2 carat round steep and deep

[Lorelei]

Hi OP, sounds like your local jeweler found you a nice stone and you'll have opportunity to continue to vet that out. I agree, and most would here, to allow your jeweler to help you and complete the purchase for good quality and CS. However, if I were in your shoes, especially at this price point, I'd want to talk to your local jeweler about their policies regarding viewing period (return policy), lifetime upgrade or trade in, buy back, regular maintenance just so you are aware and maybe can negotiate anything that is important to you that other vendors offer and put it in writing if it's different than their standard practice. This way, your interests are also covered in the long run.

Jules makes some really good points here. Compare the after sales benefits you might want from your jeweller versus those offered by online vendors such as, 100% future upgrade policies, buyback, trade in and so on, these are all important parts of any package offered that you might want to consider carefully when weighing up the pros and cons when about to close the deal.

 

[bachelor78]

So I was supposed to view the stone from the jeweler that everyone agreed looked promising today. Unfortunately, the jeweler just informed me that the dealer has already sold the stone (It was apparently "on the street" and the dealer was recalling it from his store to send out to us). Anyway, this is very frustrating as that stone looked very promising.

I have been presented with two additional options.

Option 1 @33k
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=2166645882&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

2.02 E Si1
HCA 2.3

8.08 - 8.13 x 4.97 mm
Depth
61.3 %
Table
59 %
Crown Angle
34.5°
Crown Height
14.0% (seems a little low)
Pavilion Angle
41.0°
Pavilion Depth
43.5%
Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted, 4.0% (seems a little high]

Option 2@28
2.02 F Si1
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?pagename=GST%2FDispatcher&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&c=Page&cid=1355954554547&reportno=1146885262

This stone is only excellent-VG-VG and has medium blue fluorescence, but the HCA score is 0.6. HCA says it is for "symmetrical" diamond (not necessarily graded excellent?) with very good polish, so I assume this is accurate. I added 1.5% for the small cutlet but it didn't seem to make a difference in the grade. I'm a little hesitant about this stone. There is a lot of red on the inclusion map, some odd angles ( a low crown angle and a low pavillion angle and what seems to be a low crown height--I thought a low crown angle should be coupled with a slightly higher pavillion angle), fluorescence, and only VG on symmetry and polish.

8.18 - 8.20 x 4.89 mm
Depth 59.7 %
Table 58 %
Crown Angle 34.0°
Crown Height 14.0%
Pavilion Angle 40.6°
Girdle Thin to Medium, Faceted, 3.5%
Culet Small

 

[luvdajules]

Hi OP, Ok, I guess I'll be the bad guy and say your local jeweler's 2 options both fall outside the Ideal cut proportions. That doesn't mean those stones aren't sparkly or pretty, probably both with good spread (look bigger than other 2 cts.) However, your budget allows for a freakin' fantastic H&A 2 ct. stone, besides, we would need images (ideal scope, aset) to continue discussing these options. You're on a forum where the general consensus is cut is king and aiming for ideal proportions and light performance. If you really want to give your local jeweler the chance to make this work for you, you need to tell them what you are really looking for and have them get back to you with real contenders, taking some time as you aren't rushed but want quality. Maybe I'm off base here and you don't want H&A or don't need/expect Ideal cut. Perhaps, my bump will start a new path for us to help you with your local jeweler or be more open to on-line options?

 

[Lorelei]

Hi OP, Ok, I guess I'll be the bad guy and say your local jeweler's 2 options both fall outside the Ideal cut proportions. That doesn't mean those stones aren't sparkly or pretty, probably both with good spread (look bigger than other 2 cts.) However, your budget allows for a freakin' fantastic H&A 2 ct. stone, besides, we would need images (ideal scope, aset) to continue discussing these options. You're on a forum where the general consensus is cut is king and aiming for ideal proportions and light performance. If you really want to give your local jeweler the chance to make this work for you, you need to tell them what you are really looking for and have them get back to you with real contenders, taking some time as you aren't rushed but want quality. Maybe I'm off base here and you don't want H&A or don't need/expect Ideal cut. Perhaps, my bump will start a new path for us to help you with your local jeweler or be more open to on-line options?

Nice post Jules!

Sorry Bachelor, we must have missed this one, thanks for the bump and the great assistance Jules!

My thoughts run along similar lines, they both might be nice looking diamonds but I would want a lot more info on each before pulling the trigger.

The first - the crown and pavilion angles, even allowing for GIA's proportion rounding, could lean towards enabling this diamond to leak light. This effect could be more pronounced, allowing for potential variance in GIA number rounding for example if the cut precision isn't quite there, both angles could sway towards being on the steeper side and then light leakage is more of a possibility. Conversely, it might be ok depending on a few factors but for me, it's a risky proportion configuration.

The second - again, it might be perfectly fine but here we are seeing the opposite end of the spectrum, the angles are borderline shallow and yet once again, considering potential for angle variance due to GIA's proportion rounding, they could be shallower still, leading to an undesirable effect called head obstruction. This simply means that shallower angle combos can in some cases look dark when worn in a ring at close scrutiny. However, such diamonds can make excellent pendant stones because then obstruction isn't an issue and they are often very bright and brilliant. Again, if the overall cut precision is tight and the angles are in fact aren't favouring a shallower average, it might be an option.

The above are my thoughts on the two options you presented for our opinions, as I mentioned, they might be absolutely fine but I would be remiss if I didn't point these things out. It's also difficult to advise more fully as these diamonds are with a b&m jeweller and the prospect of having the images we need is remote, but you could of course always ask if the jeweller could supply an Idealscope or ASET for you to view these through. Alternatively, you can buy an Idealscope yourself, they are incredibly useful and the small financial outlay is well worth it to have the tool at your disposal. This is unlikely to be the last diamond you buy, then you are always prepared, especially if you prefer to shop in a b&m store.

Also, to answer a question you asked about balancing crown and pavilion angles, yes, as John P has said, a little give here and a little take there can sometimes balance things out, or words to that effect. A shallower crown angle can in some cases be balanced out with a deeper pavilion angle and vice versa, also overall cut precision can play an important part, so each stone needs to be evaluated on its own desirable visual and physical merits. The second is scoring low on the HCA because it is a shallower proportion combo.

 

[luvdajules]

Thanks, Lorelei It's nice to assist to a more pro poster who has the more detailed explanation, that's why I keep it simple I haven't been here long but it so great to see such a warm reception back for you. You are clearly very valued here and from your recent posts, I can see why I hope to someday have the same knowledge as you, maybe after another 40k posts and a lot more purchases, lol!

 

[Lorelei]

Thanks, Lorelei It's nice to assist to a more pro poster who has the more detailed explanation, that's why I keep it simple I haven't been here long but it so great to see such a warm reception back for you. You are clearly very valued here and from your recent posts, I can see why I hope to someday have the same knowledge as you, maybe after another 40k posts and a lot more purchases, lol!

You are most welcome Jules, I have been really impressed by your posts and those of the others, there's some fantastic participation going on here and it's really nice to see. Thanks also for your very kind comments, I have been so touched by the welcome back I have received, it has really warmed my heart and it's great to be back on the boards helping, I didn't realize how much I missed it. One of the things I have really enjoyed is watching new posters come along and gain confidence as they too grow to enjoy helping and sharing what they have learnt. I hope I can encourage that.

It's easy to gain knowledge here, there have been so many wonderful posters and experts that have helped me so much both on the forums and behind the scenes. Some are true mentors to me, not only professionals of long standing, but those that started off as posters and then due to their talents, are now widely known and respected in the industry. I value these people greatly and I was so happy to still be in touch with them during my time away here. They know who they are and I want them to know how much I appreciate them.

 

[bachelor78]

Thanks everyone. I've spoken with the jeweler about my parameters and I showed him the link to the GOG stone as something that I would strongly consider if he couldn't come up with something better. First, he raised questions on resale with a medium blue fluorescence, even though he says it looks fine. What do you think?

The new stone looks better, but perhaps not perfect. On the GIA chart, it is the last PA/CA combo graded excellent. the HCA is .8, but this one looks a little shallow to me.

Measurements
8.29 - 8.34 x 5.06 mm
Carat Weight
2.15 carat
Color Grade
F
Clarity Grade
SI1
Cut Grade
Excellent

proportions
Depth
60.9 %
Table
57 %
Crown Angle
34.0°
Crown Height
14.5%
Pavilion Angle
40.6°
Pavilion Depth
43.0%
Star Length
45%
Lower Half
75%
Girdle
Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted, 3.5%
Culet
None

 

[Lorelei]

Thanks everyone. I've spoken with the jeweler about my parameters and I showed him the link to the GOG stone as something that I would strongly consider if he couldn't come up with something better. First, he raised questions on resale with a medium blue fluorescence, even though he says it looks fine. What do you think?

The new stone looks better, but perhaps not perfect. On the GIA chart, it is the last PA/CA combo graded excellent. the HCA is .8, but this one looks a little shallow to me.

Measurements
8.29 - 8.34 x 5.06 mm
Carat Weight
2.15 carat
Color Grade
F
Clarity Grade
SI1
Cut Grade
Excellent

proportions
Depth
60.9 %
Table
57 %
Crown Angle
34.0°
Crown Height
14.5%
Pavilion Angle
40.6°
Pavilion Depth
43.0%
Star Length
45%
Lower Half
75%
Girdle
Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted, 3.5%
Culet
None

The stone has definite potential but you are right in your observations concerning the crown/pavilion angle combo. It could be perfectly fine but it is possible depending on the angle averaging and overall cut precision, that this stone might show what is called obstruction. This means in simple terms that the diamond might darken visibly on close observation if worn in a ring due to head shadow effect. Unfortunately without an image or knowing what to look for and checking the stone in person, there is no way to tell if this is going to be the case or if there won't be an issue.

Resale concerning medium blue fluorescence, diamonds in general are very poor financial investments, if you want to sell on the secondary market one can only expect a 30 - 50% return on what was originally paid. Fluorescence might make some stones less desirable still but it depends. The best way to protect any diamond purchase from this potential depreciation is to buy from a vendor with a guaranteed lifetime trade up policy or buy back program.

 

[bachelor78]

I forgot a link to the GIA. http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=6157147960&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547


This scores 1A across the board on the AGA cut calculator and has a great HCA score. How does a stone perform so well on paper if it is a potential bad performer?

 

[Lorelei]

I forgot a link to the GIA. http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=6157147960&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547


This scores 1A across the board on the AGA cut calculator and has a great HCA score. How does a stone perform so well on paper if it is a potential bad performer?

Thanks for the link!

Firstly, I just want to clarify, I didn't imply this diamond might be a potential bad performer, I mentioned there is a chance of slight darkening at close viewing range due to the potential for head obstruction. I also said that the diamond could be perfectly fine depending on the angle averages and overall cut precision as the angles are right on the border of potentially being shallow, but in reality they might not be. But without images or seeing the stone, I am only speculating. If you imagine a brick wall that you can't see the other side and you intend to scramble up and drop over to the ground, but you have no way of knowing what's actually behind the wall until you jump. You might find that the ground is high on the other side and the drop isn't anywhere near as deep as you expect, or you could be leaping off the side of a cliff. A silly analogy maybe but the point I am trying to make is, that with the crown and pavilion angles in this case, there might not be much of a drop at all and the angles will be close to the reported values and the diamond is fine, or there could be much more of a drop and the variance is deep, obstruction becomes a possibility. Obstruction needn't even be a huge issue even if it was one in the first place, there are plenty of people walking around with diamonds that show head obstruction I am sure and they don't know what it is nor even care if they did, but it's something we bear in mind around here when trying to help. Use of an Idealscope or checking for this in person by someone that knows what to look for would tell us more.

HCA- the HCA is intended as a rejection tool, not for selection. The HCA was designed as a first round screening tool to see which diamonds score below 2, then the next step is further evaluation with images such as ASET/Idealscope, the assistance of a trusted vendor and your own preference. The HCA predicts how a few basic proportions might work together, it cannot see the stone to determine whether the diamond is going to perform only offer a forecast of how it might. It does offer warnings with stones that score <1 that obstruction might be a possibility as I mentioned above. It isn't a case of the lower the score the better, as we have seen, there are things to consider in diamonds scoring in that category. Once you score <2, this simply means a diamond is worth further consideration, this is then done with images, trusted vendor input and your own preference.

I hope this helps clarify some of the above points.

 

[luvdajules]

Hi there, I'm not an expert at these edge/cliff examples. First, let me say that on paper, your selection looks promising indeed! Why not call it in have a looksy? Will your local jeweler allow you to do that to view for inspection prior to purchase? If not, can you buy to view but then exchange for something else if it's not what you expect (after appraisal and further investigation into aset and idealscope)? Let's hope you can for the sake of further discussion. Getting back to this edge example, you have to remember that the written spec on the GIA report is an average for 8 discreet measured angles (for instance), and given that average value falls on an edge of AGS0, that means none of those 8 values can go over otherwise it maybe an AGS3 or 4! Perhaps DiamGem or DiamCalc would help map this. There was a recent discussion of this where the specific stone was on paper AGS0 but that combo was an island surrounded by 3s and 4s. John Pollard said he wanted to have a Stella Artois with that cutter, lol. Any way, just food for thought.

 

[Lorelei]

Hi there, I'm not an expert at these edge/cliff examples. First, let me say that on paper, your selection looks promising indeed! Why not call it in have a looksy? Will your local jeweler allow you to do that to view for inspection prior to purchase? If not, can you buy to view but then exchange for something else if it's not what you expect (after appraisal and further investigation into aset and idealscope)? Let's hope you can for the sake of further discussion. Getting back to this edge example, you have to remember that the written spec on the GIA report is an average for 8 discreet measured angles (for instance), and given that average value falls on an edge of AGS0, that means none of those 8 values can go over otherwise it maybe an AGS3 or 4! Perhaps DiamGem or DiamCalc would help map this. There was a recent discussion of this where the specific stone was on paper AGS0 but that combo was an island surrounded by 3s and 4s. John Pollard said he wanted to have a Stella Artois with that cutter, lol. Any way, just food for thought.

Rather have a Heineken.

 

[bachelor78]

I'm not sure I understand the issue with the ESi1 that I posted over the weekend (first option on top of page 2 in this thread) The more I look at it, it fits right smack in the middle of the ranges we've discussed here (34.5/41). In another thread John Pollard said this:

"With that said, here's a "Cliff's Notes" for staying near Tolkowsky/ideal angles with GIA reports (their numbers are rounded): A crown angle of 34.0, 34.5 or 35.0 is usually safe with a 40.8 pavilion angle. If pavilion angle = 40.6 lean toward a 34.5-35.0 crown. If pavilion angle = 41 lean toward a 34.0-34.5 crown."

I think I may want to see this stone. To me, it seems safer than a 34/40.6 (which is slightly higher priced and F color)

 

[luvdajules]

You might be right, I wish one of the cutting experts (pros) would see this thread and post. I'm so not the expert, but here goes. You might very well be right, but if I'm not mistaken those angle combo's are table % specific and a table of 59 might be okay or it might not. I'm not even sure how to access those tables with the cut grades with various angle combo's. Hold on, I'll do some checking and see if in the meantime we could coax more help

 

[Lorelei]

I'm not sure I understand the issue with the ESi1 that I posted over the weekend (first option on top of page 2 in this thread) The more I look at it, it fits right smack in the middle of the ranges we've discussed here (34.5/41). In another thread John Pollard said this:

"With that said, here's a "Cliff's Notes" for staying near Tolkowsky/ideal angles with GIA reports (their numbers are rounded): A crown angle of 34.0, 34.5 or 35.0 is usually safe with a 40.8 pavilion angle. If pavilion angle = 40.6 lean toward a 34.5-35.0 crown. If pavilion angle = 41 lean toward a 34.0-34.5 crown."

I think I may want to see this stone. To me, it seems safer than a 34/40.6 (which is slightly higher priced and F color)

The basic proportions fit within the suggested angle ranges certainly, what we are trying to do is make sure that the angle combinations work well together as GIA round them, to avoid any potential issues such as light leakage ( if the angles have a steeper swing than the rounded averages suggest), or shallower ( vice versa) or obstruction. Both diamonds could be absolutely fine and perfect for your requirements but there are a lot of other measurements and factors we just can't know about without images, hence the use of the term ' usually'. Rather like saying a lady is 5.5 inches tall with a certain hair colour and vital statistics, you might have an outline of how she could look, but you still won't know without an image or seeing her in person.

Definitely go and look at the stone and see what you think, then you will have a much better idea. Also, here is a very old thread with info from John himself when he used to post as John Quixote, I think you might find it interesting and it might shed more light on the proportion rounding.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/consumer-advisory-gia-cut-grade-rounding-problems.39401/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/consumer-advisory-gia-cut-grade-rounding-problems.39401/[/URL]

 

[John P]

I'm not sure I understand the issue with the ESi1 that I posted over the weekend (first option on top of page 2 in this thread) The more I look at it, it fits right smack in the middle of the ranges we've discussed here (34.5/41). In another thread John Pollard said this:

"With that said, here's a "Cliff's Notes" for staying near Tolkowsky/ideal angles with GIA reports (their numbers are rounded): A crown angle of 34.0, 34.5 or 35.0 is usually safe with a 40.8 pavilion angle. If pavilion angle = 40.6 lean toward a 34.5-35.0 crown. If pavilion angle = 41 lean toward a 34.0-34.5 crown."

I think I may want to see this stone. To me, it seems safer than a 34/40.6 (which is slightly higher priced and F color)

Aloha from Maui. Isn't technology awesome? I received two emails and a Facebook message asking me to comment here. I'm happy to do so!

"Safer" isn't in play. These are both promising candidates. You're looking at a 2.02 E SI1 (59 41.0 34.5) and a 2.15 F SI1 (57 40.6 34.0). By the numbers both might be blazing. What's of note is that the 2.15 has a lower crown angle but - because of the table % - has a higher crown at 14.5%. The numbers are all rounded, as Lorelei aptly pointed out. But quite frankly they are good numbers. It's up to your eye to make the decision. The fact that you have done your homework here will help you... just check them out in multiple lighting conditions.

And, compliments on being thorough. I believe your homework and questions here will all pay off for you in the end.

 

[Lorelei]

John, you are a star pausing your vacation briefly to comment, thank you!

 

[luvdajules]

Thanks, John and shout out to Maui, so jealous! Thanks too, Lorelei!! There's only so much a newb can do, lol. But I can bump to keep the conversation going! You guys are awesome Bachelor needs to find something that rocks his world, and hers, pun intended!

 

[Lorelei]

Thanks, John and shout out to Maui, so jealous! Thanks too, Lorelei!! There's only so much a newb can do, lol. But I can bump to keep the conversation going! You guys are awesome Bachelor needs to find something that rocks his world, and hers, pun intended!

Monsieur Pollard is having a stupendous time by the looks of it...! But he deserves it. You are right Jules, our Bachelor here does need to find a diamond to rock their world, it's out there somewhere.

 

[bachelor78]

Thanks so much for commenting John. And thanks Lorelei and Jules for your help too. I'm looking at the ESi1 today. I will take a look in the idealscope. I'm hoping it looks good (I'm just looking for deeper red and an absence of white right?), as I'm getting a little fatigued by this process and feel like my head might explode soon! This really has been enlightening, and John I think you were right that I've gotten more particular on cut than most jewelers care too. I think my guy has gotten a little frustrated with me, but I don't see the need to compromise here. I may ultimately buy from the B&M store, but this experience has definitely taught me that there is certainly no stigma or uncertainty with buying online. I've found the online process to be far more transparent, and it just seems to take a lot of the guesswork out of the process. My intuition told me to never buy online, but knowing what I know now I will probably never go in a B&M store again (at least for stone selection). The dealers that these stores deal with seem entirely uninterested in providing the kind of information you can readily obtain on GOG or JA.

 

[bachelor78]

potential new problem--I thought he had an idealscope but I think he only has a hearts and arrows viewer. I've just learned this is not helpful for light performance. Can I properly evaluate this without one?

 

[luvdajules]

Don't forget Crafted by Infinity, from where John comes from! Also, don't forget Phoenix's 2.5 + ct. H&A BGD stone she's selling for $29k (it;s H/Si2 and a beauty). I'm glad this experience opened you up for online selections! Do you have a setting in mind or designer? There's a lot of helpful experts for just that here too!

 

[Lorelei]

Thanks so much for commenting John. And thanks Lorelei and Jules for your help too. I'm looking at the ESi1 today. I will take a look in the idealscope. I'm hoping it looks good (I'm just looking for deeper red and an absence of white right?), as I'm getting a little fatigued by this process and feel like my head might explode soon! This really has been enlightening, and John I think you were right that I've gotten more particular on cut than most jewelers care too. I think my guy has gotten a little frustrated with me, but I don't see the need to compromise here. I may ultimately buy from the B&M store, but this experience has definitely taught me that there is certainly no stigma or uncertainty with buying online. I've found the online process to be far more transparent, and it just seems to take a lot of the guesswork out of the process. My intuition told me to never buy online, but knowing what I know now I will probably never go in a B&M store again (at least for stone selection). The dealers that these stores deal with seem entirely uninterested in providing the kind of information you can readily obtain on GOG or JA.

I could sense you are getting a little fatigued, I have seen this so many times and it's quite natural and can be a good thing actually. It can be overwhelming once you start delving in with so much information available, it can be hard to make sense of it all and what actually applies to your situation. But this ' info overload' feeling can be useful as it can make you pause to take a breath to consider various options, then move forward with renewed energy. I also have found this to be the case that many of the things we consider here with cut quality can be unheard of or not considered at all away from online vendors that take a keen interest in such things and educating their clients. Maybe your jeweller is a little frustrated as he doesn't quite know the best way to help you due to your knowledge, some of your questions might be unknown territory for them. Also, the H&A viewer is normally used to reveal the precision of the patterning, the best tool is really ASET or Idealscope to judge light return.

What you could do is this if you have the time, purchase an ASET or Idealscope, then once it arrives you can check out diamonds at your leisure if you prefer to stick with b&m stores. Then you will also be equipped for future diamond purchases. If you are in the US, it shouldn't take too long to arrive, then you will be better placed I think to make an informed decision. If you have the time to get this ring together if you aren't proposing for a little while, then you can stick around, read and learn some more here, plus check out b&m diamonds then go from there, but then at least you will know whether you end up buying online or from a store, you made an informed choice.

I hope this helps a bit, please know your buyer's fatigue is natural and will work to your advantage in the long run, this weariness you feel at the moment will pass and you will end up with a ring to be proud of.

 

[bachelor78]

I just saw the ESi1 and it really sparkled. I moved it around in all sorts of light and it looked really good to me...much better than the original steep and deep. It also looked good under the H&A viewer (although that seemed to depend on how far away I put my eye from the viewer---if I got up real close the hearts didn't look quite as well formed.

Apparently the dealer has offered to take back the stone and scan it (Sarin and something else maybe---some sort of AGA light machine?), as he is near He seems confident that it is an AGS0 light performer. I have agreed to take the stone pending a good report--so I will certainly post that here when I get it. I think that is a better option than me ordering an idealscope and guessing. I'm also a little time sensitive and am anxious to get the process moving.

Hopefully, the report will come back clean and I can move on to my new career as an amateur gemologist!

 

[Lorelei]

I just saw the ESi1 and it really sparkled. I moved it around in all sorts of light and it looked really good to me...much better than the original steep and deep. It also looked good under the H&A viewer (although that seemed to depend on how far away I put my eye from the viewer---if I got up real close the hearts didn't look quite as well formed.

Apparently the dealer has offered to take back the stone and scan it (Sarin and something else maybe---some sort of AGA light machine?), as he is near He seems confident that it is an AGS0 light performer. I have agreed to take the stone pending a good report--so I will certainly post that here when I get it. I think that is a better option than me ordering an idealscope and guessing. I'm also a little time sensitive and am anxious to get the process moving.

Hopefully, the report will come back clean and I can move on to my new career as an amateur gemologist!

That's brilliant news! Also you are doing a fantastic job and that you notice its improved performance over the S/D stone is very useful, once you know what to look for and have viewed a few diamonds, it's surprising how your eye develops. That the dealer has offered to run a Sarin scan is extremely valuable and by the sound of it do some analysis on the light return for you, what a good chap!

It sounds as if you might have found your diamond pending a favourable report on the above, but that you really like the look of this one is best of all, great job!

Please keep us posted as to what happens and we would definitely love to hear the results when you have them, it could be your search is almost over! Then you can definitely move forward with your new career as an amateur gemologist!

 

[John P]

Thanks so much for commenting John.

You're welcome. Do know that analysis-paralysis is common in this process, particularly from detail-oriented people. Diamonds are complex, cut involves a steep learning curve and this is a major purchase in terms of both cash and importance, as I sense you want the best possible for your intended. It doesn't help that most diamonds are rather average or below-average in cut. This is why you're being complimented here; you're doing better for yourself than most consumers in the most important area of beauty (cut). You are even surpassing the mainstream knowledge (or admitted-knowledge) of many professional jewelry salespeople.

I just saw the ESi1 and it really sparkled. I moved it around in all sorts of light and it looked really good to me...much better than the original steep and deep. It also looked good under the H&A viewer (although that seemed to depend on how far away I put my eye from the viewer---if I got up real close the hearts didn't look quite as well formed.

The first sentence is most important. Also good to know the cut-consistency seems solid.

Apparently the dealer has offered to take back the stone and scan it (Sarin and something else maybe---some sort of AGA light machine?), as he is near He seems confident that it is an AGS0 light performer. I have agreed to take the stone pending a good report--so I will certainly post that here when I get it. I think that is a better option than me ordering an idealscope and guessing. I'm also a little time sensitive and am anxious to get the process moving.

You mentioned that your jeweler might be getting a bit frustrated. That is logical, as you're being more discriminating than most clients. With those proportions and a nice precision-footprint (H&A) viewer the check boxes are getting ticked positively, so it may be one of the better diamonds he has sourced. He likely knows it's great and you wanting to vet it further can test patience, but it's a big spend and these details do matter, and will continue to become more mainstream. To quote Martin Rapaport: "Consumers are not becoming LESS educated."

His willingness to get a Sarin-scan of the diamond speaks highly of him. If he's talking about the AGS Proprietary Grading Software the .SRN file (data file produced by the Sarin scan) will be needed, if the goal is testing to see if it's also AGS 0 in performance. If it's some other report than the AGS PGS you can even post the diamond's .SRN file here and I can run it through the AGS software Thursday. Your descriptions, the jeweler's commitment to serving you and the fact that he's willing to produce a .SRN are all positive and make me inclined to think it's a great performer.

Hopefully, the report will come back clean and I can move on to my new career as an amateur gemologist!

Lorelei mentioned that "once you know what to look for and have viewed a few diamonds, it's surprising how your eye develops." She's 100% right. Whether you continue as an amateur gemmie or not I expect you will view diamonds differently for all-time now. It's a fascinating and fun world.

 

[John P]

Thanks, John and shout out to Maui, so jealous!

I just raised my coffee mug and toasted the surf to you luvdajules. And thanks Lorelei ... it's Mrs. Pollard who really deserves the vacay, but I get to tag along

 

[luvdajules]

He He, Gee, thanks John, I feel so special After we take the obligatory family trip to Disney, Hawaii is next! I've heard it's paradise. Enjoy and glad the Mrs. is getting her batteries charged.
Bachelor, please post again with images and photos of your gorgeous stone. Have an idea about settings? And wedding bands to work with it? There's more diamond joy to explore

 

[bachelor78]

Ok, I'm getting a little frustrated here. I thought I was getting a light report and assumed that meant and ASET or an Idealscope image, but what I received was a GCAL report, which doesn't appear to have the specificity I am looking for. I don't know why this is so difficult for these guys--I'm just asking for information that I can readily obtain for a competing stone on the internet. The GCAL report has a optical brilliance rating of excellent, but this only states it is between 93-98%.

I can't seem to attach the GCAL report, but here is a dropbox link. The angles seem to be consistent with GIA, but the GCAL is now showing a 60% table, which is concerning. The light performance diagram also looks closer to the lower end of excellent to me. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rh8pihmd7cgupjt/GCAL%20Cert%202.02.pdf

 

[JulieN]

Can you link the GIA report again? this thread is getting a bit long for navigation.