OEC: Worth polishing/faceting the girdle?

[Dreamer_D]

I just got this OEC today and it is stunning. It has some little "mouse bites" on the girdle, none visible with the naked eye. Is it worth faceting or polishing the girdle? Is it necessary?

It is 5.2mm for scale.































try to get below the blog box.





Not far enough....

 

[Dreamer_D]

Seen here around 10 o'clock

 

[yennyfire]

I guess my answer would depend on how you plan to set it and if the nibbles pose a structural issue. If it's purely cosmetic, then I'd let it go unless knowing that it's there is going to drive you crazy. It's a gorgeous stone!

 

[Dreamer_D]

I guess my answer would depend on how you plan to set it and if the nibbles pose a structural issue. If it's purely cosmetic, then I'd let it go unless knowing that it's there is going to drive you crazy. It's a gorgeous stone!

Thanks Yenny! I meant to post this in RT so asked for it to be moved.

I don't know the answer to any of your questions right now! I bought it thinking one half to some lovely studs, but it is seriously the best performing OEC I have owned and it now seems a shame to not see it all the time. It does look pretty darn good with my 1ct OEC

 

[SparklyOEC]

I agree with Yenny, I think it depends on if it's going to bother you and what you plan to set it in (meaning ring, earring) and what type of setting (bezel or prong). Polishing won't necessarily change the facet pattern either. Personally, it would bother me, but will it bother you in the long run? If it's a nice match for your 1 ct, you only need one more for a 3-stone!

ETA: It's a gorgeous stone! You find the best!

 

[Haven]

Look at that OEC! It's beautiful.

I'd probably polish it, but only because I know it would bother me.

Watcha gonna do with that beauty????

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

OH I dunno--but keep the Belcher setting.....or else!

cheers--Sharon

 

[armywife13]

I personally would, it would bother me.

ETA: What are your plans for this beauty?!?!

 

[ForteKitty]

Shipping plus polishing w/ Ari or BGD will cost almost what you paid, so no, I wouldn't do it. You paid a great price and you dont want to add cost to it if you dont have to! Those little bites wont bother me at all in earrings.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Shipping plus polishing w/ Ari or BGD will cost almost what you paid, so no, I wouldn't do it. You paid a great price and you dont want to add cost to it if you dont have to! Those little bites wont bother me at all in earrings.

Of course Ms Forte knows exactly which ring it was on ebay!

Yes, polishing would cost more than the diamond did, so I am not particularly interested in doing so unless I *needed* to. I am a picky type of gal, but you 100% cannot see these marks in person. It is even hard to see them with the loupe. So really its only on macro photography that you can see them.

My only concern would be if it limited my setting options. For earrings, no worries because they get so little wear. But this diamond is a great match for my 1ct, like its little brother, I am wondering if a ring is a better option.

Sharon beat me with a wet noodle but I am unlikely to keep the stone in this mount. It is very comfortable and low to the finger. When I unset it I will perhaps see if anyone wants to buy the mount. The diamond is 5.2mm which is the calibrated size of a half carat RB so it would be versatile.

Maybe I will set a gem into it and resize it for my mom for her birthday, it would match her engagement ring very well!

 

[Dreamer_D]

I agree with Yenny, I think it depends on if it's going to bother you and what you plan to set it in (meaning ring, earring) and what type of setting (bezel or prong). Polishing won't necessarily change the facet pattern either. Personally, it would bother me, but will it bother you in the long run? If it's a nice match for your 1 ct, you only need one more for a 3-stone!

ETA: It's a gorgeous stone! You find the best!

I don't think it bothers me since you can't see it. I just want the freedom for prong setting the stone if I want it, and I would hate for the chips to get larger.

About 90% of the fun for me in buying these OECs is the mystery of what will arrive in the mail These are the photos that the vendor was using plus a few more. Pretty nasty eh? My other two OECs has equally bad photography. But I am getting good at seeing through the muck Well cut stones have some tell tale elements.

Oh, and the mad deals are also pretty fun.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Here are some more photos.

This little guy has the best faceting yet of any of my OECs. It has FIRE which I have not really seen a tonne of yet, my other OECs favour white light and contrast scintillation more. No darkness under the table ever. If this diamond was bigger I would be set! Can I give it steroids? The one pity about these OECs is you cannot say "I want one like THIS!" unless you pay retail I suppose. I guess I will have to keep hunting.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think this is an older OEC than my other one. It has a higher crown, larger culet, and a "chunkier" look. I love it, my favourite flavour yet.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Some more.

Do you think its too big for a side stone with my 1ct?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Two pretties. In person, they are perfectly matched in color too, which is lucky.

 

[SweetAsscher]

I think it would look amazing as a side stone! I actually like those proportions.

 

[Mara]

I really love the new stone..!! I don't know that I see that they are perfectly matched from the photos, but sometimes in person you see more than in pics yanno? The new stone looks fatter. Are you thinking earrings? If you paired it with your 1c and put another one on the side that would be some serious finger coverage.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I really love the new stone..!! I don't know that I see that they are perfectly matched from the photos, but sometimes in person you see more than in pics yanno? The new stone looks fatter. Are you thinking earrings? If you paired it with your 1c and put another one on the side that would be some serious finger coverage.

I am thinking I want a mate for this one and I will go from there Earrings or three stone.

In person, the nuaces you see in macro photography are lost. This stone has a proportionately higher crown than the larger one, but they look very very similar -- table size, faceting, color are all well matched, close enough in person that I would totally put them together in a ring and happily enjoy.

The "roundness" is likely the different mounts which really affect how the stones look.

 

[Mara]

Haha I meant fatter facets...! It looks def round.

Amazing what a cleaning can do, right?!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Haha I meant fatter facets...! It looks def round.

Amazing what a cleaning can do, right?!

LOL. I thought you meant the smaller one looks "puffier". Anyways, yes the facetig in the middle is rounder. But girl, that is like a 1.5mm area. You can't see that in person. It is pretty darned close even in macro. I was surprised.

 

[TravelingGal]

Haha I meant fatter facets...! It looks def round.

Amazing what a cleaning can do, right?!

LOL. I thought you meant the smaller one looks "puffier". Anyways, yes the facetig in the middle is rounder. But girl, that is like a 1.5mm area. You can't see that in person. It is pretty darned close even in macro. I was surprised.

very pretty! And I totally get what you mean...in macro, people are like, that doesn't match! IRL and under normal viewing conditions, it's a different ball game.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Haha I meant fatter facets...! It looks def round.

Amazing what a cleaning can do, right?!

LOL. I thought you meant the smaller one looks "puffier". Anyways, yes the facetig in the middle is rounder. But girl, that is like a 1.5mm area. You can't see that in person. It is pretty darned close even in macro. I was surprised.

very pretty! And I totally get what you mean...in macro, people are like, that doesn't match! IRL and under normal viewing conditions, it's a different ball game.

We may be ring twins If lighting strikes and a magically find another 5.2mm OEC that matches these ones.

 

[TravelingGal]

Haha I meant fatter facets...! It looks def round.

Amazing what a cleaning can do, right?!

LOL. I thought you meant the smaller one looks "puffier". Anyways, yes the facetig in the middle is rounder. But girl, that is like a 1.5mm area. You can't see that in person. It is pretty darned close even in macro. I was surprised.

very pretty! And I totally get what you mean...in macro, people are like, that doesn't match! IRL and under normal viewing conditions, it's a different ball game.

We may be ring twins If lighting strikes and a magically find another 5.2mm OEC that matches these ones.

I'm sure you will - and the hunt will be fun for you in the meantime! I do see a lot more in that size range, so there are options out there if you are willing to look!

 

[Laila619]

How about a bezel halo? The bezel would protect the girdle. It's soo pretty, Dreamer!! You are a pro at this.

 

[Dreamer_D]

How about a bezel halo? The bezel would protect the girdle. It's soo pretty, Dreamer!! You are a pro at this.

If go for the earring option it will likely be milgrain bezels! But in a ring I don`t like bezels, so I would look into other options if the girdle even needed protection. The chips are in one area and the girdle looks pretty thick in the rest of the stone. I think if the prongs are oriented right it would cover and protect the area.

TGal Yeah there are a lot of stones in this range. But I only want to spend like $2. Makes it a little harder.

 

[Rhea]

Great stone! You're very good at this!

 

[Aerix]

Sent you a message on DB about something I saw that might match this one.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

If you do bezels, then no, I wouldn't polish. But I'd absolutely have to if it wasn't set in a bezel. Very pretty, though. Reminds me a little of the AVR pattern.

I gotta ask, though, I am not getting why some are going to all lengths to get below the blog box??? The text conforms to the size of the box and the picture wasn't wider than the area to the left of the blog box anyway.

 

[ame]

I don't think I would regardless of how you set them but side by side those stones to me don't match well enough. If that dosen't bother you, great, but it would bother me. But the girdle doesn't really, it's an old stone, and it's lived and it shows!

 

[Dreamer_D]

If you do bezels, then no, I wouldn't polish. But I'd absolutely have to if it wasn't set in a bezel. Very pretty, though. Reminds me a little of the AVR pattern.

I gotta ask, though, I am not getting why some are going to all lengths to get below the blog box??? The text conforms to the size of the box and the picture wasn't wider than the area to the left of the blog box anyway.

I orignally posted without all the spaces and the picture got shrunk to about 50% of its size and you could not see the nicks! Try it and you will see. The pimage gets shrunk in that space just as it gets shrunk anytime you post (notice photos never fill the entire posting box?)

Ame old cuts are not for perfectionists If you want perfectly loupe and mathematically matched stones, buy RBs or modern mass cuts like AVRs.

And more generally to all the curious readers who are reading and learning, I will say it again: These stones are perfectly matched in all the ways anyone can see in person with the naked eye. They have about the same proportion table, they have similar faceting, and their colors are matched. Obsessing over the macro-evident nuances in the cuts is a fruitless effort and one best NOT applied to old cuts.