Parti sapphire dimension concern

[Sapphhunting]

Hi first time posting here! I have been looking for a parti sapphire as a ring centre stone, and recently decided to have one shipped to view in person (see pictures from a video). Listed as 1.64ct unheated, loupe clean, origin Madagascar.

However while waiting for it to arrive I'm having a second thought/ concern on its cut - the dimensions are 6.80 x 5.60 x 5.20mm. This gives a smaller face up even though it's 1.64ct, and I'm worried the stone is cut too deep to achieve a low profile setting.

Could you share your opinion please, thanks! If people are keen I will update in a few days once I receive the sapphire

 

[Autumn in New England]

Hi first time posting here! I have been looking for a parti sapphire as a ring centre stone, and recently decided to have one shipped to view in person (see pictures from a video). Listed as 1.64ct unheated, loupe clean, origin Madagascar.

However while waiting for it to arrive I'm having a second thought/ concern on its cut - the dimensions are 6.80 x 5.60 x 5.20mm. This gives a smaller face up even though it's 1.64ct, and I'm worried the stone is cut too deep to achieve a low profile setting.

Could you share your opinion please, thanks! If people are keen I will update in a few days once I receive the sapphire

I really love the look of the cool green and warm green together in this stone. It's an interesting vibe.

So first off, yes, it's a very deep ("heavy") stone. The depth is almost as great as the width. As you already observed, this makes it face-up smaller. You'll have to decide whether that's going to bother you. Can you find a similar color in a more balanced cut?

As far as still being able to set it in a low-profile mounting, sure. The pavilion is probably only around 4mm. If the stone has a high crown or particularly thick girdle, it's even less than that.

Good luck!

 

[LilAlex]

Pretty gem! And welcome!

Don't share the vendor unless you have this on hold. I might be tempted!

Be aware that in small sizes, the parti-color nature is harder to appreciate; more likely it will be your little secret (which has always been plenty good for me, tbh).

It is quite deep. This is contributing to depth of color, which you and we like. It also makes it face up small for size, as you point out. It is possible to quantify this compromise (to some degree). You can go to a carat-weight estimator like Dendritics and play around. With a more typical depth-to-short-edge ratio of 75% or less, this stone would be closer to 4mm in depth instead of 5.2mm. And plug those sets of numbers in (along with stone type -- corundum) and some subjective assessments of pavilion "bulginess" (yours looks like a diamond pavilion) to see what you get. With those data, I estimate that with a more "typical" depth of 4mm for these face-up dimensions, you would be looking at a stone that is 1/3 ct smaller. That is, you are not wasting a ton of money -- especially if the depth is materially contributing to the appearance, which I suspect it is.

Also: the one mm extra depth in this stone should not impact the ring design much, if at all!

ETA: I agree 100% with everything @Autumn in New England says above -- it was not there when I started writing!

 

[Autumn in New England]

1. Be aware that in small sizes, the parti-color nature is harder to appreciate; more likely it will be your little secret (which has always been plenty good for me, tbh).

2. It is quite deep. This is contributing to depth of color, which you and we like. It also makes it face up small for size, as you point out. It is possible to quantify this compromise (to some degree). You can go to a carat-weight estimator like Dendritics and play around. With a more typical depth-to-short-edge ratio of 75% or less, this stone would be closer to 4mm in depth instead of 5.2mm. And plug those sets of numbers in (along with stone type -- corundum) and some subjective assessments of pavilion "bulginess" (yours looks like a diamond pavilion) to see what you get. With those data, I estimate that with a more "typical" depth of 4mm for these face-up dimensions, you would be looking at a stone that is 1/3 ct smaller. That is, you are not wasting a ton of money -- especially if the depth is materially contributing to the appearance, which I suspect it is.

You always remember to include great observations I've neglected to mention!

 

[LilAlex]

You always remember to include great observations I've neglected to mention!

Probably because you have not made these mistakes like I have!

 

[Sapphhunting]

I really love the look of the cool green and warm green together in this stone. It's an interesting vibe.

So first off, yes, it's a very deep ("heavy") stone. The depth is almost as great as the width. As you already observed, this makes it face-up smaller. You'll have to decide whether that's going to bother you. Can you find a similar color in a more balanced cut?

As far as still being able to set it in a low-profile mounting, sure. The pavilion is probably only around 4mm. If the stone has a high crown or particularly thick girdle, it's even less than that.

Good luck!

Thanks! I'm trying really hard to be patient while the stone is on its way haha. Hoping to find out soon how much I'm bothered by the depth and the smaller face up look (sob)...
Appreciate your insight on the mounting too!

 

[Sapphhunting]

Pretty gem! And welcome!

Don't share the vendor unless you have this on hold. I might be tempted!

Be aware that in small sizes, the parti-color nature is harder to appreciate; more likely it will be your little secret (which has always been plenty good for me, tbh).

It is quite deep. This is contributing to depth of color, which you and we like. It also makes it face up small for size, as you point out. It is possible to quantify this compromise (to some degree). You can go to a carat-weight estimator like Dendritics and play around. With a more typical depth-to-short-edge ratio of 75% or less, this stone would be closer to 4mm in depth instead of 5.2mm. And plug those sets of numbers in (along with stone type -- corundum) and some subjective assessments of pavilion "bulginess" (yours looks like a diamond pavilion) to see what you get. With those data, I estimate that with a more "typical" depth of 4mm for these face-up dimensions, you would be looking at a stone that is 1/3 ct smaller. That is, you are not wasting a ton of money -- especially if the depth is materially contributing to the appearance, which I suspect it is.

Also: the one mm extra depth in this stone should not impact the ring design much, if at all!

ETA: I agree 100% with everything @Autumn in New England says above -- it was not there when I started writing!

Thank you, such valuable advice!! I have been attracted to parti sapphires ever since I've known their existence haha.

Your analysis would be quite accurate - I have seen a few in person with similar face up measurements and they were mostly around 1.3ct.
(Funny story I started searching for bigger ones after seeing a 2ct one - sadly with large window. My luck then led me to this super deep 1.64ct )

I have read here that sapphires don't necessarily have a "correct" cut like diamonds... I assume this one is just a very extreme case and its depth won't bring much other issue for a ring?
Will see if I can settle my mind on a smaller face but more fun colours

 

[Avondale]

I’d say you have sufficient real estate here. PSers live by the motto “the bigger the better” but a small gem with strong colour is going to hold its ground. One of my favourite rings to wear boats a smaller than this sapphire as a solitaire. It’s colour rocks my socks off and I’ve never felt it was too small to appreciate or enjoy.

P.S. We are most definitely keen on an update.

 

[Autumn in New England]

Probably because you have not made these mistakes like I have!

How quickly we forget my mistakes.

"Look, it has a rusty bottlecap stuck in it... it must be real!"

 

[Autumn in New England]

Thank you, such valuable advice!! I have been attracted to parti sapphires ever since I've known their existence haha.

Your analysis would be quite accurate - I have seen a few in person with similar face up measurements and they were mostly around 1.3ct.
(Funny story I started searching for bigger ones after seeing a 2ct one - sadly with large window. My luck then led me to this super deep 1.64ct )

I have read here that sapphires don't necessarily have a "correct" cut like diamonds... I assume this one is just a very extreme case and its depth won't bring much other issue for a ring?
Will see if I can settle my mind on a smaller face but more fun colours

My red spinel is, unfortunately, quite deep. But when I got it home and saw how it added to its brilliance and saturation, I couldn't let it go. It's 2.72ct., but faces up more like a 2.25ct. stone.

 

[LilAlex]

"Look, it has a rusty bottlecap stuck in it... it must be real!"

I love it! I'm thinking a cab with the bottlecap as the base? Can you imagine how old that bottlecap must be?!

Well now I have my eyes peeled for a bottlecap suspended in amber...

 

[Autumn in New England]

I love it! I'm thinking a cab with the bottlecap as the base? Can you imagine how old that bottlecap must be?!

Well now I have my eyes peeled for a bottlecap suspended in amber...

 

[LilAlex]

I have read here that sapphires don't necessarily have a "correct" cut like diamonds... I assume this one is just a very extreme case and its depth won't bring much other issue for a ring?

This is correct. And this case is not very extreme. Yours seems to face up beautifully. Where the excess baggage really matters is when it detracts from the appearance. A pretty stone that is a little deep is worlds better than an unappealing stone in which one factor may be excessive depth. I am not even convinced that overdeep generally detracts apart from affecting "value." (Not value of the stone, but how good a deal it is.) When I buy an overdeep stone (and I did this earlier this year because it was a fine color and an attractive acceptable price-point), I do the dollars-per-carat math both ways -- with the actual ct-weight and with the equivalent for a conventional-depth stone. The difference is virtually never more than I quoted above. But if it's a stone that isn't beautiful, then none of this math is worthwhile.

As you pointed out above, for a large stone, extra depth (90+ % vs., I don't know, 60 - 75%) could mean a few additional mm on the pavilion side and that could impact design choice. I have an inexpensive gray sapphire and a funky-colored chrysoberyl where this was a consideration.

 

[Sapphhunting]

I’m back with the sapphire with me! It has finally arrived ✌
Quite happy with the quality, it even has a gentle blue! Photos don’t do justice… uploading 2 for now from my phone. Only if I can upload the videos haha

A pretty stone that is a little deep is worlds better than an unappealing stone in which one factor may be excessive depth.

In terms of the depth.. the pretty colours make it less of a worry . Like @LilAlex said it really has a more sophisticated look thanks to the deeper cut

 

[newtojewels]

I’m back with the sapphire with me! It has finally arrived ✌
Quite happy with the quality, it even has a gentle blue! Photos don’t do justice… uploading 2 for now from my phone. Only if I can upload the videos haha


In terms of the depth.. the pretty colours make it less of a worry . Like @LilAlex said it really has a more sophisticated look thanks to the deeper cut

You can upload videos to https://imgur.com/ and then post it as media once you've copied the video link!

 

[Autumn in New England]

I’m back with the sapphire with me! It has finally arrived ✌
Quite happy with the quality, it even has a gentle blue! Photos don’t do justice… uploading 2 for now from my phone. Only if I can upload the videos haha


In terms of the depth.. the pretty colours make it less of a worry . Like @LilAlex said it really has a more sophisticated look thanks to the deeper cut

Ooooo I see a lime green, forest green, and teal blue-green. She's enchanting!

 

[Sapphhunting]

Hello again friends, sharing some videos taken during the day.
The sapphire will be the centre stone of my engagement ring

A CAD is in progress - apart from a low profile mentioned earlier, I requested split shanks and my partner also wanted to add side stones. Not sure how these will work out as I haven’t seen much design incorporating both… if anyone has any suggestions I’m keen to see

 

[musicloveranthony]

Ok that is beautiful!! Love the color and the cut

 

[Starstruck8]

Beautiful stone!

I was a bit worried that the vendor's pics in your first post may have been a bit err ... 'flattering'. They often are. But it looks even better in your pics. It's one of the best looking parti sapphires I've seen, with bright clean colours and fascinating variation. I'm sure the 'excess' depth is helping the colours. You've done well!

 

[Avondale]

The stone is just about perfect. Nothing more can be said.

A CAD is in progress - apart from a low profile mentioned earlier, I requested split shanks and my partner also wanted to add side stones. Not sure how these will work out as I haven’t seen much design incorporating both… if anyone has any suggestions I’m keen to see

You’ll be wearing the ring, only your wants matter. Your fiancé is entitled to an opinion, but that’s just about the extent of it. Do the design the way you want it to be.

 

[LilAlex]

...and my partner also wanted to add side stones

I get it! Since it's an e-ring, it's also a reflection of the presenter's taste and means. However: all that goes out the window, imo, when the recipient is designing the ring. (Unless they have some special knowledge and can rationally bring you around to their way of thinking.) Tell them to put side stones on their own ring! (Apologies for the clumsy gender-neutrality!)

 

[Sapphhunting]

Beautiful stone!

I was a bit worried that the vendor's pics in your first post may have been a bit err ... 'flattering'. They often are. But it looks even better in your pics. It's one of the best looking parti sapphires I've seen, with bright clean colours and fascinating variation. I'm sure the 'excess' depth is helping the colours. You've done well!

Thank you thank you! I definitely had the same doubts about the vendor video haha, like you said they’re often extra juicy than irl… went to a “sapphire specialty” shop a while back (they do a lot of online promotions), their stones just looked much less than their posts.

 

[Sapphhunting]

I get it! Since it's an e-ring, it's also a reflection of the presenter's taste and means. However: all that goes out the window, imo, when the recipient is designing the ring. (Unless they have some special knowledge and can rationally bring you around to their way of thinking.) Tell them to put side stones on their own ring! (Apologies for the clumsy gender-neutrality!)

Thanks for the reminder!! It’s such a timely one. My partner definitely wants to give me full freedom in designing the ring, while I was rather the one worried about dominating the process
With all going well I shall update with the final product