which one is better or should i look further?

[wawatu]

F, VS2, cutting very good, sym/pol excellent. face 55, depth 60.9, crown 34, pavillion 40.6, medium faceted
F, VS2, cutting very good, sym/pol excellent, face 58, depth 61, crown 34.5, pavillion 40.8, slight thick to thick faceted.
both 3 carats

thank you

 

[Skippy123]

Welcome to PS. You can use this tool to plug in the numbers https://www.pricescope.com/cutadviser.asp Read the info listed to see if you need to weed out a stone. Hope that helps!

 

[Cleo]

They both look like great diamonds!

The second one comes within both the AGS0 and GIA Ex range on the HCA cut advisor- so some people might be inclined to favour this one perhaps.

Have you seen the stones and are they both graded by the same gem lab?

x x x

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/31/2008 10:13:59 PM
Author:wawatu
F, VS2, cutting very good, sym/pol excellent. face 55, depth 60.9, crown 34, pavillion 40.6, medium faceted
F, VS2, cutting very good, sym/pol excellent, face 58, depth 61, crown 34.5, pavillion 40.8, slight thick to thick faceted.
both 3 carats

thank you

I prefer the first diamond going by the info given, have you seen both diamonds? If they are online, then see if you can get Idealscope images as that would be very useful.

 

[Cleo]

Date: 4/1/2008 5:51:35 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 3/31/2008 10:13:59 PM
Author:wawatu
F, VS2, cutting very good, sym/pol excellent. face 55, depth 60.9, crown 34, pavillion 40.6, medium faceted
F, VS2, cutting very good, sym/pol excellent, face 58, depth 61, crown 34.5, pavillion 40.8, slight thick to thick faceted.
both 3 carats

thank you

I prefer the first diamond going by the info given, have you seen both diamonds? If they are online, then see if you can get Idealscope images as that would be very useful.

Lorelei - can you please further my diamond education by explaining what makes you prefer the first diamond? Is it the smaller table, the thinner, more even girdle or something else? Thankyou!!

x x x

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/1/2008 5:56:51 AM
Author: Cleo

Date: 4/1/2008 5:51:35 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 3/31/2008 10:13:59 PM
Author:wawatu
F, VS2, cutting very good, sym/pol excellent. face 55, depth 60.9, crown 34, pavillion 40.6, medium faceted
F, VS2, cutting very good, sym/pol excellent, face 58, depth 61, crown 34.5, pavillion 40.8, slight thick to thick faceted.
both 3 carats

thank you

I prefer the first diamond going by the info given, have you seen both diamonds? If they are online, then see if you can get Idealscope images as that would be very useful.

Lorelei - can you please further my diamond education by explaining what makes you prefer the first diamond? Is it the smaller table, the thinner, more even girdle or something else? Thankyou!!

x x x

Sure! Firstly we are considering rare size diamonds and likewise of colour and clarity. So I tend to look a little differently than I would for perhaps a 1 carat G SI. I prefer the first diamond with the info given as yes, it has a smaller table, and the girdle thickness looks a bit tighter, the crown and pav angles are a bit shallower, but it looks like a great diamond. However the second diamond is certainly no slouch and has excellent crown and pavillion angles. I forgot to ask for the diameter measurements for each, which is also a factor to get a feel for face up size. Wawatu, if you could post that info, that would be great. For the 2 diamonds, an Idealscope would certainly be very useful.

 

[Cleo]

Date: 4/1/2008 7:05:29 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 4/1/2008 5:56:51 AM
Author: Cleo


Lorelei - can you please further my diamond education by explaining what makes you prefer the first diamond? Is it the smaller table, the thinner, more even girdle or something else? Thankyou!!

x x x

Sure! Firstly we are considering rare size diamonds and likewise of colour and clarity. So I tend to look a little differently than I would for perhaps a 1 carat G SI. I prefer the first diamond with the info given as yes, it has a smaller table, and the girdle thickness looks a bit tighter, the crown and pav angles are a bit shallower, but it looks like a great diamond. However the second diamond is certainly no slouch and has excellent crown and pavillion angles. I forgot to ask for the diameter measurements for each, which is also a factor to get a feel for face up size. Wawatu, if you could post that info, that would be great. For the 2 diamonds, an Idealscope would certainly be very useful.

I''ve been out all day and had to hunt this thread back down again!

Thanks for the extra info Lorelei - much appreciated! I shall continue to try and absorb as much as I can from reading your posts...

If you do post again following the extra info of the diameters, I''d be grateful for what extra info they give you!

*Diamond information sponge*

x x x

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I''m glad Lorelei asked for the diameter measurements, because that is an important factor for decision making. The thick girdle on #2 may cause that diamond to face up smaller. So while I might choose #1 from the info given, I would really need the diameter to make a definite choice.

 

[Upgradable]

I''m a sucker for the smaller table!! YUM!!

 

[wawatu]

thank you all for your comments. Here are the dimensions:

1st rock with 55 face: 9.32, 9.37 x 5.69

2nd rock with 58 face: 9.23, 9.28 x 5.65

do you think diamonds this size is a very good investment? and will hold value? it''s a lot of $ and i have never bought anything like this before??

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 4/2/2008 2:08:12 AM
Author: wawatu
thank you all for your comments. Here are the dimensions:

1st rock with 55 face: 9.32, 9.37 x 5.69

2nd rock with 58 face: 9.23, 9.28 x 5.65

do you think diamonds this size is a very good investment? and will hold value? it's a lot of $ and i have never bought anything like this before??

The 55 tabled diamond faces up better than the second diamond, so again that one gets my vote Wawatu.

Cleo, a well cut 3 ct round should face up about 9.3mm which the first diamond does. Also both diamonds have a nice tight diameter at measuring 9.32- 9.37 and 9.23 - 9.28, not too much variance in these measurements.

The second diamond is facing up a little light in the 9.3mm dept, not much but when we compare to the other diamond , which wins also in other areas, and hits the 9.3mm target, then again the first one comes out best.

Wawa, I saw your post edit, no diamonds are not a good investment. Even with large diamonds with good colour and clarity, you would be lucky to get back 30 - 50% of what you paid. If you are thinking that you might want to trade the diamond in sometime, then you might be best to purchase with an online vendor who has a trade up policy, such as Good old Gold or Whiteflash, as this way you can often trade a diamond you bought from them in for what you paid, or close to it, against another diamond.

 

[wawatu]

thank you laurelei for the valuable info.

 

[Rhino]

Greetings wawatu,

Does it state anywhere on the reports what is constituting the "very good" cut grade?

It would be for one of 2 reasons generally.

1. It''s cut in such a way that the optics are taking a hit and possible to some degree that you may not like and the HCA is simply incapable of telling you ...

and/or

2. It may be for durability reasons. Ie. too much of the girdle may be too thin and prone to chip etc. which in the long run may bring you more headaches than you asked for.

If you''ve decided to not go the "Ex" route for cut and are considering these VG''s for the $aving$ its worth it to spend the money and have the diamonds shipped to either your vendor if they gemologist expertise to pinpoint what it is that makes them VG or to just have them sent to an independant appraiser like Neil Beatty, Atlas or Rich Sherwood. It''s too much of your $$$ to walk into a VG cut with such limited data IMO.

Regards,

 

[Lorelei]

Yes, an independant appraisal is always prudent Wawa when spending large amounts of money, to make sure the diamond checks out.

Rhino, in the case of both diamonds above, out of interest, it is noted that the girdles are both medium and slightly thick to thick, is there a real possibility of a thin girdle with durability issues in this case?

Also how could the optics particularly in these diamonds be taking a hit? I am just curious to learn more from an expert and vendor like yourself, if this could be the case.

Are there any similar examples on your educational section of the website which might illustrate this, so I can learn from it?

 

[Cleo]

Thankyou Lorelei - this all makes perfect sense & beautifully explained.

I was also wondering the same things which you asked Rhino, so I look forward to reading his response.

x x x