|
|
|
|
| ||
Diamond Jewelry Forums
 Picture Gallery
 Video Gallery
 Journal
|
|||
|
|  Search
|  Posted Today
|  Most Active
|  Help
|
||
 »
Home
»  » Diamond Prices and Grading »
 » RockyTalky
»  » Measurements and color
|
| Pages: 1 of 3: [1] 2 3 > |
|
 |
Measurements and color |
 |
| P: 7/1/2004 11:10:31 PM | |
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
I have a couple quick questions regarding the following stone: AGS cert I, VS2 1.235 6.99 - 7.01 x4.25 Depth 60.7% Table 55% Girdle 1-1.4 Crown 34.8 deg Pavil 40.9 deg Ideal polish and sym MB fluor Ultimately any and all opinions are greatly appreciated. Specifically, is the diameter a bit large? Second, I set out to find nothing less than an H. However, on this I, will the tint be noticeable? Given what I know, I think these are good dimensions, but I'm hesitant of the color. Idealscope appears really good...what to do? |
| Posted: 7/1/2004 11:10:31 PM | |
|
There are 67 replies to this message. There are 30 replies on this page. |
|
| P: 7/1/2004 11:46:14 PM | |
|
shyy99 Rough Rock Total Posts: 2 Last Post: 7/1/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
First of all I would prefer an GIA certification with a class of II = a weel proportioned stone. Second, table and depth look fine so diameter shouldn't be a problem. Third and most concerning is the fluor. which causes a diamond to look oily/milky in sunlight. Fourth a VS2 should be a G to be mid-range, an H is low end of the range. But tinit on an h shouldn't be a problem.
|
| Posted: 7/1/2004 11:46:14 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 12:24:55 AM | |
pqcollectibles Ideal Rock Total Posts: 3,441 Last Post: 6/18/2005 Member Since: 2/23/2003 |
---------------- That comment on Blue Fluourescence is an old wives tale. SOME diamonds containing blue flour will take on an oily or milky appearance in bright, direct sunlight. Most do not. The diamond will have to be evaluated to determine if that's true or not in this case. Chances are the blue flour will add marvelous flashes of blue light and color, and will also counter balance the I color to help the diamond appear visually whiter and brighter than the actual color grade. Also, Flour diamonds are pretty kewl under the lighting of dance clubs too! They positively glow.  This diamond has excellent specs. Looks like a 1A cut without actually comparing the charts. It scores 1.6, TIC, Ex/Vg/Vg/Vg on the HCA. Probably a much better performer than most you'll see out in public. Yes, G and H are kind of the sweet spots, based on market preference. Where there's market demand, there's pricing permiums. I and J color diamonds can offer great value to saavy buyers. And with these proportions, you get the look without a 1.25 carat without the slight price buump. You might ask for additional pics to evaluate the H&A patterns. Doubt you'll see much in the way of inclusions in a VS2 but you could check on that as well. The diamond looks to be well priced as well. And the Vendor is extremely reputable. Give them a call. Discuss your concerns. See what they have to say.  Why use a big word when a diminutive word would be succinct! |
| Posted: 7/2/2004 12:24:55 AM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 12:58:36 AM | |
quaeritur Ideal Rock Total Posts: 1,238 Last Post: 2/3/2005 Member Since: 3/12/2004 |
---------------- Hmmm? I'm a little confused by the above post, not sure what you mean by the GIA cert preference. As for the fluorescence, there's NO problem with medium blue fluor, and particularly in an I color stone, it's considered a desirable thing. There have been some good recent threads on fluorescence, and someone posted this link to a GIA study that found mostly good things about fluorescence, might be worth a look. As for this stone, as PQ said, it looks great!! The diameter is right on for that carat weight, and nice and tight, and if the IS images look good, I don't see how this couldn't be a total winner.
quaeritur |
| Posted: 7/2/2004 12:58:36 AM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 1:01:39 AM | |
Mara Ideal Rock Total Posts: 27,936 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 10/30/2002 |
"GIA certification with a class of II"
--
This is interesting...prefer a GIA over an AGS? Hmm not me. I'd actually prefer AGS over GIA but take GIA as a nice second.
Both are well reputed labs and I wouldn't split hairs over the two. Now if it was EGL...of course take GIA over it. Secondly, GIA doesn't classify diamonds with cut gradings just yet..so a class of II could be referring to the AGA cut charts? If so then I'd prefer a 1A or 1B over a 2A/B but a 2A/B again is a nice second. "Third and most concerning is the fluor"
----
Hmmm not really. Med Blue fluor on an I stone is PERFECT. That stone will face up whiter than an I...most likely more like an H which is a sweet spot to be in my opinion. ONLY Strong Fluor can cause a diamond to be milky or oily and even then in only some diamonds. Fluor being a bad thing is a seriously old midwives tale and stones with fluor are usually marked down because of that tale, so you can even benefit by getting a better looking stone for less money!
"a VS2 should be a G to be mid-range"
----
Mid-range what? It really is up to the buyer what sort of choices they make on color and clarity and sometimes the diamond falls into your lap that is perfect but the clarity is too high or too low etc. I'd prefer an SI over a VS anyday, esp if its eye clean because you save $$ but if one is not available and the rest of the shoe fits, wear it! There is no mid-range vs low-end and there's no definitive answer on what color gets paired with what clarity. Diamonds come in various colors and clarity combos and every person is going to have their own sweet spot (mine is H SI2).
Lastly, to the original poster, I have an H SI1 diamond and it faces up very white and sparkly. It's an excellent cut so it should, all you see is fire and brilliance!
This stone looks pretty good from specs, the diameter is actually perfect, right where it should be. Table and depth are lovely, and angles are sweet as well. Did you see inclusion images, pictures of the diamond, idealscope images? If these are available, request them right away. What about a Sarin, what sort of followup and research have you done on the stone? If all looks great, the specs are very nice and I LOVE the medium blue fluor!! ________________________________ |
| Posted: 7/2/2004 1:01:39 AM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 4:45:24 AM | |
|
Greg Rough Rock Total Posts: 66 Last Post: 12/22/2004 Member Since: 6/9/2004 |
If this vender has a good return policy you've got nothing to lose by ordering the stone and having a look at it (I'm assuming you haven't seen it). The color very well may turn you off, but you won't really know until you see it. Some people can pick up on the yellow in a F stone and it bugs them. Others don't see (or don't mind) the color of somewhat yellower diamonds. Don't expect an I to look like an H though because of medium blue fluorescence. The GIA did an extensive study on fluorescence a few years ago and experienced observers in the diamond industry will only detect a difference in color due to mb flour about a third of the time. Average observers failed to make any significant distinctions based on a diamond's fluorescence. In all likelihood, you'll never see the effects of the fluorescence in a meaningful way (unless you go clubbing and dance under the black-light).
|
| Posted: 7/2/2004 4:45:24 AM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 2:43:36 PM | |
|
Mara Ideal Rock Total Posts: 27,936 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 10/30/2002 |
The GIA may have done a study and found their own results, but there are some people on here who have MB fluor in their stones, and note their diamonds DO face up whiter. Also, some experts on here have noted the same as well, as I had a vendor compare an I with med blue fluor to a same cut H and they noted it looked pretty much the same from TOP DOWN. Fluor affects the whiteness of a stone from top down but not from sides.
Not sure who is 'right' persay, but I am intrigued enough to want a MB fluor stone in the future to see what effects it will have.
 It's definitely NOT a bad thing.________________________________ |
| Posted: 7/2/2004 2:43:36 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 3:10:54 PM | |
Superidealist Ideal Rock Total Posts: 655 Last Post: 8/23/2006 Member Since: 9/10/2003 |
On 7/2/2004 2:43:36 PM Mara wrote: I think I'll trust the GIA over consumers' and vendors' opinions of their own diamonds. D Riley |
| Posted: 7/2/2004 3:10:54 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 5:43:35 PM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
this is the I idealscope pic. looks really good to my amateur eyes also - the med blue fluor is the reason i even considered the stone 
|
| Posted: 7/2/2004 5:43:35 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 5:46:08 PM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
i'm also considering the following H AGS cert H SI1 119pts measure - 6.84-6.88x4.2 depth - 61.2% table - 56% girdle is 1.0-1.5 (not sure what this translates to thickness wise) pointed cutlet (none) crown angle is 34.9 pavilion angle is 40.8 polish and symmetry are both ideal no fluor price listed is $5864. which do you guys/gals think, the H or I?
|
| Posted: 7/2/2004 5:46:08 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 6:47:31 PM | |
|
elepri Ideal Rock Total Posts: 759 Last Post: 5/6/2006 Member Since: 6/29/2004 |
My boyfriend and I just looked at several AGS ideal stones, H and I side by side. From the top, neither one of us could tell the difference. From the side i could see a very very slight tint in the I. Not yellow really, just seemed a little warmer to me. My boyfriend couldn't really see it. I think i read somewhere that women are more sensitive to color than men. I'm also planning to have the stone set in a pretty open setting so i was more comfortable with the H. If you'll only be able to see the diamond from the top once set, i doubt there'll be a noticeable difference.
|
| Posted: 7/2/2004 6:47:31 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 8:52:01 PM | |
|
pqcollectibles Ideal Rock Total Posts: 3,441 Last Post: 6/18/2005 Member Since: 2/23/2003 |
I like the angles and the spread of the first stone you posted better than the second one. If you had the H and the I side by side, I doubt you'd notice a color difference, but you would notice the size difference. Great Ideal Scope image, BTW!  Edited to add: If I remember correctly, the girdle % of the second diamond would translate to thin to medium. Why use a big word when a diminutive word would be succinct! |
| Posted: 7/2/2004 8:52:01 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 10:24:10 PM | |
|
Mara Ideal Rock Total Posts: 27,936 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 10/30/2002 |
yes i also like the I for larger size and also med blue fluor and better specs.
________________________________ |
| Posted: 7/2/2004 10:24:10 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 10:35:57 PM | |
|
adillus Rough Rock Total Posts: 34 Last Post: 7/27/2004 Member Since: 5/6/2004 |
Six in one half-dozen in the other. I'd lean toward the "I" stone, because it's spread, as pqcollectibles pointed out, but ultimately I think I'd choose on price.
|
| Posted: 7/2/2004 10:35:57 PM | |
| P: 7/2/2004 10:47:27 PM | |
lop Ideal Rock Total Posts: 2,651 Last Post: 9/7/2009 Member Since: 6/14/2003 |
I have a K colored stone with strong blue floresence, and I can obviously see the color, but nothing specifc to the flour. It's a pretty stone with lots of sparkle. Nothing near an ideal cut, but I've had jeweler's comment on how nice the fouresence is. I would take the stone into strong sunlight and make sure that it doesn't look milky (an occurance in a small percentage of stones), and as long as it doesn't ,it sounds like it could be a beautiful stone. The diameter looks right on, as do the specs, so see how it looks to your eyes. 
|
| Posted: 7/2/2004 10:47:27 PM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 10:38:49 AM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
Happy 4th Everybody! i appreciate your opinions a ton! i just ran both stones thru the HCA (i'm terrible at making decisions, especially when there is so much to consider): H stone ex/ex/ex/vg -- 1.4 I stone is ex/vg/vg/vg -- 1.6 I guess not TOO much difference, but I really want her ring to be stunning, so I'm leaning toward the H even tho its a bit smaller than the I. If anybody has insight on these HCA scores, I'd love to here it....
|
| Posted: 7/3/2004 10:38:49 AM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 11:21:06 AM | |
valeria101 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 14,048 Last Post: 4/30/2006 Member Since: 8/29/2003 |
I would not say that those HCA scores show ANY difference - thay are simply too close, and the HCA is not a fine-tuning device. You will find about 1000 posts around here saying that the one and only legitimate use of this tool is to take down from a list stones with HCA scores above 2 for closer inspection. You already had better data about the stones (any picture or direct test on the stone qualifies for this). Reading through this thread, it seems to me that you already know that the I color grade is fine with you. But how about the inclusions of the SI? Did you see taht stone (or a picture of it?). You may wnat to take into acount that these grades are not absolute - it is expected that the same stone gets a somewhat different pedigree if re-graded, and one color or clarity grade difference is definitely probable. So? Grades will not tell these stones apart - only you can. Before an Iscope of the H-SI surfaces, the I-VS gets my vote - for what that matters  Ana "The greatest experts are only as good as the sum total of what they have seen." [Souren Melikian] |
| Posted: 7/3/2004 11:21:06 AM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 11:24:59 AM | |
|
valeria101 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 14,048 Last Post: 4/30/2006 Member Since: 8/29/2003 |
---------------- Now, Fred doesn't get much credit around here... and I am not a big fan of his analysis (that book, you know). But the apart with matching color and clarity grades remained completely mysterious to me. Any idea what he might mean? Ana "The greatest experts are only as good as the sum total of what they have seen." [Souren Melikian] |
| Posted: 7/3/2004 11:24:59 AM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 6:40:19 PM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
here's the inclusion on the H
|
| Posted: 7/3/2004 6:40:19 PM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 6:45:00 PM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
oops - that the H Iscope - not as good as the I obviously.
|
| Posted: 7/3/2004 6:45:00 PM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 6:46:13 PM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
here's the inclusion on the H
|
| Posted: 7/3/2004 6:46:13 PM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 6:52:31 PM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
Valeria I've seen H and I stones in person - from my fairly educated shopping - i think my money is better spent in getting the best cut I can, with no eye visible inclusions and a lower color. that said, do you think i should go higher color in maybe a smaller stone? i am a bit hesitant about the I color (thus the question)
|
| Posted: 7/3/2004 6:52:31 PM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 6:58:31 PM | |
|
Mara Ideal Rock Total Posts: 27,936 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 10/30/2002 |
if you are unsure about I..then get the H. The H idealscope is still amazing, splitting hairs between the H and I personally.
as for color, sticking with H in my opinion is smart if you are worried. the inclusion on that H diamond looks tiny, is that the only one?
________________________________ |
| Posted: 7/3/2004 6:58:31 PM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 7:01:51 PM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
from what i can tell it is the only major inclusion- attached is the non-mag.
|
| Posted: 7/3/2004 7:01:51 PM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 7:04:27 PM | |
|
AaronMG Rough Rock Total Posts: 19 Last Post: 7/7/2004 Member Since: 7/1/2004 |
from other's opinions, the I has better proportions tho ugh, the further i delve into the online supply - the harder this decision gets! that said, we're still having fun.
|
| Posted: 7/3/2004 7:04:27 PM | |
| P: 7/3/2004 7:07:59 PM | |
|
Mara Ideal Rock Total Posts: 27,936 Last Post: 11/25/2009 Member Since: 10/30/2002 |
Honestly the I does not have BETTER proportions than the H. The two are very similar, splitting hairs if you will. Both are in a nice spot for crown and pav angles, both are in great table and depth areas, girdle, etc. The images look nice for both, the inclusions on the H seem miniscule. I recognize that H picture too, I know which vendor it is, the price is probably pretty darn good.
In the end, either stone, you'd have a winner and a beautiful sparkler. It comes down to your decision in the end. Slightly larger I with med blue fluor or a smaller H with great specs. Either way you win I think. Good luck!
________________________________ |
| Posted: 7/3/2004 7:07:59 PM | |
| P: 7/4/2004 12:26:54 PM | |
fire&ice Ideal Rock Total Posts: 7,827 Last Post: 3/30/2009 Member Since: 7/22/2002 |
---------------- I don't agree with you; but, the GIA finding did *indeed* find that relative to color, the blue fluor stones correlated respectively (strong, medium, etc)to perceived better color in the face up position. And, I don't dismiss what people say about their stones; nor, their specific preferences. The entire article has been republished on their GIA mag website - link appears in another thread on Fluor) I would suggest the read to find out exactly what the findings were if you want to trust only GIA. Because this is some of their findings: "Seventy-one perscent of all observers....said that stones in a given set appeared to have different depths of color.....However, when the answers for each color set were examined separately, it became evident that these results were related to color grade: 46% of the obs. indicate no diff. for E-color diamonds. 41% for the G color, 15% for the set with an I color grade, and 10% for K color......Althought responses to strongly fluor stones were mixed, in general obs. were more likely to choose inert & faintly flour stones as "most colored" and very strongly fluor stones as least colored within each color set.........table down yeilded no trend in color respect to increasing strength...However, table up showed a trend of better color appearance with greater strengths of Fluor." and one final quote from the actual study: "In the table up position, there is a clear trend for strongly fluorescent diamonds to look less colored, and for diamonds with no to weak fluorescence to look more colored." I quoting the actual study & not the abreviated abstract. The basic finding was to debunk the myth that there existed negative effects on the stones w/ blue fluor. They succeeded. I know *I* see a difference over & over again in warmer colored stones. So, back to point, yes that "I" stone will have every bit of a chance of faceing up whiter. Looks like a really nice stone. But, the choice is up to you. I tend to like any stone w/ Fluor.
|
| Posted: 7/4/2004 12:26:54 PM | |
| P: 7/4/2004 12:57:33 PM | |
|
valeria101 Ideal Rock Total Posts: 14,048 Last Post: 4/30/2006 Member Since: 8/29/2003 |
This choice would be so much easier with two diamonds infront than on paper  Would you have had any second thought about the I-VS if you were not set on "H or better" ? That was a target set based on the description fo the grades not on inspecting a few dozen diamnds, right? Whatever makes the difference between these two stones are such small detail - as far as I understand, the SI is quite clean, both are very well cut and one color grade could hardly be seen on set diamonds. Again, as far as I know, it is not reasonable to ask an appraiser to pin point color and clarity grades with more than one grade slack on a set diamond. Why would the buyer be expected to judge better - and sight unseen to boot !  These two are just good to be told apart by a pair of dice, I would think. Ana "The greatest experts are only as good as the sum total of what they have seen." [Souren Melikian] |
| Posted: 7/4/2004 12:57:33 PM | |
| P: 7/4/2004 2:00:58 PM | |
|
Superidealist Ideal Rock Total Posts: 655 Last Post: 8/23/2006 Member Since: 9/10/2003 |
To be honest, I have no real interest in the findings. My point was simply that dispassionate observers in a scientific study seem more likely to be objective than consumers about their own diamonds and vendors about the diamonds they sell. D Riley |
| Posted: 7/4/2004 2:00:58 PM | |
| P: 7/4/2004 2:12:42 PM | |
|
fire&ice Ideal Rock Total Posts: 7,827 Last Post: 3/30/2009 Member Since: 7/22/2002 |
---------------- My suggestion to read really wasn't directed towards you. You didn't post about what GIA supposedly found.  Though your post suggested that the findings were what was mentioned. Point taken. But, I still disagree to some point. And, in relation to so many "scientific" findings that are just plain skewed. Look at HRT for women. Touted as a cure all almost. Now, look at the findings. I guess I tend to rely on the average joe in the street to find what seems to work for them. I'm a little sensitive to this whole "scientific findings/study thing" because of the incredible conflicting data when researching canine cancer. The only "real" information I got was from talking to people in a similar situation. As an aside, my love of blue fluor stones is as old as the first time I tried on my mother's engagment ring.
|
| Posted: 7/4/2004 2:12:42 PM | |
| P: 7/4/2004 2:19:30 PM | |
|
Superidealist Ideal Rock Total Posts: 655 Last Post: 8/23/2006 Member Since: 9/10/2003 |
Both science and word of mouth are of only so much help when describing something as personal as perception.
D Riley |
| Posted: 7/4/2004 2:19:30 PM | |
 Previous Page
|
Pages: 1 of 3: [1] 2 3 > |
Next Page 
|
Contact Us | Back Home | Privacy Statement | Forum Agreement | Forum Policies | |
| Ideal BB Version: 0.1.5.4.beta1 | Message forum software powered by the Ideal BB |
| |
Pricescope -
Knowledge -
Diamond Prices -
Tools -
Resources -
About
© 2000-2009 Pricescope. Terms of Use Privacy Policy Disclaimer
forum archives
