IGI report LG782687184

2.51 ct Emerald Laboratory-Grown Diamond

88/100 · Refined

A strong candidate on paper; confirm its light pattern in imagery.

What reads well

A 70.3% depth is deep for a step cut: weight sits below the girdle and the stone faces up smaller.
Screening only: for this emerald cut, check images or video of the exact stone for the "hall of mirrors" step pattern, any see-through window under the table and clean corners.
Treatment status is not stated on the report. For a laboratory-grown diamond, ask whether it is as-grown or post-growth treated.

Table · Ideal: At 68%, the table sits within the typical 60–69% range for an emerald cut, balancing brightness with fire.
Total depth · Closer look: 70.3% is deeper than typical for an emerald cut (60–69%). Extra depth holds weight below the girdle, so the stone can face up smaller than its carat weight suggests.
Length-to-width · Ideal: A 1.38:1 outline is within the classic 1.3–1.5:1 range for an emerald cut.
Polish · Ideal: Excellent polish is the top finish grade — facets are cleanly executed with nothing that would soften sparkle.
Symmetry · Ideal: Excellent symmetry is the top finish grade — facets are cleanly executed with nothing that would soften sparkle.
Girdle · Ideal: Slightly thick: a durable girdle thickness that doesn't hide meaningful weight.
Culet · Ideal: Long: a keel-line culet, normal for elongated step and modified cuts.
Color · Ideal: E is in the colorless range and faces up white in any metal.
Clarity · Favorable: VS1 is typically eye-clean, though step cuts show inclusions more readily — worth a close look at the images.
Fluorescence · Ideal: None: no meaningful effect on appearance.

With 70.3% depth, does this stone face up smaller than a typical 2.51 ct emerald?
With open step facets, is the center completely eye-clean without any visible dark marks?
Does this CVD diamond show any brown or gray undertone face-up in daylight?
Can you show me the inscribed report number under a loupe before it is set?