Point of Dimishing Returns

[jasontb]

I am getting ready to propose and shopping for diamonds. I've decided that I want to buy the best looking, reasonably priced diamond in my price range. Basically, I am looking for the point of diminsihing returns. That is, the point where you start having to pay a *lot* more to get an almost indetecably better performing diamond. I think I basically want the best performing diamong to the naked eye. And I've come to the conclusion that cut is most important, so I'll be looking at AGS 000 only for the most part. For instance, I know getting a D is going to cost a *lot* more and almost nobody will be able to tell it's better than an E.

This diamond will be set in a Tiffany style solitair platinum ring.

So this is what *I* think I should get. What do you all think?

Cut: AGLS 000 with ideal polish and symmetry
Color: E-G
Clarity: VVS1-VS2
Price: Under $4000 (I guess I'd go up to like $4200 for this right stone)

Would you relax or tighten up any of those requirements to get me to the point of diminishing return?

Also, would you criteria be different if I told you I wanted a diamond that, *to the naked eye*, would be considered in the top 1% or so of all diamonds.

Here's a diamond I've been considering. Tell me what you think:

0.735 carat
F / VS1
56% 60.5% 34.7 40.8
HCA: 1.2
H&A
$3800

Thanks all. I bet you'll be getting a lot of strange questions from me in the future as I am an indecisive super-critical engineer who can spend 10 minutes choosing a spaghetti sauce at the supermarket.

Jason

 

[StixforLegs]

Well im an engineer and I just received the engagement ring from whiteflash (they did a custom setting and I also got the diamonds from them). My thread should be on the show me your ring a few pages deep entitled "My Whiteflash custom 3 stone". My centerstone ended up being 0.753 ct., G SI1 (completely eye clean) and it was a little more than $3k. I got the ring a few days ago and it was absolutely beautiful (all the diamonds were A Cut Above [ACA] diamonds). The color might as well have been a D because in any lighting it looked crystal clear to me and as you can see from my setting its a very open setting so I wanted to make sure you couldnt see color. I bet you could go with an H and still not see anything. Clarity wise, youll find much more selection, better cuts, and lower prices by going with VS2 to SI1 as long as it is eye clean. In my PO there is no need to go much higher than that unless it is a religious or personal perference thing. With a budget of $4k, i would imagine you could find an amazing .9 ct diamond.

 

[cymbrie]

Hi Jason, first off welcome to pricescope. I am still in my research/learning stage, but I think stixforlegs has given you some very sound advice. G is a very safe color to go with. Few people are able to distinguish btw D-F and G unless they are viewed side by side (personally I can, but I was also viewing asschers which notoriously show more color mind you this was side by side in a jewelry store) and from what I''ve seen/read this is pretty rare even moreso with RBs. RBs give you much more flexibility in terms of color and clarity. An eyeclean SI1-2 can give you a lot more bang for your buck in terms of size as can going with a G-J. DO NOT compromise on cut though, I have heard of well cut G''s, H''s facing up just as white if not more white than not as well cut stones in the colorless range. There are many on this forum who prefer not to go as high as G in color and their rings are STUNNING. WF should have many beautiful stones in all ranges and as stix noted you may even be able to get a larger stone for your budget. I''ve attached some interesting links I''ve found on color you might also want to do a search on color and clarity and look at the FAQs page you will find a weath of info here and many friendly/knowledgable/helpful folks. You may even want to take your FI to be to a jewelry store and observe her personal preferences what is the lowest color/clarity she would want. Best of luck in your search, keep us posted.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-there-thread-for-i-color-stones.39886/

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/sos-need-pics-of-d-e-f-g-diamonds-stat.11554/=

 

[Regular Guy]

Hope this helps

The Magnificent Seven

Regards,

 

[Regular Guy]

Jason,

Really like your post, and avatar.

Sorry to be obscure. Originally, I was thinking, agree with taking advantage of AGS0 imprimatur, and select F/G and VS1 - SI 1. Then again, Leonid & Irina may try to answer your question with their presets on the search by cut option. Bringing that up, you'll see their pre-sets may try to respond to your question, and includes also H and SI2, which is pretty reasonable. Doing this constrained search, you get a pretty cool 7 options, vitually all from GOG, including the one you found, and also including one pretty interesting .9 option from WF. Especially, between the GOG options, I'd get Jonathan's advice, and ask what criteria he might bring among them, and take advantage of his expertise in this area. I did find myself also looking at their BScope data, however, bringing me to like the F SI1, at least initially. Can't tell you how to compare the one WF one, though.

Welcome aboard.

 

[E B]

Jason,

I'd go down in color and clarity, but if I had to choose just one, it'd probably be clarity. I have an SI1 (an I, SI1 actually) and I've never seen an inclusion in it. I never will. Then again, mine is one of the cleanest SI1s I've ever come across...and I found another extremely clean SI1 for you. This stone looks FANTASTIC.

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=AGS-6205305#
(.784 E, SI1, 0.4 on the HCA, $3564 with PS discount)

 

[belle]

g-h/si1-2
no doubt.

 

[Rod]

Listen to Belle, who is one of the most knoledgeable people you could meet on this forum.

 

[Shay37]

Ebree, that stone looks kicken as strm would say.

shay

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 2/10/2006 4:38:05 PM
Author: Regular Guy
Can''t tell you how to compare the one WF one, though.

On second thought, and especially given your criteria and approach, I might leave this one up to GOG. The one WF option I pointed to, and the one ebree found (not sure why it wasn''t in the search by cut option, maybe not updated yet, but I did find it), and Shay pointed to, show certificates from AGS, but not the AGS000 (and especially 0 for light performance) that all the GOG options seem to have.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/10/2006 4:43:14 PM
Author: belle
g-h/si1-2

no doubt.

In a round
g-h-i / si1-si2 eyeclean
near h&a to true h&a with good angles.

or what belle said.

 

[jasontb]

Date: 2/10/2006 4:38:05 PM
Author: Regular Guy

Really like your post, and avatar.

thanks...

 

[jasontb]

Thanks for all the input so far gang.

I''ve been scared of SI diamonds because I know little about inclusions. I know that if I get a VS2 diamond, I won''t be able to see any of the inclusions (hopefully). But how do I know if an SI diamond is eye clean when I plan to buy on the intraweb? Can I tell by looking at the cert? Are certain flaws ok and other bad with regard to being an eye clean stone?

 

[Shay37]

Date: 2/10/2006 6:38:30 PM
Author: jasontb
Thanks for all the input so far gang.

I''ve been scared of SI diamonds because I know little about inclusions. I know that if I get a VS2 diamond, I won''t be able to see any of the inclusions (hopefully). But how do I know if an SI diamond is eye clean when I plan to buy on the intraweb? Can I tell by looking at the cert? Are certain flaws ok and other bad with regard to being an eye clean stone?

Work with one of the lovely vendors here, (they have earned the trust of many) and just ask them if it''s eyeclean. Make sure you know what they mean by eyeclean as well. HTH

shay

 

[Regular Guy]

Shay mentions a frequently cited, and I think reliable protocol, asking the vendor it is it eye clean, which is what you want to be your reference point. (At least cause who wants to be bothered with sending them back and forth). But, if you want to both trust and verify, again, while it's understood no cert can help you understand this, ostensibly darkfield photos can help you with this analysis, and I think only GOG provides them.

Personally, I think F & VS1 are reasonable outlying reference points to include in consideration, although VS1 even may be overkill...not sure. I'm frankly basing these comments more on reading lots of posts of people describing their viewing experiences, more than based on my own ciphering. These things can get airy fairy, and I might be describing more of a mood of qualities, rather than anything actually identifiable. Of course, that's what you're after, so hopefully, you'll tell us.

Does a tree falling in a forest make a sound?

Best,

 

[cymbrie]

If going with SI definitely ask the vendor if it's eyeclean honestly with RBs, eye-clean SIs are a good way to go. VS2 if you want to be really safe but in either case make sure you know what kind of inclusions they are e.g. feathers, carbon etc. Another advantage of (eyeclean) included stones is that it provides a good (fingerprint) to identify your diamond upon its return from routine cleanings/maintenance etc. I had a friend who's setting was loose, the jeweler who "fixed" it also replaced her rock with an inferior one

. Again, asking the vendor is a good bet and I don't think you can go wrong if you go with WF or GOG they are highly regarded and praised here.

Love your avatar btw!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I certainly think you could go to a G and stay very white, and go down to a VS2. I like to look at diamonds with a loupe once in awhile, so obvious inclusions definitely bother me. I have found that H can be accceptable, too. I think each person has to set their own limits. I have settled for lower standards before and was sorry later. Juts be sure that you look at any SI stone you consider with a loupe or microscope to see what you can accept.

 

[Mara]

H SI2 is my sweet spot!!!

no need to pay for something you don''t see, especially in clarity...having had a VS1, an SI1 and now an eye-clean SI2...SI''s are the best bang for the buck..

and having had a G, H and now a J...H is my absolute favorite sweet spot for looking fabulous.

 

[jasontb]

Date: 2/10/2006 8:26:49 PM
Author: cymbrie
If going with SI definitely ask the vendor if it''s eyeclean honestly with RBs, eye-clean SIs are a good way to go.

What are RBs?

Anybody else care to offer their opinion?

 

[valeria101]

'RB'= round brilliant.


Color show more with size... and larger diamonds get more leeway on clarity (so it may be harder to find eye clean SI1 in 4 cts than 1 ct etc.). Meaning, F/VS1 is really on the safe side.

However, diamonds' price goes up more with weight than anything, so if going H/SI1 from your F/VS1 is going to account for nudging 0.1 cts more , it really isn't worth it. I have not checked what precisely makes a significant size difference from the starting point you gave.

In general, I would cut it in a slightly different spot:

F-G/SI1... AGS if needs be, than AGS0 for light return and whatever comes for the other two cut grades (proportions and finish). But I'd rather skip that and look for GIA graded with a seller's cut grading (e.g. GoodOldGold fare, Infinity, Whiteflash Expert Selection).

My 2c.

 

[jasontb]

Date: 2/11/2006 9:57:35 PM
Author: valeria101
''RB''= round brilliant.

Geez, I should have been able to get that one. I''ve figured out on my own what RB meant in other contexts.

 

[Waited2Long]

Amusing how so many "super-critical engineers" are drawn to this site. No matter how hard we try, nor how many tools we have available, the beauty of a diamond cannot be perfectly quantified and our first challenge is to accept it. I too recommend an SI1. I bought a F/SI1 for my fiancee. I bought the F because I couldn't tell F from D (but F from G I could discern surprisingly well). Turns out the SI1 grade is due to a planar inclusion that is imperceptible from the top, but visible from other angles. Still, I have to look really hard to see it, and the lighting has to be just right. Most times I can't see it at all. I am certain that an SI1 stone that has several smaller inclusions would be completely eye-clean. One thing I would do when hunting was to pull up the magnified pictures from WF, and then back away from my monitor until the image was small enough to be look proportionally correct relative to my pinky that I held up next to it in my line of sight. I could kind of get an idea of how small the inclusions really are. Works pretty well, but only for looking straight down at the table. But, worry less about inclusions and spend more time finding the right proportions and cut. The real diamond will have more fire than any picture--count on it.

 

[Regular Guy]

Ana's brought out some good points and reminders...

though you've included in your original set of specs:

Cut: AGLS 000 with ideal polish and symmetry

Ana reviews:

Date: 2/11/2006 9:57:35 PM
Author: valeria101

F-G/SI1... AGS if needs be, than AGS0 for light return and whatever comes for the other two cut grades (proportions and finish). But I'd rather skip that and look for GIA graded with a seller's cut grading (e.g. GoodOldGold fare, Infinity, Whiteflash Expert Selection).

and it's true that, though ideal polish & symmetry will frequently just come along, you needn't get it for the look you want.

Then, there's the question of AGS's premium for their AGS0 for light performance.

A really loose ciphering on the quick search suggests a possible premium of $500 for AGS over GIA. If this is true, it is a considerable portion of $4K. The two or three things or so to keep in mind may be:

1) Why was the diamond not sent to AGS for grading
2) Using the HCA, can I get enough benefit from a similar grading tool and not look for the more narrow specs needed to have AGS0 for light performance
3) Miscellaneous, covering
a) measuring issues getting an AGS cert would protect you from
b) if it was evaluated by a quality vendor or not to give you good info about the stone, independent of the cert.

Reviewing the specs on the GIA certified diamond I got 1 1/2 years ago, I'm thinking I'd likely favor duplicating the original process I went through.

Maybe if I had Garry with me I'd feel that, Idealscope will travel would be my only motto.

Alternately, throwing in his HCA, and being guided by either the search by cut database, which crunches the numbers for you, or the big search all option, where you might need to call in an option first to then get the data you'd want to see..and researching...I think I get the same results as yesterday, more or less, I might still favor the same F SI1 I saw yesterday, today.

Regards,

 

[jasontb]

So you''re saying I should consider GIA diamonds if they look good with an IdealScope?

What the difference beteen an IdealScope and a LightScope?

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 2/12/2006 7:24:58 PM
Author: jasontb
So you''re saying I should consider GIA diamonds if they look good with an IdealScope?

What the difference beteen an IdealScope and a LightScope?

The idealscope & lightscope are certainly similar technologies, designed to pick up the same characteristics; one may be a bit better than the other, but they''re more similar than different, or so I gather.

On the other...there''s different ways to say the same thing...

- if size were not a factor, then holding to the characteristics of F, VS1 (or VS2), AGS0 for light performance, perhaps H&A, for a given price point could be reasonable, I think.
- but, if moving up towards .8 or even .9 carats is attractive, the question of diminishing returns can be plied a bit more. Options with lower color, clarity, and certification (GIA) may provide worthwhile review.
- at which point, the question is either or both
- are the odds smaller of finding an "ideal" option, and/or
- for those found, are they going to be as good/attractive as the other kind.

Working with a quality vendor who will understand your criteria, and apply it to a range of options, certed by both GIA and AGS, may be the best way to proceed.

Once again, GOG brings high differentiation to the examination of this vs. that, and it seems in your particular case, their stock may be most robust, as well. Other times, and now, other vendors too can help, and those who visit here, and speak the lingo used here will be good to check out.

Although your question has brought my thought process out, I don''t know that I''m adding a whole lot of additional value to your query at this point. I hope you''ll find a venue to use your eyes and test out some of these notions, and report back on what you think.