Should i sacrifice quality for carats?

[ajacks]

I'd say yes with the exception of that 1.3 H VS1. THat's truly a really really well cut non-super ideal. It probably also displays hearts and arrows. I'd put that on hold now and ask for more imaging

here is the report they provided but they don't have any additional imaging...is that a bad sign? i can do a real time inspection but i don't know what to look for other than if i think it looks shiny or not

 

[ajacks]

here is the report but they said they don't have any more imaging...is that bad?

 

[musicloveranthony]

I don't see anything there that would give me pause.

I mentioned I only use the HCA as a tool for when a stone meets all the other criteria. This one definitely meets all the criteria including having a great HCA score (0.7).

I think you might have found a winner!

 

[lovedogs]

here is the report but they said they don't have any more imaging...is that bad?

No, it's not bad. They dont always have advanced images. I really like this option bc it gives you more size vs a true heart's or WF stone but doesnt sacrifice cut too much.

 

[lovedogs]

My only hesitation with the 1.3 H is that I think it's a "low H", probably closer to I color than to G.

 

[ajacks]

I don't see anything there that would give me pause.

I mentioned I only use the HCA as a tool for when a stone meets all the other criteria. This one definitely meets all the criteria including having a great HCA score (0.7).

I think you might have found a winner!

Thank you!! I'm so glad i asked for some expertise...i was having doubts about our original colorless stone in this setting and it not being worth the extra money for a colorless then after hearing it wasn't a great cut i started to panic!

 

[ajacks]

My only hesitation with the 1.3 H is that I think it's a "low H", probably closer to I color than to G.

do you think that's ok given we are putting in yellow gold? or will yellow gold make it "yellower"

 

[lovedogs]

do you think that's ok given we are putting in yellow gold? or will yellow gold make it "yellower"

I think yellow gold will be better because all stones will look slightly 'warmer' in yellow gold.

 

[musicloveranthony]

Yellow gold should look great. It's not going to be a "wow" yellow stone or anything. Being so well cut it also is going to face up with minimal notable tint

 

[ajacks]

I think yellow gold will be better because all stones will look slightly 'warmer' in yellow gold.

yes that is what i was reading after we had already purchased the E stone, that yellow gold basically will negate the purpose of a colorless. i should have definitely done more research before but glad i didn't miss my return window now that i've gotten all this great information

 

[sledge]

here is the report but they said they don't have any more imaging...is that bad?

This stone looks more promising than any of the others (excluding TH & ACA).

Here is the HCA for what's it worth.

 

[musicloveranthony]

Thanks... now I'm going to be dreaming of this stone!!

 

[sledge]

In regards to the 1.30 H-VS1....

FWIW, an exact 40.6 pavilion mathematically converts to 42.86% pavilion depth. Depending on the stone, you will sometimes see it reported as 42.50% depth, and others you see as 43% such as the lab report you have here.

Seeing 42.50% would indicate some of the actual pavilions pulled the average down from the "perfect" mathematically calculated 42.86 depth, and consequently got reported as 42.50% instead of 43%.

Because of the funky GIA rounding I mentioned upstream, seeing a 43% depth gives me hope there are more of the actual pavilions that are >= 40.6 instead of <40.6. If actuals were closer to 40.7 for instance, this would be more complimentary to the 34.5 crown angle and pull up the HCA score to 0.9 instead as evidenced below.

It's still a guessing game with GIA rounding, and the fact not only the PA's have variance but the CA's do too. But it does show good promise.

 

[sledge]

Thanks... now I'm going to be dreaming of this stone!!

Yeah I love that one too! I would have made the link active, except it was from 2020 and the JA page is non-existent.

Somewhere on here, Serg has a similar stone in their master set of stones (MSS). It has all sorts of geek info and video. I can't recall the MSS # now but it had me all revved up as well.

Edited to Add:
Found it. MSS #16

Overall cut quality = GD
LGF's = 61.97%

Video is amazing. More data on Serg's weblink at the bottom of the quote.

Unicorns....

Fun fact: LGF's of MSS16 = 61.97! Makes 75's look like twigs, lol.

Video of MSS16 (lower left)....compliments of @Serg

DiboxJD movies

Upper Left - MSS13 Ca 34, Pa 41, Tb 57,
Lower Left - MSS16 Ca 37.5, Pa 40.6, Tb 57,
Upper Right - MSS17 Ca 39, Pa 40, Tb 61,
Lower Right - MSS18 Ca 37.5, Pa 40.4, Tb 57

More images and specs on MSS16:

OctoNus : Master Stone Set - diamond 16

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think this one is a good option from JA:

1.30 Carat round diamond

This 1.3 carat round diamond H color vs1 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

I generally do not recommend their True Hearts because they are not generally up to superideal cut standards but they are priced higher than equivalent cut GIA stones.

I am not wild about the quality of their pave settings, and WF definitely has better quality settings in that general style. But if you are happy with it, that is fine! The color of gold does not matter. I'd choose the color gold that looks best on her and that matches most of the jewelry she normally wears. The diamond will be set in a white gold head (prongs), so it doesn't matter at all whether the shank (band) is yellow, rose, or white metal.