Think i made a slight mistake. Need advise.

[niceguy514]

Hi Everyone,

Just wanted to say thankyou for all the wealth of information you all have provided. Its amazing how there are so many experts on this forum that play so nicely with each other. Especially when it comes to evaluating something as opinionated as diamonds, since it is so much like a artwork after all.

So on to my dilemma. I purchased a round brilliant online and i thought i did all the homework i needed to before diving into a purchase, but in reality i pretty much crammed the night before hoping i chose all the right parameters.

Below is the diamond purchased:
Cut/Color/Clarity/Carat = Excellent/H/SI1/0.90

Table%/Depth% = 57%/62.7%
Crown angle/Pavilion angle = 35.5 deg/40.6 deg
====Holloway# 1.5====

Florescence = Medium Blue
Polish = Excellent
Symmetry = Very Good

Dimensions = 6.09 x 6.15 x 3.84 (mm)

Setting = Solitary 1.5mm platinum band 4 prongs

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-h-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-621558


After doing some more reading on these forums, since its labor day weekend. it seems i brought a diamond that is too deep which in turns makes it look smaller then what it is suppose to be. The diamond is definitely eye clean thankfully and it shines a slight blue when i shine my UV light at it. Don't have a loupe, but will take some 10x, 20x and 50x pictures of it when i get a chance tomorrow when no one is looking at work. The price wasn't bad, slightly below the 4k mark.

Do you guys think this is a diamond worth keeping? Or should i return it and look for something within the correct dimensions? So far it looks like a 0.1mm difference is not noticeable. But, my diamond compared to a 6.25mm round would yield about a 5% area difference which i think most of you guys and gals can tell.

I also just realized that a 1.15 looks way bigger, but in order to keep it affordable. The color would have to be in the J range. not sure if this is a good idea since my significant other wants a shiny setting.
Arg... i thought i would judge everything on price, but once i again i think i maybe going over board with specs.

 

[yssie]

Analysis paralysis

You chose a beautifully proportioned stone and it looks great in JA's pic/video. And you think it's beautiful IRL, which is far more important!

My favourite proportions for MRBs are also high-crowned small-tabled types, to greater extremes than most PS boutiques prefer their signature lines exhibit, and those types of stones tend to be deeper than other flavours. If the proportions work well together then they work well together, and yours seem to all be playing nicely.

Enjoy your stone!

 

[niceguy514]

Thank you so much for your quick reply.
Now i can stop reading and enjoy my day, more sleep

 

[niceguy514]

Hi Guys and Gals.

i'm back for more advice. The stone and setting were great! But, i wanted to go a size bigger. It seems the consensus that an additional 15% more top down area would yield a visibly bigger stone. Don't want to make the same mistake as i did with my LCD TV, should of picked the biggest one i could afford. Now i am stuck with a 47" TV for a long long time.
The ring is back at JamesAllen for a re-sizing so now would be the best time to go search for a larger size stone.

What do you folks think about this one.
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.13-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-645742
Differences are highlighted bold

Cut/Color/Clarity/Carat = Excellent/I/SI1/1.13

Table%/Depth% = 57%/62.7%
Crown angle/Pavilion angle = 35.5 deg/40.6 deg
====Holloway# 1.5====

Florescence = Strong Blue
Polish = Excellent
Symmetry = Excellent

Dimensions = 6.59 x 6.65 x 4.13 (mm)

It looks to be a pretty good deal. It similar to the stone i chosen to begin with, but larger ( http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/0.90-carat-h-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-621558 ). The angles and depth are exactly the same actually!

Do you folks think the strong florescence would make the diamond seem a bit duller under direct sunlight or indoor florescence lighting? Never saw a strong blue diamond in person. Its price is definitely cheaper then similar cut diamonds, so i was wondering if it is just because of the stron blue.


Thanks!

 

[tyty333]

What do you folks think about this one.
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.13-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-645742
Differences are highlighted bold

Cut/Color/Clarity/Carat = Excellent/I/SI1/1.13

Table%/Depth% = 57%/62.7%
Crown angle/Pavilion angle = 35.5 deg/40.6 deg
====Holloway# 1.5====

Florescence = Strong Blue
Polish = Excellent
Symmetry = Excellent

Dimensions = 6.59 x 6.65 x 4.13 (mm)

I'm seeing the depth on that stone as 62.4 which is nice (compared to the 62.7).

 

[Texas Leaguer]

It's important that you understand the issues involved with fluourescence to make sure it is right for you. Here is an overview:
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-flourescence

 

[niceguy514]

oops, sorry. The depth is better on the this other stone.

Thanks for the article on florescence. Will take some time and look at it and report back with more questions if i have.

Just what i expected......... I won't know until i see the diamond in person. Since i don't plan on selling this ever... I think the strong blue may not affect me as much as a diamond collector. Under a 550nm UV light, the medium blue glowed nicely.

So i may take the plunge and get the larger one. Will keep you guys updated, I do plan on going to Zales or Kays later today and take a look. They should have some I clarity stones with strong blues.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

oops, sorry. The depth is better on the this other stone.

Thanks for the article on florescence. Will take some time and look at it and report back with more questions if i have.

Just what i expected......... I won't know until i see the diamond in person. Since i don't plan on selling this ever... I think the strong blue may not affect me as much as a diamond collector. Under a 550nm UV light, the medium blue glowed nicely.

So i may take the plunge and get the larger one. Will keep you guys updated, I do plan on going to Zales or Kays later today and take a look. They should have some I clarity stones with strong blues.

That's a very good idea.

here is a relatively recent thread where the pros and cons of fluoro is discussed.
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fluorescence-pros-and-cons.211191/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/fluorescence-pros-and-cons.211191/[/URL]

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

niceguy514

You can always call a vendor and ask them about the appearance of the diamond as an early-check. They will have notes and/or an in-house gemologist who will look at it and be able to give you specifics before it is even sent to you.

 

[niceguy514]

Thank you all for your help, yet again.

I think i may of ranted a little much. So to get to the point, which one of these three would be a better choice?
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.13-carat-k-color-vvs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-580185
This is the cheapest. Well its cheap haha HCA numbers are bad, but the picture looks good

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.12-carat-j-color-vvs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-602073
This is a weird one, its HCA score is a 1.1. which is fantastic. But i thought that the smaller then ideal crown angle would affect its fire.

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.13-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-645742
This is the one i reference before. Its similar in quality to the 0.90ct i purchased originally, but its about 1k more.



some updates:
Came back from the mall and forgot how i missed mall chicken bourbon, its been so long since i tasted something so good and filling for $5.
There is a store in the mall called helzberg diamonds. To my surprise, they actually had diamonds that were pretty good quality. Much better then say zales and kays. The lady at the counter didn't seem to enthusiastic about selling though which made me feel better. To my surprise, she handed me a ideal-scope and loupe to look at various round brilliants. That was a very fun experience indeed, never thought a mall store would have one of these on hand. To make things even better, their diamonds are GIA/AGS/IGI certified, so i ask her to bring out some strong and medium blues. Well, they glow under the 390nm light. Looked like a H/I color diamond in ambient light. Not as yellow as K, but yellower then F. So, I have no idea what i am doing....... At least i got some bourbon chicken.

Back to the point, i don't think florescence is going to play a large role in my search unless the JamesAllen pictures shows a unclear diamond.

Well, this brings up more questions. GIA grades their diamonds under a fluorescent light. If the 2% of diamonds with very strong blue rating affects its visibly, wouldn't this be taken into affect and the diamond would be given a lower clarity if the blues affect how it actually looks? Are people worried that blues increase a diamonds color grade and that a H with strong blue is not the same as a H with faint florescence? This is all somewhat confusing and it seems it doesn't apply to most people in search of diamonds, but is getting wildly popular enough for a lot of folks to search for no blues within their criteria. SHould i start to assume blues really mean lower color grade under non-optimal lighting conditions?

Why not change to a LED light source that is catered to 460nm to 800nm to grade its clarity without UV affects?
Better yet, these diamonds can easily be put into a spectrophotometer and its UV and VIS reflection can be measured independently with a deuterium and tungsten lamp, its transmittance and absorption would have to put into consideration. But thats easy because we want the total energy coming to our eyes within a certain spectrum. A proper grade can be given without UV interference and most importantly. A additional check box that states "Fluorescent affects visibility" can be either checked or not. So much confusion can be taken away from this. For the folks who are looking for perfection, this additional data can also be used to find low reflection stones from a UV source. It seems like store fronts and online retailers are constantly defending the fluorescent term.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Thank you all for your help, yet again.

I think i may of ranted a little much. So to get to the point, which one of these three would be a better choice?
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.13-carat-k-color-vvs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-580185
This is the cheapest. Well its cheap haha HCA numbers are bad, but the picture looks good

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.12-carat-j-color-vvs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-602073
This is a weird one, its HCA score is a 1.1. which is fantastic. But i thought that the smaller then ideal crown angle would affect its fire.

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.13-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-645742
This is the one i reference before. Its similar in quality to the 0.90ct i purchased originally, but its about 1k more.



some updates:
Came back from the mall and forgot how i missed mall chicken bourbon, its been so long since i tasted something so good and filling for $5.
There is a store in the mall called helzberg diamonds. To my surprise, they actually had diamonds that were pretty good quality. Much better then say zales and kays. The lady at the counter didn't seem to enthusiastic about selling though which made me feel better. To my surprise, she handed me a ideal-scope and loupe to look at various round brilliants. That was a very fun experience indeed, never thought a mall store would have one of these on hand. To make things even better, their diamonds are GIA/AGS/IGI certified, so i ask her to bring out some strong and medium blues. Well, they glow under the 390nm light. Looked like a H/I color diamond in ambient light. Not as yellow as K, but yellower then F. So, I have no idea what i am doing....... At least i got some bourbon chicken.

Back to the point, i don't think florescence is going to play a large role in my search unless the JamesAllen pictures shows a unclear diamond.

Well, this brings up more questions. GIA grades their diamonds under a fluorescent light. If the 2% of diamonds with very strong blue rating affects its visibly, wouldn't this be taken into affect and the diamond would be given a lower clarity if the blues affect how it actually looks? Are people worried that blues increase a diamonds color grade and that a H with strong blue is not the same as a H with faint florescence? This is all somewhat confusing and it seems it doesn't apply to most people in search of diamonds, but is getting wildly popular enough for a lot of folks to search for no blues within their criteria. SHould i start to assume blues really mean lower color grade under non-optimal lighting conditions?

Why not change to a LED light source that is catered to 460nm to 800nm to grade its clarity without UV affects?
Better yet, these diamonds can easily be put into a spectrophotometer and its UV and VIS reflection can be measured independently with a deuterium and tungsten lamp, its transmittance and absorption would have to put into consideration. But thats easy because we want the total energy coming to our eyes within a certain spectrum. A proper grade can be given without UV interference and most importantly. A additional check box that states "Fluorescent affects visibility" can be either checked or not. So much confusion can be taken away from this. For the folks who are looking for perfection, this additional data can also be used to find low reflection stones from a UV source. It seems like store fronts and online retailers are constantly defending the fluorescent term.

For someone new to diamonds you ask very good questions about fluorescence and diamond grading. The uncertainties involved are the primary cause of the devaluation of fluorescence by the trade. And that has been aggravated by internet shopping where consumers can search through thousands of diamonds and find plenty of options that remove that element of uncertainty, thereby decreasing demand and putting further downward pressure on the price of fluoro stones.

If transparency issues are a "yes/no" question as opposed to a matter of degree, one would think the Labs might factor that into clarity grading (as you suggest). At least make note of it under comments.

If accurate color grading can be achieved by masking the UV of the grading lights with a filter (or as you suggest, using an LED light source that does not contain UV), why would they not do so? GIA quietly departed from that longstanding practice in recent years and other labs followed.

Whereas GIA practices and pronouncements on fluoro are evidently aimed at supporting the sale of fluoro stones for their constituencies, the effort may have hurt more than helped. Maybe they did not anticipate the impact of e-commerce.

 

[niceguy514]

Thanks for the reply Texas Leaguer and thanks for reading through my post. When i rant it usually gets really incoherent really quick.

I think i have finally come to the end of my journey on diamond shopping. That more expensive 1.13ct with the strong fluorescence seems to be something that i would be happy with. My girlfriend was already happy with the 0.90ct, so this hunt was really for my own stratification .

Thanks again everyone!

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Thanks for the reply Texas Leaguer and thanks for reading through my post. When i rant it usually gets really incoherent really quick.

I think i have finally come to the end of my journey on diamond shopping. That more expensive 1.13ct with the strong fluorescence seems to be something that i would be happy with. My girlfriend was already happy with the 0.90ct, so this hunt was really for my own stratification .

Thanks again everyone!

Congratulations! By doing your due diligence and considering all the angles, you can be confident in your purchase. In other words, you are fully stratified.

Best of luck to you.

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

That is great news. Congratulations!