GCAL Report for Diamond

[rycbar]

How does this look? It's on the list of one of the ones I wanted to buy.

 

[tyty333]

Can you drop down in color and get a better cut while still staying
In budget?

 

[rycbar]

That would be this

 

[tyty333]

This one is slightly leaky but I do believe it is better cut then the first one. Are they at the same location? Can you have a gemologist
pull them and tell you what they see? What has the best fire, brilliance, white light? Which stone is the best combination of those
3 things? Can you order both stones and send back the one you dont want? That way you can play with them and evaluate them
yourself or, you can take them to an appraiser and ask them questions about the stones.

I am having a hard time seeing the numbers on this new stone.

Edit---

Have you used the HCA tool to get more info on the stones...
https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca

Here is the cheat sheet numbers...yes, there are stones that fall outside these numbers that are still good.

depth - 60 - 62% - although my personal preference is to allow up to 62.4%***
table - 54- 57%
crown angle - 34- 35 degrees
pavilion angle - 40.6- 41 degrees
girdle - avoid extremes, look for thin to slightly thick, thin to medium etc
polish and symmetry - very good and above

note - with crown and pavilion angles at the shallower ends ( CA 34- PA 40.6) and steeper ( CA 35- PA 41) check to make sure these angles complement in that particular diamond - eyeballs, Idealscope, trusted vendor input - check as appropriate!

Also here are some good angle combos which might help from one of the experts.

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.***

***copied and posted from a Lorelei post

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

These are both lab-grown diamonds? Just making sure - typically RockyTalky is reserved for natural diamonds only - this does not invalidate your quest for information on these stones, but you may move the thread to the MMD forum?

 

[rycbar]

I looked at the rules, these are real diamonds not imitation diamonds. The way immitation diamonds are defined is any substance that is not diamond trying to pass off as diamond such as cz, moissanite, white sapphire. They further do not define diamond as exclusively natural diamond.

...but thanks for being zero help.

 

[Ella]

I looked at the rules, these are real diamonds not imitation diamonds. The way immitation diamonds are defined is any substance that is not diamond trying to pass off as diamond such as cz, moissanite, white sapphire. They further do not define diamond as exclusively natural diamond.

...but thanks for being zero help.

He's correct, we have a forum for Man made diamonds, Rockytalky is only for mined diamonds. I will be moving the thread there.

 

[denverappraiser]

I looked at the rules, these are real diamonds not imitation diamonds. The way immitation diamonds are defined is any substance that is not diamond trying to pass off as diamond such as cz, moissanite, white sapphire. They further do not define diamond as exclusively natural diamond.

...but thanks for being zero help.

Well, the FTC defines diamonds as exclusive natural diamond, but I agree it's a totally different from imitations and this didn't start out a semantic question. Both of those look like pretty stones. The issue is likely to come down to the details of that SI2 clarity grade and possibly the price. What's your question?