3 to view. Seeing them 8/10. Advice requested.

[Bluehammer]

Hello,

I have narrowed down my selection to 3 stones from Whiteflash. I have selected 3 that are similar color, clarity, and average diameter. I plan to set one of them into a 3 row custom pave setting from WF and get hitched.

I was hoping to get some pro vs con aspects you think I should look for. I would like to know what little details the numbers tell you that should stand out from a visual perspective. Should one have more fire, etc.?

I realize most PS people go for size, so this may be a bit of a stretch for some opinions (no clear size winner this time). I have viewed diamonds in a B&M, but not 3 very nice cuts like this together. I am sure one of them will "sing" to me (and get bought), but I value your opinions.

Stone #1 - ES selection, I like broadfire more than pinfire so I went with a stone that has more of a ACA New Line style IS. Per John Q. this one leans towards New Line style, but has some hint of Classic style. This one got a .6-.7 on HCA and EX in all 4 sectors.

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-2323728.htm

Stone #2 - ACA, seems to be New Line with a faint hint of Classic. Lots of inclusions, but tight Pav. angles. Slight reduction in color.

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-1583707.htm

Stone #3 - ACA, a new WF addition that portrays a strong Classic Line cut. The largest of the 3 from carat weight, but this is taken up in depth. This one has more depth and a smaller table.

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-2458445.htm


I appreciate your opinion as to which is the best, but that is also like asking which ice cream is the best. Only a trip to the store will work. But any input that can help me ask intelligent questions to the appraiser are appreciated. Thanks.

Gettin close to decision....what else to research now?

 

[Ellen]

Blue, I think anyone would be happy with any one of those. They are all great!

So, I think it boils down to which one "speaks" to you. Just get them in as many lighting situations as they will allow. Take your time, and let the stones do the talking.

Lucky you, getting to go to WF! Let us know what you decide.

 

[Bluehammer]

Thanks for the feedback. Unfortunately, I am not able to go to WF. These 3 are being shipped to me. If I was going to WF I think I would look at 20 stones!

 

[Ellen]

Date: 8/10/2006 8:26:43 AM
Author: Bluehammer
Thanks for the feedback. Unfortunately, I am not able to go to WF. These 3 are being shipped to me. If I was going to WF I think I would look at 20 stones!

Ahhhh, even better!!! You can definitely spend time with them, in lots of lighting situations. I''ll be anxious to hear what you think, so please post!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

They''ll probably look so much alike that you''ll have difficulty choosing one! The differences are so minimal, it would be sort of silly for us to choose one from the numbers. As Ellen said, choose by the look of them in different lighting.

 

[Lorelei]

As Sheena Easton once sang, I think it comes down to ''Your eyes only!!!!'' All of these are fantastic choices and I think your eyes are the deciding factor! Cherry numbers etc such as these diamonds have is a great thing, but lets see which one is the most glamorous, magical and beautiful to you! I really hope one stands out more than another for you!!!

You cannot go wrong here!

 

[Ellen]

And if all else fails and you still can''t pick, eeny meeny miney mo still works.

 

[Bluehammer]

Agreed! On stones 2 and 3 I was trying to keep specs as close as possible. It seems from the forum that some people can tell new line vs classic ACA. I will be curious to see if I can detect such differences. Perhaps I will have the appraiser mix them up and see if I can pick out the differences. Hmmmm....this could be cool or a waste of time if they all look the same. Oh well, peace of mind.

 

[mrssalvo]

I''ll be interested to see what your thoughts are once you''ve seen them. please come back and tell us what differences you can or cannot see.

 

[Ellen]

Good idea to mix them up! And peace of mind is everything.

 

[Bluehammer]

What I will be trying to also figure out is the price premium. Stone 1 is G/ES, the other 2 H/ACA. The ES stone has a 5% or so premium for similiar size/clarity. I realize the color upgrade is the main part of it.

I looked through a couple of WF stones and it seems in this range of size and color the H to G color increase in ES stones costs about $900-$1000 more. The ACA color diff. is approx. $1600. From a previous topic the ACA brand averaged about a 10% premium (I think). I would have thought the ACAs would have been more than a higher color ES.

If I see no color diff. perhaps the ACA is the better pick if all else is equal.

Use the couple of hundred of savings to pay gas prices!

 

[aljdewey]

I personally don't believe you'll see any appreciable difference between the G stones and the H stones.

Because of this, I'd likely stick with one of the two H stones as I feel they are a better value.

I suspect you'll have a hard time picking one because they'll all look beautiful. This happened when I went to visit them and had 6 stones to consider for a pendant!

Since the numbers and images on all of them are just impeccable, I'd forget about the paper and pick the one your eye seems to like the most.

In fact, don't let the appraiser tell you a single thing about them until you've looked at them in various lighting and have chosen a "favorite". Then you won't get into a "mind" bias.

 

[Bluehammer]

Per your request, an update from the appraiser:

Today I looked at all 3 stones.

#2 won out. So far.

It had a lot more broadfire flash. I took it out in full sun and was really surprised by the blinding laser beam of color that kept hitting my eyes. It reminded me of the "old" cut diamonds that seem to be like turning on and off a flashlight behind multi-colored glass. Very nice.

#1 - Had a combo of pinfire and broadfire. It was pretty close to stone #2, but not quite as much size to the flash.

#3 - Still a nice stone and up until taking them outside, it was the top pick. Once outside it had good pinfire. I did notice that when I cast a shadow on the stone with my hand (in full sun) this stone retained the most white light return (brilliance).

It all came down to the full sun action. All 3 stones looked good under the H&A viewer. I did see where the #1 stone had a slight cleft to the heart, but nothing major. I was put off for mind clean reasons at the inclusion on the table. Not noticeable by eye though. I did notice the New Line vs Classic ACA action. It is pretty much as described before. It comes down to pinflash or broadflash. Stone #1 had a bit of both, and it was nice to see the differences.

But the saga continues...I got a good look at these ideal cut stones and looked at the appraiser''s grade set. I noticed a bit of color difference between the H and F stones. It was not major, but it was enough for me to get that darn "maybe I am missing something" bug in my head.

So, I have requested WF to send me an F color ACA stone that I found that has similar measurements to stone #2. It is VS1 with only edge inclusions. It bumps me up a bit in cost, but these things last forever right?

This may just be an expensive mind clean issue, but I will not rest until I can compare the F stone and rock #2. Since the measurements are similar I do not think there would be much interest in the F stone stats. It will come down again to what I see or do not see and is it worth a premium price.

I appreciate everyone''s help. I have been pleased so far with the appraiser. I worked with Raymond from Arizona Gemological Lab in Scottsdale. He has a nice office with lots of gadgets and did not rush me a bit. I look forward to meeting him again next week for the final showdown. He is listed here on PS and I would recommend his work to others.

After getting the stone picked I will work with WF on a custom 3 row Pave.

Again, thanks for all input and intelligent banter.

 

[Ellen]

blue, great to hear your observations. And, you gotta do what you gotta do. Let us know which one you pick!

 

[Bluehammer]

If I pick the F stone then I may not be able to respond. The 35% price bump may cause me to cut my electic off!

Just a joke.

 

[Ellen]

LOL

Well, I would imagine, next to each other, you will see the difference. After getting my ring and taking it to the gemologist, we put my G next to an F and I could tell definitely.

But, take it away, no way. I cannot see anything what so ever.

Like I said though, do whatever you have to so that there are no "what ifs" or regrets!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I''ll be very curious to see if you think the F is worth that much more. It''ll worry me a little if you do, actually (since we just bought an H stone!).

 

[Bluehammer]

Date: 8/10/2006 11:31:38 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
I'll be very curious to see if you think the F is worth that much more. It'll worry me a little if you do, actually (since we just bought an H stone!).

I will let you know the result. I know from a financial stand point the F is a bigger $$$ dent. I am a saver, so spending an extra $3000 for a luxury item goes against my nature. But then again I spent money on an asset that goes down in value every year (car).

I am sure your H is awesome. If I pick the F and you question your decision, then you will make me question the F. I will have to go shopping again, post my experiences, and then you will compare your new stone to my new stone. When all is said and done we will each have Flawless, 10 carat, D color stones and have to eat Ramen noodles for the next 20 years. I like Ramen, but that is a long time.

I also like Flawless, D color, 10 carat stones, but those lotto numbers still have not come in. Enjoy your stone!

 

[belle]

i can see color in an ''h'' but don''t want to pay the premium for an ''f''....
so i have a ''g''!

for me it was the best compromise.
best of luck with your decision bluehammer!
i also own several newline style diamonds, so i can appreciate the look.

i will be looking forward to seeing what you decide on.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 8/10/2006 10:27:37 PM
Author: Bluehammer
Per your request, an update from the appraiser:

Today I looked at all 3 stones.

#2 won out. So far.

It had a lot more broadfire flash. I took it out in full sun and was really surprised by the blinding laser beam of color that kept hitting my eyes. It reminded me of the 'old' cut diamonds that seem to be like turning on and off a flashlight behind multi-colored glass. Very nice.

#1 - Had a combo of pinfire and broadfire. It was pretty close to stone #2, but not quite as much size to the flash.

#3 - Still a nice stone and up until taking them outside, it was the top pick. Once outside it had good pinfire. I did notice that when I cast a shadow on the stone with my hand (in full sun) this stone retained the most white light return (brilliance).

It all came down to the full sun action. All 3 stones looked good under the H&A viewer. I did see where the #1 stone had a slight cleft to the heart, but nothing major. I was put off for mind clean reasons at the inclusion on the table. Not noticeable by eye though. I did notice the New Line vs Classic ACA action. It is pretty much as described before. It comes down to pinflash or broadflash. Stone #1 had a bit of both, and it was nice to see the differences.

But the saga continues...I got a good look at these ideal cut stones and looked at the appraiser's grade set. I noticed a bit of color difference between the H and F stones. It was not major, but it was enough for me to get that darn 'maybe I am missing something' bug in my head.

So, I have requested WF to send me an F color ACA stone that I found that has similar measurements to stone #2. It is VS1 with only edge inclusions. It bumps me up a bit in cost, but these things last forever right?

This may just be an expensive mind clean issue, but I will not rest until I can compare the F stone and rock #2. Since the measurements are similar I do not think there would be much interest in the F stone stats. It will come down again to what I see or do not see and is it worth a premium price.

I appreciate everyone's help. I have been pleased so far with the appraiser. I worked with Raymond from Arizona Gemological Lab in Scottsdale. He has a nice office with lots of gadgets and did not rush me a bit. I look forward to meeting him again next week for the final showdown. He is listed here on PS and I would recommend his work to others.

After getting the stone picked I will work with WF on a custom 3 row Pave.

Again, thanks for all input and intelligent banter.

Hey Blue,

This is cool: We rarely get to hear a consumer's opinion about several of our diamonds compared with each other away from WF. Your post was great fun to read.

I'd like to applaud what I consider textbook descriptions of these 3 diamonds' performance qualities relative to their cutting styles. The unique appeal you described for each is, in my opinion, both technically accurate and aesthetically astute. Many people acquire the ability to make such distinctions over time - you have great eyes.

Your reasons for naming the painted ACA as the winner are logical as it relates to your personal taste. I can't wait for the next installment. This was a fun post to read. Thanks for the detailed analysis.

I'm not familiar with the Scottsdale lab, but it's nice to hear positive feedback on this appraiser from a consumer who is as aware of the latest innovations as you are. What array of services/equipment do they provide for analysis?

 

[Bluehammer]

Date: 8/11/2006 12:28:40 AM
Author: JohnQuixote

Date: 8/10/2006 10:27:37 PM

Author: Bluehammer

Hey Blue,


This is cool: We rarely get to hear a consumer''s opinion about several of our diamonds compared with each other away from WF. Your post was great fun to read.

I''d like to applaud what I consider textbook descriptions of these 3 diamonds'' performance qualities relative to their cutting styles. The unique appeal you described for each is, in my opinion, both technically accurate and aesthetically astute. Many people acquire the ability to make such distinctions over time - you have great eyes.

Your reasons for naming the painted ACA as the winner are logical as it relates to your personal taste. I can''t wait for the next installment. This was a fun post to read. Thanks for the detailed analysis.


I''m not familiar with the Scottsdale lab, but it''s nice to hear positive feedback on this appraiser from a consumer who is as aware of the latest innovations as you are. What array of services/equipment do they provide for analysis?

I appreciate the comments John. My "good eyes" may get my pocketbook in trouble if that F stone shows better than the H.

I am really looking forward to seeing the F stone since this was the original specs I had in mind.

As for the Lab, I did not specifically ask the appraiser what brand and model equipment he was using. I did not have him do a full blown analysis since all these stones are AGS and from WF (i.e. building consumer confidence). I may have him do a more in depth appraisal for insurance reasons depending on which policy I get.

My inspection was for a small fee to just view the stones under magnification, various lighting environments, and test weight. I also had a lengthy coversation (1hr.) about the stones pros and cons. He had the equipment to test Flor. eyc., but I did not feel the need just yet. There was an Ogi Megascope there too. I will try and get a little more info next time around.

 

[Bluehammer]

I wanted to add that the AGS book and black velvet bag of goodies (Loupe, H&A viewer, claw grabber etc.) was quite nice from a presentation stand point. The appraiser was delighted that the AGS books were black, because apparently he said most are blue.

Anyway nice ACA package.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Blue,

Thanks for the feedback on the diamond toolkit.

The old DQDs (pre light performance) were in blue trim and came in a matching blue holder. The DQDs that include the light performance measure are now in black trim and come with a black holder.

Your descriptions about the lab were good. No need to worry about brands/models, etc... my curiosity cat was just mewling.

 

[Bluehammer]

Looks like the update will have to wait. I got a call from the appraiser today to tell me the stone was shipped today instead of Friday. I understand from an insurance stand point not storing the stone on the weekend. However, I was a little put off by the fact I was told on Friday it would ship and the appraiser was the one who called me instead of WF. Otherwise I would have showed up to the appraiser for no reason.

A bit of time/money lost on my end due to having to rearrange my work for a second day, but I will update the looks of the F for those that asked.

 

[Bluehammer]

Went to the appraiser today and looked at the following:


http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-1583707.htm

and

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-2408719.htm


Both stones looked good. Here are my thoughts.

Technical: On paper the F stone has better stats. The F stone does not have as tight of crown and pav. angles. The F also is a little deeper and has a smaller table. This F stone has all the things I was looking for from a research standpoint. F Color, edge only inclusions, and VS clarity. The H stone has tighter numbers, but more inclusions all over. F wins.

Sight: I could see a difference in color between the H and F. Not from directly top down, but from the side and bottom. The bottom does not bother me because once mounted, who cares. In direct sun I could slightly detect the F color from top down. I think the difference in color was mainly because they were side by side. Toss up except in direct sunlight.

Emotion: I could pick out the H in direct sun. Not by color, but by the way it sparkled. It had bigger, more colorful broadfire flash than the F. The F stone had broadfire, but it appeared to be smaller and more white (sun reflection) than prismatic. I think the H had more personality. H wins.

Mind: I really wanted the F to be the one. It had the mind clean stats and appeared to be New Line ACA from the IS. However, when in full sun with the F and H together, I found it a bit difficult to pick the F. The big multi-color "bling" from the H was almost distracting when trying to compare. I am now in the state of "go with the visual" or go with the "mind clean".

I would rather not upgrade later. I think I would be happy with the F, but I would know the H "seemed" a bit better visually. But if I get the H I will know it is not the best of color/clarity that I was willing to pay for. The decision would have been easy if I could not tell a difference between the H and F in full sun. It would have been the F if both looked the same.

Well...there it is. The appraiser said he could not tell a big difference. So I am left with a decision.

Either that or start over.

 

[Bluehammer]

Date: 8/14/2006 8:25:34 PM
Author: Bluehammer
Looks like the update will have to wait. I got a call from the appraiser today to tell me the stone was shipped today instead of Friday. I understand from an insurance stand point not storing the stone on the weekend. However, I was a little put off by the fact I was told on Friday it would ship and the appraiser was the one who called me instead of WF. Otherwise I would have showed up to the appraiser for no reason.

A bit of time/money lost on my end due to having to rearrange my work for a second day, but I will update the looks of the F for those that asked.

Spoke to WF today and they apologized for the mix up. It appears there was a communication breakdown between shipping and sales. They are being nice enough to waive the shipping costs.

 

[Ellen]

Blue, sounds to me like the only thing holding you back on the H is the clarity. While I understand the clarity issue, both those stones have inclusions, but both should be eye clean. Could you see any inclusions in the H, with eyes only? If not, does it really matter where they are?

I personally would not let the H go if you can''t see anything. It''s the one that spoke to you.

 

[Bluehammer]

Date: 8/16/2006 7:11:58 AM
Author: Ellen
Blue, sounds to me like the only thing holding you back on the H is the clarity. While I understand the clarity issue, both those stones have inclusions, but both should be eye clean. Could you see any inclusions in the H, with eyes only? If not, does it really matter where they are?


I personally would not let the H go if you can''t see anything. It''s the one that spoke to you.

I could not see the inclusions on the H with the naked eye. Only under magification. I am considering buying both stones to spend more time looking at them under different lighting conditions then returning one. I thought I could make a decision this morning, but I am still unsure.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Blue, I''d have to love that F a WHOLE lot more to make the $3000 worth it. As I told you earlier, I had the same concerns about buying an H. Of course, I did not get to compare mine to an F, other than my old diamond which is a poorly cut F. At the time I was deciding, GOG had an F just a little smaller than the H for $4000 more, and I told Jonathan we''d be willing to stretch the budget if it was really that much better, and he said in his opinion it was not. He advised me to keep the H stone I had chosen (and it does happen to be a high H closer to G). Yes, an F VS1 or even VVS would be totally mind clean for me, but I''m not sure that visually you can see the price premium. If you were talking maybe $500-1000 more, I''d probably pay for mind clean.

 

[belle]

well, the good news is, you just can''t go wrong either way. both are beautiful. the price difference and your uncertainty make me think that the price difference isn''t worth it. i know it''s a tough decsision but at least know, that whatever you decide, you will be getting an awesome rock!

best of luck bluehammer