Near colorless diamonds

[sjz]

When reading the posts, I notice that most people go for the "whitest" or most colorless diamonds that they can afford. Personally, I prefer diamonds in the H to K range, because I like that hint of color. I love the icey white diamonds, too. But to me, the warmer look draws my eye. I totally love the fancy yellow and champagne colored diamonds as well. Does this make me wierd? I sort of feel like the person who prefers a wine cooler over the vintage merlot...lol.

 

[WinkHPD]

Many of my clients prefer the "warmer" colors, it is totally a what do you like thing.

The advantage to liking the "warmer" colors is that they cost a fraction of the "cooler" colors. The further down the scale you go, the less money you have to spend for the diamond of your dreams!

Wink

 

[elepri]

I don''t think it''s that uncommon. There are a few people here who prefer warmer stones.

 

[strmrdr]

Its all about what you like.
For example I like most i''s and up but I also like the fancy non-yellow colors but dont like most j''s and down untill you get to the point of a lot of color.
To me either the diamond faces up white or it has a lot of color and I dont like the ones in between.

 

[rosy]

I have an H & I never notice a hint of color. Granted I would love to have a D-E stone but we live in a world where size matters so I dropped down in color to get a larger sized diamond. If the world didn''t care about size I would probably have got a 1 carat or smaller D-E.

 

[sjz]

Date: 3/8/2005 3:27:57 AM
Author: rosy
I have an H & I never notice a hint of color. Granted I would love to have a D-E stone but we live in a world where size matters so I dropped down in color to get a larger sized diamond. If the world didn''t care about size I would probably have got a 1 carat or smaller D-E.

One thing I have to say after reading the posts here for a few weeks is that I don''t think the rest of the world cares that much about size of diamond. Many of the people who post on this forum do, that''s for sure. I couldn''t believe how many people were talking "upgrade" on stones over 1.5-2 carats! Some of the people who are talking upgrade aren''t even married yet! I remember when I got my first diamond, I was so thrilled and esctatic. I don''t even have the stone anymore (long story) and I don''t remember any specs on it, but it was dinky by pricescope standards, and probably not of great quality. But I loved it anyway.

Where I''m from-midwest USA-most women have erings that average .5 to1.5 carats. I do know a handful of people who have bigger stones, but they are either old ladies or extrememely wealthy. Most of the average people I know have other things to spend their money on...like homes, college for their kids, medical bills, paying off their own college educations, etc...

I am not knocking all of you who have the gorgeus sparklies. And I am loving that you post pics of your baubles so that I can look and drool over them. I can honestly say that I NEVER see rings like some of yours out in the real world. Most people I know have much more modest diamond jewelry. I also love reading about diamonds and learning about grading, setting, and pricing of stones. I find this subject to be unvelievably interesting!

 

[pqcollectibles]

I live in midwest USA also. I know what you mean about the smaller diamonds. Many of my friends have 0.3-0.5 carat diamonds. Many of the younger women have 0.75-1.0 carat diamonds. That makes my 1.25 carat huge by comparison. Add to that it''s a well cut diamond that sparkles like mad among many dead fish and it really looks unreal!!

I personally do not care for D/E color diamonds. They are too icy white to me. Pretty, but cold looking. At the time I was "upgrading" from a 0.75, H, I was considering 1.15, H&I color diamonds. The 1.25, J I wound up with wasn''t simply about getting size. The price was lower as well. I was hesitant at first to go this low in color, especially set in plat, but it works. This diamond faces up very bright and white with no tinge of color what so ever.

 

[smarty33]

IMO.. If you like the way it looks, it is as represented and is fair price then that''s all there is to it. I get the feeling that a lot of people I see are not 100% happy with what they have as it is not what is percieved to be the top of the range. They, like most of us, can''t afford the very best and feel like they are making do. It saddens me. On the flip side, people come along with all sorts of things on their fingers and they couldn''t care less what the market likes. They like what they have, the way it makes them feel and they are happy. These appraisals pay less but are much much more rewarding.

 

[sjz]

I recently purchased an ACA hearts and arrows .53 carat VS2 J stone from whiteflash. It's absolutely gorgeous! I took it to my local jewelery store where a couple of my friends work. They looked at my stone with their loupe, and they both thought that it was at least .75 carat weight and G-H color! And neither one of them could find any inclusions when they looked, either. They tried to show me "comparable stones" from their inventory, but they didn't have any...lol. Everything they showed me in the half carat range looked much smaller than my whiteflash stone. And the stones that were supposedly of a higher clarity or color grade didn't match the whiteflash stone in fire and brilliance to my untrained eye. One larger diamond that they showed me that was over 1.0 and G color looked milky white to me instead of icey white. A lot of the higher color grade stones that I've seen in B&M stores appear somehow "too white". Like the whiteness cancels out the sparkliness or something. I know that probably doesn't make any sense, and I'm sure it has something to do with cut or clarity in combination with the color, too.

They both tried their best to show me "better" diamonds than the one I had purchased at whiteflash. They couldn't convince me that anything in their inventory was better. They also tried to use the argument about up-grading and so forth...couldn't beat whiteflash's upgrade policy, either. The other big difference I noticed was price. Anything they showed me in the same price range as my whiteflash diamond looked dinky and/or like frozen monkey spit...lol!


Oh, they also tried to tell me that the whole "hearts and arrows" thing was a gimmic. They told me that I was probably paying more just to have a diamond that was inscribed as such, and that it didn't really make a difference. If that's the case, I wonder my diamond looked so much nicer than anything they had in their store?

 

[Hest88]

A lot of the higher color grade stones that I''ve seen in B&M stores appear somehow "too white". Like the whiteness cancels out the sparkliness or something. I know that probably doesn''t make any sense, and I''m sure it has something to do with cut or clarity in combination with the color, too.

Yeah, bet the cut is bad and/or they were heavily included--giving them that that dull, scratched-up, milky look.

About lower colors: definitely get what you love and, just think, you''re saving money on top of it! I recently bought a demantoid and had to come to terms with the realization that the color everyone else considered ideal I just didn''t like. So, although I ended up with a stone that''s darker than what I''m "supposed" to like, I know that I''ll be much happier everytime I look down on my hand than if I ended up settling for a color I just couldn''t warm up to no matter how hard I tried.

 

[rosy]

Date: 3/8/2005 7:48:16 AM
Author: sjz

Date: 3/8/2005 3:27:57 AM
Author: rosy
I have an H & I never notice a hint of color. Granted I would love to have a D-E stone but we live in a world where size matters so I dropped down in color to get a larger sized diamond. If the world didn''t care about size I would probably have got a 1 carat or smaller D-E.

One thing I have to say after reading the posts here for a few weeks is that I don''t think the rest of the world cares that much about size of diamond. Many of the people who post on this forum do, that''s for sure. I couldn''t believe how many people were talking ''upgrade'' on stones over 1.5-2 carats! Some of the people who are talking upgrade aren''t even married yet! I remember when I got my first diamond, I was so thrilled and esctatic. I don''t even have the stone anymore (long story) and I don''t remember any specs on it, but it was dinky by pricescope standards, and probably not of great quality. But I loved it anyway.

Ahem, it''s no secret that people buy large diamonds not only because they''re beautiful but they also love the attention & status it gives them. It''s the "ooh, your husband must really love you or you must be well off enough to afford that". Diamonds & jewelry are luxury items, like cars. Some people don''t care what kind of car they drive, others do. Lets face it if your husband could afford it & bought you a 3 carat ring you wouldn''t turn it down would you?

 

[ForteKitty]

I don''t think I can pull off a 3 carat stone on my 3.25 finger... even in deeper square cuts. I tried on a 2ct round and it was monstrous on me... in a bad way. Looked like a little girl playing with costume jewelry. It really depends on the person. I would turn it down if it meant getting 2 smaller diamonds.

 

[rosy]

Date: 3/9/2005 3:14:46 AM
Author: ForteKitty
I don''t think I can pull off a 3 carat stone on my 3.25 finger... even in deeper square cuts. I tried on a 2ct round and it was monstrous on me... in a bad way. Looked like a little girl playing with costume jewelry. It really depends on the person. I would turn it down if it meant getting 2 smaller diamonds.

Yes, when I was first looking at diamonds I tried on a 1.50 carat & I thought that was too big for me. I ended up buying it anyway & when I got it home it seemed too small so I went back & got the 1.85 & now that doesn''t seem that big anymore. I''m happy with it but really would love to have a 2.5-3 carat for that breathtaking "wow that''s huge & gorgeous" effect. Nothing wrong with liking that effect. In other words, you really have to do more than try on a ring, you really have to take it home & wear it to see how it is. I have a friend with a size 3.25 finger like yours that has a 2 carat & that seems to be the largest she could go without it looking tacky, as you said. I''m speaking for the 5 1/2 super long fingered girls out there!

 

[ForteKitty]

Actually, I have tried on a 2 carat RB for a week, and it never grew on me. (babysat my aunt''s ring while she went to Europe

) Instead of adorning my hand, it kinda just sat there like an extra appendage. Weird. My fingers are pretty long too, but when too much of the width is covered, it just doesn''t look good. That''s why I''m not too much of a RB girl. I prefer longer shapes or squared shapes. Perhaps I''ll develop a taste for bigger stones when I get older.

 

[sjz]

Date: 3/9/2005 2:47:34 AM
Author: rosy

Date: 3/8/2005 7:48:16 AM
Author: sjz

Date: 3/8/2005 3:27:57 AM
Author: rosy
I have an H & I never notice a hint of color. Granted I would love to have a D-E stone but we live in a world where size matters so I dropped down in color to get a larger sized diamond. If the world didn''t care about size I would probably have got a 1 carat or smaller D-E.

One thing I have to say after reading the posts here for a few weeks is that I don''t think the rest of the world cares that much about size of diamond. Many of the people who post on this forum do, that''s for sure. I couldn''t believe how many people were talking ''upgrade'' on stones over 1.5-2 carats! Some of the people who are talking upgrade aren''t even married yet! I remember when I got my first diamond, I was so thrilled and esctatic. I don''t even have the stone anymore (long story) and I don''t remember any specs on it, but it was dinky by pricescope standards, and probably not of great quality. But I loved it anyway.

Ahem, it''s no secret that people buy large diamonds not only because they''re beautiful but they also love the attention & status it gives them. It''s the ''ooh, your husband must really love you or you must be well off enough to afford that''. Diamonds & jewelry are luxury items, like cars. Some people don''t care what kind of car they drive, others do. Lets face it if your husband could afford it & bought you a 3 carat ring you wouldn''t turn it down would you?

I know this is going to either sound like blasphemy or sour grapes, but yes I probably would turn down the 3 carat ring. My husband actually could afford a much bigger diamond than the ones I have, but I like the smaller stones. It''s not about quantitiy vs quality, or bang for my buck or anything like that. I am a musician and my husband is an MD, so most people who know us know that we could afford things like huge rocks or flashy cars. And don''t get me wrong, I love to look and admire as well as anyone else

I think it has to do with priorities, as others have suggested. My diamonds might be small in pricescope standards, but they are of excellent quality and most were not cheap by any means. That goes for my other stones as well. Now if I had the chance to go for a top of the line Antigua Winds sax, or upgrade my Fender for a better guitar, I''d be whipping out my credit card so fast your heads would spin...wait, I already did that...lol! But then again, I don''t buy the instruments that are going to impress my musician friends and collegues. I aquire the ones that make the most beautiful music. Sometimes they are the most expensive, but not always.

 

[pqcollectibles]

I''m actually happy with my 1.25 carat. I used the 0.75 to guage size and decided that around 7mm looked good. I''ve got plenty of room for bigger, especially if I went with a thinner shank on the setting, but I''m really happy at this size.

 

[Asschman]

Date: 3/9/2005 3:29:42 AM
Author: rosy

Date: 3/9/2005 3:14:46 AM
Author: ForteKitty
I don''t think I can pull off a 3 carat stone on my 3.25 finger... even in deeper square cuts. I tried on a 2ct round and it was monstrous on me... in a bad way. Looked like a little girl playing with costume jewelry. It really depends on the person. I would turn it down if it meant getting 2 smaller diamonds.

Yes, when I was first looking at diamonds I tried on a 1.50 carat & I thought that was too big for me. I ended up buying it anyway & when I got it home it seemed too small so I went back & got the 1.85 & now that doesn''t seem that big anymore. I''m happy with it but really would love to have a 2.5-3 carat for that breathtaking ''wow that''s huge & gorgeous'' effect. Nothing wrong with liking that effect. In other words, you really have to do more than try on a ring, you really have to take it home & wear it to see how it is. I have a friend with a size 3.25 finger like yours that has a 2 carat & that seems to be the largest she could go without it looking tacky, as you said. I''m speaking for the 5 1/2 super long fingered girls out there!

I think in light of your previous posts, it would appear that you care more about size than "the world" you referred to. Fine by me, but it seems kind of silly to blame external peer pressure from society for your desire for a larger ring. Besides I thought enjoying diamonds was all about appreciating them for the unique beauty they each possess, not how they measure up against others.

 

[carolina]

My diamond is an H color...and I really think it is fiery and beautiful. It looks a slight slight slight bit yellowish next to my best friend''s E colored E ring, but it is really not so noticeable when not compared side by side.

I am sure that D''s and E''s are icy and beautiful, but I am happy with what I do have (just wish I could convince my fiance that he did fine...)

 

[valeria101]

Date: 3/9/2005 8:58:38 AM
Author: Asschman

I thought enjoying diamonds was all about appreciating them for the unique beauty they each possess, not how they measure up against others.

That chance must have dissapered as soon as the second diamond ever entered a jeweler''s stock

 

[rosy]

Date: 3/9/2005 7:36

5 AM
Author: sjz

I think it has to do with priorities, as others have suggested. My diamonds might be small in pricescope standards, but they are of excellent quality and most were not cheap by any means.

I would never buy a diamond solely to impress other people. But I would gladly drop down in color & clarity (but never cut) to get a bigger stone. I think it''s just part of being a wise consumer, a smart shopper. Getting the most bang for the buck, applies to any other commodity out there. Also not many people have big diamonds so it''s fun being different & having something unique. I never brag about the diamond & I never point it out to anyone. If someone walks by showing off their new one carat ring I always put my hands in my pockets to be courteous. So just because you have a big diamond doesn''t make you shallow or a show-off, to me it''s just more beauty on my hand for me to enjoy. If others notice it great, if they don''t that''s fine too.

 

[ForteKitty]

Date: 3/10/2005 3:35:38 AM
Author: rosy

I would never buy a diamond solely to impress other people. But I would gladly drop down in color & clarity (but never cut) to get a bigger stone. I think it's just part of being a wise consumer, a smart shopper. Getting the most bang for the buck, applies to any other commodity out there.

Just because someone buys for quality doesn't mean they're not wise consumers. It all comes down to preference. I bought my mom a 1.24ct D VVS2 ideal cut for her 48th b-day. Could I have gotten a much bigger stone for the same price? Sure, but I didn't because I knew she wouldn't wear it. She's not impressed by big things, so I went as high as I possibly could within my limits. It's top of the line in every way, and she loves it. Worth every single penny, and it still looks humongous on our hands, doesn't it?

 

[rosy]

Date: 3/10/2005 3:59:12 AM
Author: ForteKitty

Date: 3/10/2005 3:35:38 AM
Author: rosy

I would never buy a diamond solely to impress other people. But I would gladly drop down in color & clarity (but never cut) to get a bigger stone. I think it''s just part of being a wise consumer, a smart shopper. Getting the most bang for the buck, applies to any other commodity out there.

Just because someone buys for quality doesn''t mean they''re not wise consumers. It all comes down to preference. I bought my mom a 1.24ct D VVS2 ideal cut for her 48th b-day. Could I have gotten a much bigger stone for the same price? Sure, but I didn''t because I knew she wouldn''t wear it. She''s not impressed by big things, so I went as high as I possibly could within my limits. It''s top of the line in every way, and she loves it. Worth every single penny, and it still looks humongous on our hands, doesn''t it?

Honestly on your 1.24 carat stone I would still have dropped down in color & clarity & used the saved money to buy other things, save for the future, etc. I cannot say that D color & VVS2 means you have a better quality diamond. It''s just more rare & therefore more expensive. The difference in color betwen your stone an a G-H would be minute unless you''re a trained jeweler. I just don''t believe in D color & any clarity above VS the same way you don''t believe in huge stones. Really though, the first thing that comes to mind is "How big is the diamond?" not "what color or clarity is it?" Diamond buying is such a personal thing, it really is point of view & perspectives as mentioned. I must add that your setting is chunky & makes that diamond look larger & the sparkliness is enhanced greatly by the diamonds in the band. It looks very substantial. Take that diamond & put it in a plain solitaire band, it would look smaller. It''s not all about the size of a diamond but settings play an important role in beauty of a diamond as well.

 

[ForteKitty]

Actually, I have a 1.13ct G diamond, and we can spot the difference in color immediately, face up. When you tilt it, the difference is even more obvious. I guess my family and friends are more picky with color than anything else. The first thing my aunt said was, "God that thing is white, is it a D? Good job!" My best friend compared my G with my mom's D, and she noticed the color difference right away as well. As far as clarity, it's all psychological. As long as we know, it doesn't really matter whether others know or not.

Yes, the setting does make it appear larger, although that wasn't my intention. The custom platinum setting has 1ct of princess cut diamonds, and that whole ring only cost me $11k, so I think I did rather well. I only have to save an extra month or two to make the difference... and my mom's totally worth it!!

forgot to add:

HOWEVER, if I were buying a ring for myself, I would drop in color & clarity, but still remain around the same size range. 1.25 F/VS2 is my sweet spot.

 

[MaybeDayze]

Fortekitty - I hear you on D vs G color.
I don''t understand why people say you can''t tell the difference unless you''re trained.
I CAN! I can see it right away, maybe I''m just color sensitive. I can immediately tell a G stone vs. a D or E - Can''t most people? Sometimes it does appear that G stones seem to have more depth - does anyone else notice this? It''s all a matter of preference.
How sweet of you to really consider your mother''s preference when you bought her ring. What an amazing gift!

 

[ForteKitty]

Thanks!

MaybeDayze~ Do you have perfect vision? Everyone in my family has 15/20-20/20, and we''re sooo color sensitive. (too many cones? rods? can''t remember...) We can easily spot inclusions in VVS quality w/ a 10x loupe and the GIA report. W/o a report in front of us, it might take a few minutes.

It kinda sucks sometimes.

 

[Sashabella]

I also agree. My viision is far from perfect but I can tell a G from an F or an E from an F anyday. My eye is very sensitive to colour.

 

[ursulawrite]

I totally agree with Fortekitty. My e-ring is E, VVS1, Ideal Cut and Symmetry. I realise that I could have purchased something bigger than 1.32 carats. But there was no way I was going to compromise on colour. I like knowing that my icy white diamond is of an extremely high quality, even if other people only look at the size. (Which I don''t think they do because everyone comments that my e-ring is the whitest, sparkliest diamond they''ve ever seen.)

 

[katrina_33]

A 2 carat F VS2 would be my "ideal" and I would never want to go higher in color, clarity or size, but G SI1 is what I''ll be looking for when we buy the stone, because it''s a combo that I personally can''t tell from F VS2 and I couldn''t really justify spending the extra $ unless we really had it to burn. But I say F VS2 is my ideal because just on a psychological level, I wouldn''t ever feel that I needed to ''qualify'' an F-VS2 diamond to anyone. With a G SI1 I might get into conversations about how it''s an "eye clean" SI1, or the cut quality masks some of the color / inclusions, or whatever and feeling like I had to educate people about how it''s better quality than they think. F VS2 is no explaining necessary high quality to me. It''s just so different for everyone!

 

[cflutist]

When I had my 2.05 D-VS2 Oval next to my 3.01 F-SI1 Pear, I could definitely tell the difference in color, even face up.

The "D" colorless stone was just so icy white. Had to compromise when websailor bought the current stone
because 1 - D-VS2 was just too expensive in a 3 ct stone, 2 - websailor was cleaned out financially from his ex (he proposed without a ring and we went shopping later) 3 - F-SI1 is my sweetspot (F still in the colorless range, SI1 eye-clean).

 

[Mara]

I think it definitely depends on your eyes. I just got a J 1.60c stone after having a 1.29 H SI stone and it looks the same to me! My husband has an E ACA stone in his ring and my J looks the same to him too. Sure we aren''t scrutizing side by side but in general, the color for me is very hard to see. We were all set to buy an old euro cut ''I'' when we were originally looking, no way did we think it looked colorful/yellow.

So I guess my eyes are just not really picky at all..thank goodness...hehee because it would be alot more expensive to be purchasing D/E/F stones than a H/I/J! and with my big size dreams, budget would seriously be hampered if I had those Superman eyes...hehehe.