Help with this pear stone!

[researcher]

I''m helping a friend with finding a pear stone, and think this one might be a keeper! The numbers aren''t very good according to the AGA charts (comes out a 3A because of the crown and depth), but it still looks like a beautiful stone (it has less of a bowtie and a better ideal scope image than the majority of 1A stones we''ve seen). What do you think?!?!

Cert: GIA
Cut: Pear
Carats: 2.62
Color: strong I
Clarity: SI1 (eye clean from ALL angles)
Table % 54 Grade: 1B
Crown Height % 17.8 Grade: 3A
Girdle Thickness Thin to Thick Grade: 1A
Total Depth % 65.8 Grade: 3A
Length: Width Ratios 1.65
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Good
Final Grade: 3A

 

[researcher]

Here's the ideal scope!

 

[pearcrazy]

Looks great to me. What is a strong I? Is that the fluoresence? That is the only thing that would make me hesitant since I prefer stones with little or no fluoresence. A lot would depend on the price too.

 

[researcher]

A strong "I" means it's closer to an H in color, rather than being a weak I which is closer to a J in color. There is no fluorescence with this stone. Is the ideal scope as good as I think it is? Does it matter that this stone scored so low on the AGA charts?

 

[pearcrazy]

Beauty is in the eye so they say, so I wouldn't worry about what the charts score it as. Have you seen the diamond in person? If it looks as awesome as the picture then it might be a keeper.

 

[cflutist]

I agree with pearcrazy. I say go and look at the stone. Sometimes we get too hung up on the numbers and forget to look at the beauty of the stone. Another thing to remember is that the supply of pears out there is not as plentiful as RBs. I just ran a PS search for a pear similar to mine and there were NO stones to be found. Our admin at work (with rich husband) has been looking for a 3+ ct pear for 2 months now (she will not buy off the Internet). You may find a better one by waiting, or you may give up a very beutiful stone in the process. Websailor and I felt we were very fortunate to find what I was looking for so soon 8 years ago (even if he had to borrow money from me to pay for it

). p.s. the lady at work found a 4 ct D pear, but now her husband is balking at paying for it!!!

Just my .02 from another pear lover

 

[diamondlil]

I totally agree with the others, Researcher. It is really impossible to select a pear by the numbers alone, but I also think it is good to keep them in mind as far as knowing what you are getting and also to help narrow your selection. Have you seen this one in person?




Also keep in mind that fancy shapes show body color more than RB -- another good reason to see this particular pear in person. Many folks like the warmer stones, but if an icey white is more your friend's taste, than a visual on this one is a must.




I too have a pear that is a little deeper than the AGA cut charts recommend (mine is 66%) and the table is 54%. After finding PS and the cut charts, I thought I had made a big mistake. Then I took my pear and made direct comparisons with every pear of similar size (2 ct) I could find. Even my jeweler showed me another pear (same size and D color) with better numbers that I could trade for. After comparing mine head to head with a good dozen others, none were better and several with better numbers were duds. I learned a lot and finally put to rest my buyer's remorse.




Pears are not as plentiful as some of the other cuts so it may take a lot of effort to find comparisons. If your friend sees this one, likes it, and the price is right, I'd say go for it. Let us know how it turns out and post a pic.

DiamondLil

 

[pearcrazy]

I can second what Lil says about color in fancy shapes. I was very hesitant to buy an I color pear as I was also told that fancy shapes really show more color in the shallow elongated area. I went ahead and took the plunge and bought the I color and it is very white in every light except bright sunlight. Sure enough the elongated area does show a slight yellow. Not enough to bother me a lot but then again my pear is just 1.12 carats. In a larger pear I really would check it out in person unless the company has a good return policy.

 

[Jennifer5973]

----------------
On 7/17/2004 1:04:22 AM cflutist wrote:

... I say go and look at the stone. Sometimes we get too hung up on the numbers and forget to look at the beauty of the stone. ----------------

Amen!

It's especially hard with fancies...use the numbers as a guide but your eyes and your gut to seal the deal. The picture looks awesome--I can hardly see any bowtie...and it's a nice fat pear like cflutist's--not a real skinny one...I prefer marquise and pears to be "fat." personally....not long & skinny but that is just subjective.

 

[diamondlil]

----------------
On 7/17/2004 9:52:14 AM Jennifer5973 wrote:




...and it's a nice fat pear like cflutist's--not a real skinny one...I prefer marquise and pears to be 'fat.' personally....not long & skinny but that is just subjective.

----------------

It's interesting how different proportions appeal to different eyes (not only the color, clarity, and shape) -- once again reinforcing the need to see it in person and not follow the numbers. Jennifer sees this pear with her eyes as fat. I see it as somewhere in the middle between fat and skinny. Mine is very similar with a l/w ratio of 1.67:1. Trade preference is between 1.50:1 and 1.75:1. My eyes definitely prefer a fat pear in the 1.55 to 1.60:1 range, but at the time I was purchasing, with all my other criteria, none were to be found.

Jennifer, I used to have a marquise before I upgraded to my pear. It was also fat. When I helped a friend shop for a marquise, she preferred skinny -- mine was too fat in her eye. I think it is really neat how we all see things differently.

DiamondLil

 

[Jennifer5973]

Diamondlil, I couldn't agree more...I *try* to always qualify when something is just my opinion in my posts...because it is so true...Certain things I feel I KNOW, like how cut is important, and flourescence is usually not a BAD thing...but the fat/skinny pears is what the person likes.

I would have loved to see your friend's marquise...I actually like marquise...I want someday to get one set on its side....funky!

It will have to be "fat" of course!

 

[cflutist]

----------------
On 7/17/2004 2:33:30 PM Jennifer5973 wrote:

I would have loved to see your friend's marquise...I actually like marquise...I want someday to get one set on its side....funky!

It will have to be 'fat' of course!

----------------

Diamondlil and Jennifer5973: If I can get my husband websailor to take a picture of it, I will try to post my "fat" Marquise RH ring. I got the stone in 1985 from my aunt and its got a 1.65:1 L:W (outside of the 1.75 - 2.25 trade preference). Its now set in a cocktail ring with 24 princess cuts. Does anyone care to see what a really "fat" Marquise looks like?

BTW, L:W on my 3.01 pear is 1.64 so that puts it in the middle of the 1.50 - 1.75 trade preference. I never thought of it as fat or skinny, but rather just liked its pleasing outline.

 

[researcher]

Thanks for all the advice! We haven't seen the stone yet, but the pics look pretty good. However, we are also considering this stone which scores better, but were told is not as nice. What are your opinions?

 

[researcher]

Here's the other ideal scope....

 

[researcher]

Here they are side by side....

 

[researcher]

And again....

 

[researcher]

Which one looks best to you?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Left side has more pleasing shape.

 

[diamondlil]

Researcher,


I do agree with Gary that the left one has a more appealing overall shape to *my eye* based on the picture at 1.48:1. In person, when I have looked at stones this fat, they seemed too fat though. I can see that the bow-tie is more aparent in the left stone as well. The AGA cut grade is 1A. Am I correct in reading that the vendor has given you a visual on this stone and says it is not as nice? Is there a significant price difference? Boy, this is a tough one. Would it be possible to have both stones sent to the appraiser for you to view? That would make the deal for me.




Cflutist,


Of course we want to see pics! We need more pics of beautiful fancy shapes here at PS. It seems the majority we see here are RB followed by princess. Pear and marquise are definitely the least. The 2 ct marquise I sold to get my 2.07 ct pear was a l/w ratio of 1.66:1, also outside trade preference on the very fat side. It was cut deep with a very thick girdle and appeared smaller than it's weight. Also, it was an H color which looked fine to my eye until I got my E colored pear!! Now I'm hooked on icey white. Again, all personal preference here since the lady I sold the marquise too absolutely loves it! I get to visit it now and again since she lives close to me.

DiamondLil

 

[pearcrazy]

I choose the stone on the left too. The stone on left has a more pleasing symmetry to my eyes as well, a more defined teardrop shape. I tend to like my pears more toward the 1 to 1.5 ratio for that very reason. My pear is 1 to 1.49 and just outside the "ideal" but still very pleasing to my eyes. It's all a matter of how fat or skinny your friend likes them.

 

[cflutist]

I must be in the minority here. I like the one on the right because it seems to have more scintillation and its outline is more pleasing to my eye (maybe thats because I prefer L:Ws in the 1.6s).

Also, it this for a pendant or a ring? The left one would be fine for a pendant but might be difficult to set if in a ring (might need a custom head). Also, if on a ring, what is her ring size? Might look at little chubby on a size 4 but okay on a size 7.

 

[chrono]

I prefer the cut on the right pear. There's just something in the look that I like more than the left. The facets (scintillation?) seem to catch my eye.

 

[quaeritur]

Let me qualify this by saying I know NOTHING of pears. I like the one on the right better. It just seems crisper and more lively (as much as you can tell that from a still photo)...

 

[researcher]

Wow! Thanks for all the posts. I haven't seen the diamonds myself, but I think we may go with the 2.62 ct. According to WF, the larger stone shows a lot of yellow in the tip (it's an EGL "I") and has more of a bowtie. It's just so scary to put all your eggs in one basket (although I did it with my stone and I couldn't be happier!).

 

[researcher]

Well, we looked at both stones and decided on the 2.62ct (the one on the right). It's GORGEOUS!!! Thanks again for all your help!

 

[headlight]

GREAT choice!
I missed this thread somehow, but I would've voted for the one on the right (really, I would have

) because of the following:
While the other one was larger (and appeared as such) and while it was more "full" and not as elongated, it had a significant bow-tie (based on the photo), and it also looked "dead" in certain areas.
The one you selected is just absolutely STUNNING; from the photos I loved its crispness, its very small bow tie effect, its faceting, and the colors it gave off. Yes, it is more elongated in shape, but its qualities overcome it because it ROCKS!
I hope the wearer enjoys it immensely.