Which one?

[Michel]

Anyone else have any views?

I think I prefer the smaller one out of principle.

 

[Michel]

Here is a better photo. Other specs about to come along...

I''ve also got a really graet video, but its 20mb..

If anyone would like to see it to offer advice, then please email me at:

[email protected]

And I will send you a copy.

Paul

 

[Michel]

Guys, I was actually wrong! They 0.97 is not an ideal cut...

See below. 0.8 to follow:

 

[whatmeworry]

amazing what the second set of photos show. You can hardly tell the color difference. The 0.97 is not an AGS0 because of polish. It still gets all the marks for light return. If it''s priced at an AGS1 and just below the 1 ct mark, it could be a great deal. I''d take a really close look at the larger stone before dismissing it.

 

[Michel]

I am not so sure, though, as I put it through the HCA andit only gets a score of 2. and VG-VG-VG-VG.


And while pavillion, crown are within AGS 0, the table is a little too big: 58.4

Can anyone advise on what the percentage for the girdle means? I am used to reading it in turns of thin-med, etc etc.

I agree with you though, the colour is less noticeable, though I can still tell, but I still think cut affects this a bit as the one on the left is still a little better...

 

[Michel]

But, notice that the table is too big: 58.4, thats part of the problem too.

Also, it only get 2 on the HCA - VG-VG-VG-VG. However, it does score 9.2 on the Isee2 machine. I agree about the colour, but I can still tell a slight differance, but I think cut is affecting that too.

Struggling to get the AGS report up, so instead the figures:

Table 55.1
Pavillion 40.9
Crown 34
Depth 61.2

Ideal polish and 9.8 on Isee2.... 1.1 on HCA EX EX EX VG (not that it means anything at this level....)

 

[whatmeworry]

Paul get the bigger one (if it''s eyeclean). When your gal starts showing it off to her friends. They will not comment on th 58% table or the HCA score of 2.0. They will notice 3 things: Is it big? It it sparkly? Is it big? (credit to this article)

 

[Michel]

I take your point, but the size difference isn''t that great.

The one clincher may actually be that the bigger one is Canadian, and she did like the idea of GURANTEED ethically sourced stones...

I am uploading the video now, this I think shows the 0.8 coming into its one. Its fire is incredible!

 

[LegacyGirl]

How about you buy both?

They''re both pretty but I would go for the slightly smaller one.

 

[Michel]

Why?

 

[pixley]

I''m throwing in a vote for the smaller one too. It looks lively and bright and crisp. I''m very colour-sensitive (as opposed to a size girl) and couldn''t go lower than an F coloured stone. Besides that, it''s even shooting off fire in that static shot. It looks amazing. I have two coworkers who both wear round brilliants. One has an ideal cut, smaller stone that it colourless, and one has a larger stone, not as well cut that has more warmth, and I am mesmerized by the smaller, colourless stone. It distracts me during meetings. Find out whether your girl is a colour or size girl and then pick whichever diamond matches her preference!

 

[Michel]

Hi Everyone,

I''ve managed to upload the file to Mediashare. Please click on the link below to download, view and give me your arguments!

Thanks

http://www.mediafire.com/?ce92zmyjwix

 

[Imdanny]

The smaller one looks better in the photograph. Please don't ask me why. I don't know.

 

[arjunajane]

I agree that the one on the left looks *better* - i will not try to analyse why, as I''m no good at that. Just call it a "taste test".

However I agree with a pps, when you actually give this diamond to your girl, none of these figures are gonna matter as long as they are both great cuts. And also, the bigger one will have more "wow factor"

Maybe 0.001% of ppl you''ll meet "IRL" and show the diamond to will know about the technicalities of crown and pavillion angles etc. Unless pf course you live close to alot of PS''s!

Either way, I''m sure you''l make her one happy girl

 

[Michel]

Guys,

Here are the respective pages for both:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/4052/

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/3661/