Oval .94 to .99 ct: The more I learn, the harder it gets!

[iheartkeylargo]

We are looking for a GIA certified oval diamond slightly under a carat for under $5000. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

My boyfriend and I began our search for a diamond fairly uneducated. I knew the 4 Cs, and that's about it. I looked at the mall stores like Zales, Kay, and Jared, but they didn't have much in loose fancy shapes. At first I was looking at pears, but then we decided we prefer an oval. I started doing some more research to find the most beautiful oval at the best price, and realized that I will not find a diamond of the quality I'm looking for in those kind of stores.

So I started looking at some local stores that refer to themselves as diamond "wholesalers," and they do have some more ovals, but now I'm not sure if that is the best way to go. I've heard about the importance of seeing the Ideal Scope and ASET image of the diamond, but I don't think that's available locally, and it seems complicated to buy those and take them into the store (I'm not sure I could use them properly anyway). I'm wondering if we should consider looking online for a diamond with a retailer who has these images available? Are these Ideal Scope/ASET images better than seeing a diamond in person, where we would have the ability to look at it also in natural light? I do like seeing the magnified rotating images on James Allen, especially for picking out the pretty ovals vs the ones with prominent bow ties, and checking out the inclusions. That was harder to discern in the store.

Also, if we buy locally, they have a lifetime guarantee that they will buyback in cash the full price paid at any time. That seems to be the advantage to buying locally (along with the fact that we can see the diamond in person). Is that important?

We are looking for a diamond within these specifications, with as many in the "excellent" category as possible, and with priority at the items at the top of the list. We want maximum sparkle with minimal bowtie.

Table %
54% – 58% Excellent
50% – 62% Very Good

Depth %
62% – 66% Excellent
60% – 68% Very Good

Girdle
Very Thin – Slightly Thick

Color
D, E, F, G

L/W Ratio 1.45 – 1.55

Clarity
FL - VVS2 Excellent
VS1 - VS2 Very Good

Flourescence
none - faint

Symmetry
Excellent - Good

Polish
Excellent - Good

 

[drk14]

Re: Oval .94 to .99 ct: The more I learn, the harder it gets

I'm curious about how you arrived at your numerical specifications. Some of your values seem unusual (e.g., the preference for very deep diamonds), and others have impossibly narrow ranges (e.g., the L/W ratio requirement and the carat weight range).

Good ovals are hard to find, so you don't want to unnecessarily exclude diamonds from your search pool based on some theoretical criteria.

 

[iheartkeylargo]

Re: Oval .94 to .99 ct: The more I learn, the harder it gets

I found the numerical data on a couple of different websites that talked about how to choose an oval diamond with the most brilliance and least bow tie. It said "For an oval diamond to produce maximum brilliance while minimizing the bow tie effect, a depth percentage between 62% – 66% is recommended. Ovals with depths that fall below 60% usually have low pavilion angles which can cause prominent bow ties to form. When the diamond is cut to deep proportions (depth of more than 68%), the bow tie effect is reduced significantly. However, the optical performance of the diamond is also adversely affected. This results in a diamond that is usually dull and take on a darker appearance."


I choose that carat range because we are looking for a 1 carat, and I read the price per carat goes up quite a bit over .99 carat. But I suppose it could be .9 to .99 ct.

I would like the L/W ratio to be a bit less than 1.5, as I prefer a chubby oval to a skinny one. It seems many I find are closer to 1.3, so that would probably be fine.

I don't expect everything to be in those ranges. Those are just guidelines I'm trying to be within or close to as many of them as possible.

 

[drk14]

Re: Oval .94 to .99 ct: The more I learn, the harder it gets

Google only brings up one website with the quoted language, written by a guy with three years of experience in evaluating diamonds ... hey that's 2 years more than me, to be sure (and he also has GIA training), but my point is, I wouldn't take his numbers as absolute truth. An alternative source for suggested oval diamond proportions, which (IMO) has better provenance, is the AGA Cut Class Chart devised by David Atlas, according to which you may want to narrow your search by considering, say, Tables in the range 52-62%, and Depths in the range 59-63%.

But you don't want to be over-reliant on numbers when it comes to ovals.

For carat weight, you're right that all other factors being equal, there is a price jump at 1.00ct. However, all other factors are never actually equal, i.e., there are many variables that determine the price of a diamond, and some of those will often counter-act the "premium" associated with the 1.00-ct mark. You probably shouldn't be so strict on the carat weight, because you already have a budget limit as one of your criteria, so are you really going to disqualify a >1ct diamond that costs less than $5k? Second, the "size" of ovals are typically judged by spread (L x W) rather than by weight. Third, there's a big "waste land" in the range 0.93-0.97ct (i.e., most of your preferred size range) in which there are very few oval diamonds available -- carat weights near 0.90 (+/-) and near 1.0 (+/-) ct are much more common. Thus, if you artificially set an upper limit at 0.99ct, you are not saving money (because you're already limiting yourself to a <$5k budget), while you're excluding a large number of potential diamonds in the range 1.0-1.1ct.

What about your clarity requirements? Why do you prefer VVS2-FL? Do you want a "mind clean" diamond (i.e., would it bother you to know that the diamond has microscopic flaws, even if they cannot be seen with the naked eye?)? If you're OK with an "eye clean" diamond (one that has inclusions that cannot be seen by the unaided eye under normal viewing conditions), you can get away with including diamonds down to SI1 in your search, as long as you screen your search results carefully.

 

[iheartkeylargo]

Re: Oval .94 to .99 ct: The more I learn, the harder it gets

Thanks for the advice! That is really helpful. I guess I was sticking with those numbers because I don't feel confident about picking a "good" oval. I will try searching with those parameters. I'm still wondering if I should be concerned about viewing the diamond with an IdealScope?

 

[drk14]

Re: Oval .94 to .99 ct: The more I learn, the harder it gets

Yes, ultimately, you'll need something more than the numerical specifications to go by. I was primarily trying to help you revise your specs to be more realistic. For example D-G, SI1-FL, 0.9-1.1ct for the basics. Consider if you want a certain minimum width or length (in millimeters) for your diamond, based on your ring size and/or whether you plan to set it as a solitaire, three-stone, or halo.

For the L/W ratio, please play with this tool to determine what aspect ratios you find visually pleasing, and try to keep the range as broad as possible (in order to maximize the number of available diamonds in your search).

Do post your revised specs here when you've thought about your priorities a little more.

If you're going to shop locally in a B&M, you might benefit from purchasing an ASET scope (the Ideal Scope is less useful for fancy cut shapes like oval). However, benefits might be limited unless you are also able to successfully take pictures through the ASET scope (and post them to PS for feedback), or otherwise spend some time educating yourself on how to interpret ASET images. Most important is that you are able to view the diamond in a variety of lighting conditions, away from the spot lights and display cabinet lights that are pervasive in jewelry stores (and that make every diamond look great). If you care about whether the faceting pattern of the diamond is visually pleasing (to you), you should also loupe the diamond (any jewler shoudl let you borrow their loupe. The risk of doing this is that you may get scared by seeing some of the inclusions that are invisble to the naked eye (but that may become visisble under then magnification of the loupe)! Again, think about whether you want "eye clean" or "mind clean" as your clarity grade.

Many here would advise you to work with a vendor such as Good Old Gold, who can select promising ovals for you and produce all sorts of images and videos to help with the decision process.

On the other hand, if you're comfortable with an internet purchase, you can also consider other reputable internet vendors, as long as they offer high-magnification images and videos of the diamond in motion (e.g., JA, Ritani, etc.), and ideally are also able to supply ASETs on request. If you go this route, you will find that PS members will be able to help you pick out a good oval from the available choices.