://www.bluenile.com/certs/450/GIA12910151_zoom.jpeg



2)
Report: GIA
Shape: Round Brilliant
Carat: 1.29
Color: I
Clarity: SI2
Depth: 62.0
Table: 54
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 7.00-7.04X4.35

Link to site GIA Certificate (may need to enlarge):
http://www.bluenile.com/certs/4/GIA13150582.jpeg



Thanks in advance. Just wanted to add there is a $44 difference between the first and second diamond.

 

[squirerad]

It is difficult to grade the cut (poor, fair, very good, ideal) without the sarins on the above diamonds. You can call BN and ask for the sarin info paying special attention to the crown angle and pavilion angle/percentage. Next thing I would do is to plug the numbers into the HAC (Holloway Cut Advisor) to see if it's <2.

And while you're talking to a customer rep from BN, ask them to pull out the stones to see if the inclusions are eye clean since not all SI2 clarities have inclusions undetectable to the naked eye. If the HAC is <2 and its eye clean, then go with that stone.

Then again, you can probably find a better deal with another e-vendor.

 

[dimonbob]

Welcome to Pricescope tinarie01

Both diamonds are SI2 and both have crystal inclusions under the table. An SI2 is usually NOT an eye-clean diamond. You might ask BN what color those crystals are and if they are black or dark, you might want to consider something else. If they are white or clear and not eye visible the next thing you would need for us here on PS is the crown and pavilion angles. Those angles have a lot to do with the beauty of the diamond. Ask BN for a Sarin report.

 

[valeria101]

BN has four diamonds with likewise specs (1.29-1.3ctsm I, SI2). One stands out with more detailed info on cut, since it has an AGSL report, not GIA (LINK).

The inclusions plot is not very conclusive - all that red haze could well be made of many invisible inclusions (good for you, if this is the case) or spell disaster. The AGS0 mark of aproval is clearly obvious and the numbers themselves (34.9 crown angle, 41 pav. angle, 55% table, 62.2% depth) pass HCA scrutiny, but at a score of 2.2 manage to get right among the lest worthy of AGS0s. Price, $5380.

About the other stones, well... there is not much to talk about without the stats! One would need to see thm to decide wether they stand as close to H&A cuts as the price suggests, and taking them off the net is not a painless opperation. Of course, more data on each stone would setle the dispute, if BN obliges.

There are two "direct contestants" to this stone listed on PS: one by Whiteflsh (LINK) and one 1.28 at GOG (which can't link here), both ~$5300. The AGS cert of the WF stone looks cleaner (and this could be right, or the artifact of scanning, SI2s will have to be seen anyway) and has better number (by HCA=1 blessing).

Of course the $80 does not mean much here, however, the inclusions plot and numbers of the second stone read as a safer bet.

If you do want to stick with BN, they also have their AGS stones with - not unimportant given the size and value of the stone. For this choice of color and clarity, a successful cut could make the piece a great buy by obviating inclusions.