Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamonds

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

In regards to fire vs brightness, that is too dependent on the lighting environment to give specifics. And, as I said, sometimes you prefer stone A in X environment and stone B in Y environment. Doesn't mean that either of them are bad.

Did you prefer the more fiery G or did you prefer the #4 D? I don't think you should settle for #4 if you prefer a more fiery look.

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

Just curious as well.

Is a diamond of these specs good?
HCA score is 5.7, which I know isn't good at all.
However, for some reason it had more fire than #4. So I just took down the specs anyhow because I was curious if it was because this diamond is good, or that #4 is just returning too much white light and lacking fire.

I attached a picture of #4 and the diamond below.
#4 is on the right.
What do you think? Thanks a lot!

2.55 carats
8.81 -8.85 x 5.35mm
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Fluorescence: None
Triple EX diamond (Precision of cut, symmetry and polish)
Total Depth percentage: 60.6%
Table Size percentage: 61% (VERY big table for some reason...)
Crown height percentage: 13.5%
Crown Angle: 34.5 degrees
Pavilion depth percentage: 44.0%
Pavilion angle: 41.4 degrees
Girdle thickness: Medium
Girdle finish: Faceted
Cutlet: None

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

On the right?

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

In regards to fire vs brightness, that is too dependent on the lighting environment to give specifics. And, as I said, sometimes you prefer stone A in X environment and stone B in Y environment. Doesn't mean that either of them are bad.

Did you prefer the more fiery G or did you prefer the #4 D? I don't think you should settle for #4 if you prefer a more fiery look.

I understand what you mean.
We looked at the diamond close to the windows where the sun was shining in.

Tiffany out of all the stores, seems to have the best lighting (according to my gf). Everything, including the skin tone, looks nicer. HW's store is really dark so it's just much harder to see for the most part. I have not seen HW or Tiffany under the sun or close by the windows.

Typically what's the determination for a good diamond? Do people place more emphasis on the fire, or the brilliance, or equal parts to both?

Thanks!

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

On the right?

ah my bad. the picture got rotated for some reason. #4 is at the top now

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I knew the bottom stone was the low HCA score based on the picture. See the darkness under the table? Compare to #4 which does not have the darkness under the table. #4 looks much better than the 2.55

So in the windows (at Tiff) you are going to see a lot of white light and some fire.

At HW (?) where you saw stones #4 and the 2.55, its darker so it is easier to see fire. Now you said the 2.55 was more fiery. Was #4 also brighter looking? Yes, usually there is a tradeoff between brilliance and fire.

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I knew the bottom stone was the low HCA score based on the picture. See the darkness under the table? Compare to #4 which does not have the darkness under the table. #4 looks much better than the 2.55

So in the windows (at Tiff) you are going to see a lot of white light and some fire.

At HW (?) where you saw stones #4 and the 2.55, its darker so it is easier to see fire. Now you said the 2.55 was more fiery. Was #4 also brighter looking? Yes, usually there is a tradeoff between brilliance and fire.

#4 and the other diamond in the picture are both Graff diamonds.
#5 is HW.

Generally which is more desirable? Brilliance or fire? or an even combination of both is most ideal?

For instance, would you recommend #4? Is it better to go with just #5? Both are the same setting.
I've asked SAs to find diamonds within the cheat sheet specs but in the meantime these are the ones available. Im debating whether to settle for #4 if the discount is good enough, or if I should just pursue a better diamond regardless of the discount since I am already paying so much.

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I personally prefer the HW double claws over the Graff prongs, so I'd go with #5 if you think the stone looks good. Also, maybe its my imagination but I think HW baguettes tend start wider and taper more.

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I've attached pictures of both diamonds.
Lighting is different though due to store environments.

Do you see any darkness in #5? Or that is hard to tell under artificial lighting?
From the pictures itself (I know this doesn't mean much), is it possible to tell which is the better diamond?

Like Ame and you said, #5 is the better diamond and I am leaning towards it, while also getting the other brands to look for something within those cheat sheet specs.

On the other hand, Graff is offering a pretty good discount on the ring if I decide to just take this ring. Therefore I am trying to see if it's a good idea to just take this ring if the discount is good enough, or if I should just not compromise since I am already paying so much, get a really good diamond, and then possibly try to negotiate the price down again at that point.

What are both of your recommendations?
@Ame, which of these 2 designs do you prefer more? Julien prefers #5 more, right?

The HW baguettes does seem to taper more, or it could be those 2 small "beads" on the side that makes it look fatter.
The HW ring seems "larger" because the prongs are more noticeable, which gives the illusion that the diamond is bigger, even though it's the smallest diamond out of all 5.

Graff seems to have a cleaner look with less noticeable prongs and the baguettes have a slim look that's about the thickness of the ring itself. Different styles, but I am trying to find out which is generally more popular since I like both designs a lot! Because the prongs are thinner, could this be a problem down the road? such as the prongs breaking and then the diamond falling out

HW's diamond has feathers on the edges (bottom view of diamond diagram). There's also 2 clouds in the center of the diamond (top view). Does this dramatically affect the look of the diamond, or it doesn't matter since it's still a VVS2 afterall?

Thank you all so much. I am so sorry for asking so many questions. I wish I wasn't as much of a bother to both of you but this is an expensive purchase and I am really confused.

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

#5 HW! VVS2 Inclusions have no effect on durability, don't worry. And you're buying insurance anyway in case of damage or loss, I thought you mentioned earlier?

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

#5 HW! VVS2 Inclusions have no effect on durability, don't worry. And you're buying insurance anyway in case of damage or loss, I thought you mentioned earlier?

yea i just wanted to be 100% sure Sorry for asking again. I have not bought such insurance before so I don't know how easy / hard the process is, but if I can avoid insurance for anything that's the best case scenario.

So there's no darkness in #5 right?

So forget about #4, because of the specs, even if the price is good, and just go for #5? Both are about the same right now; #4 is slightly cheaper for a bigger diamond. #5 is smaller and slightly more expensive. With these differences, #5 is still a better bet since I'm already spending 100k+ so might as well just spend that little bit more?

Thank you!!! I think I've made up my mind for the most part now
Just want another reconfirmation. I really appreciate all the help and I am very sorry for being so long-winded. I would hate for her / me to regret on the purchase and possibly end up with even more store credit with another jeweler. I'd go nuts then

 

[ame]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

There's really nothing in a VVS clarity that's going to cause an issue with durability.

Hey, thank you both so much!

With regards to the cheat sheet, so the diamond will still remain as white but with more fire, right? Or will the white tone down a little and instead produce more different colors / fire?

I have asked the SAs to get a diamond of these specs. Tiffany probably will have the easiest time finding a diamond within these specs simply because of the amount of inventory they had. It was really hard for HW and Graff to get rings #4 and #5.

So should I just settle for say #4 (esp if they give a nice discount), or strictly go with either #5 or have them find something within specs of the cheat sheet, and then try to negotiate for the discount again? HW wouldn't budge much on the price, as compared to Graff or Tiffany. Then again, the discounted amount doesn't really matter, since the final selling price is still pretty close for these 3 brands, which means Graff just had a higher initial markup in the MSRP.

The problem with the Tiffany credit is that it is a Tiffany credit. Other than an engagement ring, I don't see myself spending that much money at their stores. I may purchase wedding bands and some small and cheaper jewelry pieces, but they still don't add up anywhere close to the amount of credit I have. For fanciful looking necklaces and jewelry pieces, Cartier, HW and Graff appeal to me more than Tiffany does.

Graff said service is free for life. I believe HW said the same. Tiffany I cannot remember at all. Then again, there's probably a lot of exclusions in the T&Cs, so it's not going to be that useful other than the occasional cleaning.

I do plan to purchase insurance, and that's really pricey from what I was quoted so far. What's the typical amount for each 10k covered?

Thanks!

Tiffany finding stones within those specs is debatable, as they tend to select stones that are deep. I don't have any idea WHY they go for deeper stones, but hopefully they will find one within the specs I recommended. If we stay within the cheat sheet, you will have lots of fire and lots of brilliance--a good balance of both white and color light.

I would not settle on anything that you both don't love. She has to love the ring, so if she doesn't love it, don't just settle to be done. This is a LOT of money. A LOT. Don't settle! And for this amount of credit, you're right, I have no idea what you'd buy there if not for a ring. I cannot even believe they don't have a stunner in their stock in that cheat sheet range for this price point. I know where abouts you are in the country, and even world wide, I can't believe stock in that range just gets snapped up this quickly.

I've attached pictures of both diamonds.
Lighting is different though due to store environments.

Do you see any darkness in #5? Or that is hard to tell under artificial lighting?
From the pictures itself (I know this doesn't mean much), is it possible to tell which is the better diamond?

Like Ame and you said, #5 is the better diamond and I am leaning towards it, while also getting the other brands to look for something within those cheat sheet specs.

On the other hand, Graff is offering a pretty good discount on the ring if I decide to just take this ring. Therefore I am trying to see if it's a good idea to just take this ring if the discount is good enough, or if I should just not compromise since I am already paying so much, get a really good diamond, and then possibly try to negotiate the price down again at that point.

What are both of your recommendations?
@Ame, which of these 2 designs do you prefer more? Julien prefers #5 more, right?

The HW baguettes does seem to taper more, or it could be those 2 small "beads" on the side that makes it look fatter.
The HW ring seems "larger" because the prongs are more noticeable, which gives the illusion that the diamond is bigger, even though it's the smallest diamond out of all 5.

Graff seems to have a cleaner look with less noticeable prongs and the baguettes have a slim look that's about the thickness of the ring itself. Different styles, but I am trying to find out which is generally more popular since I like both designs a lot! Because the prongs are thinner, could this be a problem down the road? such as the prongs breaking and then the diamond falling out

HW's diamond has feathers on the edges (bottom view of diamond diagram). There's also 2 clouds in the center of the diamond (top view). Does this dramatically affect the look of the diamond, or it doesn't matter since it's still a VVS2 afterall?

Thank you all so much. I am so sorry for asking so many questions. I wish I wasn't as much of a bother to both of you but this is an expensive purchase and I am really confused.

It IS an expensive purchase. DO NOT settle, and don't apologize. That's why we're here to help!

My understanding of what she was after was that she liked a solitaire more, am I misremembering that? I feel like the only reason we have baguette and pear settings is because that's what HW and Graff had available...? Of the two settings, I much prefer the pear setting, but the only stone I really thought was well cut was the 2.06 (#5 iirc). Her ring size being so amazingly dainty (again, JEALOUS) gives you guys lots of WOW on her hand.

Let's see what they come up with. As much as you don't WANT Tiffany--I am curious what they come up with. It seems like kind of a waste to not use that credit since you have it and can't get a full refund.

That 2.55 you just shared with us is a PASS. Huge table, and the crown and pavilion don't line up well.

 

[canuk-gal]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

HI:

I have been reading your thread.

If I am not mistaken, your Tiffany credit does not expire, correct? Therefore, you have some time to find the stone that is just right for you both.

I say this, because I, too, have been in the position of looking for a > 2 ctw diamond from Tiffany. Although there were stones available in the store I was looking, I had a narrower set of parameters--not unlike yours for cut, but including lower colors--and I let my SA know.

From there, I understand the request goes through their concierge and they (first) do a search of stones in the US and Canada. For me the list was long! That said, in speaking to the SA--I understood the search is not limited to the above countries, but International as well. Although the stones I was interested in were in the US--my sister did buy jewellery that was brought in from the UK. This seemed very natural request. But their response was not immediate. It took at least a week for the list of stones to be provided.

My point is, please let Tiffany do the work for you. But provide them some time--they have access and many resources to tap, local and International. I know this is an important decision for you, so if you take the variable of time out of the equation you might feel less stress about committing to the stones on hand.

I will continue to read your thread, as I look forward to the outcome.

cheers--Sharon

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

You need to ask your gf which setting SHE really wants.

And if the whole of Tiffany, HW, and Graff can only come up with 5 stones that meet your specs... something is wrong. Either your color/clarity combo is too restrictive or the cheat sheet is too restrictive. The one floating around on PS is ridiculously restrictive. It is dummy-proof for buying online when literally thousands of diamonds are at your fingertips, but you are not buying online, you are in the hands of the three of the largest premier jewelers with stores around the globe... who can only find 5 stones???? That should tell you there's something wrong.

 

[JoshuaNiamehr]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

Here is a really great resource within pricescope on diamond cut:

https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-grading-chart-round

Thank you.
This is very helpful as well. So Class 1A is the best on paper followed by the subsequent classes. However, is there a different standard for the international fine trade cut as compared to the American ideal cut? Is it just a different style of cutting diamonds?

Yes according to the AGA and David Atlas (whom I agree with) Class 1A is the best on paper. These are not cutting styles these are just classifications named by David.

 

[ame]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

You need to ask your gf which setting SHE really wants.

And if the whole of Tiffany, HW, and Graff can only come up with 5 stones that meet your specs... something is wrong. Either your color/clarity combo is too restrictive or the cheat sheet is too restrictive. The one floating around on PS is ridiculously restrictive. It is dummy-proof for buying online when literally thousands of diamonds are at your fingertips, but you are not buying online, you are in the hands of the three of the largest premier jewelers with stores around the globe... who can only find 5 stones???? That should tell you there's something wrong.

Part of the issue, I think, is simply that they're fighting supply in the eye of proposal season.

The "cheat sheet" is just fine, as are their requirements. Since you've never seen it, you probably can't really judge it. However, we on PS keep people on here within those specs all the time, in fact, we reject stones that fall outside of it consistently, yourself included. My cheat sheet isn't something floating around PS, at least not that I've spotted. Further, Tiffany isn't known to select stones for cut quality. They grade them in house anyway, based on some random ass criteria they set up as "excellent" that is not by any stretch "excellent," no matter how many times their Sales Professionals mutter it off the script. Many people that shop there don't know any better, nor do they care. And the majority of those Sales Professionals don't care either, as long as they make the sale. They would if they knew better, I'd wager. The brand opts to select stones for color and clarity and carat, and sell them at a huge markup to pay for their marketing budget. The VAST majority of their stones are steep deeps, and they seem very proud of those and price them accordingly. They don't face up the proper diameter for their carat weight, and they're priced infinitely higher than they would be elsewhere for those cut dimensions. Not everyone wants a "ideal on paper stone", but when I get asked for help, the ones who want perfect on paper are who is asking for help.

I do agree that knowing exactly what SHE really wants is vital. This is a lot of money for either of you to just "settle" on anything, though. You have time, I assume. Don't rush into it.

 

[JoshuaNiamehr]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

The cheat sheet floating around PS, in my experience and research, viewing of tens of thousands of diamonds is fairly accurate. Its not fair to call it a cheat sheet as David Atlas put a lot of effort and research into it, its very much based on science.

Working with Sarine, the most prestigious diamond technology company in the world has only reasserted that the AGA "cheat sheet" is highly accurate.

As for a diamonds beauty - that is a discussion and term that is hotly debated, but in my experience, is something the AGA "cheat sheet" handles very very well.

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I shown the cheat sheet to the SAs and one of them commented on the table being too small at 53%, and 59 depth is too shallow. He said it was "old school ideal range". Is this true? So my comment was for him to just find something in the 55-57 region then (still within the cheat sheet), and everything else being within the cheat sheet proportions.

Stock seems to be really low for this carat weight + color + clarity combination. He showed me a screenshot of there being only 6 stones that is between 2.3 to 2.7 carats D color in the entire U.S. So right now, I told him I'll accept anything between a D and a G, and as for clarity, anything at VS and up is fine. Some of the stones have fluorescence as well, which I guess I should pass on it? Supply does seem to be an issue right now as well because of upcoming Valentine's and Lunar new year. Lunar new year in Asia is equivalent to Christmas in the U.S. - that's when they typically sell the most diamonds or jewelry in general in Asia (according to the SA).

She liked the solitaire more, because it was more diamond and less distractions on the side and also less metal covering the center diamond. However, after looking at the other designs more, it isn't as bad as we initially thought it was, so we're equally receptive to those other designs now. However, for solitaires, I prefer Tiffany's style compared to Graff or HW's.

I would prefer going with Graff / HW, just because the SAs (esp for Graff) been especially nice. That being said, the Tiffany credit is a big problem and it'd be nice to use it, but I would not want to compromise on the ring and experience just to get rid of the credit, since it's a once-in-a-lifetime thing after all (assuming no upgrades . The Tiffany credits do not expire, but I can't wait perpetually for him to find a diamond, if they're ever going to find one. Graff and HW cannot put those rings on hold for too long either, esp #5, which so far seems to have the best cut. The original SA that I am working with at Tiffany is back, so hopefully they can find us something.

None of the brands seem very willing to import in rings from other countries, because the duties / taxes may have already been paid overseas. Hopefully they have a few suitable loose diamonds in stock that can be made into a ring.

So currently, HW has found a ring within those specs, but the diamond is a little on the small size (smallest out of all 5). #4 is a nice ring visually, but like others have said, there's not as much fire in the diamond, which I agree. So your advice is to not settle at all for #4, regardless of the discount they give, since it's already such an expensive purchase?

Thank you so much everyone! This is quite a long and frustrating process (thanks to Tiffany) but hopefully I'll find the perfect stone soon!

 

[canuk-gal]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

HI:

Yes, well, just D color will be very limiting. Glad you are open up to other possibilities.

As for "cheat" sheet parameters...if it is good enough for AGS then

cheers--Sharon

 

[ame]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I shown the cheat sheet to the SAs and one of them commented on the table being too small at 53%, and 59 depth is too shallow. He said it was "old school ideal range". Is this true? So my comment was for him to just find something in the 55-57 region then (still within the cheat sheet), and everything else being within the cheat sheet proportions.

Stock seems to be really low for this carat weight + color + clarity combination. He showed me a screenshot of there being only 6 stones that is between 2.3 to 2.7 carats D color in the entire U.S. So right now, I told him I'll accept anything between a D and a G, and as for clarity, anything at VS and up is fine. Some of the stones have fluorescence as well, which I guess I should pass on it? Supply does seem to be an issue right now as well because of upcoming Valentine's and Lunar new year. Lunar new year in Asia is equivalent to Christmas in the U.S. - that's when they typically sell the most diamonds or jewelry in general in Asia (according to the SA).

She liked the solitaire more, because it was more diamond and less distractions on the side and also less metal covering the center diamond. However, after looking at the other designs more, it isn't as bad as we initially thought it was, so we're equally receptive to those other designs now. However, for solitaires, I prefer Tiffany's style compared to Graff or HW's.

I would prefer going with Graff / HW, just because the SAs (esp for Graff) been especially nice. That being said, the Tiffany credit is a big problem and it'd be nice to use it, but I would not want to compromise on the ring and experience just to get rid of the credit, since it's a once-in-a-lifetime thing after all (assuming no upgrades . The Tiffany credits do not expire, but I can't wait perpetually for him to find a diamond, if they're ever going to find one. Graff and HW cannot put those rings on hold for too long either, esp #5, which so far seems to have the best cut. The original SA that I am working with at Tiffany is back, so hopefully they can find us something.

None of the brands seem very willing to import in rings from other countries, because the duties / taxes may have already been paid overseas. Hopefully they have a few suitable loose diamonds in stock that can be made into a ring.

So currently, HW has found a ring within those specs, but the diamond is a little on the small size (smallest out of all 5). #4 is a nice ring visually, but like others have said, there's not as much fire in the diamond, which I agree. So your advice is to not settle at all for #4, regardless of the discount they give, since it's already such an expensive purchase?

Thank you so much everyone! This is quite a long and frustrating process (thanks to Tiffany) but hopefully I'll find the perfect stone soon!

Don't settle for anything that's not absolutely what your fiance and you both want. If that's her favorite ring, though, get that one. Regardless of specs on paper. She is wearing it. Get her what makes her happiest.

Don't pass on fluorescence unless you've seen it in person and know you don't like it. It can be a really nice trait AND save you money getting you a larger stone. It's spectacular in higher colors, as well.

If you can find something that is:
Total depth between 59 – 61.8%
Table diameter between 55 – 57%
Crown angle between 34.3 – 34.9 degrees
Pavilion angle between 40.6 – 40.9 degrees
Girdle thickness between thin to medium, faceted (bruted isn't bad, but faceted would be better)
Culet size: none

No, it's not OLD SCHOOL. Those numbers are AGS approved. *eyeroll* You're not going to find those there without major combing through inventory and a seriously patient sales associate. You're hopefully going to find 55-57% range there, likely above 57... but you'll find 55-57 via most ideal vendors. That's where most are cut to. Best yet, 55% with the right numbers. A 55% table with around a 60% depth, a 34.5 degree crown angle and a 40.7 or 40.8 pavilion. It's the secret sauce. In fact--send em that bolded part. lol you'll probably never get a stone through any of em at that rate.

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

Ridiculously restrictive.

Depth 59.5-63.0 Even up to 63.5 in cases with very high crowns, though you are probably taking a hit on the spread. Here's why: depth is not equal. 0.5% depth extra in the girdle (still within EX/ID limits) will impact spread more than 0.5% extra depth in the crown.
Table up to 60... 61 may also be acceptable. As you saw with the the 2.55 stone, a 61T can be more fiery than a 58T.
CA 33.5-36, possibly 36.5
PA 40.5-41.2

AND

HCA score under 3.

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I shown the cheat sheet to the SAs and one of them commented on the table being too small at 53%, and 59 depth is too shallow. He said it was "old school ideal range". Is this true?

59 is pretty shallow for a 53-57 Table...

Anyway, yes, 53-57.5% table is old school, that is the old standard for AGS Ideal. Now that we have better understanding of how table, crown and pavilion angles affect each other, more combinations can be made outside of those old Ideal percentages. AGS and GIA allow Ideal/Ex tables from 52-62, I believe.

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

Don't settle for anything that's not absolutely what your fiance and you both want. If that's her favorite ring, though, get that one. Regardless of specs on paper. She is wearing it. Get her what makes her happiest.

Don't pass on fluorescence unless you've seen it in person and know you don't like it. It can be a really nice trait AND save you money getting you a larger stone. It's spectacular in higher colors, as well.

If you can find something that is:
Total depth between 59 – 61.8%
Table diameter between 55 – 57%
Crown angle between 34.3 – 34.9 degrees
Pavilion angle between 40.6 – 40.9 degrees
Girdle thickness between thin to medium, faceted (bruted isn't bad, but faceted would be better)
Culet size: none

No, it's not OLD SCHOOL. Those numbers are AGS approved. *eyeroll* You're not going to find those there without major combing through inventory and a seriously patient sales associate. You're hopefully going to find 55-57% range there, likely above 57... but you'll find 55-57 via most ideal vendors. That's where most are cut to. Best yet, 55% with the right numbers. A 55% table with around a 60% depth, a 34.5 degree crown angle and a 40.7 or 40.8 pavilion. It's the secret sauce. In fact--send em that bolded part. lol you'll probably never get a stone through any of em at that rate.

You mean if she likes the visual looks of the ring, then it's alright to go with it even though the specs are slightly outside the cheat sheet? Or would it be better to wait for something within those specs since she'll probably like the looks even more?

Currently, I gave Tiffany the specs and am waiting to hear back. I will update those specs to what you just gave me too.

So fluorescence isn't a bad thing? What is generally a "better" color to accept? Is it generally a negative trait? Or neutral?

So these specs don't really change over time, including AGS / GIA standards?

Hopefully they can find something. Otherwise I may just settle with #5. My gf really like the looks of #4 though (the design mostly). However you said it's a bad idea to settle for that diamond and we should just have them find a better diamond in that setting right?

Thanks!

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I shown the cheat sheet to the SAs and one of them commented on the table being too small at 53%, and 59 depth is too shallow. He said it was "old school ideal range". Is this true?

59 is pretty shallow for a 53-57 Table...

Anyway, yes, 53-57.5% table is old school, that is the old standard for AGS Ideal. Now that we have better understanding of how table, crown and pavilion angles affect each other, more combinations can be made outside of those old Ideal percentages. AGS and GIA allow Ideal/Ex tables from 52-62, I believe.

What is the new standard now typically?

Ridiculously restrictive.

Depth 59.5-63.0 Even up to 63.5 in cases with very high crowns, though you are probably taking a hit on the spread. Here's why: depth is not equal. 0.5% depth extra in the girdle (still within EX/ID limits) will impact spread more than 0.5% extra depth in the crown.
Table up to 60... 61 may also be acceptable. As you saw with the the 2.55 stone, a 61T can be more fiery than a 58T.
CA 33.5-36, possibly 36.5
PA 40.5-41.2

AND

HCA score under 3.

So you recommend I find something within these specs?

Thank you!

 

[ame]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

Don't settle for anything that's not absolutely what your fiance and you both want. If that's her favorite ring, though, get that one. Regardless of specs on paper. She is wearing it. Get her what makes her happiest.

Don't pass on fluorescence unless you've seen it in person and know you don't like it. It can be a really nice trait AND save you money getting you a larger stone. It's spectacular in higher colors, as well.

If you can find something that is:
Total depth between 59 – 61.8%
Table diameter between 55 – 57%
Crown angle between 34.3 – 34.9 degrees
Pavilion angle between 40.6 – 40.9 degrees
Girdle thickness between thin to medium, faceted (bruted isn't bad, but faceted would be better)
Culet size: none

No, it's not OLD SCHOOL. Those numbers are AGS approved. *eyeroll* You're not going to find those there without major combing through inventory and a seriously patient sales associate. You're hopefully going to find 55-57% range there, likely above 57... but you'll find 55-57 via most ideal vendors. That's where most are cut to. Best yet, 55% with the right numbers. A 55% table with around a 60% depth, a 34.5 degree crown angle and a 40.7 or 40.8 pavilion. It's the secret sauce. In fact--send em that bolded part. lol you'll probably never get a stone through any of em at that rate.

You mean if she likes the visual looks of the ring, then it's alright to go with it even though the specs are slightly outside the cheat sheet? Or would it be better to wait for something within those specs since she'll probably like the looks even more?

Currently, I gave Tiffany the specs and am waiting to hear back. I will update those specs to what you just gave me too.

So fluorescence isn't a bad thing? What is generally a "better" color to accept? Is it generally a negative trait? Or neutral?

So these specs don't really change over time, including AGS / GIA standards?

Hopefully they can find something. Otherwise I may just settle with #5. My gf really like the looks of #4 though (the design mostly). However you said it's a bad idea to settle for that diamond and we should just have them find a better diamond in that setting right?

Thanks!

The specs I gave you are fine. "Ridiculously restrictive" my ass. They're the AGS standards, which is who actually grades for cut. GIA's "standards for cut quality" are so huge you can drive a semi through them. Take those with a grain of salt. These brands are cut for size, color and clarity, not for cut quality. Those are more the factors they care about. You're not going to get a hideous diamond from these brands. But you can find the best cut based on AGS ideal cut numbers in their inventories, IF that matters to you, it might just take a while.

And yes, if she LOVES that ring and THAT stone, with her eyes, even if they fall outside of the cheat sheet, and she doesn't care about perfect on paper, that's the one to go with. If she doesn't love perfect on paper, that's fine. Go with what she LOVES. Make sure she LOVES it. But if she doesn't LOVE IT don't settle on it and keep looking. Don't settle for what you don't LOVE.

Fluorescence is not a bad thing. Some brands, some dealers frown on it, but it's a naturally occurring trait, and can have a pretty awesome effect on the stone in sunlight.

Definite "better color to accept". Whatever color meets your needs. I wear an H. Not warm at all. Warmer than a D side by side, but if you saw my stone in person you'd probably never know it's an H without me telling you.

 

[ame]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

I shown the cheat sheet to the SAs and one of them commented on the table being too small at 53%, and 59 depth is too shallow. He said it was "old school ideal range". Is this true?

59 is pretty shallow for a 53-57 Table...

Anyway, yes, 53-57.5% table is old school, that is the old standard for AGS Ideal. Now that we have better understanding of how table, crown and pavilion angles affect each other, more combinations can be made outside of those old Ideal percentages. AGS and GIA allow Ideal/Ex tables from 52-62, I believe.

No it's not. It's within AGS range for ideal. And it pairs very well with a 53-55 table.

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

Don't settle for anything that's not absolutely what your fiance and you both want. If that's her favorite ring, though, get that one. Regardless of specs on paper. She is wearing it. Get her what makes her happiest.

Don't pass on fluorescence unless you've seen it in person and know you don't like it. It can be a really nice trait AND save you money getting you a larger stone. It's spectacular in higher colors, as well.

If you can find something that is:
Total depth between 59 – 61.8%
Table diameter between 55 – 57%
Crown angle between 34.3 – 34.9 degrees
Pavilion angle between 40.6 – 40.9 degrees
Girdle thickness between thin to medium, faceted (bruted isn't bad, but faceted would be better)
Culet size: none

No, it's not OLD SCHOOL. Those numbers are AGS approved. *eyeroll* You're not going to find those there without major combing through inventory and a seriously patient sales associate. You're hopefully going to find 55-57% range there, likely above 57... but you'll find 55-57 via most ideal vendors. That's where most are cut to. Best yet, 55% with the right numbers. A 55% table with around a 60% depth, a 34.5 degree crown angle and a 40.7 or 40.8 pavilion. It's the secret sauce. In fact--send em that bolded part. lol you'll probably never get a stone through any of em at that rate.

You mean if she likes the visual looks of the ring, then it's alright to go with it even though the specs are slightly outside the cheat sheet? Or would it be better to wait for something within those specs since she'll probably like the looks even more?

Currently, I gave Tiffany the specs and am waiting to hear back. I will update those specs to what you just gave me too.

So fluorescence isn't a bad thing? What is generally a "better" color to accept? Is it generally a negative trait? Or neutral?

So these specs don't really change over time, including AGS / GIA standards?

Hopefully they can find something. Otherwise I may just settle with #5. My gf really like the looks of #4 though (the design mostly). However you said it's a bad idea to settle for that diamond and we should just have them find a better diamond in that setting right?

Thanks!

The specs I gave you are fine. "Ridiculously restrictive" my a$$. They're the AGS standards, which is who actually grades for cut. GIA's "standards for cut quality" are so huge you can drive a semi through them. Take those with a grain of salt. These brands are cut for size, color and clarity, not for cut quality. Those are more the factors they care about. You're not going to get a hideous diamond from these brands. But you can find the best cut based on AGS ideal cut numbers in their inventories, IF that matters to you, it might just take a while.

And yes, if she LOVES that ring and THAT stone, with her eyes, even if they fall outside of the cheat sheet, and she doesn't care about perfect on paper, that's the one to go with. If she doesn't love perfect on paper, that's fine. Go with what she LOVES. Make sure she LOVES it. But if she doesn't LOVE IT don't settle on it and keep looking. Don't settle for what you don't LOVE.

Fluorescence is not a bad thing. Some brands, some dealers frown on it, but it's a naturally occurring trait, and can have a pretty awesome effect on the stone in sunlight.

Definite "better color to accept". Whatever color meets your needs. I wear an H. Not warm at all. Warmer than a D side by side, but if you saw my stone in person you'd probably never know it's an H without me telling you.

I see.
Tiffany has yet to get back to me.

#5 falls within those ideal numbers for AGS, right? I think we may just go with that if Tiffany is getting nowhere.

Do you think there's a noticeable difference between a 2.07 and a 2.16? Dimensions are 8.18 - 8.24 x 5.04mm vs. 8.38 - 8.42 x 5.09mm

So right now #4 is really nice, but the lack of fire is bothering us a little. Ideally #5 does seem to be better. The diamond isn't as clean, and it's smaller, but the specs fall in nicely.

I meant fluorescence comes in blue, yellow and sometimes green? Is there one color that is "better" than the other? Or is it better to not have any? Fluorescence basically gives the diamond a hue of that color, right? So in some cases, say a lower color grade diamond may actually do better with blue fluorescence?

Thanks!

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

Ridiculously restrictive.

Depth 59.5-63.0 Even up to 63.5 in cases with very high crowns, though you are probably taking a hit on the spread. Here's why: depth is not equal. 0.5% depth extra in the girdle (still within EX/ID limits) will impact spread more than 0.5% extra depth in the crown.
Table up to 60... 61 may also be acceptable. As you saw with the the 2.55 stone, a 61T can be more fiery than a 58T.
CA 33.5-36, possibly 36.5
PA 40.5-41.2

AND

HCA score under 3.

So you recommend I find something within these specs?

Thank you!

The new AGS Ideal tables go from 47-62%, I think. GIA goes from 52-62%, I think. Lots of PSers with nice stones 60/61T. I use 61 as the cutoff.

If you cut off the depth at 61.8%, you will disqualify too many stones. Stones in the 62D range tend to have "sweet spot" angles similar to stones in the 61D range. The difference is usually the girdle... thin-med vs med-slt thick girdles. So on PS people do try to eek out some extra spread to get more for their money, but if the angles are similar, the performance is similar (also, you have a very large budget, you're not exactly playing in the same sandbox...) Again, depending on how the weight is distributed, a 62D and 63D can have very similar spreads. Avoid girdles labeled "thick," it impacts spread quite a bit.

#4 has a 14% CH which is on the low side. Other things may be reducing the fire, but I think you should add CH of 14.5% or greater to your cheat sheet.

PA of 40.4 if used judiciously can work. 40.5 and above is more conservative, though. A cutter will usually make skinnier arrows with shallow pavilion angles so that the stone doesn't look too dark, but I personally don't like that look. 40.5/40.6PA with 36/36.5CA will be very fiery.

Now, if you ALSO use the HCA with this, you will avoid the overly deep stones that Ame has already cautioned you about. This is the key... its about angles that work well together.

Yes, #5 fits within AGS Ideal and GIA Ex. Let's see if Tiffany can find you a solitaire for your gf before she has to settle for a HW round with baguette setting.

 

[CuteTeacup]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

Ridiculously restrictive.

Depth 59.5-63.0 Even up to 63.5 in cases with very high crowns, though you are probably taking a hit on the spread. Here's why: depth is not equal. 0.5% depth extra in the girdle (still within EX/ID limits) will impact spread more than 0.5% extra depth in the crown.
Table up to 60... 61 may also be acceptable. As you saw with the the 2.55 stone, a 61T can be more fiery than a 58T.
CA 33.5-36, possibly 36.5
PA 40.5-41.2

AND

HCA score under 3.

So you recommend I find something within these specs?

Thank you!

The new AGS Ideal tables go from 47-62%, I think. GIA goes from 52-62%, I think. Lots of PSers with nice stones 60/61T. I use 61 as the cutoff.

If you cut off the depth at 61.8%, you will disqualify too many stones. Stones in the 62D range tend to have "sweet spot" angles similar to stones in the 61D range. The difference is usually the girdle... thin-med vs med-slt thick girdles. So on PS people do try to eek out some extra spread to get more for their money, but if the angles are similar, the performance is similar (also, you have a very large budget, you're not exactly playing in the same sandbox...) Again, depending on how the weight is distributed, a 62D and 63D can have very similar spreads. Avoid girdles labeled "thick," it impacts spread quite a bit.

#4 has a 14% CH which is on the low side. Other things may be reducing the fire, but I think you should add CH of 14.5% or greater to your cheat sheet.

PA of 40.4 if used judiciously can work. 40.5 and above is more conservative, though. A cutter will usually make skinnier arrows with shallow pavilion angles so that the stone doesn't look too dark, but I personally don't like that look. 40.5/40.6PA with 36/36.5CA will be very fiery.

Now, if you ALSO use the HCA with this, you will avoid the overly deep stones that Ame has already cautioned you about. This is the key... its about angles that work well together.

Yes, #5 fits within AGS Ideal and GIA Ex. Let's see if Tiffany can find you a solitaire for your gf before she has to settle for a HW round with baguette setting.

I am somewhat confused with all the numbers you're giving me. I think I get it, but I just want to make sure I am not misunderstanding either (Sorry!).

So in the case of #4, the crown height is too low. What else do you think isn't ideal for that diamond? Is that considered a diamond that is too flat? It is considered one that's lacking fire, that I think both you and Ame said, right? I kinda observed the same thing too.

I understand the angles have to work together, but the hard part is me not understanding how to properly determine which angles work with what.

Thanks a lot!

 

[JulieN]

Re: Help needed to choose between these 2+carat round diamon

#4: there is nothing wrong with the stone, it looks nice in the picture. You were the one that said it was not as fiery as another stone, and that this was kind of bothering you and your gf. I said that based on its proportions, #4 theoretically may have less fire. Now, the 2.55 has a bigger table and an even lower crown height... so why are you seeing more fire? One possible explanation is that the 2.55 is bigger and seems to have bigger arrows.

Crown and pavilion angles have an inverse relationship. Raise CA, lower PA. Lower CA, raise PA.

So, if the ring your gf really wants is the Tiffany solitaire, we should do what we can to make her happy, right? Let's try to give her some choices to choose from. Now these numbers are not to live and die by. They are a good starting point but they can be modified based on preferences and availability of stones.

Depth: actually this number is not very important as you think. Not so long ago, we didn't always have angles on lab reports and Internet shoppers had to use total depth as a rough proxy for angles (it doesn't work very well.) Under 59, you're less unlikely to have pleasing angle combinations. Over 63 and you tend to lose too much spread. So 59-63D is not a bad place to start. Actually, the more important thing with spread is to not have a thick girdle.

Since you have already opened up the color and clarity to G+ VS2+, let me make the numbers I gave you earlier a little bit more conservative:

D 59.5-63
T <=59
CA 33.5-36.3
PA 40.5-41.2

AND HCA <=2.5. FYI you do not want to combine low CA and low PA, this is the one thing HCA wil not weed out. So don't combine 33.5CA with the 40.5PA! (I have bumped up D to 59.5 to try to help you avoid that.)

If your salesperson cannot get 5 stones with these parameters we can think about widening them a little. If this gives you too many results, we can tighten the proportion parameters.