shape
carat
color
clarity

Advice needed with my choice and road to buying

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by Siyah, Dec 28, 2018.

  1. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Aaargh, unfortunately not working for me! I don't know why, but it gives an error after writing down my email and submitting. Thanks anyway! :(

    BTW, I got a second opinion about the first stone that was shared. Here is the feedback from one of the experts of BN:
    The vault that owns this diamond has confirmed that this stone is very light milky. Typically milkiness can affect the light performance in a stone, and without seeing the stone ourselves, we cannot confirm that this feature won't affect the light. More often than not, milkiness will dull the sparkle. My suggestion to you would be to stick with LD11584975. This diamond is not milky, and is overall a better quality stone.

    @SimoneDi: Lastly: how do you know I have to pay additional taxes on JA? I can't read that anywhere and all prices are already incl. VAT?
     
  2. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 2, 2019
    I like the 0.6 posted from BN. I'd be hesitant to order a SI2 with a cloud as a grade-stetting inclusion on the basis of the information available from BN.

    To @Siyah question about "sparkle" that comes down to the cut -- the actual faceting of the stone. Color makes no difference, clarity can impact the benefits of a good cut with the "wrong" kind of inclusion. That is why PS members are focusing on the actual cut proportions of the stone first.

    Skip any stone that is milky!

    So, that puts the 0.6 @SimoneDi found as your top choice. https://www.bluenile.com/nl/build-y...DiamondDetails&action=newTab&catalogView=true
     
  3. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
  4. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Hmm, still hesitant even after they say both are eye-clean? I can't see anything actually regarding the S12 stone in terms of inclusions...

    I am tempted to buy the latest one (expensive, yes, but it seems crisper indeed) even though it's SI2.

    https://www.bluenile.com/nl/build-y...DiamondDetails&action=newTab&catalogView=true

    Anyone else have an opinion about it?
     
    


    


  5. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 2, 2019
    Make sure to look at the size in mm at this point, not the weight. The 0.6 that @SimoneDi posted and the 0.58 have the same spread in mm. You see the size in mm -- not the weight.

    As I noted above, I would not personally buy a SI2 with a grade-setting cloud based on the limited information provided by BN. Clouds an SI1 and SI2 are usually a problem. The angles of the 0.6 are nice with fat arrows, but that cloud would exclude it for me.

    I would look at the 0.58 I posted that has the same spread in mm as the 0.6. They are both 5.4 mm.
    https://www.bluenile.com/nl/diamond...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab
     
    kipari, lovedogs and Siyah like this.
  6. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Thanks for the important information. When would you buy a SI2 with a cloud? Even a "no" from you when they say it's eye-clean? Do you think it would have a worse light performance than the other (first) 0.6 that is a bit more milky?
     
  7. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,151
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 2, 2019
    Assuming the F SI2 is eye clean I'd be more inclined to go that way myself. The 34.5 crown is a little steeper and more complimentary to the shallow 40.6 pavilion.

    Here's my concern -- it's an SI2 and it's virtual inventory. While crystals are the grade setting inclusion, there are still clouds in it. It may or may not be a problem. But I'd make sure to ask questions to BN about the crystals and clouds to ensure it's a non-issue.

    0.60ct F SI2 - 56T, 61.8D, 34.5/40.6:

    Capture2.PNG

    Whereas the other 0.60ct has a 58 table, shallow 34 crown and shallow 40.6 pavilion that isn't as complimentary. Besides, with the new information of the stone being milky it's a hard NO anyway. But this shows how the different angles can have an affect. Also, in a stone with these properties it'd favor a little more white light return vs rainbow light.

    0.60ct G SI1 - 58T, 60.6D, 34/40.6:

    Capture.PNG
     
    Siyah likes this.
  8. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Thank you for the valuable feedback. When can we say it's a non-issue? When it's eye-clean or is that too simple? I want to understand when I should pull the trigger and what info I exactly need from Blue Nile to confirm.

    I mean, they can say that the crystal and clouds are not a problem, but would that be enough? I am not sure.

    @sledge: is that the HCA calculator or something else? What does the second BN (0.6) score there? I can't try it myself, as I apparently had 3 chances... :confused2:
     
  9. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 2, 2019
    A cloud is a lot of little crystals. Think of it like a snow-globe. Those inclusions will scatter light making the stone less bright. A dense cloud on an SI2 is less problematic in that you can see it an decide if the location and placement are livable. A cloud you cannot see, as is the case with this 0.6 F, means it is less dense and spread out. That would suggest more of an issue as it is spread out and will impact light return more. The only way I would buy a SI2 cloud (and I happen to own one) is if I can personally evaluate with my eyes or a vendor whom I trust does the same. BN does not own this diamond and they are limited to the notes in the file on the stone. That would not give me enough assurance, especially as an international buyer. Its a shame, as I like the angles and can see why @SimoneDi posted it!

    Stones under consideration to bring us all up to speed. I'm eliminating the milky one.

    LD11584975 0.60 F SI2, 5.39 mm, inclusions crystal and cloud
    https://www.bluenile.com/nl/build-y...DiamondDetails&action=newTab&catalogView=true

    LD 11069253 0.55 G SI2, 5.40 mm, inclusions crystal, feather
    https://www.bluenile.com/nl/diamond...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

    I would consider dropping this size just a bit to consider other options.

    https://www.bluenile.com/nl/diamond...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab {clouds at this clarity level are a non-issue; 5.34 mm}

    https://www.bluenile.com/nl/diamond...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab { lovely angles and cut is very fine; 5.29 mm}
     
    Siyah and lovedogs like this.
  10. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,151
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 2, 2019
    First off, remove the hold from the 0.60ct G SI that you know has a milky appearance. That is not a stone you or anyone else wants to buy, period.

    I noticed the F SI2 has a hold placed on it already. Is that you? If not, then you need to call and find out what is going on with the stone as it may not be available to purchase. If that's you, good. Keep the hold active while you decide.

    Also, the 0.58ct G SI1 that @rockysalamander posted is a nice find. You need to also place a hold on this stone while you make a final decision. The stone proportions are kind of a blend between the F SI2 and milky G SI1. When I say proportions I am ignoring clarity and looking at how the stone might behave in regards to sparkle (aka light performance).

    Below is how the projected AGS proportions charts for this stone.

    Capture3.PNG

    FYI, the above chart is not part of the HCA calculator. I apologize if you were mislead to believe that. This is a spreadsheet that I custom built. I based it off the AGS proportions charts that AGS uses to determine 'ideal cut' which is what we are really seeking. The dark black box identifies exactly where the proportions fall on the chart, whereas the dark blue box identifies a more releastic range. Without getting too detailed, GIA rounds & averages values that are listed on the certificate so the blue box is a way of accounting for those variances.

    For fun, I ran HCA's on all the stones you have narrowed down to and they fall as noted:

    0.60ct G SI1 (milky) = 0.7
    0.60 F SI2 = 0.8
    0.58 G SI1 = 0.8
     
    Siyah and rockysalamander like this.
    


    


  11. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Thanks for the detailed response. So, this makes thing much more clear (wish I could say that about the diamond itself as well!).

    The mm you are mentioning; that is the actual size we are seeing, right? The carat would only be the weight or am I wrong? So am I correct when I say that 5.34 mm but 0.57 ct would be the exact same regarding how it looks when compared to a 5.34 mm 0.6ct?
     
  12. SimoneDi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,258
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2014
    by SimoneDi » Jan 2, 2019
    Thanks for the additional comments @rockysalamander!

    @Siyah The 0.6 G SI1 with a cloud grade setting inclusion does indeed have lovely angles and looks to be a lovely diamond and I still think that there is a high probability that it will be a nice diamond, but I agree that it needs to be seen in person or by a trusted gemologist to be fully evaluated. I wouldn’t call it immediately milky as other posters have indicated, because even on my laptop the videos are a bit blurry. With BNs generous return policy, this would be a non concern for me, but it would be easier just to go with one of the other options at this time and safe yourself the need to return.

    The other diamonds posted are also beautiful. OP I would make sure that your intended will be happy with a diamond that is less than 0.6ct. We look at spread many times, but many people still feel more satisfied knowing that the carat weight is X ct.

    Any minute differences in cut between all stones will be indistinguishable irl in my opinion, so I wouldn’t look too deeply into that. The 0.6 F SI2 and the 0.58 G SI1 are both gorgeous diamonds.
     
    Siyah likes this.
  13. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,151
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 2, 2019
    Winner winner, chicken dinner!!! Put this baby on hold now, or better yet -- just buy it!

    Holy sparkleballs -- proportions are amazing -- 55 table, 62.1 depth, 34.5 crown, 40.8 pavilion & 75 LGF's!

    Small table and that awesome 34.5/40.8 combo will throw lots of fire. The 75 LGF's gives you those sexy fat arrows and will deliver bold flashes of light. Really, this stone will be a fireball.

    Oh yeah, G VVS2 to boot. You hit the lottery here.

    upload_2019-1-2_10-37-11.png
     
    rockysalamander and Siyah like this.
  14. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Man, I love this website already! Incredibly valuable feedback and information, thank you very much! I will get rid of the hold for the first stone.

    To answer your question: yes, the other is also on hold for me.

    What do you think of the 0.60 F S12? Would you think it might be a problem knowing that the clouds are not visible on the surface of the diamond as @rockysalamander suggests?

    I don't think I ever had so many difficulties finding a "stone" :D
     
    sledge and rockysalamander like this.
  15. SimoneDi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,258
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2014
    by SimoneDi » Jan 2, 2019
    Ahh I just saw this comment. Ok steer clear from the stone then. You have other great options.
    I would reach out to BN as ask for the first time discount. I don’t believe that it is restricted by country.
     
    sledge, rockysalamander and Siyah like this.
    


    


  16. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Haha! :twisted:

    I have put it on hold, but I am not very satisfied by the fact it's "just" 0.57. I found 0.6 even not that big (but that's me), although I am sure my girlfriend will like it.

    You got me confused now (in a positive way though).

    Choices, choices....

    Thank you, @SimoneDi. You have been amazing! When you are saying that the difference between cut will be indistinguishable in rl, do you also mean that about the cloud and light performance or not?
     
    rockysalamander likes this.
  17. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,151
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 2, 2019
    FYI @SimoneDi makes a valid point about people getting hung up on carat weight. I personally believe it's a horrible way to determine "size" because as you are learning when the table, depth, crown & pavilion angles all play into the final geometry & dimension of the stone.

    But I obviously fall into the camp where I am less concerned with carat weight and more with dimensions.

    Whichever camp you fall in is fine, but I will clarify it takes about 0.20mm difference (almost 1/128th inch for the US folks) before most people can see a size difference and that is when the stones are placed side by side. Even then it's going to be a minor increase and not mind blowing. Truth is if showed the stones separately you probably wouldn't even recognize a difference.

    Below is an example using EXACT dimensions of the 0.58ct stone and the 0.57ct stone that I like. The 0.58ct has the same dimensions of the 0.60ct stones. As such, there is about 0.10mm difference between the 0.57ct and 0.58/0.60ct stones.

    What are your thoughts?

    https://www.diamdb.com/compare/0.57ct-round-5.29x5.31x3.29-vs-0.58ct-round-5.40x5.42x3.27/
    upload_2019-1-2_10-50-35.png
     
  18. SimoneDi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,258
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2014
    by SimoneDi » Jan 2, 2019
    We want you to make a good choice!

    Not about clouds when they are the grade setting inclusion. I would eliminate the 0.6 G SI1 at this point.

    I don’t have concerns for the 0.6 F SI2, the cloud is not a grade setting inclusion there and the stone seems to be crisp and obviously very white.

    The stones that Rocky suggested are also lovely. Can’t make a wrong choice at his point.
     
    rockysalamander and Siyah like this.
  19. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Thanks for the honest feedback.

    Well, for me personally, the carat wouldn't make that much of a difference as long as I can not see a big difference between the 0.6ct and the 0.57 ct. I have seen 0.5ct stones and I did not find them very big, so that's why I am aiming for bigger, but bigger does not mean better (that's what I learned here!).

    I am really convinced by the fact that the stone you think is a winner, is the best choice in terms of scintillation and so on, but I am wondering what is more important: the fact it looks a bit bigger or the sparkle? I would go for the latter, but then again: I am not a woman and the awful thing about shopping online is the fact that I can't see how it looks in real life....

    Otherwise I would definitely make a choice right now and buy the stone you mentioned. I just do not know how the 0.6ct even looks like in real life, let alone the 0.57.
     
    rockysalamander likes this.
  20. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 2, 2019
    I'd pick the .57. it will be lovely. Solid numbers and nothing to worry about with clarity.

    .57 rounds to .6 in my book....!
     
    sledge, kipari, Siyah and 1 other person like this.
  21. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
  22. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    @rockysalamander @SimoneDi @sledge @lovedogs:

    I think I will go for the 0.57ct, but this is what concerns me:
    Fluorescence: Medium Blue
    Clarity Characteristics: Feather, Cavity, Pinpoint, Surface Graining

    It has way more different clarity characteristics. What would be the effect of all of this?

    ------
    BTW, the setting I think I will go for as I want the diamond to pop out:
    https://www.bluenile.com/nl/build-y...olitaire-engagement-ring-14k-white-gold_43589

    What are your thoughts?
     
  23. SimoneDi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,258
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2014
    by SimoneDi » Jan 2, 2019
    @Siyah Nothing to worry about with medium flouro. The diamond will be beautiful and once again, BN has a very generous return policy, so try not to stress over the purchase please :)

    The setting looks lovely. I love the E/W prong orientation!
     
    sledge and rockysalamander like this.
  24. SimoneDi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,258
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2014
    sledge, Siyah and rockysalamander like this.
  25. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 2, 2019
    At a Vvs clarity, none of the notes concern me.

    I love the integrated head, but nesw prongs can make a wedding band hard to find.

    Does your girl like tradition or unique?
     
    sledge and Siyah like this.
  26. Siyah
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    100
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    by Siyah » Jan 2, 2019
    Wedding band? Oh dear, I haven't even thought about that and the fact it needs to be "matching".

    Well if I had to choose, that would be traditional. She prefers classic. The only thing I recall she said was the fact she loves classic and she prefers the band to go a bit thinner towards the diamond...
     
  27. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 2, 2019
    She wants aa reverse taper. Let me see what BN has...
     
    Siyah and SimoneDi like this.
  28. SimoneDi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,258
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2014
    Siyah likes this.
  29. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 2, 2019
    This is the style ring she asked for, reverse tapered shank.
    https://www.bluenile.com/uk/build-y...ing_23192?elem=img&track=product&vtype=sample

    I think the online rendering makes it looks bulkier than I'd expect at 2.1 mm, which makes me think that is the narrowest dimension - not the widest. I think that will overwhelm this lovely diamond.

    I was able to find a few photos of some IRL BN settings (not me or my hands)

    Classic 6 prong, .6 diamond, size 8 finger

    upload_2019-1-2_13-39-24.png

    Petite Nouveau .64 carat, guessing around a size 4 finger
    upload_2019-1-2_13-32-50.png
     
    NorthernIce, Siyah and SimoneDi like this.
  30. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,708
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 2, 2019
    With the tapered solitaire, I'd worry there will be a visible gap where the head and shoulder meet. Hard to know without BN providing a side view with a stone of the same size.

    upload_2019-1-2_13-52-49.png
     

Share This Page