Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Which one is a better diamond??????

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

nefredity

Rough_Rock
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Messages
8
Hi all, I am new to this forum and planning to buy a diamond. I found these two and wondering which one is better (considering all the aspects). The first stone is cheaper than the second and the second one is triple zero. thank you for your help. Greatly appreciate it.

#1
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 61.2%
Table: 55%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Very thin to thin
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 11.26*11.34*6.92
Cloud

#2
Color: F
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 61.2%
Table: 56%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin, faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 10.99*11.09*6.76
Cystal, Feather, Needle, Cloud, Indented natural
Crown 35.6
pavil 40.5
culet 0.3%
girdle 1.4%
 
Nefridity,

Welcome to Pricescope.

Liking ostensibly triple 000 for #1, but not the very thin girdle.

But, more info still will be very helpful. Triple zero is sometimes used casually, as you''ll read elsewhere on these boards. What is the specific certification of both. If triple 000, does it have a zero for light performance, meaning a newer cerrtificate.

Specifically, to help check, and just because, what are the crown & pavilion angles. We will want those.

Good wishes,
 
Thank you for the quick response.

Both are GIA.


This is the #2 stone additional info:
Crown 35.6
pavil 40.5
culet 0.3%
girdle 1.4%

What's wrong with thin girdle? sorry for many questions.
 
A very thin to thin girdle can chip, that''s the concern...
 
Though #2 is likely nice and interesting...do read the thread right nearby on ideal vs AGS ideal. Triple zero really should only be applied to a diamond certified by AGS, which you''ve just told us neither is.

But...it''s an FIC, meaning more firey than normal, scores well on the HCA, evaluating potential performance, and seems promising.

Read the tutorial, from which these charts are taken, showing how girdles can also be assessed.
 
I didn''t think AGS000 could include very thin girdle or very good polish. So what kind of cert does it have?
 
The stone #2 is the triple zero ...sorry for the confusion
that's what the seller told me even tho it's GIA cert. (He put the diamond in a machine and there's light shooting it, and the machine would tell you if the diamond is triple zero or not). This is my first time seeing that machine.
 
It''s BIG!
 
It appears that #2 would be the best choice of those two.
 
How about the indented natural? I heard that it is not preferable?
 
Thanks, Julie, for that bit of perspective...yes...that's true. What must be the carat weight?



Date: 9/13/2006 11:31:32 PM
Author: nefredity
The stone #2 is the triple zero ...sorry for the confusion
that's what the seller told me even tho it's GIA cert. (He put the diamond in a machine and there's light shooting it, and the machine would tell you if the diamond is triple zero or not). This is my first time seeing that machine.
Click to expand...
Well...the story you present seems innocent enough, but still...you're spending a lot of money. Read please two threads...this one.

Probably the machine is sarin, or sarin like (OGI), and running on either new, or more likely old data. Still...you're spending enough to understand that if it's certified from GIA, the representation that it is 000 is derived from what 000 could be. The point certainly could be that you do instead have the option of getting a non-derived 000 evaluated by AGS, and then it's not like a Mercedes...it is one. Not that there's anything wrong with GIA...just that they're using AGS's imprimatur to make their point.

(edited to add...) is this like...5 carats?
 
Yes, now I remember it's OGI machine. So it's not that accurate?

The first stone is 5.27 and the second is 5.02.
 
Thanks for the info and the help Regular Guy. So we can only call a diamond Triple zero if it has AGS cert. For GIA is it only Ideal cut then?
 
It's not that an OGI scanner isn't accurate. It's just that saying it is 000 doesn't make sense for stone 1. It may fall into the (old) ideal AGS system of grading for proportions. AGS no longer grades that way, and different proportions are allowed under the new system than the old. There are some differences in the ways AGS and GIA handle girdle, so either this is a stone that has a GIA VTN and AGS TN+ girdle, or the scanner missed it. However, the sticking point is that polish is Very Good. There is no way you can call a stone comparable to 000 if it has VG polish.

There is no GIA Ideal cut; EX is highest.
 
Consider a few things...

1) I live in Washington DC...and between OGI and Sarin, there''s not 6 machines in the city
2) Yes. between OGI, Sarin, and Helium (which maybe only two places have in the US?), Ogi is the least favored (read here), but the fact that your shop will have any of these is pretty impressive.
3) But vaguely, getting around 5 carats...maybe Helium would have a hard time.

Consider employing one of the very best appraisers you can find. Four are frequenters on this board, and I''ll throw in Jonathan at GOG as an honorary one, who also sports Helium, and who says he''ll do appraising on the fly.
 
JulieN, the second stone is the one that my seller said "triple Zero"..... the first one i think it''s just an ideal cut.
 
Is #2 a light performance AGS 0? (not a very important question, but for the sake of thoroughness...)
 
Julie, I don't think the kind of machine being described would give that kind of output (describing on AGS's behalf 0 for light performance. Sounds like it is OGI, and I'm betting running the older models for AGS0, but we don't have to care, because we can apply the newer charts here when running these through the HCA

(edited to add...) Nefrititi, partly, we don't have to care that Julie is right, and we can't even call GIA's option ideal, because they only go to excellent. Partly, we don't have to care because the charts can be applied as though they were AGSs. But, only partly. You'll pay a premium if you get AGS0 (if you can find one for 5 carats somewhere), but they'll separately rate it...not just based on predicted performance, but also, actual performance, and that's the separate 0 for light performance that Julie is asking about.

You always might want to know why they didn't send it to AGS, since they could have. Ostensibly, Rockdoc has software to answer that question. Actually, Jonathan at GOG does too. You on the east coast?
 
Wow, there are so many things involved choosing a diamond. My seller said the second one is a better choice just because it's more firey, but when I asked other jeweller, he said the first one is better because the second one has indented natural which is not preferable. And the polish doesn't really make any different. And if I want the GIA can repolish the diamond (the first one) to make it excellent. Is that true ( for indented natural and repolish)?
 
If you do a search on "indented Natural" in the upper portion of this page, where it says: search, you''ll see 193 or so hits. Not all discrete, but a lot of discussion.

You haven''t mentioned price, and if you did, I wouldn''t know what to compare either to. Without crown & pavilion angles on #1, that''s an unknown quantity.

Although you could decide to keep looking, based on concerns (which could be reasonable) for the indented natural, once again, if other qualities reasonably bring you back to #2, again, employ a qualified appraiser, and even consider interviewing a couple.
 
Nefredy,

What does you husband do for a living? I am curious because I can never afford a stone like that
 
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
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top