A Consumer''s Guide: How to get everything you need and nothing you do not . . .

[NewShiny]

All,
I hate to get into the middle of this debate, but I'm willing to take my chances

. DiamondBuyer, I have to say that I agree with you on a personal level. HOWEVER, I do feel diamonds are a personal choice, and my FVS2 may NOT be perfect for someone else. The important thing is to educate yourself, and to get what YOU feel comfortable with. For me, its FVS2, for others, its not. Some people go higher, some go lower - in order to comply with their priorities and budget. I started off wanting an EVVS, but "settled" for a slighly lower grade. I know my BF's money could have bought us a bigger carat weight, but I feel like what I'm getting (he has yet to give me the ring, so please welcome me to the club Nic!

) is big enough and perfect enough for me.

Okay, that's my two cents. I just though DiamondBuyer could use a little boost.

 

[mike04456]

Not everyone has the same color vision, and the same person may have differing color perceptions based on the time of day or, believe it or not, their recent diet. This is not conjecture; it's established fact.




So G-H may be suitable for one person, D-F for another. It's another reason why you really have to see your diamond in person before you make the final commitment.

 

[fire&ice]

Diamonds have two realities. What is on paper & what the face up color is. One must pay for the specs on paper; but, that doesn't translate to what the eye sees regardless of whether one is color sensitive.

BTW, the real question isn't how hued the stone is. A G/H/I stone with a good make is *near* colorless. Plenty white face up to set in white gold. The question is how much does one like the look of an icey white stone. Not everyone does. It's kinda cool; but, it's not my preference. Color is just that - color. The only reason that a D is more expensive is rarity.

 

[Nicrez]

Color snob here....


PQC you really showed color snobs everywhere that an F is the same as a well cut J!!!


*kick in the shin* /idealbb/images/smilies/14.gif What an excellent ring! /idealbb/images/smilies/love.gif I mention it every color post!!!!




Honestly, I was seriously considering a 1.5 H SI1 in the round Cento cut!!! Imagine me with a perfectly white H!!! It was cut with so many little white sparkles I would have dropped my (BF's) wallet down for it that day! Actually it was set VERY much like your J!!!




BUT, I got a shaped stone because they spoke to me (almost all of them spoke to me....

) and my eye is uncanny. Today, looking at princess stones in an eternity ring for my friend, I pointed out the Fs and Gs, and freaked out the jewler who asked if I was an appraiser...Hee hee. I responded..."mmmm...not yet!"

From what I have seen, most women like size, so I would go lower in color and down to a clean SI1 for a bigger round stone, but for my radiant, I would rather smaller and whiter and clearer (VS2 or higher) with a better cut than size. I will admit that my stone gives me a bit of maternal pride knowing it's an E and VVS...It's stupid. Just like I adore my silly Tiffany's stuff. Bragging rights. But some girl with a 2ct honker will come by, and suddenly I am a little deflated?




Diamond Buyer, know your lady. If she's all about color (which FEW people can really see in round stones, even Color Snob Leader, me) I say go for wow and bargain. But some people want better quality than size and the rarity of color and clarity is WORTH the smaller size, then I say go for it.




Just to piss off Tomatoe (sorry!/idealbb/images/smilies/sad.gif) : My Asian friend made this comment, "Asians are not known for going for the bigger is better attitude like Americans. Some do, but most consider the quality and prestige of quality to be bigger priorities. Just look at their luxury and fuel efficient cars, versus the US's Ford Explorers and trucks..." NOT ALL ASIANS WILL AGREE, but the gal had a point...

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 3/10/2004 4:30:32 PM LawGem wrote:


Not everyone has the same color vision, and the same person may have differing color perceptions based on the time of day or, believe it or not, their recent diet. This is not conjecture; it's established fact.


quote]


Funny, I remember my appraiser saying that he doesn't do diamond appraisals after 12:00 pm or so. What you say makes complete sense. I know when I turn on the TV in the morning it's blaring loud. It was just right the night before.

And honestly, I can appreciate the perfection & rarity of a D stone; but, after an initial "it's cool", it's not what I prefer to live with.

 

[dfreak]

so what about COLOR vs CUT???

no doubt a G/Si1 "Ideal Cut" will sparkle and perform 10 times better than any
F/VS1 with a "Good" Cut. An ideal cut will improve the color of the stone, so
that's why I'll choose better cut over color or clarity.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 3/10/2004 5:12:11 PM dfreak wrote:




no doubt a G/Si1 'Ideal Cut' will sparkle and perform 10 times better than any
F/VS1 with a 'Good' Cut. An ideal cut will improve the color of the stone, so
that's why I'll choose better cut over color or clarity.

----------------

No disagreement there, freak, but it was already put forth that cut was Ideal or exceptional in the opening remarks.

The contention is whether or not F is necessary for a white stone......all else being equal, including cut.

 

[dfreak]

gotcha, in that case this is a nonsense talk, everybody should know that even for some gemologists it's hard to tell from one grade to another, specially when high colors like F and G. it's so hard to tell even with the 10x lense that non untrained eye will notice the difference even if you look the stone for 100 years


caramba!

 

[tlnini]

----------------
On 3/10/2004 10:55:50 AM aljdewey wrote:


Sorry, but I wholeheartedly disagree with you.


I cannot contest what you say you see.....if you say you can see the diff between F & G, then I guess you can (although I'd find it improbable as nearly every expert agrees that people cannot see a difference of only one color grade).

---------------------------------------------------------------

Giving the same logic, there wouldn't be any difference between a J, and a K diamond. One can play this game all the way down to a Z.

Buy what you are comfortable with. I recently looked at two diamonds, 1.53 G/VS2 and 1.54 E/VS2. And I walked away with the E/VS2. And yes, with them unset and side by side, there IS a difference. Of course I paid $2000 more for the E, but it was worth it to me, and that's the important part

 

[makemepretty]

I had a sales person put a colorless diamond ring next to an H and they couldn't tell the difference(except the colorless diamond was half the size)and had my sister in law try to see the difference between an E and H and she couldn't either. I say, it's too mean to say 'my diamond is better than yours' and actually, very pointless too. If anyone feels the need to do a poll on 'tacky yellow stage', well then, that says a lot to me about that person. NO ONE is going to ask me what rating my diamond is and I would NEVER ask someone theirs. Wear what you prefer but don't preach to others what they should buy. It's just not nice

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 3/10/2004 8:14:27 PM tlnini wrote:





Giving the same logic, there wouldn't be any difference between a J, and a K diamond. One can play this game all the way down to a Z----------------

Not really. I said there isn't a *noticeable* difference between ONE color grade. Of course there is some difference, or else the grades would be interchangeable, and they aren't. But that doesn't mean it's a discernable difference. One of your hands is actually bigger than the other, but it's not a visually noticeable difference.

The difference begins to be noticeable at two color grades. Further, the statement pertains to comparing two stones to one another.

I begin to see tint in I stones *whether or not* they are next to other stones.

 

[tlnini]

I begin to see tint in I stones *whether or not* they are next to other stones.

[/quote]----------------[/quote]


Agreed. To me, G color by itself is difficult to see any tint. The only time I can see the difference is place it next to the E.

I once saw a Tiffany ring with I color in the store, even with all the jewelry lights in the store, the yellow tint is still noticeable.

 

[fire&ice]

The color scale is a sliding one. Minute differences in the colorless expanding to more in the near colorless & so on.

 

[diamond_buyer_2004]

Anyone else care to comment?

 

[Mara]

No.

 

[dfreak]

G color and F, if you want to invest in size, there are some Gs that even if you put them next to a F you wont see difference. For me G is white enough, I'd rather spend the money Im saving in color in size. If I had the money of course I'd get a huge ideal cut D color, but not everybody has the money, specially if it is the case of an e-ring. every single case is different. most people look for quality/price settings. so why sacrifice other settings just to get something that would look the same for most of the untrained eyes out there.

that's just me

 

[MFLetou]

I think its interesting there is much 'color' debate going on about the assertions made, but not much 'clarity' debate. I object perhaps even more strongly to the assertion that a VS2 is the ideal, lowest you should go. And I also object to the assertion that a BMW M3 is the best combination! It'll be staring at the tailights of a more luxurious Cadillac CTS-V for the same money!

But anyway, from what I've learned over the past few months, clarity seems to be mental more than anything else. In the course of diamond shopping, I've seen plenty of SI 1's and SI 2's that were completely eyeclean--you literally could not tell where the inclusion was because of WHERE it was located. I saw plenty of SI2's that were clearly in better shape than SI 1's and I even saw some SI 1's and SI 2's that looked exactly the same as VS2. The key is how the inclusion looks to the naked eye and where it is located. To me, if you can find an SI 1 or 2 that has slightly more inclusions that are not at all noticeable, it makes no sense to pay for VS2 to get exactly the same naked-eye performance. I suppose if you are going to live with your diamond under a microscope every day its a different story. And for some people just knowing that a larger inclusion is there someplace even though they can't see it is problematic, so they absolutely should do what makes them happy and get a VS2+. But for the vast majority of people out there, there are plenty of SI 1and SI2 stones that look exactly the same to the naked eye as a VS2--so why not save a LOT of money and invest in something else, a bigger stone, or if it matters to you, a better color?

 

[pqcollectibles]

Maximize the buck even further. Find a fabulous I1 with a well placed, defining inclusion that is hidden from view!!

 

[Rank Amateur]

----------------
On 3/12/2004 11:23:49 AM diamond_buyer_2004 wrote:

Anyone else care to comment?----------------

No one "needs" a diamond, so all further arguments are moot.

 

[hoorray]

----------------
On 3/13/2004 9:59:00 AM Rank Amateur wrote:

----------------
On 3/12/2004 11:23:49 AM diamond_buyer_2004 wrote:

Anyone else care to comment?----------------

No one 'needs' a diamond, so all further arguments are moot.
----------------

hmmmm...I thought diamonds were part of Maslovs hierarchy, just after food and before shelter. At least that's what I've worked to hard to convince hubby is true.

 

[ClownFishFunk]

----------------
On 3/13/2004 10:14:12 AM lop wrote:

----------------
On 3/13/2004 9:59:00 AM Rank Amateur wrote:

----------------
On 3/12/2004 11:23:49 AM diamond_buyer_2004 wrote:

Anyone else care to comment?----------------

No one 'needs' a diamond, so all further arguments are moot.
----------------

hmmmm...I thought diamonds were part of Maslovs hierarchy, just after food and before shelter. At least that's what I've worked to hard to convince hubby is true.

----------------

LOL lop - so true isn't it

Certainly one of the necessary steps to self-actualization.