Which one would you pick?

[carboncastles]

I am on the verge of getting one these. What do you guys think?

Weight: 1.42
Color: G
Clarity grade: SI2
Depth: 59.4%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 33.3%
Pavilion Angle: 40.2%
Girdle: Thin-Medium F
Culet: None
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None

Price: 7,700

-or-

Weight: 1.34
Color: D
Clarity grade: SI2
Depth: 59.9%
Table: 57%
Crown Angle: 33.9%
Pavilion Angle: 41.1%
Girdle: Thin-Medium F
Culet: None
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: None
Price: 8,000

 

[mikeb81]

Its just my opinion, but I would chose neither. They are both well cut stones, but why go with a weaker clarity like SI2? I just dont see any reason to get a D or G color stone if the clarity will take away from the beauty. If money is the chief concern, why not go down a grade in color to make up for it with a grade in clarity to SI1? Many SI1 stones will look very eye clean. The difference between SI1 and SI2 is much much greater than the difference between D and E, or even G and H in terms of quality. Thats just my 2 cents. Good luck.

Mike

 

[katbadness]

I''d disagree with the previous poster.

You can get an eye-clean SI2, even I1. I''ve seen quite a few posters on the board happily describing their stones as I1. The key here is eye-clean. Work with your vendor to ensure the diamond you''re getting is clean.

 

[oldminer]

I suppose I prefer #2. Better color, a tiny bit better proportions. A lot better color and not much more money.

YOU MUST ascertain how good or bad the SI2 is, and how visible to the naked eye before deciding.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/10/2004 8:43:37 AM
Author: oldminer

YOU MUST ascertain how good or bad the SI2 is, and how visible to the naked eye before deciding.

... even looking at inclusion maps (on cert) helps, although it is not the definitive judgement.Must say though... these are the ideals of nicest spread posted in a while. That's rare good news

As far as GIA's plot shows, the D is rather clean - very promissing, IMO. The G I could not locate (is it Wink's) ? You can definitely obtain clarity photos from most sellers here for a better guess than the GIA cert allows.

It doesn't have to be 120X either (some actually DO that) - 5X with appropriate lighting is surely more realistic.

 

[carboncastles]

The G is from Blue Nile:

http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?pid=LD00398204

This diamond is very spready - 7.33-7.39, bigger than some 1.5''s. It has a pavillion depth of 42, which according to the Sarin makes it an AGS 2 & AGA 2

but it still has an HCA of 1.1. The D is 7.22x7.26 so a bit smaller. The idealscope on it looks awesome although this one has an HCA of 1.9.

 

[JC]

#2 looks like the choice to me. However, it always depends on where those inclusions are, seeing that this is an "SI2" diamond. Good luck...

 

[carboncastles]

I have been told both are eye clean, with a prongable inclusion for the 1.42. It is just so tempting because it is bigger and cheaper. I just wonder if it is a bit to shallow. It is on the bottom part of the HCA chart...

 

[quaeritur]

I vote #2. Because I love Ds, and because I think the shallower #1 might lack fire. BUT, it''s hard to tell on paper. If the IS image looks great for the D, that''s yet another reason to love it. Once mounted, I really doubt you''d see a noticeable size difference between the two. If it''s truly an eye-clean (or prongable) SI2, I like it better.

 

[oldminer]

This thread is an excellent example of how Pricescope can fine tune your buying. Instead of a world of diamonds, we are down to two that arguably are different, but probably both have positive attributes. Without looking at the stones, you have a very good idea of what your money will get for you.

I think you deserve to examine both and pick the one YOU like. Selecting the one you prefer is thankfully not scientific. It is like picking your mate. Its a hands-on affair....That''s the fun part!

 

[carboncastles]

I am leaning towards trying out the 1.42c. I know the 1.34 is a great stone but am very curious if the predictions on cut prove out to be true - some brilliance but very fiery with a lot of scintillation.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/10/2004 2:10:38 PM
Author: carboncastles
I just wonder if [the 1.42] is a bit to shallow. It is on the bottom part of the HCA chart...

There is barely any difference (0.5% ?!) between the two. This is slight enough to get lost in measurement error and what not... Can we see the two Iscope pictures one next to the other ?

With the measurements of the two so very close, I am not sure if fine interpetation of the HCS results mean allot.

On the other side, you could probably take a look at these side by side, at least in picture

 

[carboncastles]

This is the iscope for the d si2 (1.34), i will get the other soon, i hope:

 

[carboncastles]

I found this thread on a diamond with similar proportions. Would a shallower diamond be darker?

https://www.pricescope.com/diamonds/x2835.htm