Yet another

[DillPickle]

Depth % 61.1
Table % 55.3
Crown angle 34.9
Pavilion angle 40.8

Comments? Correct me if i'm wrong but was it the general rule that the smaller the table, the more fire? Hope that this is enough info.

 

[Ellen]

Not sure what comments you want. Should be a great stone. When I hear smaller table, I think 53, 54.

 

[DillPickle]

Hi Ellen,

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Something else about the stone that concerns me a tad is that the girdle is listed as "Thin Faceted." I got the following excerpt from the tutorial:

Be wary when selecting diamonds that have pointy ends with Extremely, Very Thin, or even Thin parts on the points because there is a high risk of damage during prong setting. The example in the photo shows a dangerously thin point on a Princess cut.

When compared to a "Medium Facet", is the difference negligible with respect to durability? Should the thin facet be that much of a concern?

 

[Mara]

i prefer a thin girdle because it means less stone weight is carried in it. it's just a preference thing. i'd take a medium too. but not an ex thin or an ex thick. thin on rounds will typically be fine, thin on a princess though might be a danger point because the edges are prone to chipping.

that stone looks very nice.

smaller table to me also is like 53 or maybe 54. 55 is pretty typical for the superideals or the very well cut ideals.

 

[DillPickle]

Thanks for chiming in Mara and for eliminating any fears re: the girdle. Your input means a great deal! I too am hoping that this stone is everything that the numbers are claiming. I''ve gotten in contact with WF and am awaiting for Chris to get back to me with more info. The diamond is a 1.224 ct G SI1 ACA. Care to comment on the value of it pending the next issue... whether or not it''s eye-clean.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 9/26/2006 3:56:23 PM
Author: DillPickle
Thanks for chiming in Mara and for eliminating any fears re: the girdle. Your input means a great deal! I too am hoping that this stone is everything that the numbers are claiming. I've gotten in contact with WF and am awaiting for Chris to get back to me with more info. The diamond is a 1.224 ct G SI1 ACA. Care to comment on the value of it pending the next issue... whether or not it's eye-clean.

Hi DP. I'm glad I saw this as Chris had to leave unexpectedly. We would like to assist you with no delay: If you can speak to Katie and ID yourself as Dill Pickle she will be glad to help.

 

[DillPickle]

Thanks for the heads up John. I had read this message a little too late in the day today, but will definitely being picking up the phone later in the morning.