Thoughts on this specific GIA report

[kBY]

Glad to help @kBY and speak a language that allows you to relate.

If you got a spare moment, this may be a fun read for you. Proof of why reports don’t tell the whole story. I found & wrote that back in 2020 but they still exist.

Thread 'Why Advanced Images Matter...A Bad 34.5/40.8...'

Jan 27, 2020

I'm just as guilty as anyone. Helping someone find a stone and run across one with that 34.5/40.8 combo. You smile. You then run through the rest of the proportions....

57 table, 61.7 depth, 75 LGF's, 50 stars and medium-slightly thick girdle....check, check, check,check and check

You quickly pound in the GIA number to the HCA calculator to double check the proportion analysis you've already performed in your head. Yup, just as expected, a 1.3 to 1.7 score.

And while we don't love the cavity, it's the 3rd inclusion on the list and probably rather inconsequential.

Then your heart...

• sledge
• Replies: 58
• Forum: RockyTalky (Diamond Discussion)

• 

It’s not really a big secret around here that I like H&A stones. Part of that is I like max performance — cars, diamonds, etc. The other part is H&A dealers give you more data to make a better informed decision and that confidence can be the difference of feeling great about a $10k purchase or crappy with a cheaper $8-9k purchase. Nothing stings worse than a purchase you regret.

I haven’t asked all the usual questions to help you find a stone but sounds like you are trying to avoid the H&A cost premium. A potential alternative is Yuketiel @ ID Jewelry. He is located in NYC but has helped several folks here. Often he finds deals others can’t. Also they have the ability to provide advanced images to help you select a better performer, even if not a H&A stone.

For fun, here is a 1.22 G VS2 H&A @ $7,324 wire. Angles, images and video are great. Total sparkle bomb!

I know weight-wise it’s a little less but look at the dimensions, 6.87mm vs 7mm. That’s about 0.13mm variance which is 0.005 inches. That is less than 1/128th of an inch (0.0078 FYI). In human talk about a hair difference, literally.

Food for thought.

Diamond | 1.22 ct G VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 4779189

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.22 carat G color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the Gemological Institute of America (GIA). | 4779189

www.whiteflash.com

That is a beautiful diamond!!! If only I would have known more about diamonds in general and this site way back before I made my first purchase after I lost my first engagement ring. At that time, I started on a journey with my replacement engagement ring at a local jewelry store that has now branched out to a few other locations in Wisconsin. They're one of the few that has a trade up policy where I can trade in my diamond for anything of equal or greater value for mined diamonds. So I'm kind of in this loop with them. So it's great to have a site like this to help me with the certificate specs and also what I should be looking at when trading in my diamond, which I appreciate a lot.

I did take a look at both earlier today and have decided to trade mine for the 1.3ct, G color, VS2. This one was definitely more of a colorless G and seemed to sparkled more evenly all around versus the 1.36ct. The 1.36 did have it's own sharp colorful fires, but it wasn't as constant as the 1.3. Not sure if I'm saying that correctly. Just hoping that once it's set in my setting that it'll look nice outside the store and in different lightings. (btw, I was the only one in the store walking around with two loose diamonds and my own to compare LOL!)

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

Nothing to add, but nice to "see" you @sledge !!!

cheers--Sharon

 

[freddyboston]

They're one of the few that has a trade up policy where I can trade in my diamond for anything of equal or greater value for mined diamonds. So I'm kind of in this loop with them.

What size / shape / proportions diamond are you upgrading from ??

 

[kBY]

What size / shape / proportions diamond are you upgrading from ??

I'm updating from this one below with GIA #7463730155.

I have asked insights on this one previously too and seemed like this one was okay. I wanted to stick to G since I'm a little color sensitive .

 

[sledge]

HI:

Nothing to add, but nice to "see" you @sledge !!!

cheers--Sharon

Thank you, great to be back. This is a great community and I’ve missed it everyone!

I'm updating from this one below with GIA #7463730155.

I have asked insights on this one previously too and seemed like this one was okay. I wanted to stick to G since I'm a little color sensitive .

Wow, your old stone had great proportions! FYI, the medium blue fluorescence may have helped it look a little whiter in direct sunlight (direct UV activates fluor & counters the typical yellow hues in many stones).

The real “trick” to proportions is understanding there are 57 actual facets, 58 if the culet doesn’t come to a point (more common in old cuts but some modern cuts too).

But when you look on any diamond report you don’t see that many measurements. Instead you see a single value for crown, pavilion, stars, lower girdle facets (LGF’s), etc. As you can see in the images below, you have 8 actual crowns, 8 actual pavilions, 8 stars, etc.

In the case of GIA, they take the individual values of each individual measurement and average them. Then they round them to the nearest 0.5 degree on crown, 0.2 degrees on pavilion and 5% on stars & LGF’s. The now defunct AGS reports did it differently in the fact they averaged but didn’t round and gave a more accurate representation of actual data.

In general, averaging data creates some opportunity for a stone to look better on paper than in reality. When you think about how angles need to compliment each other for maximum light performance, the problem continues to compound. Add rounding into the mix and it just adds insult to injury.

The final kicker is GIA casts a very wide net for their “elusive” triple X grade. What makes this almost criminal is the fact the vast majority of people don’t know how any of this works. They just know GIA is reputable and triple X is the best so they gain (false) confidence they are buying a quality stone. Meanwhile, diamond cutters understand more weight means more profit so they cut to maximize weight and reduce waste. Of course they aren’t stupid so they too want to ensure they get max weight while still earning a GIA triple X report. And so the games begin and the result is a lot of triple X stones that aren’t really excellent at all.

This is where super ideal vendors differ. They cut for beauty first and then max weight retention. This means more labor and higher waste. All the actual facets are cut tighter and more true. Ask for a SARIN report and it will show all the actuals and not just the limited data of a GIA report. Of course, they know the angles are right so they give advanced images, etc.

My very long point is yes, proportions matter to a certain degree. And the HCA score is a method for those that don’t understand how the angles work to gain some confidence. Yet it’s all based on a GIA report with lots of weaknesses the average Joe/Jane doesn’t know exists.

 

[kBY]

Thank you, great to be back. This is a great community and I’ve missed it everyone!



Wow, your old stone had great proportions! FYI, the medium blue fluorescence may have helped it look a little whiter in direct sunlight (direct UV activates fluor & counters the typical yellow hues in many stones).

The real “trick” to proportions is understanding there are 57 actual facets, 58 if the culet doesn’t come to a point (more common in old cuts but some modern cuts too).

But when you look on any diamond report you don’t see that many measurements. Instead you see a single value for crown, pavilion, stars, lower girdle facets (LGF’s), etc. As you can see in the images below, you have 8 actual crowns, 8 actual pavilions, 8 stars, etc.

In the case of GIA, they take the individual values of each individual measurement and average them. Then they round them to the nearest 0.5 degree on crown, 0.2 degrees on pavilion and 5% on stars & LGF’s. The now defunct AGS reports did it differently in the fact they averaged but didn’t round and gave a more accurate representation of actual data.

In general, averaging data creates some opportunity for a stone to look better on paper than in reality. When you think about how angles need to compliment each other for maximum light performance, the problem continues to compound. Add rounding into the mix and it just adds insult to injury.

The final kicker is GIA casts a very wide net for their “elusive” triple X grade. What makes this almost criminal is the fact the vast majority of people don’t know how any of this works. They just know GIA is reputable and triple X is the best so they gain (false) confidence they are buying a quality stone. Meanwhile, diamond cutters understand more weight means more profit so they cut to maximize weight and reduce waste. Of course they aren’t stupid so they too want to ensure they get max weight while still earning a GIA triple X report. And so the games begin and the result is a lot of triple X stones that aren’t really excellent at all.

This is where super ideal vendors differ. They cut for beauty first and then max weight retention. This means more labor and higher waste. All the actual facets are cut tighter and more true. Ask for a SARIN report and it will show all the actuals and not just the limited data of a GIA report. Of course, they know the angles are right so they give advanced images, etc.

My very long point is yes, proportions matter to a certain degree. And the HCA score is a method for those that don’t understand how the angles work to gain some confidence. Yet it’s all based on a GIA report with lots of weaknesses the average Joe/Jane doesn’t know exists.

Woahhh..so now the question is, did I make a mistake by swapping that one in for the 1.3ct? Is the 1.3ct a decent cut wise or did I just downgraded on cut by going slightly bigger in size?

 

[DejaWiz]

Good to see you back on the forum, sledgehammer!

 

[freddyboston]

Woahhh..so now the question is, did I make a mistake by swapping that one in for the 1.3ct? Is the 1.3ct a decent cut wise or did I just downgraded on cut by going slightly bigger in size?

cuts are likely the same so you mostly gained size / improved clarity grade / lost fluor bigger question is how much $ you spent to swap and did you lose the ability to upgrade again ? on paper a 1.30 3x G VS2 Non would be "higher priced" than a 1.07 3x G Si1 Med BL

 

[kBY]

cuts are likely the same so you mostly gained size / improved clarity grade / lost fluor bigger question is how much $ you spent to swap and did you lose the ability to upgrade again ? on paper a 1.30 3x G VS2 Non would be "higher priced" than a 1.07 3x G Si1 Med

cuts are likely the same so you mostly gained size / improved clarity grade / lost fluor bigger question is how much $ you spent to swap and did you lose the ability to upgrade again ? on paper a 1.30 3x G VS2 Non would be "higher priced" than a 1.07 3x G Si1 Med BL

Price wise, I paid an additional $2500 for the upgrade..1.07 was $8,300 when I upgraded a few years back and the 1.3 is $10,858

The trade-in policy for mined/natural diamonds is a lifetime warranty, but not transferable. So.. I can technically go back and swap if this diamond doesn't perform as I would like it to.

 

[freddyboston]

Price wise, I paid an additional $2500 for the upgrade..1.07 was $8,300 when I upgraded a few years back and the 1.3 is $10,858

The trade-in policy for mined/natural diamonds is a lifetime warranty, but not transferable. So.. I can technically go back and swap if this diamond doesn't perform as I would like it to.

That seems ok $ for a nice bump in clarity and face up size.... Enjoy !!!

 

[sledge]

Woahhh..so now the question is, did I make a mistake by swapping that one in for the 1.3ct? Is the 1.3ct a decent cut wise or did I just downgraded on cut by going slightly bigger in size?

The GIA reported proportions on both stones are very similar to one another. From that perspective it seems they should perform similar. As @freddyboston pointed out earlier in this thread it looked like some obstruction may be present in the 2-4 o’clock range of the new stone.

That’s from a still image. No video. No advanced images to help further ascertain cut quality.

How well each individual stone performs would come down to the precision of the actual readings I talked about a few posts up.

In lieu of any other data, how well does the new stone compare to the old stone? You have the unique advantage of seeing both stones with your naked eye and how they look next to each other.

Good to see you back on the forum, sledgehammer!

Thanks buddy, glad to be back! Good to see some familiar faces are still in play around here.

cuts are likely the same so you mostly gained size / improved clarity grade / lost fluor bigger question is how much $ you spent to swap and did you lose the ability to upgrade again ? on paper a 1.30 3x G VS2 Non would be "higher priced" than a 1.07 3x G Si1 Med BL

Careful, you will start a war over rather fluor is good or bad, lol. Agree though that the markets discount price for stones with fluor.

Price wise, I paid an additional $2500 for the upgrade..1.07 was $8,300 when I upgraded a few years back and the 1.3 is $10,858

The trade-in policy for mined/natural diamonds is a lifetime warranty, but not transferable. So.. I can technically go back and swap if this diamond doesn't perform as I would like it to.

Ignoring trade policy, you could snap up a similar sized super ideal for a hair less than $10k. So a normal GIA 3X stone with good proportions would trade a little cheaper meaning less dollars or a little larger stone for about the same money.

While knowing that does nothing for what you initially paid on the 1ct stone, it may give you a little leverage to negotiate a lower upgrade price for yourself on the 1.3ct stone.

Diamond | 1.32 ct G VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 4731604

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.32 carat G color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the Gemological Institute of America (GIA). | 4731604

www.whiteflash.com

Diamond | 1.31 ct F VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 4708688

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.31 carat F color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the Gemological Institute of America (GIA). | 4708688

www.whiteflash.com