Is this a European Cut or Transitional?

[bluelotus]

Hello all,
I have been lurking here for some time as I also have an interest in the old cuts. I am one of the guys who likes to wear a nice ring every now and again. I used to love wearing the ring my mother gave dad on their wedding in 1960. Sadly I no longer have the ring but it had a half carat OEC that was all fire! I have wanted to find another ever since the stone was lost.

My mom passed away last month and in her memory I am hoping to make three memorial rings for us three children (I have 2 sisters) and am looking at the simple bridge settings at Caleb Meyer's shop here in Philly. I like the timeless simplicity of the designs and the fact that they don't look like engagement rings. I am looking to find a 1.5 to 2 carat OEC/TC stone for myself. One sister wants an emerald or sapphire, the other a garnet.

To make a long story short I have found some stones that many of you old cut-purists would classify as transitional. There are currently two men's estate rings on e-bay in the neighborhood of 1.7 to 2 carats and advertised as VVS. One is an L the other H-I. Both are priced around 7.5k. One appears to be a true OEC while the other looks to be transitional . . . I am waiting to get some good photos but will attach the best photo I have. In the meantime I have found another stone that looks to me to be a late European cut or transitional. It's advertised as an VS2 L and I am waiting on the report to see what it says.

I guess I have a couple of questions. The first is, how would you classify the stone I have attached a photo of? The second, is 7k too much to spend on high color VVS stone?

Thanks!
Gregory

 

[bluelotus]

This one is listed as an L 2 ct vs2. Took me a moment to figure out how postig images works. . .

 

[bluelotus]

This is the ebay ring advertised as 1.7 ct VVS H-I. . .

 

[bluelotus]

One more thing to share. . . I am most interested in getting a stone with a great cut and good clarity and fiery brilliance. . . color is less important to me. If anyone has any ideas about sourcing a stone here in Philly do let me know. I am open to looking around.

 

[yennyfire]

Neither of those has what I would call a great cut. I'm not sure if they're transitional or not, just not very appealing (to me). I'm on my phone, so can't post examples, but if you search there are a bunch of threads.

 

[bluelotus]

Thanks yennyfire. . . take a look at the other one on e-bay. This one is also listed as an L but I suspect it is probably an M or an N. . .

 

[yennyfire]

This one looks like an oec based on the one photo. It does look pretty warm, but might be worth asking for better photos.

 

[bluelotus]

I've spent a bit of time looking at different cuts that people have posted and one stone that keeps coming back to me in my mind is the following that was posted some time ago by vip0802. Beautiful stone!

 

[bluelotus]

Here are more of one of the rings. . .
Listed as 1.89 ct center stone, L, VVS

Is that dark center what is called "obstruction"?

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think the first one you posted looks simialr to VIPs stone. The diamond is showing some leakage on the left side of the table, but I know that style of cut and like it. I have a similar cut in my e-ring. Its a sort of early ideal cut, some call transitional, or a later OEC with exceptional symmetry and long lower girdle facets. I regret to inform you that it is a very rare type of cut.

That last one in the men's ring is a classic OEC and looks very tinted.

This diamond is a gorgeous make and looks a lot like VIPs stone: http://jewelsbyericagrace.smugmug.com/Jewelry/Loose-Diamonds/207ct-Old-European-Cut-Diamond/26963003_zwjM4f#!i=2260181265&k=qpL8CvC

Priced at $18k.

 

[bluelotus]

Thanks Dreamer for the comments. The other rather unclear double image I posted is from an ebay vendor whose images are maddeningly unclear. I repeatedly requested better images but was finally told that I would simply have to purchase the ring in which it is set then return it if not satisfied. Seems a little backwards to me. . . would rather actually see what he has then determine whether or not a lower offer is appropriate. It appears that he has some very nice older stones in vintage engagement rings but is not particularly savvy about describing cut. This one I thought looked more like VIPs from the blurry photos.

In any event, I did notice those areas of leakage on the first stone . . . is this typical of these transitional stones? That stone has a depth of about 62.5% and a table of about 50%. I do like the cut very much but the leakage concerns me. Does this happen only in certain conditions? Is this simply a characteristic of these early cuts?

 

[bluelotus]

I took a look at the JbEG diamond you posted. . . it is very beautiful but I do see some leakage even in that stone. It appears to be shallower than one would expect to see in a classic OEC.

I am just getting through Gilberston book and it is quite informative. . . how interesting that Morse appears to have really laid the groundwork for what Tolkowsky was credited for. . .

 

[bluelotus]

Hello again. Here are some other views of the first diamond I posted. Best I could get from seller. . . very dirty!
Your comments/observations are appreciated.

 

[GemFever]

Tough call from just those photos. I found the thread where vip0802's tranny is discussed, turns out it has a depth of 57.8% and table of 62%. How does that even work? And yet it looks so beautiful in her photos. Just goes to show that you have to see the stone in person to know. If the seller has a good return policy on the ring, can you maybe buy it and check it out?

In terms of leakage, I'm guessing that a little is normal for an old cut. Not 100% sure, but after seeing the unusually-proportioned stones that look beautiful (Vip's and Kelpie's), I'd say just see it in person.