Which diamond is better judging by paper

[diamondkitty14]

Having a hard time deciding between these three stones, what do the experts think about the specs? Which one would you guess to be the pretties with most bling?

And just FYI, I did the HCA tool and got
stone 1 - 2.6
stone 2 - 3.7
stone 3 - 1.4





And to give more detail, stone 1 and 3 are the whitest. Stone 1 has a feather just on the edge of the table but is considered eye clean. Stone 3 has small crystals/cloud, I am waiting to see close up picture tomorrow, it too is considered eye clean. I am leaning towards stone three though stone 1 is tempting due to wide spread. One of these will be set in a Ritani halo bezel.


THANKS IN ADVANCE!

 

[CanuckAB]

Not an expert but here are my thoughts: I personally like higher crowns, smaller tables and lots of fire so for me #1, the 60/60, is out. I don't like the angle combination on #2. It's in steep/deep territory. I REALLY like the proportions of # 3!

 

[Just_Starting]

Not an expert but 3 wins it easily for me. Wouldn't be interested in the first two at all. Got access to any pictures e.g. ASET/IdealScope?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

#3 is the cut that I would prefer. #2 is totally out as you can toss out any stone that has an HCA score that high.

But with SI2's, the paper doesn't tell you if the stone is eyeclean, so there's no telling if #3 is acceptable until you talk to the person who is looking at it for you. And idealscope image would be good and also a magnified image of the diamond.

 

[John P]

#3 is the cut that I would prefer. #2 is totally out as you can toss out any stone that has an HCA score that high.

But with SI2's, the paper doesn't tell you if the stone is eyeclean, so there's no telling if #3 is acceptable until you talk to the person who is looking at it for you. An idealscope image would be good and also a magnified image of the diamond.

I was going to write a reply, but this covers all of it.

 

[diamondkitty14]

Thank you so much for your replies! You confirmed what I was thinking and gave very interesting insight.

Here is image of stone 1 and the diagram from GIA certificate.

I am still waiting for an image of stone 3, but here is the diagram from GIA certificate if anyone wants to make any educated guesses to how bad the inclusions will look.

Again, both dealers have stated that both stones are eye clean, in the case of stone 1, the feather is not visible 6 inches from stone but my guess is when you look close it's quite clear.

Thanks you advance!

Stone 1




Stone 2

 

[diamondkitty14]

correction: the bottom diagram is for stone 3

 

[heididdl]

So hard to see... But they are definitely graded correctly as si2....# 3 is the best of these three stone.s

 

[diamondkitty14]

Heidi, any idea how "scary" the crystals and cloud in stone 3 will look like in real life?

 

[John P]

Heidi, any idea how "scary" the crystals and cloud in stone 3 will look like in real life?

There is no way to know. The clarity plot is just a map. Transparency/opacity and relief (how much a characteristic stands out) can only be evaluated in-person.

I will note that SI diamonds with multiple inclusions can be cleaner to the eye than SI diamonds which have a single notable grade-setting inclusion. But as with all-things-diamond, it depends on the specific stones.

 

[diamondkitty14]

Ok here is stone 3. It was described in color as J+ so a very good J. Again, it's said to be eye clean, and the crystals in it "bother me" a lot less than the feather in stone 1.

At $9.2K -- I think I am going to go for it. What do you guys think?

 

[teobdl]

Ok here is stone 3. It was described in color as J+ so a very good J. Again, it's said to be eye clean, and the crystals in it "bother me" a lot less than the feather in stone 1.

At $9.2K -- I think I am going to go for it. What do you guys think?

The crystal/feather in the table of this actually looks pretty acceptable.

The bigger issue here is that either the photo is tremendously out of focus, or the diamond is tremendously opaque. I don't know why a vendor wouldn't retake the photo if it was that out of focus. In fact, it looks like a portion of the diamond is in focus, but it's hard to know if the overwhelming blurriness is caused by the camera's focus or the diamond itself. Can you ask for a retake? Ask them to "line it up perpendicular to the table and stop down the aperture," if possible.

 

[Just_Starting]

A J+ according to who? If it is the vendor I'd be very sceptical. I've not heard of GIA using such a grading themselves. This is only a small issue but could be an indication of a dishonest vendor.

 

[John P]

This is only a small issue but could be an indication of a dishonest vendor.

Plus and minus are used by tradespeople regularly. Color is a sliding scale. Correct use of J+ would indicate a diamond visibly closer to I than K in the face-down position, or graded too harshly by the lab. As with many things the application is subjective.

 

[diamondkitty14]

Thank you all!

John, thats exactly the case. We asked to give an indication of color and it was a way to say its closer to I than K. I have seen many Js that were so yellow they shouldn't be Js, but my J is very white, so I had to ask.

 

[diamondkitty14]

UPDATE:
So after I thought I made the decision on stone 3, i stumbled upon another stone that was 2.04 carat and scored 0.8 on HCA. It's gia J, SI2, very good cut, but the dimensions and online pictures made me think it might be worth taking an in person look. It came in and didnt disappoint. I looked at it under loupe and microscope today and crystals are visible but its totally eye clean, I have looked at quite a few in person and online stones and can spot inclusions straight away, but not with this guy. Here are some pictures. I am taking it to an appraiser on tuesday and if all goes well it will be set in a simple Ritani bezel halo. My finger is 4.5 so i was a little hesitant about it's size and halo, but I think it will be perfect. Price, just over 11k.