Earring diamond colors

[vivianv]

Would a one I diamond go alright with one J diamond for earrings if they are about .30 ct?Would they look like they matched?

 

[somethingshiny]

They would probably match just fine. Especially if they are really well cut, they will look whiter anyway.

 

[vivianv]

Thanks!Both are AGS ideal cut. One says it has a faceted girdle the other does not say faceted. Will that matter?One averages 4.14 diameter and the other 4.18 , will that be close enough??Probably since it is on ears....

 

[Ellen]

Date: 10/24/2007 1:01:34 AM
Author: vivianv
Thanks!Both are AGS ideal cut. One says it has a faceted girdle the other does not say faceted. Will that matter?One averages 4.14 diameter and the other 4.18 , will that be close enough??Probably since it is on ears....

The 2 different colors should be fine in ideal cuts. I have .58 each, G and H. I can''t tell at all. And the girdles won''t matter either.

However, I would definitely be able to tell the size difference. Granted, I am more sensitive in that area, but in smaller stones (under 1 ct.) the difference IS more noticable.


If it were ME, they''d have to be (and are) the exact same diameter. How much difference you can tolerate I can''t say. Have you seen them?

And here is what others, including JohnQ had to say on this subject.


If you haven''t seen them, I''d get out and look first.

 

[belle]

Date: 10/24/2007 12:30:53 AM
Author:vivianv
Would a one I diamond go alright with one J diamond for earrings if they are about .30 ct?Would they look like they matched?

if they are both graded by the same standars, yes, they will definitely match. you may be able to see a slight difference when you hold them side by side and view them in good lighting but on the ears, no one would ever notice a difference. same with the size. our eyes can't comprehend such subtleties on the ears.

 

[belle]

here they are together

 

[Ellen]

Date: 10/24/2007 9:13:57 AM
Author: belle
if they are both graded by the same standars, yes, they will definitely match. you may be able to see a slight difference when you hold them side by side and view them in good lighting but on the ears, no one would ever notice a difference. same with the size. our eyes can''t comprehend such subtleties on the ears.

Some can, and at much less difference than that.

 

[belle]

Date: 10/24/2007 9:27:37 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 10/24/2007 9:13:57 AM
Author: belle
if they are both graded by the same standars, yes, they will definitely match. you may be able to see a slight difference when you hold them side by side and view them in good lighting but on the ears, no one would ever notice a difference. same with the size. our eyes can''t comprehend such subtleties on the ears.

Some can, and at much less difference than that.

i have no doubt. the mind is a powerful thing!

 

[Ellen]

Date: 10/24/2007 9:31:10 AM
Author: belle

Date: 10/24/2007 9:27:37 AM
Author: Ellen

Some can, and at much less difference than that.

i have no doubt. the mind is a powerful thing!

Trust me, it wasn''t my mind. I did NOT want to send the set back.

I can''t hep it I gots super sensitive size vision.

 

[belle]

Date: 10/24/2007 9:38:54 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 10/24/2007 9:31:10 AM
Author: belle

Date: 10/24/2007 9:27:37 AM
Author: Ellen

Some can, and at much less difference than that.

i have no doubt. the mind is a powerful thing!

Trust me, it wasn''t my mind. I did NOT want to send the set back.

I can''t hep it I gots super sensitive size vision.

hey, is wiggle guy in with the rest? he is ADORABLE!

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 10/24/2007 1:01:34 AM
Author: vivianv
Thanks!Both are AGS ideal cut. One says it has a faceted girdle the other does not say faceted. Will that matter?One averages 4.14 diameter and the other 4.18 , will that be close enough??Probably since it is on ears....

Yes, the I and the J stones will appear to match, so no worries there.

Yes, I believe the two stones will be so close in diameter that you won't see the difference.

On my last trip to WF, I was shopping for a solitaire pendant stone that was just over .50. They lined up six stones in a tray for me to look at (so there was about an inch between each stone). The diameters on the stones varied a bit. The one I bought was 5.26 x 5.29. Two other stones were more like 5.21mm x 5.24.

We absolutely couldn't see a difference. In fact, after I'd chosen one and the other five had to be put back in their wrappers, they had to be weighed/louped in order to be identified....because we couldn't tell them apart. The differences are that miniscule.

When you wear them, you'll have your entire head in between them. They will appear to be identically sized.

 

[aljdewey]

Oh, and something else.......

Because stones have different ''personalities'', those personalities may have more impact on how big a stone appears than the actual measured diameter differences do.

Stones that are worked to return light from edge to edge may ''appear'' bigger than stones that cut just as well, but a bit differently.

The best way I can explain it is this: two of my friends (Marie and Tina) happen to be the exact same height (5''4"), but Tina appears ''taller'' than Marie due to her proportions. Tina is compact in the torso and longer in the legs, so she VISUALLY looks taller than Marie even though she''s not.

I suspect that even if Marie grew 1/4-inch, Tina would still appear taller. Sometimes the reasons things look different (people or diamonds) isn''t about actual measurements.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 10/24/2007 10:17:28 AM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 10/24/2007 1:01:34 AM
Author: vivianv
Thanks!Both are AGS ideal cut. One says it has a faceted girdle the other does not say faceted. Will that matter?One averages 4.14 diameter and the other 4.18 , will that be close enough??Probably since it is on ears....

Yes, the I and the J stones will appear to match, so no worries there.

Yes, I believe the two stones will be so close in diameter that you won't see the difference.

On my last trip to WF, I was shopping for a solitaire pendant stone that was just over .50. They lined up six stones in a tray for me to look at (so there was about an inch between each stone). The diameters on the stones varied a bit. The one I bought was 5.26 x 5.29. Two other stones were more like 5.21mm x 5.24.

We absolutely couldn't see a difference. In fact, after I'd chosen one and the other five had to be put back in their wrappers, they had to be weighed/louped in order to be identified....because we couldn't tell them apart. The differences are that miniscule.

When you wear them, you'll have your entire head in between them. They will appear to be identically sized.

To everyone who views them, I'd say yes. To people who are size sensitive (and yes, it exists just like color sensitivity), they may very well see it. (as evidenced in the link I gave)

The first pair of studs I picked from WF were the same diameter. However, I got a call back that one had aleady been sold, so another was picked for me. When I got the link for them, I saw they weren't the same diameter anymore. .463 vs. .447 (I went to get the actual diameters but the links don't work anymore). For a second I thought, gee, will that be noticable? But then dismissed it, thinking, surely they wouldn't send it if it was.

So when I got them, I could tell the difference. Even getting them mixed up after cleanings. And I could tell it with my big head inbetween.

Believe me, I tried to live with it, because I didn't want to send them back. I couldn't, I really could see the difference Al. And if it really was a mind thing, then I would have seen the color difference too, as they also were two different grades, as are my current. But I can't see diddly squat there.

So while I would venture to say no, the large majority of folks absolutely won't see this difference, and they will indeed appear identical in size, I couldn't in good concience say it unequivocally, cuz, we just don't know the buyers eyes.

p.s. belle, yes, he's in with the rest!

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 10/24/2007 1:20:55 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 10/24/2007 10:17:28 AM
Author: aljdewey

When you wear them, you'll have your entire head in between them. They will appear to be identically sized.

To everyone who views them, I'd say yes. To people who are size sensitive (and yes, it exists just like color sensitivity), they may very well see it. (as evidenced in the link I gave)

So while I would venture to say no, the large majority of folks absolutely won't see this difference, and they will indeed appear identical in size, I couldn't in good concience say it unequivocally, cuz, we just don't know the buyers eyes.

Ell, I don't think we're presenting opposing information here. We're just focusing on different things. I agree that it's entirely possible some random individual might be able to see the difference; I just doubt that it's a probable enough likelihood to add a qualifier.

When I frame my replies, I tend to answer with a mind focused more toward what's probable and less on 'what's remotely possible but very unlikely'. Sure, it's probably *possible* that an asteroid could smash into my house and destroy it, but I certainly don't think the chance is anything more than very slim. So if someone came here asking about the wisdom in purchasing an asteroid rider for his/her house, I'd likely say "I don't think it's a valid concern" even though it is possible.

The original poster said "will that be close enough?? Probably since it is on ears...." By the way the question was asked, I figured 'close enough' didn't suggest an expectation of dead-on-tap matchy-matchy perfection, so worrying about a remote percentage of size-sensitive souls wasn't really my focus. Unless one plans on spending a ridiculously inordinate amount of time gazing at herself in the mirror, the phrase 'on the ears' implies to me concern about 'everyone who views them', so I answered accordingly.

That doesn't mean 'unequivocally', mind you....... but do I think that 99 people out of 100 wouldn't see a difference on the ears? Yep, and I answer with that overwhelming majority in mind. Rule, not exception.

Honestly, I don't dispute that size-sensitive people can exist; I readily acknowledge that clarity-sensitive and color-sensitive people exist too. That said, I personally don't believe that 'size-sensitive' people amount to more than an incidental percentage, and further, I believe that some of those scant few are more 'power-of-suggestion'-sensitive than they are truly size-sensitive.

It's amazing how many more people think they are "clarity-sensitive" when they've been told they are going to look at an SI1 diamond and have seen the plot for the stone. Likewise with size, it's easier to 'see it' when someone's been told 'one of these stones measure 4.14 and one measures 4.18" because there's already a mental expectation that they aren't identical.

I'm much more likely to think a shirt is crisper if I've been told that it was starched, so to speak.

 

[FireGoddess]

We're talking four hundredths of a millimeter difference here (0.04 mm)....I think visibly they will look just about the same to most people. I also wouldn't worry about 1 color grade difference.

 

[Ellen]

Well, I''m really sorry I said anything. I guess this is one of those times when I should leave my personal experiences, and opinions, at the door, and go with the masses.

 

[vivianv]

These are for my daughter,she is not so picky but I want her to try to find at least some well cut diamonds. These are Ideal cuts so ought to be ok. She'll do what she wants , thats for sure.

I did want to get some opinions ....I may start my own search for earring diamonds now that she has me thinking about it.

My earring are really bad diamonds...I mean really bad. Bought them at the maul store years ago.

So easy to get sucked in to this diamond buying .

As far as color goes is it always ok to go one color either way? I know people say J is where you start to see color..so would you want to go to a K with a J or would an I be ok??

I can easily tell size difference but I do think that .04 would be nearly imperceptible to virtually everyone.At least on ears.

Thanks so much for all the views. Very helpful to me and my daughter.

Ellen, it is perfectly ok to be size sensitive!! Having worked in quality control for years I am pretty good at spotting differences in mm of size [but not if I can't see them until I buy them!!Thats why I need opinions!]
In this part of your post Ellen:
"When I got the link for them, I saw they weren't the same diameter anymore. .463 vs. .447 "
Did you mean .463 vs .447 or 4.63 vs 4.47?? I know I could easily see the difference in 4.63 and 4.47 .

 

[FireGoddess]

Date: 10/24/2007 7:08:47 PM
Author: Ellen
Well, I''m really sorry I said anything. I guess this is one of those times when I should leave my personal experiences, and opinions, at the door, and go with the masses.

No Ellen, you just have freakishly hawkish eyesight.

Who knows, there''s bound to be a few more like you out there, and your post assures them that they''re not alone in the world.

 

[FireGoddess]

Date: 10/24/2007 7:11:54 PM
Author: vivianv

So easy to get sucked in to this diamond buying .

As far as color goes is it always ok to go one color either way? I know people say J is where you start to see color..so would you want to go to a K with a J or would an I be ok??

When you get to large stones, it can be easier to tell color differences, but generally you''re okay within a color grade.

Date: 10/24/2007 7:11:54 PM
Author: vivianv

I can easily tell size difference but I do think that .04 would be nearly imperceptible to virtually everyone.At least on ears.

Maybe we should start adding ''units'' here. 0.04 ct would be perceptible to more people than 0.04 mm ....KWIM?? People could get confused, and it IS confusing!!!!!

 

[Lynn B]

Ellen, dear, I have no doubt at all that you saw and noticed that small size difference! xoxox! And I'm glad you spoke up... the OP needs to hear ALL kinds of experiences and opinions!

To Vivian: OK, here's my experience. Regarding color: I am presently in the market for a stud upgrade, but my current studs are .45 each, AGS-0, killer stones. One is a J and one is a K, and honestly, I cannot tell the little stinkers apart! They are both SO white and sparkly -- no hint of yellow AT ALL. In fact, I have to get out the high-powered loupe and read the inscription to know "which is which".

Regarding size... I dug out the certs and one stone is 4.85 x 4.90 and the other is 4.91 x 4.94. Again, such a minute difference, I can't even tell that one is a little "bigger". They look identical to me... with and without my big old head between them!!!

Enjoy the looking, and definitely enjoy the studs. They are fun, fun, fun!!!

 

[vivianv]

"
Maybe we should start adding ''units'' here. 0.04 ct would be perceptible to more people than 0.04 mm ....KWIM?? People could get confused, and it IS confusing!!!!! "

So true Firegoddess! I am confusing myself already in this thread.

 

[canuk-gal]

Date: 10/24/2007 7:08:47 PM
Author: Ellen
Well, I''m really sorry I said anything. I guess this is one of those times when I should leave my personal experiences, and opinions, at the door, and go with the masses.

HI:

Don''t sweat it Ellen--my husband has been telling me for years that his........

cheers--Sharon

 

[gontama]

Sensitivity, tolerance, and preference seem often discussed without making distinction of each.

Benig sensitive to color for example does not always mean being less tolerant to color: I am fairly sensitive to color. I love D & E colors (especially w/ fluo) and never ever miss the I color which is much more than just a "hint" of the color. D & G will never look the same to my naked eye. It does not mean I always "prefer" higher color stone. I could gladly go for a very wel cut I or J color large stone that blows away whiter smaller stones. Why not? My partner on the other hand is not sensitive to color at all and in fact cannot see any difference between D & G side by side which was hard for me to believe. It does not mean she is tolerant to color. She does not want to see any color in diamond. She just does/can not see the color I see. Hence G is the perfect color for her. Difference between sensitivity and tolerance - this I learned during my purchase process.

Likewise some will notice the diameter difference less than 0.1 mm especially for smaller (<1ct) stones. I probably will see the difference in this case. It does not necessarily mean I can/will not accept the pair at all. Others may not see any difference in diameter. But they may hate any size difference that are visible to the naked eye.

A lot of people and a lot of perception and a lot of preference This is why I encourage people to see/compare items in person when possible.

I am ready to be bashed away -- would like to add sensitivity/tolerance to symmetry ...

 

[AGBF]

Date: 10/24/2007 8:10:59 PM
Author: gontama

This is why I encourage people to see/compare items in person when possible.


I am ready to be bashed away -- would like to add sensitivity/tolerance to symmetry ...

I do not know who you are, gontama, but I am not going to bash you. I agree with you. I am incredibly sensitive to color and incredibly insensitive to size. I matched my own stone (taken out of a ring) with another I bought on-line to make a pair of earrings and I matched for color and clarity. The earrings looked perfect to me. When I wore them into the jewelry store, my friend, Mona who has an eagle eye, immediately noticed that the tables were different sizes. What can I say? Sue me.

Deb

 

[Lynn B]

I agree that color "sensitive" does not necessarily mean "color intolerant". I can certainly see the "difference" between a color grade "D" stone and a "J", for example... but does that mean I don't love and adore my "J"? No, of course not!

"Color" in a diamond is not bad... it just "is". Some people prefer icy white "transparent" diamonds, other people prefer warmer, richer-toned stones. For others, their preference lies somewhere in between... and then of course, some people just don't care at all!

Me? I love 'em all!

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 10/24/2007 7:08:47 PM
Author: Ellen
Well, I'm really sorry I said anything. I guess this is one of those times when I should leave my personal experiences, and opinions, at the door, and go with the masses.

Ellen, I really hope you aren't sorry you said anything. I hope you don't infer that your experiences or opinions aren't valid and shouldn't be shared based on my posts.

Everyone's personal experience is valid and meaningful. If you are one of those truly size-sensitive people, that's great and it's good for the OP to know that can exist. Shared experiences typically mean even more when they are in context.

PS isn't (and shouldn't be) about 'going with the masses'. But nor do I want someone who is new here to assume that color-, size-, or clarity-sensitve is hugely prevalent or make it seems like it's a huge thing to worry about. Saying so shouldn't (and doesn't) negate your personal experiences in any way; it hopefully just provides context.

It's really not much different than saying "hey, keep in mind that PS is populated by diamond freaks, but in real life, the majority of folks don't walk around with 2+ carat stones or upgrade their diamonds multiple times." It's just providing a reality check (context) so they realize that one experience here (tons of folks have massive stones) shouldn't be mistaken for being the norm.

 

[Ellen]

Al, I honestly don''t think my comments made her assume "size sensitivity" is hugely prevalent, nor the norm around here. Nor do I think my post was worded in a way to make her worry needlessly.

I clearly pointed out I was size sensitive, and how much difference she could tolerate, I couldn''t say. See, I never said, "Oh no, that''s too much difference, you''ll be able to tell". All I said was, if she hadn''t seen them, to go out and take a look first. I really thought that was a reasonable suggestion, to eliminate possible hassles in the future....

I hardly think that''s cause for alarm. And frankly, no one knew, and she may not have even known if, or how, size sensitive she was (of course we know now, but didn''t in the beginning). I certainly had no clue until I received my first pair from WF. (read: learned the hard way) So when I saw the difference in size with hers, which was more than the difference in mine, I thought it might be nice to save her from possibly having to send a set back. Hence, my suggestion to go looking.

Actually, to me, your post did seem to negate my comments. You basically said, you couldn''t see a difference in diameters at WF, ending with, when she wore them, they would appear identical. That sounded kinda "case closed" to me. It probably wouldn''t have sounded that way if you had ended with maybe, "Most of us wouldn''t see the difference, but if you think you might, it might not be a bad idea to check first".

At any rate, I just thought I''d maybe save her some grief. Obviously it''s a moot point now. And hopefully we can let this thread go.

Sharon, lmao.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 10/25/2007 7:35:28 PM
Author: Ellen
Al, I honestly don't think my comments made her assume 'size sensitivity' is hugely prevalent, nor the norm around here. Nor do I think my post was worded in a way to make her worry needlessly. Ellen, I don't think (and didn't say) your comments made her assume that either.

My initial comments were simply relating my experience. You seem to be inferring that they were a direct response to your comments, and they weren't. Others replied similarly before I did?

I clearly pointed out I was size sensitive, and how much difference she could tolerate, I couldn't say. See, I never said, 'Oh no, that's too much difference, you'll be able to tell'.

Right. And I never said "no one could ever tell, regardless of what they claim." I still don't get why you're bothered?

All I said was, if she hadn't seen them, to go out and take a look first. I really thought that was a reasonable suggestion, to eliminate possible hassles in the future....

It was a reasonable suggestion, and I nothing in my comments said (or even implied) that it wasn't?

I hardly think that's cause for alarm. And frankly, no one knew, and she may not have even known if, or how, size sensitive she was (of course we know now, but didn't in the beginning). I certainly had no clue until I received my first pair from WF. (read: learned the hard way) So when I saw the difference in size with hers, which was more than the difference in mine, I thought it might be nice to save her from possibly having to send a set back. Hence, my suggestion to go looking.

Actually, to me, your post did seem to negate my comments. You basically said, you couldn't see a difference in diameters at WF, ending with, when she wore them, they would appear identical. That sounded kinda 'case closed' to me. It probably wouldn't have sounded that way if you had ended with maybe, 'Most of us wouldn't see the difference, but if you think you might, it might not be a bad idea to check first'.

Ellen, c'mon. We've both been around here a waaaaaaaay long time; by now, it should totally go without saying that I hold your input in tremendously high regard....and have *said so* many times over. I don't get how you think that my sharing my experience somehow negates yours.....they are just two differing experiences. They cannot cancel each other out, yanno? If I get crappy service and you get great service at a restaurant, our experiences don't cancel each other out. They are just two different experiences, and each has its value to someone considering the restaurant.

I said I couldn't see a diff at WF because that's the truth....I couldn't. Based on my experience (and my belief that the majority of folks aren't size sensitive), I said I think they'll appear identically sized....and I still think that. That doesn't make me right, it doesn't make it 'case closed', it certainly doesn't make my belief "unequivocal", and it doesn't suggest that your idea to see for herself wasn't a good one. It doesn't say your experience wasn't relevant or any other thing.

I was pretty clear in the post that it was my opinion (I even said "i believe"), so I'm not sure why you're taking my comments personally, but they certainly weren't offered that way. I didn't think a ton of qualifiers were necessary (unless you're x, y, z, on a Tuesday, etc.).

They weren't directed at you, toward you, or toward anyone.

At any rate, I just thought I'd maybe save her some grief. Obviously it's a moot point now. And hopefully we can let this thread go.

I hope so, too....and I hope you realize that I wasn't 'refuting' you. It really bothers me that you think my offering my experience is somehow a barb at you.

We're all adults here, and there are times when we aren't going to share the same opinions, have the same viewpoints, or sometimes even disagree. Why is that something to be taken personally?

 

[belle]

i think the real issue here is, we have to be careful mixing pumpkins and chainsaws.

 

[whatmeworry]

I know I''m size sensitive when it comes to pie.