Is 35.2 crown and 40.9 pavilion steep deep?

[rogue]

Hi all, I'm thinking about a stone with HCA score of 2.4, Table 57.0, Depth 62.1, Crown 35.2, Pavilion 40.9.

Is that potentially going to be dark in the steep deep way or is this is a situation where I could trust my eyes if it looks okay to me? I'm always so hesitant of the latter because I'm worried that there may be an environment that I don't see at the moment which could be an environment where the stone will perform poorly. Thanks for your thoughts!

 

[Karl_K]

Have any images?

 

[LLJsmom]

35.4 and 40.9 on the right in the pic on top. It’s my favorite MRB. Usually bright. Whitish or colorful. Rarely ever dark and exhibits lots of colorful flashes.

On the bottom, it’s the stone on the left. Also shown is the AGS report.

So I think it could be a beautiful stone.

 

[headlight]

It’s an AGS000 so I’m not sure what there is to question.

 

[lovedogs]

I think the general consensus is that the HCA isn't needed for AGS000 stones. However, it's hard to see the AGS report light performance thingy in black and white (hard without the colors). It looks like there might be some leakage based on the AGS report, but again it's hard to "read" without the colors.

In the pics is it the one set in a ring, or the one in the ring holder?

 

[LLJsmom]

It’s an AGS000 so I’m not sure what there is to question.

True. Just saying that AGS000 can happen with those numbers. Thus hard to say whether a stone with similar numbers could or could not be AGS000 if not graded by AGS.

 

[LLJsmom]

I think the general consensus is that the HCA isn't needed for AGS000 stones. However, it's hard to see the AGS report light performance thingy in black and white (hard without the colors). It looks like there might be some leakage based on the AGS report, but again it's hard to "read" without the colors.

In the pics is it the one set in a ring, or the one in the ring holder?

AGS 000 is In the ring.

and yes, there is leakage in the report. IRL, very hard to see it. I can now, if I try hard and know where to look.

And so I don't confuse people, the stones I posted were not the stone the OP asked about. The OP just asked whether it would be dark. I posted these pics to show that an even steeper and deeper stone is not dark at all. That's all I'm saying.

 

[lovedogs]

AGS 000 is In the ring.

and yes, there is leakage in the report. IRL, very hard to see it. I can now, if I try hard and know where to look.

And so I don't confuse people, the stones I posted were not the stone the OP asked about. The OP just asked whether it would be dark. I posted these pics to show that an even steeper and deeper stone is not dark at all. That's all I'm saying.

omg I'm so sorry @LLJsmom ! My phone was having a meltdown and showed your post under OPs name (somehow I think Karl's post got formatted oddly on my phone so I didn't see anything between OPs post and yours). Sorry for the extreme confusion!

 

[Karl_K]

Whats in the averages and in particular the lgf% make a huge difference in borderline stones.
Those numbers have the potential to be ags0 to ags3 or worse.

 

[rogue]

I don't think I have anything too helpful. Still shot of the stone below.

 

[LLJsmom]

Whats in the averages and in particular the lgf% make a huge difference in borderline stones.
Those numbers have the potential to be ags0 to ags3 or worse.

I guess your point @Karl_K is that you can’t tell just from the numbers. I agree.

 

[Karl_K]

I don't think I have anything too helpful. Still shot of the stone below.

Whats the clarity grade and has it been checked to be eyeclean to your standards by the dealer?

Cut wise the best your going to get with the info provided is a guess. My guess is in person it would be very nice but probably not the best in reflector images(is/aset).

 

[rogue]

Thanks as always for your thoughts! It’s SI1 and I’m not sure how I’m going to feel about the inclusion under the table in real life. But I’m looking at fairly large stones (another potential ding re: inclusion) so want to keep an open mind given price and availability.

 

[flyingpig]

Hard to predict.
Can be super ideal quality

I don't think I have anything too helpful. Still shot of the stone below.

35.2/40.9 can be near super ideal or a train-wreck with wonky pavilion. Unfortunately, this is closer to the latter.

 

[gm89uk]

The proportions are as such that if they are tight you can have a beautiful well cut diamond, but they are at a cliff edge where the variation of the individual angles (that contribute to the average of 35.2 and 40.9) can lead to very reduced performance.

It's not a tightly cut diamond. If you saw it in a shop you might like it and keep it, but there are better options online to choose from.

 

[rogue]

Hard to predict.
Can be super ideal quality

35.2/40.9 can be near super ideal or a train-wreck with wonky pavilion. Unfortunately, this is closer to the latter.

Thank you all. It looks like with the inclusion plus the reasonable potential for poor performance, this one will be a pass. But flyingpig, out of curiosity, what about the photo suggests to you the likelihood of a wonky pavilion?

 

[flyingpig]

As PA reaches 41, you begin to see these. But the size and symmetry are a bit off even considering the diamond is tilted, indicating some noticeable variation in how the pavilion is cut.