0.9 Carat Round Brilliant Choices Help

[bmfang]

Hi guys,

I have now got an update from a vendor in my country on a 1.06 carat G vs1 Triple excellent. Can you guys give me a thought on this? It is priced at $7k. I have attached the photo but he does not have idealscope image. Should I risk it? https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=2237957624

The only consideration is that if I buy from US, I need to bear the tax getting it landed which makes this diamond comparably cheaper.
Thanks guys and gals

Hi Kevin,

It sneaks in under 2 in HCA but it is only excellent in light return. Smack bang in the middle of GIA XXX territory but right on the edge of AGS 000.

Was the price given to you in AUD or USD? Because if in AUD, that is very cheap in my books for >1ct GIA graded G VS1 here in Australia. Table and depth are ok for me. Would prefer the PA to be below 41 degrees but you sometimes can't have everything in life if you are shopping on a budget. It looks ok to me based off that photo as well.

For me, I'd still prefer something more within ideal cut parameters, but that's me. Curious to see the responses of other PS folks on this diamond.

 

[mrs-b]

Kevin -

I like it. I dont think there's risk involved on this stone. Yes, you could go for .2 of 1% difference in the pavillion angle to get perfect stats, but there's no question that this will be a beautiful stone - white, clean, very sparkly, and a great size!

If the price is good for you, I'd say 'go ahead - immediately.'

 

[KevinNanda]

Hi Kevin,

It sneaks in under 2 in HCA but it is only excellent in light return. Smack bang in the middle of GIA XXX territory but right on the edge of AGS 000.

Was the price given to you in AUD or USD? Because if in AUD, that is very cheap in my books for >1ct GIA graded G VS1 here in Australia. Table and depth are ok for me. Would prefer the PA to be below 41 degrees but you sometimes can't have everything in life if you are shopping on a budget. It looks ok to me based off that photo as well.

For me, I'd still prefer something more within ideal cut parameters, but that's me. Curious to see the responses of other PS folks on this diamond.

Kevin -

I like it. I dont think there's risk involved on this stone. Yes, you could go for .2 of 1% difference in the pavillion angle to get perfect stats, but there's no question that this will be a beautiful stone - white, clean, very sparkly, and a great size!

If the price is good for you, I'd say 'go ahead - immediately.'

Hi bmfang and mrs-b, thank you so much for giving me a constructive thought on it. The price however is in usd $7k. Also the picture looks so white-ish, does it mean it is foggy or just camera?
Thanks guys. Very undecided if i should get this one. Cheers.

 

[mrs-b]

Kevin -

No idea what you mean about foggy. Looks great to me. Perhaps you're just not used to looking at diamonds in photographs? It does look white - but a G color is going to be white - it's a very high quality stone.

Not sure why you're undecided - it seems to me to tick all your boxes.

 

[gm89uk]

Hi bmfang and mrs-b, thank you so much for giving me a constructive thought on it. The price however is in usd $7k. Also the picture looks so white-ish, does it mean it is foggy or just camera?
Thanks guys. Very undecided if i should get this one. Cheers.

I think you are referring to the white arrows and the lack of contrast that you are used to seeing with 8 distinct black arrows. This is due to different photography technique rather than diamond quality

 

[KevinNanda]

I think you are referring to the white arrows and the lack of contrast that you are used to seeing with 8 distinct black arrows. This is due to different photography technique rather than diamond quality

Hi gm thanks for the response.
I have just got an update as it has arrived.
What do you think?

 

[KevinNanda]

Hi guys,

I have got an update as it has arrived.

Picture taken by the jeweller at his home. Just wondering if it is supposed to be this yellow or just lighting.

Thanks guys

 

[bmfang]

That could be the lighting. The arrows image looks not too shabby.

 

[KevinNanda]

That could be the lighting. The arrows image looks not too shabby.

Thanks bmfang, just a reminder that it is a 1.08 carat G VS1.

Cant wait to put it on a ring for her

 

[mrs-b]

Hi Kevin -

Your stone looks lovely. Just a question - is this the 1.06 G VS1 you linked to above? You mentioned in your last comment that this is a 1.08ct stone, so I wondered if that was a typo, or if you went with a different diamond in the end?

ETA I'm withholding unbridled enthusiasm till you tell me if this is the lovely stone whose certificate you showed us earlier. (I really liked the stats on that 1.06 G VS1 and am hoping this latest stone is that one!)

2nd ETA - I think it's clear from the pattern of reflection that the photo was taken either in a yellow room, or by someone wearing a yellow shirt. Your stone will NOT be yellow! (like - seriously Kevin - not at ALL)

 

[KevinNanda]

Hi Kevin -

Your stone looks lovely. Just a question - is this the 1.06 G VS1 you linked to above? You mentioned in your last comment that this is a 1.08ct stone, so I wondered if that was a typo, or if you went with a different diamond in the end?

ETA I'm withholding unbridled enthusiasm till you tell me if this is the lovely stone whose certificate you showed us earlier. (I really liked the stats on that 1.06 G VS1 and am hoping this latest stone is that one!)

2nd ETA - I think it's clear from the pattern of reflection that the photo was taken either in a yellow room, or by someone wearing a yellow shirt. Your stone will NOT be yellow! (like - seriously Kevin - not at ALL)

Hi again mrs-b, yes you are right it is the 1.06 carat G VS1 haha. Silly me. Yes hopefully it is a good one. Also I am looking for a setting now. It would be great if I can get advices in it as well. Thanks a lot again

 

[bmfang]

Thanks bmfang, just a reminder that it is a 1.08 carat G VS1.

Cant wait to put it on a ring for her

Actually looks like the photo was taken under spotlighting. Reminds me of the videos that Rhino uploads onto YouTube where he shows how stones look under spotlighting rather than diffuse fluorescent lighting. Or as mrs-b says, someone likes yellow!

Would be good if your jeweller could somehow get access to an IdealScope and take a photo of it.

As for settings, a platinum one would look very nice with this stone. Now just depends on whether you want pave on the shanks or a halo or just a plain solitaire (4 or 6 prong setting). Really depends on what your significant other likes.

 

[mrs-b]

I think your stone looks wonderful, Kevin. If you wanted anything else, the thing you'd want is an ASET image - not an Idealscope. The images you already have tell you about as much as an Idealscope would. But personally, I think you've passed the need for that. You have a great diamond - FAR nicer than average. Relax now and enjoy it.

Re settings - what sort of thing does your girlfriend like? Simple or more detailed? White metal or yellow metal? Let's start there....

Also - do you know what size your girlfriend's finger is? That will make a big impact on what sort of ring would look good on her hand.

 

[KevinNanda]

Hi bmfang and mrsb,

Thanks again for the kind and thoughtful advice.
she is a size 5.5. Looking for just standard solitare. Should i go for 4 or 6 prong? If you guys know the pro and cons that would be great.

Thanks,
Kevin

 

[bmfang]

There is always the standard Tiffany style 6-prong solitaire but to be honest, I find it boring (and so does my wife). You could mix it up and have the solitaire with cathedral shanks rather than the mount being directly on the band itself like in the typical Tiffany style solitaire.

6-prong may work out better given the stone is larger than a carat so it is more "secure". But 4 prong may allow the stone to be shown a bit more (and then you consider whether you want the prongs/claws to be set N-S-E-W or like the four corners of a square).

Some ideas for you can be found at this blog post that came up when I was googling for setting styles:
https://taylorandhart.com/blog/engagement-ring-settings

Has you significant other expressed any hints to you about how she wants a solitaire to look like and in what type of metal?

 

[KevinNanda]

There is always the standard Tiffany style 6-prong solitaire but to be honest, I find it boring (and so does my wife). You could mix it up and have the solitaire with cathedral shanks rather than the mount being directly on the band itself like in the typical Tiffany style solitaire.

6-prong may work out better given the stone is larger than a carat so it is more "secure". But 4 prong may allow the stone to be shown a bit more (and then you consider whether you want the prongs/claws to be set N-S-E-W or like the four corners of a square).

Some ideas for you can be found at this blog post that came up when I was googling for setting styles:
https://taylorandhart.com/blog/engagement-ring-settings

Has you significant other expressed any hints to you about how she wants a solitaire to look like and in what type of metal?

Hi bmfang,

thank you for the suggestion. yes i did go all through together with her. She likes the 6 prong a lot more when being viewed from distance or from the top since it makes it look bigger and round.

I have looked at plenty of images for 6 prong claw solitaire setting and found 3 which really stand out.
those are;

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/tapered-classic-style-half-round-5540
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/classic-style-half-round-5478
https://www.brilliantearth.com/Six-...Qmg.0&utm_referrer=https://www.google.com.au/

What is tapered again btw? and how do i choose the right measurement like height and width?
Thanks.

 

[bmfang]

tapered basically means that the shanks either taper thinner towards the setting or towards the actual bottom of the ring. I.e. If the latter, the bottom of the ring it may be a 2-2.5mm width band but when you get up close to where the diamond is set, the width of the band tapers down to a 1.5mm width.

Realistically, best way is if your gf tries on a few types in b&m stores before you take the plunge. You may want to read this article that BGD has on their 4 main solitaire type engagement ring settings:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/news/4-types-of-solitaire-diamond-engagement-rings/

If you are looking for a knife edge solitaire setting, this article may also help with your understanding:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/news/knife-edge-diamond-ring/

 

[KevinNanda]

tapered basically means that the shanks either taper thinner towards the setting or towards the actual bottom of the ring. I.e. If the latter, the bottom of the ring it may be a 2-2.5mm width band but when you get up close to where the diamond is set, the width of the band tapers down to a 1.5mm width.

Realistically, best way is if your gf tries on a few types in b&m stores before you take the plunge. You may want to read this article that BGD has on their 4 main solitaire type engagement ring settings:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/news/4-types-of-solitaire-diamond-engagement-rings/

If you are looking for a knife edge solitaire setting, this article may also help with your understanding:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/news/knife-edge-diamond-ring/

Hi bmfang,

Thank you again for replying.
I have got sort of the idea what kind of ring it will be. It would just be a classic 6 prong with a few bead set roughly about 6 diamonds in each side with 0.02 carat diamond. The other thing that I need to get around is having it to stack with a wedding ring. My jeweller suggest to have the the prong lifted a bit higher. Is this a good recommendation?

Cheers,
Kevin

 

[bmfang]

That might work. Or the wedding band has a curved section where it would stack against the e-ring (I have seen that advertised a lot by jewellers in the past).

I'm not a settings expert by any means. My wife doesn't even wear her wedding band anymore as she prefers to just wear her e-ring/anniversary ring which is just a solitaire so I never have to worry about having to stack her wedding band against it

 

[mrs-b]

Kevin -

Don't do a curved band; few women like them as they look odd if worn alone.

The BGD tapered band is beautiful - and I've had 3 of them over the years, but David Klass will make you a cheaper one which I like just as much, frankly, and is more delicate for a smaller stone. The width is a standard setting on the BGD tapered classic, and the stones I had set in that setting over the years were 1.72ct, 2.15ct and 5.2ct - so - quite a bit bigger than your stone, which will throw off the proportions. I would go with David Klass Jewelers, who have a gorgeous setting on their web site with a small stone in it - and it looks CLASSIC (with a capital C!)

I wouldn't do the bead set diamonds. 2pts doesn't sound like much - but when you add the setting, it will make your band wider. It would still look nice, I'm sure, and many women have something similar, but it's a much more specific 'look' and I think you would be wise to go with a straight solitaire. They're super elegant, and titivating is rarely a good thing; I don't think you want anything to draw the eye away from the center stone. You're better off to go with a plain solitaire and a diamond wedding band - a classic, eye-catching look. By the way, tapering the band always makes the center stone look larger. I would ALWAYS recommend tapering the band on a ring with a 1ct or less center stone (!.06 is roughly 1ct) to get most possible out of the size. I did tapered bands on all of mine and it worked beautifully every time.

Definitely do 6 prongs - it will make the ring more substantial and balanced looking (I've had both 4 and 6 prong settings and love them both, but I think I have a sense of what you're looking for here, and 6 prongs will work better). I would steer away from the cathedral arms; just not a look I'm fond of, and somewhat dated at this point in time. A little bit 'cluttered' too, on a smaller stone. Instead of doing cathedral arms, do a band which is tapered when looked at from above, but which deepens when looked at from the side. I'll post a photo and look at the band where it meets the head of the ring; you'll see that the band gets deeper. This is very visually pleasing, and is a sort of 'mock cathedral' setting, without the busyness. Cleaner and more classic in overall appearance. Deepening the band near the head also gives the band extra strength where it tapers, as it compensates for that.

1.06 on a 5.5 finger is a lovely ratio. Add a narrow diamond wedder, and you have a great set. I'll attach a photo of one of my BGD taper classic rings, and one of the DKJ setting.
And can you PLEASE clarify for me exactly where you are? Both BGD and DKJ will make a setting for your stone and ship it to you so your stone can be set in it.

So - included photos are: 1) my 1.72ct solitaire in platinum in the BGD tapered classic 2) DKJ tapered Tiffany style solitaire, also in platinum 3) a sideways shot of my current solitaire, so you can see what I mean re the band deepening where it meets the head. The band, when seen from above, also tapers. The setting is in yellow gold with a platinum head. The arms on this last ring are very elegant and pretty.

So - to summarize, I'd do the DKJ setting in platinum, but ask for the arms to be tapered in an even taper so there's no bump where the band goes from full width, to tapered. If you look closely at the DKJ setting you'll see there's a small bump on the band and the taper is not completely smooth and even. I'd ask them not to do this. I'd also ask for the band to deepen where it meets the head, and I'd ask for an upwards curve there also, as it's a soft, elegant look.

 

[bmfang]

ooh, very nice designs on the David Klass website! Only issue is whether his jeweller will be willing to ship the stone over to LA (DK) or Houston (BGD) for setting from Australia instead of Kevin paying for that himself (and assuming the risk of the stone being stolen or damaged in transit).

 

[mrs-b]

ooh, very nice designs on the David Klass website! Only issue is whether his jeweller will be willing to ship the stone over to LA (DK) or Houston (BGD) for setting from Australia instead of Kevin paying for that himself (and assuming the risk of the stone being stolen or damaged in transit).

bmfang -

I mentioned above that DKJ would certainly be willing to make the ring to fit Kevin's stone's dimensions, then ship the setting to him for his jeweler to set locally. I believe, but am not positive, that BGD would be willing to do the same. But I know that DKJ definitely will.

 

[KevinNanda]

Kevin -

Don't do a curved band; few women like them as they look odd if worn alone.

The BGD tapered band is beautiful - and I've had 3 of them over the years, but David Klass will make you a cheaper one which I like just as much, frankly, and is more delicate for a smaller stone. The width is a standard setting on the BGD tapered classic, and the stones I had set in that setting over the years were 1.72ct, 2.15ct and 5.2ct - so - quite a bit bigger than your stone, which will throw off the proportions. I would go with David Klass Jewelers, who have a gorgeous setting on their web site with a small stone in it - and it looks CLASSIC (with a capital C!)

I wouldn't do the bead set diamonds. 2pts doesn't sound like much - but when you add the setting, it will make your band wider. It would still look nice, I'm sure, and many women have something similar, but it's a much more specific 'look' and I think you would be wise to go with a straight solitaire. They're super elegant, and titivating is rarely a good thing; I don't think you want anything to draw the eye away from the center stone. You're better off to go with a plain solitaire and a diamond wedding band - a classic, eye-catching look. By the way, tapering the band always makes the center stone look larger. I would ALWAYS recommend tapering the band on a ring with a 1ct or less center stone (!.06 is roughly 1ct) to get most possible out of the size. I did tapered bands on all of mine and it worked beautifully every time.

Definitely do 6 prongs - it will make the ring more substantial and balanced looking (I've had both 4 and 6 prong settings and love them both, but I think I have a sense of what you're looking for here, and 6 prongs will work better). I would steer away from the cathedral arms; just not a look I'm fond of, and somewhat dated at this point in time. A little bit 'cluttered' too, on a smaller stone. Instead of doing cathedral arms, do a band which is tapered when looked at from above, but which deepens when looked at from the side. I'll post a photo and look at the band where it meets the head of the ring; you'll see that the band gets deeper. This is very visually pleasing, and is a sort of 'mock cathedral' setting, without the busyness. Cleaner and more classic in overall appearance. Deepening the band near the head also gives the band extra strength where it tapers, as it compensates for that.

1.06 on a 5.5 finger is a lovely ratio. Add a narrow diamond wedder, and you have a great set. I'll attach a photo of one of my BGD taper classic rings, and one of the DKJ setting.
And can you PLEASE clarify for me exactly where you are? Both BGD and DKJ will make a setting for your stone and ship it to you so your stone can be set in it.

So - included photos are: 1) my 1.72ct solitaire in platinum in the BGD tapered classic 2) DKJ tapered Tiffany style solitaire, also in platinum 3) a sideways shot of my current solitaire, so you can see what I mean re the band deepening where it meets the head. The band, when seen from above, also tapers. The setting is in yellow gold with a platinum head. The arms on this last ring are very elegant and pretty.

So - to summarize, I'd do the DKJ setting in platinum, but ask for the arms to be tapered in an even taper so there's no bump where the band goes from full width, to tapered. If you look closely at the DKJ setting you'll see there's a small bump on the band and the taper is not completely smooth and even. I'd ask them not to do this. I'd also ask for the band to deepen where it meets the head, and I'd ask for an upwards curve there also, as it's a soft, elegant look.

ooh, very nice designs on the David Klass website! Only issue is whether his jeweller will be willing to ship the stone over to LA (DK) or Houston (BGD) for setting from Australia instead of Kevin paying for that himself (and assuming the risk of the stone being stolen or damaged in transit).

bmfang -

I mentioned above that DKJ would certainly be willing to make the ring to fit Kevin's stone's dimensions, then ship the setting to him for his jeweler to set locally. I believe, but am not positive, that BGD would be willing to do the same. But I know that DKJ definitely will.

Hi bmfang and mrs-b,

Thank you for the kind and thoughtful advices. I am forever grateful for it.

I have shopped around and saw tiffany 6 prong which is just breathtaking. I ended up with a classic 6 prong knife edge.

I am just a classic guy after all haha.

Will certainly give an update once I have the ring.

Thanks again,
Kevin

 

[bmfang]

Sweet!

 

[KevinNanda]

Hi Guys,

It is finally done and I want to give final credits to people who are unknown but treat and teach me patiently as if I am your lover, son, relative, etc.

Sweet!

.

.

First of all to Bmfang, mrs-b and Niel who have gave me recommendations and allowed me to end up with 1.06 carat instead of 0.9 wohoooo.

.

.

Then to Marymm and sox fan that have a say in my choice of diamond.





Thank you guys. It would have not happened without you guys!! Very Satisfied and most importantly Happy!!

Fly away with my fiancé now

 

[ratatat]

Beautiful, congrats!

 

[Mondayschild]

Fabulous!!