Potential problems with this stone?? The 3 ct. search continues.....

[kristie]

I just want to say THANK YOU to all of you that have been so kind to answer my diamond question. I am currently having the upgrade itch from my 2.11 ct RB to a 3.0 range RB. Price is important...cut is important but we are kind of on a budget.

So I present the RB in question......it scores a 2.7 on the HCA (I know, I know..it should be under 2 but $$ is a concern)

GIA 3.03 ct. RB
H color
SI2
Cut: Very Good
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluor: Medium Blue
Dimensions: 9.16 x 9.22 x 5.57mm
Depth: 61.7
Table: 60
Crown angle: 34.5
Pavilion Angle: 41.0
Girdle: Thin-thick (faceted 5%)
Lower star: 80%

Below is the diamond I was looking at but my fellow PSers told me to pass (is the 3.03 above at least "better" than this one below?):

GIA 3.0 ct.
G color
SI2 clarity
Measurements: 9.24 x 9.21 x 5.52mm
Cut: Good
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Good
Fluor: Medium blue
Depth: 59.8
Table: 58
Crown angle: 33
Pavilion angle: 39.4
Girdle: Thick-Very thick (faceted) 5.5%

The (reputable) seller states it is beautifully cut and is gorgeous in person

 

[Stone-cold11]

yap, the above is better choice. Can you get an idealscope image?

 

[kristie]

I am working on the IS image for the 3.03 .....they told me they don't think they can do it. I had it placed on hold so they can confirm it is eyeclean. The plot on the Report look waaaayyyy better than the 3.0 stone, I am just hoping they are white inclusions and not black ones. That would be a deal breaker.

I got an IS from the second (3.0) stone and it was not exactly pretty.....I cannot resize the pics though to post them! The other forum I belong to posting pics is simple

(

 

[Stone-cold11]

Resize it into a jpg file below 100kb and name it with a random name without weird characters, that should work. Else, msg the admin, there seems to be some problem with uploading files recently.

 

[kristie]

^^^Argh!!!! I hate MAC sometimes........it won't upload and now it won't let me delete the post!!!

 

[Stone-cold11]

You can''t delete post. Msg the admin with the report concern button to delete it.

 

[kristie]

^^^Thx for your help!
Hopefully, some more PSer experts can chime in too
I am just curious as to the differences in performance between these two.....the 3.03 still does not hit the magic 2 on the HCA but I think the 3.0 was around a 3.9 or so on the HCA??

 

[Stone-cold11]

The 3.03c although scoring 2.7 has longer lower half, this usually will help, but will need an idealscope image to confirm.

The 3.0c is too shallow in the pavilion angle, not good for a ring stone as it will look dark most of the time to the wearer. You can see the result in the Idealscope image, there should be large patches of black. The black in the idealscope simulate a person''s head at about an arm''s length away from the diamond.

 

[kristie]

The IS on the 3.0 shows the "star pattern" in the middle as a pink color. The areas surrounding the center of the star is black...almost like a circular center of black with a pink colored "star pattern" in the middle......bad from what I have seen on good IS images, right?

 

[Stone-cold11]

How extensive is the black? Would be good if you can post the IS.

 

[kristie]

Not too much black at all IMO.....ack, no matter what I do, I can't post the image I wish photobucket worked on here!

 

[dreamer_dachsie]

Date: 2/6/2010 9:10:28 PM
Author: kristie
Not too much black at all IMO.....ack, no matter what I do, I can''t post the image I wish photobucket worked on here!

click on "meg admin" and send them the file, they will attach it for you.

Open the doc in paint usually helps me, resize, then name is kookopooso or something silly.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/6/2010 6:32:22 PM
Author:kristie
I just want to say THANK YOU to all of you that have been so kind to answer my diamond question. I am currently having the upgrade itch from my 2.11 ct RB to a 3.0 range RB. Price is important...cut is important but we are kind of on a budget.

So I present the RB in question......it scores a 2.7 on the HCA (I know, I know..it should be under 2 but $$ is a concern)

GIA 3.03 ct. RB
H color
SI2
Cut: Very Good
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluor: Medium Blue
Dimensions: 9.16 x 9.22 x 5.57mm
Depth: 61.7
Table: 60
Crown angle: 34.5
Pavilion Angle: 41.0
Girdle: Thin-thick (faceted 5%)
Lower star: 80%

Below is the diamond I was looking at but my fellow PSers told me to pass (is the 3.03 above at least 'better' than this one below?):

GIA 3.0 ct.
G color
SI2 clarity
Measurements: 9.24 x 9.21 x 5.52mm
Cut: Good
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Good
Fluor: Medium blue
Depth: 59.8
Table: 58
Crown angle: 33
Pavilion angle: 39.4
Girdle: Thick-Very thick (faceted) 5.5%

The (reputable) seller states it is beautifully cut and is gorgeous in person

Hi Kristie

The new diamond is a much better proposition, if you could get an Idealscope image, that would be very helpful. The table is a little larger at 60% but that needn't be an issue. That the lower girdle facets are a bit longer at 80% might be helpful to minimize any potential leakage, but again an image is really needed to get any meaningful info on the stone.

Do you know if this new diamond is eyeclean?

 

[tonyc2387]

To resize a picture on a Mac, open the image in Preview, then go to the Tools menu, and click "Adjust Size". If you adjust width to 400-600 pixels, it should come in under 100k, it will tell you in the "Resulting Size" section in the bottom. Then, under the File menu, click Save As ... and again, rename it something silly. You should have no problem uploading it then...

 

[kristie]

Tony!! You are my hero!!
This is the IS image for the first 3.0 I posted a few days ago.........

Below is the diamond I was looking at but my fellow PSers told me to pass:

GIA 3.0 ct.
G color
SI2 clarity
Measurements: 9.24 x 9.21 x 5.52mm
Cut: Good
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Good
Fluor: Medium blue
Depth: 59.8
Table: 58
Crown angle: 33
Pavilion angle: 39.4
Girdle: Thick-Very thick (faceted) 5.5%

The (reputable) seller states it is beautifully cut and is gorgeous in person

 

[kristie]

Here is the above and first 3.0 next to a GIA triple Ex.....GIA triple Ex is on the right

 

[kristie]

I am still awaiting confirmation if the 3.03 is eyeclean......It is from BN, and they told me they can view the stone to tell me if it is eyeclean, but they cannot do an IS image (most likely).

Both the 3.0 and the 3.03 are in the same price point.....one has a better cut...just hoping it is eyeclean.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/7/2010 3:08:31 PM
Author: kristie
Tony!! You are my hero!!
This is the IS image for the first 3.0 I posted a few days ago.........

Below is the diamond I was looking at but my fellow PSers told me to pass:

GIA 3.0 ct.
G color
SI2 clarity
Measurements: 9.24 x 9.21 x 5.52mm
Cut: Good
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Good
Fluor: Medium blue
Depth: 59.8
Table: 58
Crown angle: 33
Pavilion angle: 39.4
Girdle: Thick-Very thick (faceted) 5.5%

The (reputable) seller states it is beautifully cut and is gorgeous in person

The Idealscope image is showing obstruction as we thought, I would personally pass on this one.

 

[Laila619]

The one on the right is definitely better.

 

[kristie]

Thanks Lorelei! I am just hoping the 3.03 is eyeclean......from the proportions of the 3.03, will there be any obstruction concerns? I just wish BN did IS images Obviously if I buy the 3.03 and like it while it is in my hot little hands, I will take it to my appraiser for a final verdict.

 

[JulieN]

No problems with obstruction on the new stone. What we're more worried about is leakage, but it is a nice stone.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/7/2010 4:06:04 PM
Author: kristie
Thanks Lorelei! I am just hoping the 3.03 is eyeclean......from the proportions of the 3.03, will there be any obstruction concerns? I just wish BN did IS images Obviously if I buy the 3.03 and like it while it is in my hot little hands, I will take it to my appraiser for a final verdict.

No, not with this one! It looks nice from what I can see in the photo.

 

[kristie]

^^^Lorelei, the photo of the two diamonds side by side is the 3.0 (obstructed) stone just on the left of a random 3.0 GIA triple Ex. so the vendor could show me what the GIA "good" cut vs. Excellent may look like

I have not received photos of the 3.03 yet....the rep for where the 3.03 is at says they cannot do photos unfortunately.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/7/2010 4:14:31 PM
Author: kristie
^^^Lorelei, the photo of the two diamonds side by side is the 3.0 (obstructed) stone just on the left of a random 3.0 GIA triple Ex. so the vendor could show me what the GIA ''good'' cut vs. Excellent may look like

I have not received photos of the 3.03 yet....the rep for where the 3.03 is at says they cannot do photos unfortunately.

Ok thanks, I must have misunderstood! The concern with the other diamond is possible leakage but the chances are it could be a great stone depending on GIA rounding and overall cut precision. But from the info we have it is definitely a better proposition than the original diamond.