|
|
|
|
| ||
Diamond Jewelry Forums
 Picture Gallery
 Video Gallery
 Journal
|
|||
|
|  Search
|  Posted Today
|  Most Active
|  Help
|
||
 »
Home
»  » Diamond Prices and Grading »
 » RockyTalky
»  » Help the New Guy
|
|
 |
Help the New Guy |
 |
| P: 11/28/2004 1:03:33 PM | |
Xmasproposal Rough Rock Total Posts: 7 Last Post: 11/29/2004 Member Since: 11/28/2004 |
I plan on proposing Dec 23rd. Pretty excited actually. Anyway to the heart of the matter concerning a loose diamond. Oval Shape: Here are my choices: Oval Brilliant 9.52 x 6.72 x 3.95 1.60 carat Depth 58.8% Table 59% Med to slightly thick, Faceted Cutlet - none Polish Very Good Symmetry Very Good Clarity - SI2 Color - D Flor - None ------ Oval Brilliant 9.25x 6.95 x 4.58 2.01 carat Depth 65.9% Table 52% Thick to very thick, Faceted Cutlet - none Polish Good Symmetry Good Clarity - SI2 Color - G Flor - None Both the same price $10,000 with simple platinum solitary setting. Both have inclusions that are colorless and not visible to my naked eyey, moms, or sisters. No inclusions under on the table. I realy worry about the small table on the 2.01 carat, but it sure would be nice to give her a 2 carat ring? Maybe I should look for something in between? Both are reputable dealers Solomon Brothers in Atlanta and Bock in Dallas. We are in Dallas - I want the best for her. Her sister says size, but I might be inclined to upgade the setting later (3 or 5 yr Aninvessary) with some smaller diamonds....Any help would be appreciated.... |
| Posted: 11/28/2004 1:03:33 PM | |
|
There are 8 replies to this message. There are 8 replies on this page. |
|
| P: 11/28/2004 1:30:59 PM | |
strmrdr Ideal Rock Total Posts: 23,296 Last Post: 10/9/2009 Member Since: 11/1/2003 |
All else being the same Id take the G color. Very very few people will see the color difference and everyone will see the size difference. That said im dont know enough about ovals to comment on wether those are good examples of them. Have you ran them thru the aga charts? ........... Karl has joined the diamond trade and is now posting as Karl_K |
| Posted: 11/28/2004 1:30:59 PM | |
| P: 11/28/2004 1:32:30 PM | |
|
strmrdr Ideal Rock Total Posts: 23,296 Last Post: 10/9/2009 Member Since: 11/1/2003 |
linkage: http://www.pricescope.com/fancy.asp ........... Karl has joined the diamond trade and is now posting as Karl_K |
| Posted: 11/28/2004 1:32:30 PM | |
| P: 11/28/2004 1:43:57 PM | |
|
Xmasproposal Rough Rock Total Posts: 7 Last Post: 11/29/2004 Member Since: 11/28/2004 |
Thanks for the quick reply as I am quite anxious to make a decision and see it through - I ran the diamond stats through the charts you provided - As I suspected the smaller one is a 1 b the larger one is a 3a. Would you still go with the larger one? They both looked good in the store. When you compare the colors side by side there is a difference but how often will that happen? Thanks for the help as I am stressed about the diamond b/c I want the best I can afford. I am not stressed about asking her.....
|
| Posted: 11/28/2004 1:43:57 PM | |
| P: 11/28/2004 1:56:44 PM | |
fortheloveofdiamonds Ideal Rock Total Posts: 1,279 Last Post: 7/4/2006 Member Since: 10/8/2004 |
I'd go for the one that looks best to *your* eye! Good Luck!!
|
| Posted: 11/28/2004 1:56:44 PM | |
| P: 11/28/2004 2:18:43 PM | |
lop Ideal Rock Total Posts: 2,651 Last Post: 9/7/2009 Member Since: 6/14/2003 |
Have you seen them side by side? If so, do they really look smaller/larger than each other? The 2.0 is much more deep, so a lot of it's weight is in depth, not visible size. Is one shape more pleasing to you? The top one looks a little longer and more narrow than the second one, and is right in the middle of the good range. I would try to forget about the weight, and focus on which one looks better to you. If the second one looks better because it visually looks bigger, then go for it. Not being an oval expert, my instinct is to go for #1, but I really think the best way to decide is to forget the specs and let your eyes choose. Weight is just a check box, but if hitting the 2.0 mark is mentally important, then factor it into your decision making.
|
| Posted: 11/28/2004 2:18:43 PM | |
| P: 11/28/2004 3:39:58 PM | |
|
Xmasproposal Rough Rock Total Posts: 7 Last Post: 11/29/2004 Member Since: 11/28/2004 |
LOP - You are right - The measurements actually favor the smaller diamond in terms of what looks bigger from a birds eye view. The weight of the diamond of the 2 ct is in the depth. The smaller is so much more pleasing to the eye to me. I think I might go back to the jeweler and ask to examine a larger E or F diamond that has a great cut next to the D. I like great color - great cut and upgrade the setting, but when girls get together - I hear "Did you see the size of that rock?" Catch 22 when you have a budget... Any other ideas please lay them on me....Thanks for the help
|
| Posted: 11/28/2004 3:39:58 PM | |
| P: 11/28/2004 11:33:37 PM | |
youngster Cut Rock Total Posts: 187 Last Post: 2/19/2007 Member Since: 10/27/2004 |
Make sure you check to see how minimal the bow-tie effect is on the oval diamonds you are considering. All ovals, pears and marquise shape diamonds have a bow-tie (a dark, less brilliant zone) to some degree. Do a search on bow-tie and you'll find tons to read.
|
| Posted: 11/28/2004 11:33:37 PM | |
| P: 11/29/2004 12:29:25 AM | |
windowshopper Ideal Rock Total Posts: 2,023 Last Post: 7/25/2006 Member Since: 7/11/2004 |
number 1--VG VG on polish and symmetry and good depth and table
|
| Posted: 11/29/2004 12:29:25 AM | |
 Previous Page
|
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
