Advice on the stone I purchased?

[Afelda]

Hi I’m a new member here. I recently purchased a diamond from blue Nile. I was not happy with the setting because it sits very low and in my opinion it makes the stone look smaller. I am a ring size 5 and tried multiple diamonds at jewelry stores before deciding on a .7
Can someone tell me if this is a good Diamond I chose? I’m satisfied with the sparkle but it looks very tiny compared to others I tried.
And please any recommendations on a better Diamond I can purchase in case I decide to exchange it? It has to be from blue Nile in the .7ct range.

This is the Diamond I purchased after doing some research here and there
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD11874557
Thanks

 

[Athena10X]

I’m listing quite a few that fall within PS-recommended parameters, color I-D, clarity VS2-VVS1. Some are “Astor-Ideal”, which comes with a price premium. Are Astor ideals superior, that’s up for debate. Still, without ideal scope or ASET images (which BN does not provide), their potential light performance can only be assessed in-person.

None/faint fluorescent options:
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

My current stone is a 35.5C/40.6P/56T (actually, very similar specs on paper); slightly outside PS-recommended range, but score well on HCA due to complimentary angles:
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

35.5/40.6 stones with slightly larger table (57%):
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

I had a G with medium flourescence (lost) and since your original diamond exhibits flourescence, I’m including:
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

Not sure about D with medium flourescence; if no negative impact, could be good value
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

 

[lovedogs]

Hi I’m a new member here. I recently purchased a diamond from blue Nile. I was not happy with the setting because it sits very low and in my opinion it makes the stone look smaller. I am a ring size 5 and tried multiple diamonds at jewelry stores before deciding on a .7
Can someone tell me if this is a good Diamond I chose? I’m satisfied with the sparkle but it looks very tiny compared to others I tried.
And please any recommendations on a better Diamond I can purchase in case I decide to exchange it? It has to be from blue Nile in the .7ct range.

This is the Diamond I purchased after doing some research here and there
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD11874557
Thanks

I wouldn't recommend buying a stone with a larger table than depth. It isn't likely to perform well and I think you could likely do better. Look through the ones posted above.

 

[headlight]

After... don’t get stone with table larger than depth.

 

[TreeScientist]

It depends, what are you looking for in a diamond? Lot's of brightness/white light return or more of a balance of brilliance and fire? This is a well-cut 60/60 style diamond. Nothing inherently wrong with this cut. There's just visual differences in how it will perform vs a Tolk-style MRB. 60/60s will give you more brilliance/white light return at the expense of fire.

Have you seen a 60/60-style diamond side by side with a Tolk-MRB in person to determine what you like the best?

 

[sledge]

Since no one has made the obvious connection yet, the 60/60 term you hear is a stone that has a table size and depth that both equal (or very near) 60%. It originated from old beliefs this produced the "perfect" diamond. Obviously it takes more than 2 proportions to make any stone great, but again, that was the original theory.

Some people like and prefer 60/60 stones. As noted by others they produce lots of white light return so they have the advantage of looking very white.

Also because the table is large, depth is shallow and crown angle is also shallow that style of stone will give you more spread than a traditional Tolk proportioned cut stone. It's usually not a massive gain, but if you are coming from a steep/deep badly proportioned stone that looks small for its weight, it may appear much bigger.

While it's nice to get some spread/size gain there is a tradeoff. Simply stated, they won't have as much fire as a Tolk style stone. Most people consider a very firey stone to be a sign of high quality and what most of us here seek.

Lastly with Tolk style proportions you get into an ideal cut range which has the added benefit of getting a stone that looks it weight (not too small or big). But even if a 0.70 carat stone is proportioned well and looks its weight, the real question is are you happy with the size for a well cut stone that size. People have very different opinions about size.