Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Search for an OEC.

joelly

joelly

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
2,378
Is it possible that two stones with similar carat size have different mm? I figure it’s because one is deeper than the other.

I’m so torn between two oecs. Thought I made my decision but now am not sure. I hate being this way.

If you were me, what would you do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV_
Two stones with the same weight & depth can have seriously different spread - girdle width counts the most.

2p

I am rarely torn between choices; my problem is having very specific, very odd wants!
 
There are 4 OECs. I have only video and for some reason, I can’t post them here.

The one that makes my heart sing has the smallest mm but same carat size as the other three. It’s mind boggling.
 
AV_ said:
Two stones with the same weight & depth can have seriously different spread - girdle width counts the most.

2p

I am rarely torn between choices; my problem is having very specific, very odd wants!
Click to expand...

Interested in why are you rarely torn between choices? What’s your secret?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV_
Will you be happy with the smaller mm in the long run? Is it possible to see in person?
 
joelly said:
There are 4 OECs. I have only video and for some reason, I can’t post them here.

The one that makes my heart sing has the smallest mm but same carat size as the other three. It’s mind boggling.
Click to expand...

It's just math. Imagine a piece of play-doh with the ability to mould into slightly different proportions. You can easily have one that's 64% depth with steeper crown and pavilion, creating a completely different look from a 55% depth pancake. I'd pick the one that looks the best because that's what makes people upgrade most of the time... they "just don't like it as much as this other one with the slightly better pattern".
 
ForteKitty said:
It's just math. Imagine a piece of play-doh with the ability to mould into slightly different proportions. You can easily have one that's 64% depth with steeper crown and pavilion, creating a completely different look from a 55% depth pancake. I'd pick the one that looks the best because that's what makes people upgrade most of the time... they "just don't like it as much as this other one with the slightly better pattern".
Click to expand...

Thanks. So I really shouldn't worry about the size in mm as long as the stone has the pattern that I like.
 
Do you have links to the reports?
 
joelly said:
Thanks. So I really shouldn't worry about the size in mm as long as the stone has the pattern that I like.
Click to expand...

depends on which one YOU prioritize more, or you wait for the one to pop up for sale that fulfills both your mm wishes and pattern wishes.
 
If you have a youtube account then post the video to youtube. You should be able to upload the video here from youtube.
 
@joelly It must be the way I make my mind, comming up with a detailed picture what I want from considering allot of references, many quite far off, not just what is available or accessible [choices to waiver about]; when anything real fits my wishes, there tends to be just one best fit, if even. Things can get odd, for sure.

I can immagine that one of the two diamonds you are considering fits beter among the rest of your collection; eg. YF's stones have a certain old school play of light, but there are distinct styles even among old stones that he offers but does not cut & would stand out against his stones www & www, etc. I do not know what you are looking at, of course!
 
joelly said:
Thanks. So I really shouldn't worry about the size in mm as long as the stone has the pattern that I like.
Click to expand...

A well cut oec shouldn't appear that much smaller than an average one. My sweet spot has typically been 44-46% table, 63-64% depth. What exactly is the size difference between the three stones you're considering? I can't imagine them being that far off unless one has 50% depth and no scintillation.
 
I'm not a fan of the 3.54. I can clearly see girdle reflection as soon as it's tilted and not facing the camera directly. Also the center facets don't seem lively. These types of videos aren't accurate and can hide a lot of flaws due to all the distractions in the back. Ask for a video of it either sitting in a mount or sitting on the hand between fingers.
 
Not a fan of the pattern in the 3.02. The 2.92 has some issues I'm not fond of either. I'd want to see a video of it in a mount or on the hand. My guess is the lower half is shorter and crown height is taller proportionally in that stone, which results in the chunkier facets under the table. For stones with shorter lower halves (proportional to total depth), I usually like the table smaller because they tend to cause scintillation issues. Some of the facets under the table aren't as lively as they should be given the video style.
 
ForteKitty said:
I'm not a fan of the 3.54. I can clearly see girdle reflection as soon as it's tilted and not facing the camera directly. Also the center facets don't seem lively. These types of videos aren't accurate and can hide a lot of flaws due to all the distractions in the back. Ask for a video of it either sitting in a mount or sitting on the hand between fingers.
Click to expand...

Got it. I learn a lot from your reply. Thanks so much.
 
ForteKitty said:
Not a fan of the pattern in the 3.02. The 2.92 has some issues I'm not fond of either. I'd want to see a video of it in a mount or on the hand. My guess is the lower half is shorter and crown height is taller proportionally in that stone, which results in the chunkier facets under the table. For stones with shorter lower halves (proportional to total depth), I usually like the table smaller because they tend to cause scintillation issues. Some of the facets under the table aren't as lively as they should be given the video style.
Click to expand...

3.02 M/VS1 and 2.92 L/VVS2 sitting side by side:

 
ForteKitty said:
Not a fan of the pattern in the 3.02. The 2.92 has some issues I'm not fond of either. I'd want to see a video of it in a mount or on the hand. My guess is the lower half is shorter and crown height is taller proportionally in that stone, which results in the chunkier facets under the table. For stones with shorter lower halves (proportional to total depth), I usually like the table smaller because they tend to cause scintillation issues. Some of the facets under the table aren't as lively as they should be given the video style.
Click to expand...

@ForteKitty any thoughts on the 3.15 N/VS1?
 
ForteKitty said:
I adore it.
Click to expand...

Me too, the second Alex posted it I was in love. the pastels in it, OMG <3

I think if you dont know for sure then maybe none of these are your perfect stone. It took me 6 LONG torturous months to finally get my OEC, but once i saw it, i was certain. Every other diamond I saw had something "wrong" with it in my eyes, not good MM or an inclusion, or too small culet or too big culet or too much money for what it was... they were all just not right. My only hesitation was mine is an "L" and I mentally had a really hard time with that, I didn't want lower than a J, but once I saw it in person I was so in love.

Maybe you're struggling because none of these are "right" for you yet??
 
Last edited:
The 3.15 from Alex is my favorite. I know zip about diamonds so take my opinion with a grain of salt. I just love the facet pattern on that one. :love:
 
i also love alex’s stone way more than any of the other ones...gah, i wish i could have had the money to buy it! it is gorgeous
 
Inked said:
Me too, the second Alex posted it I was in love. the pastels in it, OMG <3

I think if you dont know for sure then maybe none of these are your perfect stone. It took me 6 LONG torturous months to finally get my OEC, but once i saw it, i was certain. Every other diamond I saw had something "wrong" with it in my eyes, not good MM or an inclusion, or too small culet or too big culet or too much money for what it was... they were all just not right. My only hesitation was mine is an "L" and I mentally had a really hard time with that, I didn't want lower than a J, but once I saw it in person I was so in love.

Maybe you're struggling because none of these are "right" for you yet??
Click to expand...

The right one for me is the one that Alex offered. Maybe if the hold fell thru... Otherwise, back into searching, I am. :read:
 
Besides Alex stone which is stunning I like the 3.54 vs1 the best for some reason but I wish they had a still of it
 
Tables are small, but crown heights are lower than I expect. I am not saying that other proportions are better - the old stones I have in mind are not as bright - sure enough, the spread is trully miserable, all for rather subtly distinctive play of light; nobody in their right mind might be making such oddities today WWW without an affidavit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top