Opinions on a stone

[scardali]

I had created a post called "Requesting images from a vendor not so computer savy" about 1 month back where I had mentioned I was working with a gentleman out of NY (whereas I live in DC) whom my brother used to get a stone a few years back and was very happy with. On my last trip to Long Island to see the family, I was able to sneak away from the girlfriend for a little while to view a stone I had inquired about remotely. Unfortunately that day was a bit gloomy so I got to see the stone under relatively poor lighting. So my last post was to ask about appraisers and about any methods for getting pictures taken so I didn't have to sneak away again to see the stone.

I've since requested that the stone be taken to GCAL and had a certificate created and I was hoping I might get some of your opinions. My hopes are to get an "eye clean" (I've read some of the controversy over this highly subjective concept) SI2 with G or better color, and of course get the best bang for my buck as far as brilliance. This stone comes with a GIA cert and all that cert mentions are 3 twining wisps. Looking at the stone with a loop, I saw much more going on, but what I could see in this gentleman's dining room under low light was a very pretty stone.

This GCAL cert shows quite a bit more, but even talking to the woman who graded the stone said it was a nice SI2.

That being said, any opinions any of you might have would be welcomed before I take the plunge.

Thanks in advance.

 

[yssie]

Eyeclean SI2 is possible - even in bigger sizes - I''ve got one! Just like yours, it has 3 twinning wisps on the GIA cert but a lot more going on under a loupe. The "going on" is very visible in blown-up photos (if you take a lot, that might be something to consider) but you can''t see anything IRL face up.

Can you post all the certs? The pros can tell you more.

Can you keep the stone for a few days while you make your decision? That would give you enough time to really look at it without the I-need-to-figure-this-out-now pressure.

 

[stone-cold11]

You are not allow to link to external images. The link will be taken down by the admins. Please attached the images here. SI2 will depend on you and what you think your gf''s comfort level is with that level of eye-clean.

 

[Lorelei]

Hi scardali

Please can you upload the images directly here please, linking to photo hosting sites is against forum policy, thanks!

SI2 clarities can in fact be eyeclean, not all will be but this grade is definitely worth considering.

 

[scardali]

Sorry about that guys. I sent a msg to the admins referencing the thread name and requesting they be removed as I can no longer edit the original post. I was having trouble attaching images to the thread, so I went with links but I can certainly imagine where that could lead to problems.

Seems I can attach only 1 pic per reply, so I''ll try another here in a moment.

 

[scardali]

Ok so top view, twining wisps.

Again, according to the conversation I had with GCAL, I think that these pictures show much much more than you can see in person until you get it under a loop.

 

[scardali]

Stone specifications:

 

[scardali]

Proportions and symmetry.

Thanks again all.

 

[scardali]

Finally, low res (but best res I have) of the GIA inclusion plot.

It simply shows 3 twining wisps from the top view and shows no inclusions from the bottom which I find interesting given the attached picture.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Very likelly eye clean, but carrying some dead weight that in my book is worse than an eye visible inclusion because when you know where to look that part will be dead - but if you never learn to know the difference you will never know

 

[scardali]

Thanks Gary. Can you explain a little more of what you're thinking when you're describing the "dead weight" part? I think you might have a bit of a different perspective than I've heard before so I'm very interested. I think I understand the "once you know where to look you'll always know how to find them" part but I also understand and am comfortable with the fact that this stone is an SI2.

I think I already know my answer as to how I'm going to feel with this stone in the long run and that is going to be that I'll be proud of the find and as far as "mind clean" goes, I think I'm going to be pleased but that is hard to say without spending some actual time (in days instead of hours) with the stone where I can take it into different light situations and also have it mounted instead of loose.

I'm in interested in any opinions, so thank you. If there are any pitfalls that anyone sees if what I'm looking at here, that would also definitely be something I'd be interested in hearing.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Run it through HCA - top tools bar under Tools - cut adviser

 

[scardali]

Punching in what I think are the correct dimensions:

Depth: 62.8
Table: 60.0
Crown Angle: 35.2
Pavillion: 41.1
Culet: 00.2

I see that the HCA tool gives it a low score of 4.3. I'm a little surprised given GCAL's rating of excellent light return but I imagine there are things that I'm not considering. But this is exactly why I created a post here before buying.

Is the GCAL light and symmetry rating just not giving a full enough "picture" to include details as to why the HCA tool is giving it such a low score? I'm still not sure how to make heads or tails of the GCAL versus HCA ratings.

 

[stone-cold11]

The rating is off, IMO, as you can see a ring of slight leakage at the edge of the table.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 10/1/2009 7:25:21 AM
Author: scardali
Punching in what I think are the correct dimensions:

Depth: 62.8
Table: 60.0
Crown Angle: 35.2
Pavillion: 31.1
Culet: 00.2

I see that the HCA tool gives it a low score of 4.3. I'm a little surprised given GCAL's rating of excellent light return but I imagine there are things that I'm not considering. But this is exactly why I created a post here before buying.

Is the GCAL light and symmetry rating just not giving a full enough 'picture' to include details as to why the HCA tool is giving it such a low score? I'm still not sure how to make heads or tails of the GCAL versus HCA ratings.

I believe that is a typo, pavilion should be 41/ 41.1 Anyway this diamond is what we call a steep deep, this means the crown and pavilion angles won't work effectively together, because of this light leakage is often the result.

Also is the depth is 62.8% or 61.2%?

 

[scardali]

Thank you both Lorelei and Stone-cold. You had both given me some great feedback back on 9/4 for this same stone on a thread called "Requesting images from a vendor not so computer savy" and that info motivated me to request this stone be run through the GCAL grading.

I corrected the pavillion as you were correct and that should be 41.2. As far as the depth being 62.8 or 61.1, looking at the HCA tool, the depth it was looking for was "total depth" and it looked as though I should add the two numbers (61.1 and 1.7) together, which is how I came up with the 62.8. Is that correct?

I''m bummed as it sounds like both of your original apprehensions about leakage are confirmed with that light return diagram. I of course was hoping I found the nice SI2 I was looking for, but all this info is very helpful so I''m grateful to have it.

Thanks folks.

 

[stone-cold11]

No, the total depth is 61.2%. The 1.7% is the girdle thickness. It is already added into the total depth.

Good luck in whatever you decide to do next.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 10/1/2009 8:04:45 AM
Author: scardali
Thank you both Lorelei and Stone-cold. You had both given me some great feedback back on 9/4 for this same stone on a thread called ''Requesting images from a vendor not so computer savy'' and that info motivated me to request this stone be run through the GCAL grading.

I corrected the pavillion as you were correct and that should be 41.2. As far as the depth being 62.8 or 61.1, looking at the HCA tool, the depth it was looking for was ''total depth'' and it looked as though I should add the two numbers (61.1 and 1.7) together, which is how I came up with the 62.8. Is that correct?

I''m bummed as it sounds like both of your original apprehensions about leakage are confirmed with that light return diagram. I of course was hoping I found the nice SI2 I was looking for, but all this info is very helpful so I''m grateful to have it.

Thanks folks.

No, the girdle measurement is already included so 61.1% is the figure to use. Sorry to dash your hopes but it is a risky angle combo and from the images we have leakage is probable - you will find the one!

 

[scardali]

Few more questions if you folks don't mind...

I'm still considering the 1.61 I originally spoke of in this thread but am trying to consider it from a few more angles as well. I've reached out to GCAL to ask if any of the twining-wips reach the surface of the stone. Also, I'm looking at another stone as a comparison, but looking at the ASET image of this stone, if I know how to read it correctly, there's some light loss on this one as well.

That being said, even though I do very much like the size as well as other characteristics of the 1.61, what would your recommendations be as compared to this 1.39 G VS2 (inclusions for the most part aside).

Also, in the case that GCAL cannot tell me whether or not these wisps reach the surface (as they no longer have the stone), what are the chances of this thing really breaking and is that the only potential downfall to them reaching the surface? If I insure the stone, then that covers the scenario that it actually breaks correct?

Finally, with regards to all the previous talk about light leakage, I'm not sure if I'm over thinking this or if this really is a stone I should stay away from. I am not an expert, nor is my girlfriend. So if this is even a pretty nice stone, as long as she can hold it up to another (mounted) from time to time and not see any major flaws, I think we'll both be happy. I don't know have much experience in reading the GCAL light results nor that of ASET images, so if we are really only talking "slight light loss" with this 1.61 G SI2, I will probably still consider it despite it being on the border of steep and deep.

I'm not looking for perfection, I'm really more looking for a pretty stone that I can feel confident is/was a good buy. I know I'm looking for a bit of hand-holding here, but if any of you have any further thoughts, I'd be very interested to hear them.

Thanks!
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/5367/