Help in Selecting Diamond!

[anesde]

Hello!

I am in the process of sourcing a diamond. I'll be proposing in the next few months, but just wanted to get a handle on it. I've been through many of the threads here and just want to thank all for the great advice - especially the "cheat sheet". I'm an engineer so appreciate the use of numbers in sifting through something I have no idea about!

Quick background - my girlfriend and I are both fairly frugal and she's quite traditional in that she wants no part of picking the ring. She doesn't have any expectations, and doesn't wear much jewellery in general. That said, I do want to get her something and I want her to be able to wear it daily. I'm looking at a (fairly) modest diamond in a 3-stone setting, set against blue sapphires (to match her eyes).

Parameters:

Budget: $2-3K (all in, for diamond only). I'm willing to stretch this, but don't really see the need
Carat: 0.6-0.7
Color: E-H
Clarity: Eye-clean
Cut: Round brilliant, per "cheat sheet" parameters

This turns up the following (among others):

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3839999.htm?source=pricescope
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3892589.htm?source=pricescope
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4027971.htm?source=pricescope
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3988034.htm?source=pricescope
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4027961.htm?source=pricescope
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3934299.htm?source=pricescope

Key Questions:

1. How much will the colour (i.e. I vs E) matter against the blue sapphires (3-stone setting)?
2. The "in-house" vetted diamonds are all more expensive than the "virtual" diamonds (via pricescope search enginge). How much of a risk is it to look into the "virtual" diamonds?

I still need to visit some actual brick & mortar shops to understand what a 0.6-0.7 looks like. I may change my mind based on this, but I doubt it. She has quite petite hands and I know she would feel uncomfortable wearing a giant rock on a daily basis.

Any help (especially on key questions and vetting the proposed diamonds) is much appreciated!

 

[OoohShiny]

Welcome to the forum

Your intended not wanting to be involved in the process does make things trickier and increase the risk that she will get something she doesn't like... but you are on the right lines for the diamond!

The virtual stones are stones out in the wider market, that have to be called in. The in-house stones are those that have been vetted by WF (or whichever vendor you work with) in order to ensure they are of the highest quality. You therefore pay a little more for such stones, but you do get guaranteed light performance for that additional premium

0.6-0.7 is not a small diamond, so do not fret about it looking small, especially if your other half has smaller hands/fingers. Also, one of the added benefits of the 'SuperIdeal' stones is that they have incredible edge-to-edge brightness, which means they can 'punch above their weight' and look larger than they actually are!

 

[lovedogs]

IMHO you can't go wrong with a WF ACA. In a 3 stone with sapphires I don't think you need E color. G/H/I is 99% sure to be fine, and it means you arent paying extra for higher colors when you don't need it.

 

[rockysalamander]

Look at montana sapphires for sides. It might bump the price, but they are lovely and offer more shades to play with to get her eyes to match...unless they are true sapphire blue. If your gonna say inspo by your eyes better get the color right.

 

[bmfang]

Some may prefer a stark contrast of a D-E-F round brilliant against blue sapphires.

My wife has a 5 stone ring (2 MRB’s with 3 Ceylon sapphires) and the diamonds in that are G colour (per the gemologist in the independent jeweller we bought it from, for me, that means I discount it to a maximum of two colour grades so it’s anywhere from G-I in my books if the stones had been unmounted and sent to GIA or the Australian gemological association’s preferred partner lab, Gem Studies Laboratory. Those two round brilliants look perfectly fine against the three medium-dark intensity blue sapphires.

I think your soon to be fiancée will love what you are getting her.

 

[lovedogs]

Also, if you post what size side stones you want, the colored stone forum will help you out that's what we do, and diamonds is what rocky talk does. So that way you'll get the best of both colored stones and diamond

 

[sledge]

Do you know what size your girl's finger is? If so, you can go to the following website and get an idea how different sized stones will look on her finger.

https://www.diamdb.com/

I find this site especially helpful in the fact that diamonds are sold based on their carat weight instead of actual dimensions. Being an engineer, you understand volume. The formula for the approximate carat weight of a round diamond is: length * width * depth *0.061.

As you begin to analyze the angles and proportions more, you will see how those proportions have a direct effect on the length, width & depth of a diamond.

This site will allow you to enter either weights to get a general idea of size. However, if you get to a point where you are comparing two stones (say a 0.65ct and 0.72ct stone) it can be helpful to see a side by side comparison using the ACTUAL dimensions of each stone.

Also, looking through some of the stones you had asked about I think it's prudent you understand that WF has 3 main product lines of in-house (vetted) stones:

• A Cut Above (ACA) = AGS000 with distinctive hearts & arrow (H&A) patterning and also meets ACA standards/requirements (also known as a "super ideal diamond")
• Expert Selection (ES) = AGS000 with distinctive H&A patterning, but barely missed ACA requirements
• Premium Selection (PS) = GIA XXX with distinctive H&A patterning, but misses ACA requirements

ACA Info:
https://www.whiteflash.com/a-cut-above-diamonds/

ES Info:
https://www.whiteflash.com/expert-selection-diamonds/

PS Info:
https://www.whiteflash.com/premium-select-diamonds/

ACA Standards/Requirements:
https://www.whiteflash.com/a-cut-above-diamonds-specifications-and-qualifications/

H&A Patterning and Why It Matters:
https://www.whiteflash.com/about-di...ow-are-hearts-arrows-diamonds-graded-1578.htm

 

[sledge]

Here's you a new comparison link that you may find useful. It makes comparing multiple stones a little easier.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-di...39999,3892589,4027971,3988034,4027961,3934299

I'd personally eliminate the 0.68 G SI1 ACA myself. It has a big crystal in the middle of the table and has twinning whisps and surface graining not shown on the cert in addition to all the twinning whisps on the cert. Looking at still image and video, it looks pretty gnarly to me and I don't like it. Additionally if you look on the WF details page under "Eye Clean" you will see it says "Inquire" which means it's not eye clean. Too many good choices exist in your budget that will be eye clean so again, I'd eliminate.

If you look closely at the ES stones you'll notice the 0.635 G SI1 has larger rips in the clefts of the hearts. The 0.634 F VS2 has an extra green spot between the 2 and 3 o'clock position on the ASET image and some minor imperfections in the hearts image. These minor imperfections don't really bother me and the videos still look really good, although I do prefer the F VS2 myself. Just depends if you want an ACA or ES.

My personal favorite of the group is the 0.625 F VS2 ACA.

 

[anesde]

Thank you so much for the input! After taking another look, I agree with sledge and have eliminated the 0.68 G SI1 ACA due to "eye clean" issues.

That leaves me with 5 options:

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=3839999,4027971,3988034,4027961,3934299

I appreciate the education on ACA vs ES, but after reviewing the literature I can't really determine whether it will make a difference to us. I see the green spots and imperfections that sledge mentioned on the ES diamonds, and I can see how the 0.625 F VS2 ACA seems to be the most "perfect" of the 5.

However, I'm still struggling to grasp what those imperfections mean. Prior to about 3 days ago I've never even thought about diamonds and my girlfriend (self-professed) doesn't know anything about them other than "they look pretty". To be honest, when I view the 360 videos they all kind of look the same.

Ultimately I guess I'm asking if ES vs. ACA is more of a status symbol amongst diamond connoisseurs or if it results in tangible benefits for us more "ignorant" folks?

All else equal I would lean more towards size and price, which pushes me towards the 0.635 G Sl1 as it's the largest and most economical of the 5 (I do realise that at this carat size the difference between them is negligible). It would also increase the budget for the setting. It seems as if the price difference between the diamonds is more of a result of ACA and VS2/VS1 rating?

Thanks again! Also, thanks for the tips on sapphires. I haven't started down that rabbit hole yet but will be sure to check out the forums here!

 

[OoohShiny]

There is ongoing discussion about whether one can easily tell the difference between the 'SuperIdeal' diamonds and those that fall within the PS-recommended parameters - some people have said they can see a difference (and that it's noticeable) but others have said they can't see a difference.

FWIW I bought a SuperIdeal CBI for my good lady, and it continuously distracts me from across the room! The amount of coloured fire it throws off is ridiculous

If you have the cash or the line of credit, you could order an ACA or a CBI and then an ES, so that you can see for yourself whether you think it makes a difference!

 

[sledge]

Ultimately I guess I'm asking if ES vs. ACA is more of a status symbol amongst diamond connoisseurs or if it results in tangible benefits for us more "ignorant" folks?

All else equal I would lean more towards size and price, which pushes me towards the 0.635 G Sl1 as it's the largest and most economical of the 5 (I do realise that at this carat size the difference between them is negligible). It would also increase the budget for the setting. It seems as if the price difference between the diamonds is more of a result of ACA and VS2/VS1 rating?

On the ES vs ACA thing I think it's a case by case basis. Take for instance the 0.635 G SI1 stone you like. Watch that video compared to the 0.631 G VS1 stone and IMO the 0.631 stone has a little more fire. It's my opinion the symmetry is more perfectly aligned so reflections are hitting exactly perfect. Also, a smaller table (55.3) will produce more fire/sparkle than a larger table (55.8 ). This is being extremely nit picky as both the 55.3 and 55.8 tables are fantastic and highly desirable! But....you have only great choices and that 55.3 is the smallest of the group.

Looking back over the videos, that 0.631 G may have a little more fire than the 0.625 F I initially preferred. It's by a small margin though. And being that close I may opt for the higher color but that comes with caveat of having learned my fiancee is VERY color sensitive and would likely see the difference between an F and G. For most people I doubt you could see a difference to be honest.

In all cases, I would strongly encourage you to take advantage of the the excellent WF customer service and have them pull all 5 diamonds from their vault and have their gemologist perform an expert comparison. They can take additional pictures and videos and report back what their trained eyes see. FWIW, when I was first looking for my fiancee I stumbled upon an ES that they pulled against several ACA's and they actually preferred the ES stone and didn't understand why it didn't qualify as ACA. I think that's more the exception than the rule, but it can happen.

The nice thing about buying from the ACA, ES or PS lines is they come with the same trade-in & buy-back policies. While it may not seem important now, later it may matter. With WF, you spend $1 more and you get FULL credit of your original purchase! No other restrictions, etc. To me, that is important.

You did mention a preference because of SIZE. I'd like to remind you of my previous comments concerning depth and the equations to find carat weight. Looking at the horizontal measurements (which is what everyone actually sees) you can see these diamonds are basically the same size and will look no different to our eyes. FYI, it takes about 0.20mm before (most) people see a size difference, which is about 1/128th of an inch. On these stones, you are about 0.02mm difference which is about 1/10th of the noticeable size difference and will never be detectable with the human eyes.



If you are looking for another stone to eliminate I'd drop the 0.625 H stone. It has the largest table, plus it has no color, size or price advantage (of significance) compared to your other selections.

Lastly, yes, if all stones are otherwise equal you will pay more for each C. For instance:

• 0.65ct F VS1 is more expensive than 0.65ct F VS2
• 0.65ct F VS1 ACA is more expensive than 0.65ct F VS1 ES
• 0.65ct F VS1 is more expensive than 0.65ct G VS1

 

[anesde]

Hello all,

I got caught up with starting a new job so this went on the backburner. Most of the diamonds I originally listed are all sold now, but luckily I did the same criteria search and there are still plenty of options. See 5 such options below:

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4060804,4060806,4013672,4060791,3981499

They all fall within my budget, and criteria of size (0.6), cut (ACA), clarity (eye-clean). They also are within the "ideal" ranges for table (54-57), crown angle (34-35), depth (60-62), pavilion angle (40.6-41).

So my only questions are:

1. If Whiteflash say eye-clean for SL1 is "yes" is there any risk that it isn't? I've eliminated any "inquire" from my list. Please keep in mind my significant other is not a diamond connoisseur. I've read the definitions of how they define eye-clean and I tend to think it's fine?
   
   
2. Other than the "eye-clean" criteria above, is there any discernible difference between these diamonds? For instance, is a 55.4 table > 57.3? At this point what should I be using to eliminate the options?

Thanks all in advance for the help!!

 

[sledge]

I'm on my mobile so will reserve detailed comments for later when I can see images and video better.

Generally speaking, yes, you can trust WF if they say a stone is eye clean. I would narrow the list to 3 and have their gemologist pull to confirm eye clean and if any of the 3 stood out in color or sparkle.

With all these stones being ACA they will perform beautifully and be amongst the best available. Truly, you don't have any losers in the group but you may see slightly different personalities.

For instance a smaller table will produce a little more fire than a larger table. Steeper crowns do the same. The smaller the lower girdle facets, the fatter the arrows and bigger bolder flashes of light.

My initial thoughts are the 0.612 F SI1 is a good choice. Small table and the 34.5/40.8 angle combo is highly sought after.

A final thought. Remember this is a 0.60ct stone and on the computers we live in the land of magnification. To a reasonable degree less body color can be seen as it jas a smaller body and clarity issues may be harder to discern with the naked eye as you have a smaller surface to analyze. I mean this in a positive way as buying a larger stone would mean an opportunity for color or clarity to be more of an issue for you.

 

[lovedogs]

Agree w @sledge to have them pull your top 3 favorites and see what they think. You really can't go wrong with an ACA, so there are no bad choices generally, eye clean for WF means "cannot see inclusions with the naked eye at 10 inches away", and you can 100% trust them on that. Just make sure you are ok with that definition of eye clean, since some people are more strict. The nice thing about a sub 1ct stone is that inclusions will be super tiny and extremely hard to see with the naked eye. So my guess is that all of WFs "eye clean" options will work.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I would pick the G VS2. A nice well balanced stone.

 

[anesde]

Thanks again for all of the input. I ended up selected the 0.612 F SI1 after chatting with Whiteflash and having them confirm it is indeed eye-clean.

Also after input from friends/family I ended up going with a simple classic 6 prong solitaire ring.

Happy holidays!

 

[OoohShiny]

Thanks again for all of the input. I ended up selected the 0.612 F SI1 after chatting with Whiteflash and having them confirm it is indeed eye-clean.

Also after input from friends/family I ended up going with a simple classic 6 prong solitaire ring.

Happy holidays!

Congrats!

Please do post pictures when you've popped the question, if you are happy to

 

[sledge]

Awesome news! I am very happy for you. I can't wait to see final pictures.

For those following the threads, what was it that WF said that made the 0.612 F SI1 attractive over the other stones?