Radiant Diamond Ratio ( depth vs table)

[flyhigh123]

Hi Guys!

I just found this site and its great!

I have a question if anyone can help.
I''m planning on buying a Radiant Diamond, with a ratio as close as 1 as possible. What is a good depth to table percentage that best shows off this diamond?

Also if anyone has any other suggestions for the radiant diamond to look out for that would be great!

BTW, my GF loves the radiant so this is the one i need to find

Thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/19/2010 4:38:16 PM
Author:flyhigh123
Hi Guys!

I just found this site and its great!

I have a question if anyone can help.
I'm planning on buying a Radiant Diamond, with a ratio as close as 1 as possible. What is a good depth to table percentage that best shows off this diamond?

Also if anyone has any other suggestions for the radiant diamond to look out for that would be great!

BTW, my GF loves the radiant so this is the one i need to find

Thanks!

Hi Fly and welcome!

Radiants can't really be judged by numbers as all the depth and table give you are a chalk outline of the stone, having said that, this chart can be used as an initial screening tool but don't worry too much if you fall in love with a diamond which falls outside of these ranges, radiants can be unpredictable!

Radiants show colour more readily than other stones, this is the reason so many fancy colour diamonds end up as these shapes. I would advise making GIA graded H your cutoff initially unless you have seen I and J colour in person and don't mind some warmth in the stone.

Depending on where you choose to buy from, if online, it would be best to put yourself into the hands of a trusted vendor that can supply essential images such as ASET, detailed photographs, plus their expert eye and advice. Of course it always comes down to your taste and preference which stone you like best but a trusted vendor that can be your eyes is invaluable to guide you in the right direction so you can make the right choice.

What I would do if you are planning on buying online, have a look around and if you can't find what you are looking for, contact one of the trusted vendors here, tell them what you are looking for and see what they suggest.

Vendors that may be able to help you are below.

www.goodoldgold.com

www.whiteflash.com

www.jamesallen.com

www.engagementringsdirect.com

Depending on where you are located, it might be possible there is a vendor nearby that also has a brick and mortar store so you could view some stones in person.

Lastly, if you give us an idea of budget then we might be able to suggest some diamonds that might suit you?

 

[flyhigh123]

thanks for the great info!

I''m looking for something in the 2.5 carat range, budget is less than 25k.

I''m mainly looking at VS2 and G color and ups.

Sometimes I see a radiant and the center shows almost a circle, and sometimes, I don''t see a circle. Is there a way to get more of a circle? What I mean is it looks like a circle in a square.

Thanks!

 

[flyhigh123]

How is USA certed?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/19/2010 5:06:05 PM
Author: flyhigh123
thanks for the great info!

I'm looking for something in the 2.5 carat range, budget is less than 25k.

I'm mainly looking at VS2 and G color and ups.

Sometimes I see a radiant and the center shows almost a circle, and sometimes, I don't see a circle. Is there a way to get more of a circle? What I mean is it looks like a circle in a square.

Thanks!

You are welcome!

I will have a look to see what we can find for you. It could be a reflection you are seeing in the stone if I am understanding you correctly but if you could find a photo of what you are seeing that would be helpful.

USACerted are a trustworthy vendor but I believe they would need to call a particular diamond in for you as they don't have all the diamonds in house. I don't believe they offer ASET images which are so useful for evaluating fancy shapes nor photos of the diamonds.

If you would consider H colour and SI clarity if verified eyeclean, this radiant is well within your budget. It doesn't have the best optical performance nor does it have an upgrade policy but its still a nice radiant so I thought I would post it for you, I don't know if it is square enough?

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond.php?d=7407&shape=16384&resultsColumns=268435471&singleResult=1

 

[flyhigh123]

I dont have a photo, but its what I see.

But that''s not as important.

For ratings, i''m sticking with the VS2 and G or higher. I am very grateful for all your help! It is really fortunate for me to find this site and so many helpful people like you!

Thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/19/2010 6:32:39 PM
Author: flyhigh123
I dont have a photo, but its what I see.

But that's not as important.

For ratings, i'm sticking with the VS2 and G or higher. I am very grateful for all your help! It is really fortunate for me to find this site and so many helpful people like you!

Thanks!

Ok no problem, it might take going down in size a bit to stick with G VS but you never know, something could turn up. And its my pleasure to help, you are most welcome!

I had another look and found this one but it might be smaller than you wanted, you would need to request an ASET image for the diamond,

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Radiant-Diamond-1268496.asp

Same with this one, the photo isn't great but it might be worth asking for an ASET image if you are seriously interested,

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Premium-Cut-Radiant-Diamond-858506.asp

 

[flyhigh123]

how about this one:

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/radiant-cut-diamond-2267468.htm
http://www.pricescope.com/origin.asp?id=527164&sh=7&prc=23980
http://search.virtcert.com/cgi/u/1012/v.cgi?stock=10669490&_s=1012&_p=sdf348gd743&_c=&_fs=1&prestock=&_ln=ps

I''ve been looking at these 3.

What do you think? Thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/19/2010 8:29:11 PM
Author: flyhigh123
how about this one:

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/radiant-cut-diamond-2267468.htm
http://www.pricescope.com/origin.asp?id=527164&sh=7&prc=23980
http://search.virtcert.com/cgi/u/1012/v.cgi?stock=10669490&_s=1012&_p=sdf348gd743&_c=&_fs=1&prestock=&_ln=ps

I've been looking at these 3.

What do you think? Thanks!

That is a virtual stone that doesn't belong to WF but is with the suppliers, WF would need to call it in for you to evaluate it and there might be shipping fees involved etc. If you are ok with that then you could certainly ask them to get the diamond in for you.

The JA stone I am not keen on looking at the photo but you could request an ASET image if you are interested in it. I would personally keep looking but its up to you.

Third, USACerted would need to call this one in for you as above and there might be shipping fees involved.

The WF and USA diamonds are at the moment unknown quantities without images regrettably. They might be great stones or they might not be.

 

[flyhigh123]

How much of a difference is a symmetry of Very Good and Excellent? I mean, how important is it to you? This is what makes it shine/sparkle even more right?

thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/22/2010 1:26:08 PM
Author: flyhigh123
How much of a difference is a symmetry of Very Good and Excellent? I mean, how important is it to you? This is what makes it shine/sparkle even more right?

thanks!

No. Lab graded symmetry is the grading of the alignment of the physical facets of the stone, it really doesn't influence sparkle. Read more here from the Pricescope Tutorial on symmetry.

Far more important to the performance and beauty of the diamond is the overall cutting and proportioning of the stone, this dictates the diamond's ability to return light.

In fancy shapes, you more often see lower grades such as good, very good and so on rather than fine cut/ top cut rounds which commonly have Excellent or Ideal symmetry ( depending on the lab).

It is said that good and above symmetry normally looks the same to the naked untrained eye. If I am buying a fancy shape or even some rounds, good symmetry is ok with me if I have all the info I need on the diamond such as images to show there aren't any issues with the good symmetry grade ( unusual). Good however for both polish and symmetry is as low as I am prepared to go with a modern stone ( I would consider fair symmetry in an antique/ vintage diamond such as OEC and so on).

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 3/19/2010 5:06:05 PM
Author: flyhigh123
thanks for the great info!


I''m looking for something in the 2.5 carat range, budget is less than 25k.


I''m mainly looking at VS2 and G color and ups.


Sometimes I see a radiant and the center shows almost a circle, and sometimes, I don''t see a circle. Is there a way to get more of a circle? What I mean is it looks like a circle in a square.


Thanks!

HI Flying high123,
Although you''re getting advice with the very best of intentions, the radiant cut grade chart is completely useless- even worse, it''s very deceptive.
Many of the most beautiful radiant cut diamonds I''ve seen get downgraded if you put any faith into the chart.

It''s important to point out that the chart is only the opinion of one person-not an industry accepted standard.

I have seen many "circle in a square" radiant cut diamonds.
IN many cases these are shallower stones ( possibly below 60%) with great spread. A larger table (possibly above70%) also may emphasize the look you seek. Both these attributes are shown as deficits on the cut chart.
There is no hard fast rule with which you can use table /depth to get the look you seek.
Your price range should allow you to find the grade within your budget- but my advice is the cast aside any charts, and look at actual stones, or photos/video. I believe that what you may find you like best is not necessarily favored by the chart.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 3/19/2010 4:38:16 PM
Author:flyhigh123
Hi Guys!

I just found this site and its great!

I have a question if anyone can help.
I'm planning on buying a Radiant Diamond, with a ratio as close as 1 as possible. What is a good depth to table percentage that best shows off this diamond?

Also if anyone has any other suggestions for the radiant diamond to look out for that would be great!

BTW, my GF loves the radiant so this is the one i need to find

Thanks!

Flyhigh123,

Cut grading is based upon judging light return performance. This can be done directly by reflector technologies like an ASET or Idealscope or indirectly by cut proportions. For Fancy shapes it is extremely difficult to have standardized rules for any Fancy shape, while the charts are helpful as a guide there are often too many exceptions which make their utility limited.

In addition those who choose a radiant cut for colorless diamonds are often choosing them for other aspects of the diamond (like shape outline, spread, color etc.) qualities other than light performance. If one is interested in strictly light performance there are other cuts like a modern faceted square cushion with similar girdle outlines that lend themself better to more optimal light return.

Please describe what aspects your GF finds beautiful about a Radiant cut, or what types of radiant your GF prefers this would help far more than initial selection from a chart. The charts mentioned favour enhanced light return and larger flashes(larger virtual facets) but with those that prefer a Radiant over other cuts these things may not be the most important criteria.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/22/2010 1:55:40 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 3/19/2010 5:06:05 PM
Author: flyhigh123
thanks for the great info!

HI Flying high123,
Although you're getting advice with the very best of intentions, the radiant cut grade chart is completely useless- even worse, it's very deceptive.
Many of the most beautiful radiant cut diamonds I've seen get downgraded if you put any faith into the chart.

Hi David!

I believe I made that clear that the chart was to be used for a first round screening tool and guide only, also that it is quite possible that the buyer could fall in love with a diamond which falls outside of the suggested ranges. I wouldn't call it completely useless as I don't believe it is and also out of respect for the creator....But I am sure you didn't mean it to come across that way....

 

[Rockdiamond]

If one used it as a screening tool they might very well eliminate the stones that they would have preferred best...hearing what the OP is looking for might be the perfect example.
For that reason, I don't feel the chart should be used to eliminate any diamonds...or place diamonds into a subjective lower grade compared to other diamonds that better fit into the categories outlined on the chart.

There is NO valid cut grade for a radiant cut diamond agreed upon by the trade at large..
I agree the creator of the charts has good intentions, but that does not make the chart useful.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/22/2010 2:37:59 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
If one used it as a screening tool they might very well eliminate the stones that they would have preferred best...hearing what the OP is looking for might be the perfect example.
For that reason, I don't feel the chart should be used to eliminate any diamonds...or place diamonds into a subjective lower grade compared to other diamonds that better fit into the categories outlined on the chart.

There is NO valid cut grade for a radiant cut diamond agreed upon by the trade at large..
I agree the creator of the charts has good intentions, but that does not make the chart useful.

Thats fine that you don't feel its useful, thats different to me to calling it useless. I believe it does have a use when trying to wade through the stones on the virtual listing, it is inevitable that in doing so potentially great stones can be eliminated but not much can be done about that. If you have no images or stones to choose from in front of you then I believe the chart can have a use for consumers when working with virtual diamonds, obviously if you do have images and or actual diamonds to work with then a different approach can be taken.

I am saying the above from a consumer point of view if I were going to be purchasing a fancy shape.

And I know there is no valid cut grade for radiants or any other fancy shape come to that which is agreed on by the trade.

 

[Rockdiamond]

My objection to the charts is that it gives a false sense of security on some stones, while downgrading stones arbitrarily..
If it gives people the idea they can get exactly what they want buying radiant diamonds blind, it''s misleading.
What makes a 59% depth radiant "worse" than one of 60% depth?

What follows is that believers of the chart can get the idea that someone selling a 59% depth radiant is selling inferior goods.
Or they might not look at stones of 59% depth because they have learned "cut is king", and according to the charts, 60 is the least you can go.
At the end of the day, the result is the charts are nit giving information which is actually relevant and useful.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/22/2010 3:23:48 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
My objection to the charts is that it gives a false sense of security on some stones, while downgrading stones arbitrarily..
If it gives people the idea they can get exactly what they want buying radiant diamonds blind, it's misleading.
What makes a 59% depth radiant 'worse' than one of 60% depth?

What follows is that believers of the chart can get the idea that someone selling a 59% depth radiant is selling inferior goods.
Or they might not look at stones of 59% depth because they have learned 'cut is king', and according to the charts, 60 is the least you can go.
At the end of the day, the result is the charts are nit giving information which is actually relevant and useful.

Firstly I just want to mention that I am not referring to the chart as a selection tool or that it should be used as such.


For me as a consumer, thats not actually the case that I or anyone else is saying that the chart is a guarantee of a beautiful stone and as you know is something we don't advocate here is buying fancy shapes blind. Lets say for example, I want to buy a radiant and I need to work through the virtual listing as none of the vendors have what I want. The chart is helpful to me so that I am not wasting my time and potential shipping fees on getting my vendor to call in stones which are less likely to perform or be what I want. It is true that a diamond ( and I often mention this) with proportions outside of the so called suggested ranges can be completely beautiful. But as a consumer if I am working from a list of unknown quantities from the virtual listing, I feel in using the chart if I have nothing else to go on that it can help increase the chance that I can narrow the field and find what I am looking for, bearing in mind as above and as we constantly remind new consumers that diamonds which don't fall within the suggested ranges can also be perfectly good options particularly if one has seen the stone and love it.

I agree that a few basic numbers aren't going to guarantee me a well cut stone or even if well cut that I am going to fall in love with it.

But again when working from the virtual listings when the vendor doesn't have what I want, then to me it is a useful starting point. Yes it is entirely likely that I could be eliminating stones I could adore but thats inevitable and it is a chance as a consumer that I am willing to take.

It is important that users of these charts use them in the right way and realize that proportion sets outside of these ranges can produce a beautiful stone and I believe I made that clear in my first post and I always endeavour to do so.

 

[flyhigh123]

Flyhigh123,

Cut grading is based upon judging light return performance. This can be done directly by reflector technologies like an ASET or Idealscope or indirectly by cut proportions. For Fancy shapes it is extremely difficult to have standardized rules for any Fancy shape, while the charts are helpful as a guide there are often too many exceptions which make their utility limited.

In addition those who choose a radiant cut for colorless diamonds are often choosing them for other aspects of the diamond (like shape outline, spread, color etc.) qualities other than light performance. If one is interested in strictly light performance there are other cuts like a modern faceted square cushion with similar girdle outlines that lend themself better to more optimal light return.

Please describe what aspects your GF finds beautiful about a Radiant cut, or what types of radiant your GF prefers this would help far more than initial selection from a chart. The charts mentioned favour enhanced light return and larger flashes(larger virtual facets) but with those that prefer a Radiant over other cuts these things may not be the most important criteria.

thanks for the help!

So My GF does not like a Princess because its too "square". She doesn't like round for whatever reason, but just doesn't like it.

She feels that the radiant is a nice shape. She likes the semi square look with the slightly rounded sides.
She Does like a diamond that's "Shiny". I dont think she really knows the difference. Sometimes she says, that ring is not shiny, or that ring is really shiny, but i'm thinking its because a ring is dirty or just hasn't been cleaned.

Thanks!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Lorelei,
I think in fairness, we can only speak for ourselves.
Does anyone else use the charts as a selection tool- or advocate that?
Yes, I believe it's done on a regular basis- even though you did not advocate using the chart as a selection tool, the fact the chart is referred to here in this thread is a perfect example.
The type of look the OP is looking for is not any more likely to be associated with the numbers on the chart as be eliminated by the numbers on the chart.

Flyinghigh- I believe your description is adequate for a vendor who is looking at actual stones to be able to confirm that a particular diamond has the attributes you seek.

I know that Lorelei is here with only the best intentions to assist you .
I am not in favor of using the charts- and your case is a perfect example of why- but all of us here responding have a goal of assisting you.

 

[Mrs Mitchell]

I find the charts really confusing and very frustrating. I''m dyscalculic, they just don''t work for me (before you even consider if they work in general).

Personally, I have to rely on a vendor with stones in-house and a good return pollcy.


Jen

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/22/2010 4:35:17 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Lorelei,
I think in fairness, we can only speak for ourselves.
Does anyone else use the charts as a selection tool- or advocate that?
Yes, I believe it's done on a regular basis- even though you did not advocate using the chart as a selection tool, the fact the chart is referred to here in this thread is a perfect example.
The type of look the OP is looking for is not any more likely to be associated with the numbers on the chart as be eliminated by the numbers on the chart.

Flyinghigh- I believe your description is adequate for a vendor who is looking at actual stones to be able to confirm that a particular diamond has the attributes you seek.

I know that Lorelei is here with only the best intentions to assist you .
I am not in favor of using the charts- and your case is a perfect example of why- but all of us here responding have a goal of assisting you.

David, I fully understand that. My point is that the chart gives a place to start if the consumer is searching themselves from the virtual listings. If a skilled vendor takes up the search for a client then it is entirely possible from a basic description that the right diamond could be found on that basis alone. These are two entirely different methods of approaching the buying process. It is in the end however you look at it I believe, definitely preferable to buy from a vendor that has in house diamonds or can call a particular stone in for the client and provide images etc.

 

[flyhigh123]

Date: 3/22/2010 4:35:17 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Lorelei,

I think in fairness, we can only speak for ourselves.

Does anyone else use the charts as a selection tool- or advocate that?

Yes, I believe it''s done on a regular basis- even though you did not advocate using the chart as a selection tool, the fact the chart is referred to here in this thread is a perfect example.

The type of look the OP is looking for is not any more likely to be associated with the numbers on the chart as be eliminated by the numbers on the chart.


Flyinghigh- I believe your description is adequate for a vendor who is looking at actual stones to be able to confirm that a particular diamond has the attributes you seek.


I know that Lorelei is here with only the best intentions to assist you .

I am not in favor of using the charts- and your case is a perfect example of why- but all of us here responding have a goal of assisting you.

I know and honestly, I appreciate all the help i''ve received. This forum is really great and i think is so important to really understanding a dimaond and how to buy one.

The chart has helped, and has given me some ideas on the diamond. It does help me know what I''m looking for. For example, there was a 2.5 carat with a depth of 76% and now i understand it and will be passing that up.

I''ll be receiving a few of the reports soon and will post for more opinion.

I called whiteflash on one of the diamonds, but for me to get an ASET and sarin, it would cost me $100+ if I didn''t buy it.
Hard to do a good comparison. I can''t even get a picture without them getting it first, so even 1 picture may cost me $100+.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I guess we have to agree to disagree on this one Lorelei

The chart is of no help at all to the OP IMO.
I honestly believe that suggesting it''s use can actually hamper the OP''s efforts.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 3/22/2010 5:04:36 PM
Author: flyhigh123

Date: 3/22/2010 4:35:17 PM

Author: Rockdiamond

Lorelei,


I think in fairness, we can only speak for ourselves.


Does anyone else use the charts as a selection tool- or advocate that?


Yes, I believe it's done on a regular basis- even though you did not advocate using the chart as a selection tool, the fact the chart is referred to here in this thread is a perfect example.


The type of look the OP is looking for is not any more likely to be associated with the numbers on the chart as be eliminated by the numbers on the chart.



Flyinghigh- I believe your description is adequate for a vendor who is looking at actual stones to be able to confirm that a particular diamond has the attributes you seek.



I know that Lorelei is here with only the best intentions to assist you .


I am not in favor of using the charts- and your case is a perfect example of why- but all of us here responding have a goal of assisting you.

I know and honestly, I appreciate all the help i've received. This forum is really great and i think is so important to really understanding a dimaond and how to buy one.


The chart has helped, and has given me some ideas on the diamond. It does help me know what I'm looking for. For example, there was a 2.5 carat with a depth of 76% and now i understand it and will be passing that up.


I'll be receiving a few of the reports soon and will post for more opinion.


I called whiteflash on one of the diamonds, but for me to get an ASET and sarin, it would cost me $100+ if I didn't buy it.

Hard to do a good comparison. I can't even get a picture without them getting it first, so even 1 picture may cost me $100+.

ASET is another aspect that is not widely agreed upon by the trade at large.

There are vendors who stock stones, and can send you photos without charging anything.

I'm not saying that certain depths are not to be avoided- I agree 75% is rather deep.
The chart groups 56 and 78 depths together in class "3a".
56% might be a perfect stone for you- and can look a lot better than a stone with a 1A rating.

ETA- Flyinghigh- I agree, this is an excellent site.
The reason I feel it's important to bring up the points I am is that it's easy to get the idea that things like the charts are widely accepted outside PS- which is by no means the case.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 3/22/2010 5:09:02 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
I guess we have to agree to disagree on this one Lorelei

The chart is of no help at all to the OP IMO.
I honestly believe that suggesting it's use can actually hamper the OP's efforts.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree! Also I feel we are looking at this from opposite sides of the fence, you as an experienced professional ( seller) and I as a consumer ( purchaser), it is probably to be expected our views will differ on this. Thats ok.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

Date: 3/22/2010 4:14:18 PM
Author: flyhigh123

Flyhigh123,

Cut grading is based upon judging light return performance. This can be done directly by reflector technologies like an ASET or Idealscope or indirectly by cut proportions. For Fancy shapes it is extremely difficult to have standardized rules for any Fancy shape, while the charts are helpful as a guide there are often too many exceptions which make their utility limited.

In addition those who choose a radiant cut for colorless diamonds are often choosing them for other aspects of the diamond (like shape outline, spread, color etc.) qualities other than light performance. If one is interested in strictly light performance there are other cuts like a modern faceted square cushion with similar girdle outlines that lend themself better to more optimal light return.

Please describe what aspects your GF finds beautiful about a Radiant cut, or what types of radiant your GF prefers this would help far more than initial selection from a chart. The charts mentioned favour enhanced light return and larger flashes(larger virtual facets) but with those that prefer a Radiant over other cuts these things may not be the most important criteria.

thanks for the help!

So My GF does not like a Princess because its too 'square'. She doesn't like round for whatever reason, but just doesn't like it.

She feels that the radiant is a nice shape. She likes the semi square look with the slightly rounded sides.
She Does like a diamond that's 'Shiny'. I dont think she really knows the difference. Sometimes she says, that ring is not shiny, or that ring is really shiny, but i'm thinking its because a ring is dirty or just hasn't been cleaned.

Thanks!

That does not describe a radiant (which is cut cornered with straight flat edges) to me it sounds more like a rectangular modern cushion.

Based on that description you have left the entire selection up to the vendor with no mention of the light performance or if you have a preference for small, medium or larger flashes of light.

The cut charts at the higher grades represent stones more likely to exhibit more medium sized flashes and edge to edge briilliance. However there are many types of Radiant cuts, from 58 - 70 facets which also determine the size of the virtual facets(flash size).

If you aren't too picky about light performance, don't mind some areas of that don't return light at all, and the flash to be mostly small pinfire with some watery areas than like RD said a wide range of proportions may satisfy you.

 

[iota15]

Flyhigh - I've been looking for Radiants for over a year now. (Crazy, I know). With your requirements and your budget, I'd take a serious look at this entirely drool-worthy diamond: http://rockdiamond.com/index.php/jewelry/loose-diamond-252ct-esi1-premier-med-blue-radiant-cut-diamond--great-cut

I oogle it every so often... if only I had your budget (sigh. If you get it, please post LOTS of pictures).

It's E, SI1... now I know you want a VS but honestly, if you can't see ANY inclusions or ANYTHING WRONG in these super-mega sized pictures, you are never going to see anything in person. As a radiant-lover, this is as beautiful as it gets... plus, it actually looks like a 3 carat stone with 63 sq mm's of face up beauty! 3 carats! Most 2.5's are about 57 sq. mm. Your girlfriend is going to flip out.

 

[iota15]

By the way, if your girlfriend does not want a princess, stay away from stones that are too close to 1. I''m personally not a fan of the princess either - too square, and in my area of the country, rather common. On the finger, a 1:1 ratio can come across as a princess. A little elongation will separate your stone from her friends.

Plus, also note that the cut corners that you see in these super large images will not be as obvious on the hand - even on a diamond your size. I was looking for 2-2.4 carat radiants (not with your budget though) and even tried on the GOG 2.5 radiant. The cut corners are not obvious at all. Again, a square one can look like a princess to her in real life.

Gem appraisers has a shape selector tool to help your girlfriend pick an ideal ratio for her: http://www.gemappraisers.com/shapePickerNew.asp If it''s around 1:1, GOG seems to have a source for well-cut square radiants. Jon at GOG doesn''t have any in your size currently but it wouldn''t hurt to ask.

 

[Mrs Mitchell]

Date: 3/23/2010 3:41:54 AM
Author: iota15
Flyhigh - I''ve been looking for Radiants for over a year now. (Crazy, I know). With your requirements and your budget, I''d take a serious look at this entirely drool-worthy diamond: http://rockdiamond.com/index.php/jewelry/loose-diamond-252ct-esi1-premier-med-blue-radiant-cut-diamond--great-cut

I oogle it every so often... if only I had your budget (sigh. If you get it, please post LOTS of pictures).

It''s E, SI1... now I know you want a VS but honestly, if you can''t see ANY inclusions or ANYTHING WRONG in these super-mega sized pictures, you are never going to see anything in person. As a radiant-lover, this is as beautiful as it gets... plus, it actually looks like a 3 carat stone with 63 sq mm''s of face up beauty! 3 carats! Most 2.5''s are about 57 sq. mm. Your girlfriend is going to flip out.

I agree with the suggestion to consider stones in the SI1 range, but do get the vendor to go over it very carefully with you about what can and can''t be seen and from what angles. There have been a few threads about what eye-clean means to different people and it''s worth taking time to talk to the vendor about your definition. For what it''s worth, I really like the stone that iota15 posted, and I would consider it. I''ve bought from DBL a fair few times and David has always been very up front about describing inclusions so I know exactly what to expect. I would say that his definition of eye clean is probably more stringent than mine, so I''d be very comfortable with this one if he thinks it''s good.

Jen