Help..Looking for Diamond for engagement!

[Pharmer]

Hello All,

This is my first post but I''ve been reading a lot of threads trying to learn exactly what I want. Trying to keep on the downlow from my GF. But she''s always around looking over my shoulder. So, hard to spend a lot of time looking online (I''ve decided to look online for the most part).
I''ve got a budget max of around 9k for the diamond. Been looking for a round ideal cut around 1.2 carat, d-f, vs2-sI1 eyeclean (don''t really consider myself having an eagle eye though), good score on the HCA, (don''t really understand which scores constitute a FIC) I''d like something that sparkles a lot in most light conditions. I think that''s what FIC is? From what I read a little fluorescense isn''t going to make a difference to the eye since I''m looking in the colorless range. I''m thinking about setting it in a solitaire Tiffany style six prong setting. I read somewhere that girdle thickness shouldn''t be too thin to reduce the chance of chipping. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Peace be with you
Pete

 

[wonka27]

Here are a couple with a lot of good info:

SC G VS2 1.3ct
SC D SI1 1.24ct
WF E SI1 1.22ct
WF F SI1 1.21

There are a few to get ya started

 

[alexah]

Hiya Pharmer Pete

and welcome!

There's this 1.15 D SI1 from GOG.

And these WF expert selections 1.225 F VS2 & 1.25 D SI1. PS, you get a small discount from WF if you mention Pricescope.

Good luck!

 

[quaeritur]

Personally, I wouldn't risk this kind of purchase on e-bay, especially with an EGL cert, unless it's EGL-USA. I'd say the other choices offered are not only in your preferred color range, but in my mind, the safer choices. You have a very healthy budget to find something stunning!

 

[kevinng]

Hi!

I don't think you should limit yourself to the FIC. If I'm not mistaken, most premium diamonds nowadays are cut to the TIC because they try to keep within the AGS0 cut proportion. A well cut TIC would perform well under most lighting conditions.

Good luck!

 

[Pharmer]

Yeah,
I was going to stick with GIA and AGS cert. stones after reading the threads and Lab Grading Report articles on Pricescope. I am considering moving into the G color range to possibly move up into the higher clarity ranges. I would like it to be eye clean but I can't imagine myself getting very hung up over getting a stone with impeccable clarity. I figured a novice like myself would find more of a relative difference to other stones in the color. The above recommendations are nice! Some of them are a teeny bit over my price range. 9k was a max I was thinking for the stone itself but I'm also not averse to spending less if the stone will make me "feel good" when I "see" it. (Thanks ez monet for the post but I have qualms about purchasing high dollar items on Ebay). One last thing...on WF website why are some stones designated ideal cut (missing the H&A designation) and some are designated H&A A Cut Above? Are they stating that the ones under their ideal cut category don't have as strong a H&A as their "A Cut Above"? Or is it like the signature series on DCD, whereas the "A Cut Above" diamonds are outright owned by WF and the others aren't?
Thanks again for all the replies. I love this website!
Pete

 

[Pharmer]

What does everyone think about this selection compared to the others. It scores I think a .9 on the HCA.

http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/diamond_detail.cfm?did=6981776

Mind you, I also live in the same state as DCD. So, I would most likely be paying an additional $441 in tax. But this stone was an early contender when I was started looking.

Peace be with you
Pete

 

[alexah]

----------------
On 10/3/2004 11:41:36 AM Pharmer wrote:

One last thing...on WF website why are some stones designated ideal cut (missing the H&A designation) and some are designated H&A A Cut Above? Are they stating that the ones under their ideal cut category don't have as strong a H&A as their 'A Cut Above'? Or is it like the signature series on DCD, whereas the 'A Cut Above' diamonds are outright owned by WF and the others aren't?

Thanks again for all the replies. I love this website!

Pete----------------

Hi Pete,

John from WF commented on this in THIS post last week. I'll put his quote below in case you don't want to scroll thru the entire thread

"Expert Selection diamonds are all hand picked by Brian the Cutter. Each stone has the best value for its class and category.

Our definition of true "Hearts & Arrows" is the pattern you see in the A Cut Above line. ES stones may display what could be defined as hearts and arrows elsewhere.  Some ES stones may come close to our definition of "true H&A," but we feel it would be confusing to the casual consumer (and diluting, as aljdewey said) to advertise any diamond not meeting distinct ACA standards as a Whiteflash Hearts & Arrows stone.

Since Brian does select all of the ES stones, you are correct in assuming that there are tremendous values there."

 

[quaeritur]

Pete- I think that DCD diamond you posted looks fantastic! I'd suggest getting an IdealScope image from DCD, but I can see nothing wrong with it. I'd have DCD confirm that it's eye clean from all angles too.

D SI1 is my personal favorite color/clarity combo. Having said that, you do pay a premium for the D color. If you don't think you really really must have a D, then you could certainly save some money by dropping the color.

 

[alexah]

----------------
On 10/3/2004 12:01:20 PM Pharmer wrote:

What does everyone think about this selection compared to the others. It scores I think a .9 on the HCA.

http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/diamond_detail.cfm?did=6981776

Mind you, I also live in the same state as DCD. So, I would most likely be paying an additional $441 in tax. But this stone was an early contender when I was started looking.

Peace be with you

Pete----------------

That one does look nice... is there an idealscope photo?
For comparison's sake tho, the WF D SI1 I posted above scores a 1.2 and, even before the PS discount, is $200 cheaper plus the $400 you'd be saving in sales tax... and the Iscope shot is beautiful

 

[Pharmer]

What do you think about this one from WF F SI1 A Cut Above H&A

It has a 1.2 on the HCA. That one from DCD has a .9 on HCA. Is the difference between a 1.2 and 0.9 going to be noticeably different to average viewer like me? Is the 0.9 always going to outperform the 1.2 or is it depending on the stone? Because the above stone is considerably less than the one from DCD. Also how do you think it compares to the stone Alexha showed from WF?
One last question... quaeritur.... I was reading the posts about "The Precious" (spectacular!!! btw) and saw the pictures you posted up comparing the last three choices. Was the HCA 1.2 a noticeably weaker performer than the other .8 and .9 stones? It looked that way from the pictures but I wasn't sure if it was just the way the pics were taken. If so, would you attribute that to the HCA scores or other things like the fluorescence? Also how did you get all three stones in hand to compare at the same time from different vendors?

Whew....ok I think that's all for this post.
Thanks you all.
Pete

 

[abradabra]

Pete,

The general rule of thumb around here is that anything under 2.0 is great. Everything after that depends more a personal preference. If I remember correctly, Garry had designed the tool to be used to weed out poor performers initially, not be the determining factor in your decision. For that, you need to rely on seeing it yourself or using eyes that you trust (i.e. your jeweler's).

I read some post, which I couldn't find but maybe someone else can chime in here, that sometimes stones that score under 0.5 have tons of brilliance but not as much fire. I could be botching someone else's comments though, so take this game of "telephone" for it's worth.

The real point of my post is that there probably isn't a substantial difference between 0.9 and a 1.2. It comes down to what you want and the other factors you are considering (Ideal Scope images, H&A images, Color, Clarity, Price, etc.).

 

[Pharmer]

Then what is the upper limit for HCA scores? Maybe a 2?

Pete

 

[abradabra]

Yes and no.

Stones that score under a 2 on the HCA are cut to provide maximum optical performance (light return, fire, scintillation and spread). That doesn't mean a stone that just misses the 2.0 mark should be disregarded, especially if you've seen it and it does exhibit strong brilliance and fire.

The "upper limit" is somewhat dependent on how important having the absolute best cut is to you (a lot, if not most, posters around here, myself included, consider that a top priority, but it is ultimately a value judgement on what you want to pay for and what makes a diamond meaningful and beautiful for you) and what your budget will tolerate.

For example, if you want the biggest diamond that you can get for you money and are less concerned with things like "sparkle"--looking in the "Very Good" range (scores of 2-4) might be a better option for you--especially if they score well on the AGA charts as well.

If you are looking for the best cut you possibly find, look for HCA scores under 2 and AGA cut class of 1A across the board.

 

[mrcalculus_tx]

Hey I just got one from Tiffany's, go see where ever you like but it is just not compareable work. There is really not much of a diffrence between .5 C. and .4 c, but you pay a lot less just because not many people want that! I got .39, E vvs2 with the etoile setting ( setting by itself is about 1600) for about 3700. I think 2000 for such a clear diamond, that time just add value to it is a good deal. Dont buy online, most of their goodies are over rated. They are mostly india's cut. Meaning 10 years old kid cut the diamond, so go figure!
Tiffany would not even sale the Ideal from online.
How often do u plan on buying one of those? once in a life time right? so don't be cheap for 300 more for a design name, make her happy.

 

[hoorray]

The HCA is a tool to help eliminate poor performing stones. It is better used for elimination than for final selection. Garry, the creator of the HCA, says that the differences below 2.0 are subjective (I'm paraphrasing), and that it is personal preference about whether you would like a .5 more or less than a 1.5 scoring stone. In fact, at <.5, the stones tend to be more shallow and can look flatter (paraphrasing here again) close up due to head shadow, so you might actually prefer a higher scoring stone.

There has been much debate about this over the past few months. You can search to see the details, but the net net is that you should use the HCA to get started sorting out the may to a few, and then get pictures, expert opinions (like the trusted vendors), and hopefully your own eyes to make the final selection.

BTW...there have been some good suggestions, here is another DCD option, and I like the the 1.22 WF stone Wonka suggested.

DCD 1.22

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

----------------
On 10/5/2004 7:06:56 PM mrcalculus_tx wrote:

Hey I just got one from Tiffany's, go see where ever you like but it is just not compareable work. There is really not much of a diffrence between .5 C. and .4 c, but you pay a lot less just because not many people want that! I got .39, E vvs2 with the etoile setting ( setting by itself is about 1600) for about 3700. I think 2000 for such a clear diamond, that time just add value to it is a good deal. Dont buy online, most of their goodies are over rated. They are mostly india's cut. Meaning 10 years old kid cut the diamond, so go figure!
Tiffany would not even sale the Ideal from online.
How often do u plan on buying one of those? once in a life time right? so don't be cheap for 300 more for a design name, make her happy.----------------

Mr Calculus are you sober?
Please keep to the topic.
And if you know what you are discussing then bring in relevant info, but do not throw slander about like that.

 

[kevinng]

I cannot believe that the premium cut diamonds sold by Pricescope vendors are cut by children in India. That's complete rubbish. It takes investment in technology and craftsmen to cut diamonds to these exacting standards.

Just pick up an IdealScope and look at them... or use a sarin viewer... Check out the measurements of each facet... then tell me again if they are cut by children in India.

 

[Pharmer]

MrCalculus_tx
What exactly are you talking about? I was asking what everyone thought about the diamond in my last post. Anyways, I thought Tiffany gets all their diamonds the same place everyone else does. You just end up paying more for their brand name. Kind of like pharmaceuticals.

Pete

 

[reena]

----------------
On 10/5/2004 7:06:56 PM mrcalculus_tx wrote:

Hey I just got one from Tiffany's, go see where ever you like but it is just not compareable work. There is really not much of a diffrence between .5 C. and .4 c, but you pay a lot less just because not many people want that! I got .39, E vvs2 with the etoile setting ( setting by itself is about 1600) for about 3700. I think 2000 for such a clear diamond, that time just add value to it is a good deal. Dont buy online, most of their goodies are over rated. They are mostly india's cut. Meaning 10 years old kid cut the diamond, so go figure!

Tiffany would not even sale the Ideal from online.

How often do u plan on buying one of those? once in a life time right? so don't be cheap for 300 more for a design name, make her happy.----------------

LOL

so many things about this are hilarious that i don't even know where to start. pharmer pete, i'm glad you didn't buy his uninformed bull$hit . . .

 

[Pharmer]

Does anybody have an opinion on this Idealscope image. It's of the diamond in my last last post. I'm pretty much a novice at looking at these things but it looks alright to me. Do those little paired triangles of black in between the arrows mean it's going to sparkle nicely? Looks like the inclusion charted on the cert is shown at 6oclock near the center. I asked if it was eye clean and they said yes. Still waiting on other pictures of it from them. Any opinions would be great. I'm getting real close to calling my bank.

Thanks and peace be with you
Pete

 

[alexah]

That i-scope shot looks great!
Here's a link so you know what you're looking at ref chart.
And here's a link the to the PS tutorial on the idealscope

LINK

 

[Pharmer]

Thanks for the link Alexah!!

 

[aljdewey]

Pete, the idealscope image on that diamond looks positively GORGEOUS!

A note about your questions on the HCA: Is the difference between a 1.2 and 0.9 going to be noticeably different to average viewer like me? Is the 0.9 always going to outperform the 1.2 or is it depending on the stone? Was the HCA 1.2 a noticeably weaker performer than the other .8 and .9 stones?

You are thinking of the HCA in quantitative terms.....thinking that a .9 is better than a 1.2, which is in turn better than a 1.5. That's not how it works.

ANTHING under 2 is FINE.....a 1.5 isn't "better" than a 1.2....1.2 isn't "better" than 0.6. As long as you're under 2.0, that's all that matters. From there, it's just a matter of preference in terms of how much contrast you like to see in your stone.

At the 1.2, you're right in the sweet spot - should see a nice display. The stone looks fabulous. Please post pictures when you get it!