Help picking diamond

[Ringstrue]

Hello PS experts,

I'm very impressed by the expertise and extreme helpfulness I see here, you guys are great. I'm hoping for help looking for a round diamond for an engagement ring with the following parameters:

Budget: Under $10k would prefer closer to 9. Also, looking for value
H SI1 or better, eye clean
HCA 1-2
Hoped to get close to 1.5 CT but am adjusting downward for quality

Here are what I've seen so far:

Diamond comparison | Compare Diamonds to choose and buy the best one

Whiteflash gives you an excellent opportunity to compare diamonds to make a great deal. With diamond’s parameters provided, you can compare any detail.

www.whiteflash.com

Please let me know what you would pick or if you see other candidates.

Thanks in advance for the help!

 

[jp201845]

Welcome to Pricescope

Here is one I found on Whiteflash that is under budget and close to 1.5 ct

Whiteflash ACA 1.332 ct
SI1 I Wire price $8633

Diamond | 1.332 ct I SI1 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4172747

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.332 carat I color SI1 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4172747

www.whiteflash.com

 

[Ringstrue]

Thanks for the help. I was hoping to stay at H or better. Does this look like a better diamond than the others?

 

[jp201845]

Thanks for the help. I was hoping to stay at H or better. Does this look like a better diamond than the others?

The one I posted is A Cut Above their top branded diamond which will be a better performer than the others you posted.

 

[tyty333]

Hi @Ringstrue

The virtual stones you selected are not in house so there is no telling if they are nice or not.. The H you pick is in house and is a lovely stone.
(top of budget though).

You can ask WF why it didnt make the ACA line (it still has the benefits of the ACA line like trade in/up)

This is the other H option (ACA). Slightly smaller.

Diamond | 1.306 ct H VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4063437

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.306 carat H color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4063437

www.whiteflash.com

 

[Ringstrue]

Thank you both for your help. I appreciate it.

What do you think of the ASET image on this stone and thoughts in general?

1.45 carat (ct) GIA Round Loose Diamond H Color VS2 Clarity Excellent Cut

www.b2cjewels.com

 

[jp201845]

Crown is too shallow at 32.5 I would pass on this stone.

 

[Ringstrue]

Crown is too shallow at 32.5 I would pass on this stone.

Thank you, I did reject it. I put a deposit on the mentioned WF stone. But now have been shown another option by a reputable jeweler recommend on PS. Which would you or others on the forum pick?

1) https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4080920.htm

2) https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=6291178008&s=1575826971638



The first stone is 10,300 and the second is 7,900. Is the first really worth 2400 more? They state the second stone is eye clean. The price is very tempting. What would you guys pick and why?

Thank you!

 

[Ringstrue]

Hi @Ringstrue

The virtual stones you selected are not in house so there is no telling if they are nice or not.. The H you pick is in house and is a lovely stone.
(top of budget though).

You can ask WF why it didnt make the ACA line (it still has the benefits of the ACA line like trade in/up)

This is the other H option (ACA). Slightly smaller.

Diamond | 1.306 ct H VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4063437

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.306 carat H color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4063437

www.whiteflash.com

Hi tyty333. Which one of the above would you pick? Thanks!

 

[sledge]

You can ask WF why it didnt make the ACA line (it still has the benefits of the ACA line like trade in/up)

The 1.4 premium select missed due to variations in the hearts image that don't meet the strict hearts symmetry requirement of the ACA line.

IMO, this is still a beautiful stone and comes with all the upgrade perks of the ACA line so it offers a nice overall value. Unfortunately I see the stone is also sold.

The other 2 stones in the WF comparison are virtual selection stones and not eligible for the upgrade programs WF is known to offer. That's not necessarily bad as it may come with a cost savings but it's important to realize you are getting a different service level as well.

If you were to go with virtual, I find the first stone with 35.5/40.6 proportions to be interesting.

However, if I was value shopping I would prefer to find a premium or expert select from WF as opposed to virtual inventory. Also, sometimes you can find the right ACA when value shopping.

 

[Ringstrue]

The 1.4 premium select missed due to variations in the hearts image that don't meet the strict hearts symmetry requirement of the ACA line.

IMO, this is still a beautiful stone and comes with all the upgrade perks of the ACA line so it offers a nice overall value. Unfortunately I see the stone is also sold.

The other 2 stones in the WF comparison are virtual selection stones and not eligible for the upgrade programs WF is known to offer. That's not necessarily bad as it may come with a cost savings but it's important to realize you are getting a different service level as well.

If you were to go with virtual, I find the first stone with 35.5/40.6 proportions to be interesting.

However, if I was value shopping I would prefer to find a premium or expert select from WF as opposed to virtual inventory. Also, sometimes you can find the right ACA when value shopping.

Thank you. It is showing sold because I have a deposit on it. I am now being shown this stone from IDJ

https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=6291178008&s=1575826971638

Images are in the above post. How do you think this compares to the WF premium select I have on hold? It is $2300 cheaper at $7900 which seems like a good value. Has in an inclusion on the table but they say is eye clean.

 

[sledge]

The images and GIA proportions of the IDJ stone look good. The hearts image does reveal it's less symmetrical than the WF stone. Also, the ASET reveals a little more painting/digging on the IDJ stone.

Visible Effects of Painting & Digging on Superideal Diamonds

With grateful acknowledgment to John Pollard, Sergey Sivovolenko, AGSL and GIA Laboratories for valuable resources and input. Graphics produced with DiamCalc software by OctoNus. Note: This article pertains only to […]

www.pricescope.com

By chance did IDJ perform and share with you a detailed SARIN report? This is a 3D scan of the stone that will kick back each individual value as well as the averaged values (based on the scan).

I like the SARIN because GIA not only rounds but averages. For instance the other day another user was looking at a stone reported as a 35/40.8 combo but came back as a 34.7/41 combo on the SARIN. The images that came back also were not as good as yours. Still, it was a beautiful stone.

By chance are you located near either vendor? WF is in Sugar Land (near Houston), TX whereas IDJ is located in NYC. If so, my thoughts was to ship in one stone and take to the other vendor to do a live comparison viewing. If you aren't close to either, you could have them shipped loose to you for analysis and compare at your home and return the stone you don't want. I know WF is cool with this but you need to verify IDJ's policy.

Also, what are your thoughts on the variation in upgrade policies? To some this is very important and others it's not.

We haven't seen a video of the IDJ stone but I would want to verify the crystals are clear/white as opposed to black. And also that they are positioned/sized so they do not affect light performance in any manner. WF does vet their stones to ensure not only are they eye clean but the inclusions don't impede light performance.

Based on what we've seen so far, the WF stone is better cut and should perform better as a result. However, the IDJ appears to be very respectable. Until you see them side by side I'm not sure you will be convinced if one or the other is worth a $2k premium, unless the upgrade program is near and dear to you. Your eyes may or may not detect a difference, which is why I suggest a viewing if possible.

 

[TODiamonds]

$2.3k (over 20%) is a significant premium IMO for a stone that's not even ACA.

Having said that, I'm also not crazy about the inclusion on the table of the IDJ stone, even if they say it's eye clean. It's been sitting in inventory for a year and a half which should tell you a few things.

I think if you keep looking you can find a stone of similar size and quality at IDJ (or lower) prices without an inclusion like that. That's what I would do personally, unless you're in a rush.

 

[sledge]

The cert is dated 5/31/2018 but it does not mean it's been sitting in inventory that long.

It's quite possible the stone was sold and traded back in to IDJ or elsewhere. This happens all the time. However, it's worth asking about the history. Assuming it was a previous trade, and you decide to purchase I would ask for IDJ to send back to GIA for an updated certification to ensure no wear/tear occurred that would change the grade results. Assuming it comes back graded the same, I'd be willing to pay for the re-cert. If it came back worse, I'd have a condition that IDJ pays for the re-cert and you have the ability to walk without penalty.

 

[TODiamonds]

The cert is dated 5/31/2018 but it does not mean it's been sitting in inventory that long.

It's quite possible the stone was sold and traded back in to IDJ or elsewhere. This happens all the time.

For me, that's even worse than the stone sitting in inventory. At least with the former you know it's probably a price issue.

 

[sledge]

For me, that's even worse than the stone sitting in inventory. At least with the former you know it's probably a price issue.

Why's that worse?

People buy stones and upgrade them all the time. For a variety of reasons. Usually for a size bump. But sometimes because they want better color, clarity or performance.

While this stone may not perform as well as a true H&A stone, the images and proportions indicate it will be a good overall performer so I don't think it was upgraded for that reason.

As I mentioned earlier, you just want to make sure it's sent back to the lab and re-graded to ensure no additional damage, etc has occurred that would effect the grade/value of the stone from 2018.

 

[TODiamonds]

Why's that worse?

People buy stones and upgrade them all the time. For a variety of reasons. Usually for a size bump. But sometimes because they want better color, clarity or performance.

While this stone may not perform as well as a true H&A stone, the images and proportions indicate it will be a good overall performer so I don't think it was upgraded for that reason.

As I mentioned earlier, you just want to make sure it's sent back to the lab and re-graded to ensure no additional damage, etc has occurred that would effect the grade/value of the stone from 2018.

Personal preference. I wouldn't want a pre-used stone if I'm proposing. I'm superstitious and would feel like it's a bad omen. That's all it boils down to for me personally. More practically, most sellers will not want to run the risk of a regrading and most buyers won't want to pay for it. There's so many stones out there, most people can't be bothered to incur that kind of hassle.

Not that a grading certificate is proof anyway - I'm sure people unknowingly buy used diamonds all the time.

 

[Ringstrue]

The images and GIA proportions of the IDJ stone look good. The hearts image does reveal it's less symmetrical than the WF stone. Also, the ASET reveals a little more painting/digging on the IDJ stone.

Visible Effects of Painting & Digging on Superideal Diamonds

With grateful acknowledgment to John Pollard, Sergey Sivovolenko, AGSL and GIA Laboratories for valuable resources and input. Graphics produced with DiamCalc software by OctoNus. Note: This article pertains only to […]

www.pricescope.com

By chance did IDJ perform and share with you a detailed SARIN report? This is a 3D scan of the stone that will kick back each individual value as well as the averaged values (based on the scan).

I like the SARIN because GIA not only rounds but averages. For instance the other day another user was looking at a stone reported as a 35/40.8 combo but came back as a 34.7/41 combo on the SARIN. The images that came back also were not as good as yours. Still, it was a beautiful stone.

By chance are you located near either vendor? WF is in Sugar Land (near Houston), TX whereas IDJ is located in NYC. If so, my thoughts was to ship in one stone and take to the other vendor to do a live comparison viewing. If you aren't close to either, you could have them shipped loose to you for analysis and compare at your home and return the stone you don't want. I know WF is cool with this but you need to verify IDJ's policy.

Also, what are your thoughts on the variation in upgrade policies? To some this is very important and others it's not.

We haven't seen a video of the IDJ stone but I would want to verify the crystals are clear/white as opposed to black. And also that they are positioned/sized so they do not affect light performance in any manner. WF does vet their stones to ensure not only are they eye clean but the inclusions don't impede light performance.

Based on what we've seen so far, the WF stone is better cut and should perform better as a result. However, the IDJ appears to be very respectable. Until you see them side by side I'm not sure you will be convinced if one or the other is worth a $2k premium, unless the upgrade program is near and dear to you. Your eyes may or may not detect a difference, which is why I suggest a viewing if possible.

Sledge, thank you for the detailed response. I'm not close to either vendor so will try to choose the better stone online or may resort to having the finalists shipped. The WF upgrade policy is very appealing to me but I'd say value is a little more so.

The IDJ crystal was black which causes me pause. They have sent me another stone with the SARIN report I'd be curious to get your thoughts, see below. It is $8,600. still significantly less expensive than the WF stone. I'm pretty torn between the value of the IDJ stone and the WF larger size, service, and upgrade policy.



TODiamons, I appreciate your comments as well. We have similar philosophies on value. I am in a bit of a rush, hoping to have an ER by Christmas or NYE at the latest

 

[TODiamonds]

For $8,600 I would take this over the $7,900 one.

The proportions are less "ideal" but still fine. The color and clarity upgrade are more important imo, and the inclusion isn't as prominent.

 

[Ringstrue]

For $8,600 I would take this over the $7,900 one.

The proportions are less "ideal" but still fine. The color and clarity upgrade are more important imo, and the inclusion isn't as prominent.

Thanks. Would you pick the IDJ $8,600 one or the WF 1.4 ct for $10,300?

 

[TODiamonds]

Thanks. Would you pick the IDJ $8,600 one or the WF 1.4 ct for $10,300?

Let's see...

$10,300 H Premium Select (ie: GIA stone, not their ACA)
vs
$8,600 G + $1,700 in my pocket for xmas shopping

It's a no brainer to me, but many around here will tell you different

 

[sledge]

The WF stone may be a premium select but the H&A pattern is much more symmetrical. Also, the WF stone has less painting & digging around the girdle.

That said, there is a color bump and $1,700 savings with the IDJ stone.

Have you asked Yeukitel @ IDJ his thoughts on the stone, and if there was any negative issues he would be concerned about? After all, he has the stone in-stock as he did the scan and images for you.

I personally prefer the 35/40.6 combo of this IDJ G over the 35/40.8 combo of the IDJ H. Looking at the SARIN, all the pavilion angles was 40.6 or better, which is important as you can get leakage at 40.5 and lower. The steeper 35 crown is better complimented with that lower 40.6 angle. Although in the SARIN you can see two of the actual pavilions are 40.8 and one is a 40.9. Still the ASET is nice.

I am curious why @TODiamonds feels this stone is less ideal. These proportions actually fall within line of ACA specifications, although the lack of precision symmetry and lack of AGS000 certification would prevent it from qualifying as an ACA.

A CUT ABOVE® Diamonds Specifications and Qualifications

Uncover the diamond specifications and qualifications that make up the Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® diamonds. The most carefully crafted diamonds in the world.

www.whiteflash.com

 

[TODiamonds]

I am curious why @TODiamonds feels this stone is less ideal. These proportions actually fall within line of ACA specifications, although the lack of precision symmetry and lack of AGS000 certification would prevent it from qualifying as an ACA.

It was more of a facetious comment hence the quotations (I did say it was fine) given most people around here think of ideal as 34.5/40.8 which is in the ballpark of where the ACAs typically are. Often when newbies around here present anything with <34/35+ crown or 40.6/41.0 pav they are immediately shot down or discouraged due to the angles being too steep/shallow - frustrating to see.

I'm perfectly comfortable with the 35/40.6 combo (it's what I bought my fiance!) as well as other less conventional angles going the other way. I love it when people find these since they can look fantastic and often represent better value than the safer, more traditional "ideal" proportions.

 

[sledge]

It was more of a facetious comment hence the quotations (I did say it was fine) given most people around here think of ideal as 34.5/40.8 which is in the ballpark of where the ACAs typically are. Often when newbies around here present anything with <34/35+ crown or 40.6/41.0 pav they are immediately shot down or discouraged due to the angles being too steep/shallow - frustrating to see.

I'm perfectly comfortable with the 35/40.6 combo (it's what I bought my fiance!) as well as other less conventional angles going the other way. I love it when people find these since they can look fantastic and often represent better value than the safer, more traditional "ideal" proportions.

While I certainly think and to some extent even agree that a 34.5/40.8 combo is a very, very sweet spot I disagree that everyone believes it's the only "ideal" proportion.

The ranges frequently quoted like the 34-35 crown and 40.6-40.9 pavilion is for a reason. This criteria tends to work really well! Also, you have to consider the level of precision faceting, or sometimes the lack thereof. Not to mention with GIA certs, the proportion values are not only averaged but also rounded.

Combine these factors and sometimes you end up with stones that fall within the proportions recommended but still have leakage, etc because of specific actual values. That's part of the difficulty in shopping for a diamond by proportions only. They get you close, but things like the ASET, IS and/or H&A images tell us more about the precision

In this case, the OP has a good cert, great images and a SARIN to confirm actual individual values.

FWIW, the 35/40.6 combo is one of my favs too. Especially combined with a smaller 54-55 table and 75-76 LGF's as those stones are very firey! Unfortunately, if one of the actual values slip to 40.5 or less and you can start to have issues. I also like a 35.5/40.6 and I nearly bought my wife a 36/40.6 combo from WF (it was a premium select, but was a stunner).