Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Affordable ring for my girl...

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
As much as I''m all psyched up over this whole "tulip" thing, I have to sleep or I''ll be a pill at work tomorrow. Please let me know what you think of the picture I posted with a tulip head sitting on it, though. Only envision the band and all that in white gold.

I''m so thankful to all of your suggestions, and please, keep them coming.

Also, if anyone hears anything about whether or not tulip heads are ultra delicate and prone to breaking, please let me know that, too.
 
I''d call GOG tomorrow and ask them how complicated that would be. I know they sell the Stuller line which makes the best tulip setting I''ve seen so far. It may be a little much to combine the ring you showed with a tulip head, but could be wrong. Ask Jonathon what he thinks. www.goodoldgold.com Good luck and sweet dreams, Lol!!!!
2.gif
 
Date: 2/27/2006 10:57:12 PM
Author: argh&stuff
This is a setting she likes a lot, from what I can gather. It has a ''slight'' wave to it, and it has cathedral sides, which she thinks is going to keep the diamond more safe. And the wedding band fits into it. The ring is Stuller, and comes without a head. Can a tulip be put in it, you think? Or would that be too much, since it has the cathedral part?
Click to expand...
Well the ring that you have pictured looks like it has a basket/prong peg head in it already. It wouldn''t be hard for a jeweler to put a different peg head on there. The one thing that you would need to consider with the cathedral sway to it is if there would be enough room to make it fit. The tulip head is going to flare out, and I don''t know is that particular setting will hold it. As far as it being too much, I think it is a personal opinion. If she has seen this ring, and loves it ... well, what does it matter what I think of it ... I am not going to wear it.

I think you need to figure out how clean does she like her rings?

As far as the cathedral shank protecting the diamond more, I don''t know if that is really going to make a huge difference in this particular setting. It is very thin, and dainty, I don''t think it will take abuse like a thicker setting would. My original ering was also cathedral and very princess like ... and all I have to say is that the heavy metal door won vs. the cathedral setting. Whoops!

35.gif
 
Okay, last post for the night...

What in the world does all this stuff mean? I found a diamond for 792, and this is the stuff they had to say about it:

DIAMOND DETAILS


Stock number: 5866963
Shape: Round
Cut Grade: Excellent
Carat weight: 0.44
Color: I
Clarity: VS1

Depth %: 63.7
Table %: 59
Symmetry: Good
Polish: Fair
Girdle: M-TK
Culet: N
Fluorescence: N
Measurements: 4.91x4.79x3.09
 
ha ha, sounds like you need some education in diamond specs. This is the fun part!
 
Okay, I lied. This is sort of addicting, to a degree.

Here are some more blurbs of info on another diamond. This one is 747.30

DIAMOND DETAILS


Stock number: 28277965
Shape: Round
Cut Grade: Excellent
Carat weight: 0.47
Color: F
Clarity: SI2

Depth %: 67.6
Table %: 57
Symmetry: Good
Polish: Good
Girdle: M-TK FD
Culet: N
Fluorescence: N
Measurements: 4.72x4.81x3.23
 
Date: 2/27/2006 11:52:02 PM
Author: argh&stuff
Okay, last post for the night...

What in the world does all this stuff mean? I found a diamond for 792, and this is the stuff they had to say about it:

DIAMOND DETAILS


Stock number: 5866963
Shape: Round
Cut Grade: Excellent
Carat weight: 0.44
Color: I
Clarity: VS1

Depth %: 63.7
Table %: 59
Symmetry: Good
Polish: Fair
Girdle: M-TK
Culet: N
Fluorescence: N
Measurements: 4.91x4.79x3.09
Click to expand...
Depth is too deep, polish is fair?? Yikes. Let''s work on this tomorrow. We will find you a great stone within your budget. No worries there. Promise
1.gif
 
Date: 2/27/2006 11:56:48 PM
Author: argh&stuff
Okay, I lied. This is sort of addicting, to a degree.

Depth %: 67.6

Table %: 57

Symmetry: Good

Polish: Good

Girdle: M-TK FD

Culet: N

Fluorescence: N

Measurements: 4.72x4.81x3.23
Click to expand...

Argh, you need to check the knowledge menu up above. But the first thing that pops out to me is that for a Round stone the Depth % is getting too deep. I think it''s best to stay closer to 60.
 
Haha... Okay, I will sleep now, and be educated tomorrow. I''m hoping to get as close to a 1/2 carat as I can, for around about 800, give or take. Big depth, bad. Fair, bad. I''m a fast learner. Usually. I''m so grateful for this help!

Crash course in diamonds to begin tomorrow. (I''m planning on asking her in Spring, so I have enough time to learn all this stuff, right?)

There''s a pillow calling my name... Night all.
 
Date: 2/27/2006 11:56:48 PM
Author: argh&stuff
Okay, I lied. This is sort of addicting, to a degree.

Here are some more blurbs of info on another diamond. This one is 747.30

DIAMOND DETAILS


Stock number: 28277965
Shape: Round
Cut Grade: Excellent
Carat weight: 0.47
Color: F
Clarity: SI2

Depth %: 67.6
Table %: 57
Symmetry: Good
Polish: Good
Girdle: M-TK FD
Culet: N
Fluorescence: N
Measurements: 4.72x4.81x3.23
Click to expand...
Ok tomorrow when you have had a nice sleep read the tutorials here on cut. Read all that you can on here. There is great info and you''ll be much better off being informed. This stone isn''t what you want either. Too deep. Not sure if it''s eye clean either. You''ll need crown and pavillion angles going forward too, so read up. We''ll help you along the way. Now go to sleep
24.gif
Just kidding
3.gif
 
Congratulations. Your story reminds me of stories of my parents'' courtship. You are wise to marry such a good, whimsical lady sooner rather than later.

Yes, Stuller makes high-quality settings.

My fiancée''s engagement ring has a Stuller setting; she is very happy with it.

I hope that you choose a comfortable ring for your lady. Fortunately, most of the rings pictured in this thread seem to have a "comfort-fit": they are rounded on the inside, so that the ring can go on and off. ("Pipe-fits" are less pleasant: they have an abrupt edge that catches on the flesh of the finger.) Also, if your lady''s finger size varies with the weather, you might want to have sizing bumps put in. I posted a thread about my shopping experience at Seattle Area Jewellers.

I also hope you have the chance to keep her ring clean. It takes just a minute to scrub or ultra-sonic a ring, but the difference is amazing. It is like bringing her flowers -- you can do it as often as you like, and it will always bring joy to her face.

-- Jasper
www.folds.net/diamond
 
Well, Aph, I briefly read that "informational site" this morning, but I didn''t see anything with regard to polish, depth, or girdle. Those are the things that make me go, "Huh?"

I understand the 4 C''s, I believe I do, anyway. Carat is the size (close to 1/2 carat is my goal), Clarity is how clear it is (I want a V or an S, no?), Cut is how many facets it has (sparkle), and Color (from what I''ve gathered, anything down to a J can work with white gold).

How do the above mentioned things fit into the 4Cs? I''m assuming the depth of the diamond is a "bad" thing because the deeper it goes down, the less "face" it has, making the diamond appear smaller?

Polish, well I don''t what that means. I guess the shininess, but I don''t think I''ve ever seen a non-shiny diamond, so I assumed once they finish cutting them and setting them and all that fancy stuff they do, it''d be pretty shiny.

Girdle I have read many threads on, but I have yet to understand exactly what it is, or why it matters how "thick" the side of the diamond is.

So, a good student I will be, and during my breaks at work today, I will try to come up with information to answer these questions, and maybe tonight when I do a little searching, I''ll get praises for my increased ability to choose a diamond for my wonderful girl.

(Size bumps... how do those work? When we first started dating, I knew she was something special, so I got her a birthday ring, and I remember the trials I went through to get her size... At that time of year, late spring, she was a 4 1/2; luckily she brought up sizing again around Christmas, so we both went in to be sized, and she was a 3 1/2!! Is that normal? I went into near hysterics, telling her she needed to eat more and all that. She said she''s always done that, but I was still worried. Maybe that''s a weather issue?)
 
Many women''s fingers swell in the summer months. I''d suggest going to have her sized again because when it''s cold the fingers are smaller. If the ring fits in the summer but spins or is slightly loose in the winter you can always go to claire''s (a teen type store) at the mall and buy these cheapy little plasic ring sizers.
 
Oops, you're right. I posted the wrong page. Sorry. Well, there's a good tutorial here on PS that you can look at that I'm sure will explain everything:
http://diamonds.pricescope.com/
 

Date: 2/28/2006 7:57:24 AM
Author: argh&stuff
How do the above mentioned things fit into the 4Cs? I''m assuming the depth of the diamond is a ''bad'' thing because the deeper it goes down, the less ''face'' it has, making the diamond appear smaller? You''re right in that the deeper the diamond is, the smaller it will appear.

Polish, well I don''t what that means. I guess the shininess, but I don''t think I''ve ever seen a non-shiny diamond, so I assumed once they finish cutting them and setting them and all that fancy stuff they do, it''d be pretty shiny. It will say on the GIA or AGS report what the symmetry and polish are. GIA grades symmetry and polish as poor, fair, good, very good, and excellent. For round brilliants, most people are looking for very good polish and symmetry and better. I believe for AGS they have the same terminology and the additional term of ideal.

Girdle I have read many threads on, but I have yet to understand exactly what it is, or why it matters how ''thick'' the side of the diamond is.
If the girdle is too large, it will hide some of the weight of the stone just like if the stone is too deep. So, the stone will appear smaller than it should if it has an extra thick girdle. The best girdle thicknesses seem to be thin-medium, medium-slightly thick.
Click to expand...
Here''s a link to a diamond that looks pretty good. The girdle could be a concern since it is very thin-medium, but it may not be an issue at all if the thin part is very small and can be hidden under a prong to protect it.

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-1955214.htm
 
Date: 2/28/2006 7:57:24 AM
Author: argh&stuff


(Size bumps... how do those work? When we first started dating, I knew she was something special, so I got her a birthday ring, and I remember the trials I went through to get her size... At that time of year, late spring, she was a 4 1/2; luckily she brought up sizing again around Christmas, so we both went in to be sized, and she was a 3 1/2!! Is that normal? I went into near hysterics, telling her she needed to eat more and all that. She said she''s always done that, but I was still worried. Maybe that''s a weather issue?)
Click to expand...
My ring fingers are also 3.5ish, and I have a .51ct solitaire for a right hand ring. I have to say, that size will look great on her hands!
 
This tulip setting is one of my faves from the Niwaka Bridal Collection 2006 (see www.niwaka.com). It's called the Water Lily and is designed to complement a smaller diamond. Niwaka is very expensive but maybe inspiration for custom design?
2.gif


Niwaka_2006bridal_WaterLily.jpg
 
Hi there, I have a chart that helps me alot from one of my appraisals it may help you some.

IDEAL PROPORTIONS

Total Depth 58.9 to 61.8%
Table Diameter 53 to 57%
Pavilion Depth 43.1%
Crown Height 14.8 to 16.2%
Crown Angle 34.5

RANGE OF GENERALLY ACCEPTABLE PROPORTIONS

total depth 57.0 to 63.0%
t.diameter 53.0 to 66.0%
pavilion depth 41.5 to 45.5%
crown height 11.0 to 16.2%
crown angle 30.0 to 35.0%


color D to F colorless G to I-J near colorless VVS1, VVS2, VS1 very very slightly included, VS1,VS2,SI1 very slightly SI1,SI2 Slightly included ( IMO ) you wouldn''t want anything less. I hope this can help and if there is anything off please may someone correct me.
1.gif
 
Just happened to see this one browsing around...

$1200, .45cts princess cut as main stone and a less than typical, reasonably well done design. I don't know anything about this ring other than it is written on the listing. 'Thought I'd rather mention than not... because the design looks lovely (to me).

DSCN81531.jpg
LINK


'On a budget' so to speak... I would surely look over estate pieces like this one, but I can't quite recommend the move. Precisely because there is always some room for error about quality, gem grades, potential wear, whether the pieces can be sized... All sorts of things. Over time, I got somewhat used with the 'gray' aspects for the sake of a good 'hunt'. But... it s a different thing.
 
Date: 2/28/2006 7:57:24 AM
Author: argh&stuff
Well, Aph, I briefly read that 'informational site' this morning, but I didn't see anything with regard to polish, depth, or girdle. Those are the things that make me go, 'Huh?'


I understand the 4 C's, I believe I do, anyway. Carat is the size (close to 1/2 carat is my goal), Clarity is how clear it is (I want a V or an S, no?), Cut is how many facets it has (sparkle), and Color (from what I've gathered, anything down to a J can work with white gold).
Click to expand...
Actually cut is how skillfully the facets are cut, and includes diamond proportions, symmetry, and polish.
Oooh, and once you get into the Si's where the inclusions are in the stone and what color they are matters. A diamond can get the same rating wether or not the inclusions are a big cloud and a feather off to the side, or a black thing right in the middle. (Black thing being easier to spot). And IMHO, I wouldn't really do a SI2 in an e-ring.
How do the above mentioned things fit into the 4Cs? I'm assuming the depth of the diamond is a 'bad' thing because the deeper it goes down, the less 'face' it has, making the diamond appear smaller?
Click to expand...
Ok, A) diamonds are priced by weight so you are paying for more diamond then you are seeing. B) Light goes into a diamond, bounces around off of all those flat angled facets and shoots back up through the face or the diamond.
Ummm, did you ever see the "Raiders of the Lost Ark"? Remember when they lit up the insided of the tomb by angling mirrors so light from outside bounced off one, hit another, bounced of it, and so on?
It's just like that. If the bottom half of the diamond is too deep then the angles are bound to be off and the not as much of the light bounces back towards your eye. That's actually the explanation for a lot of the different cut factors you worry about.

Polish, well I don't what that means. I guess the shininess, but I don't think I've ever seen a non-shiny diamond, so I assumed once they finish cutting them and setting them and all that fancy stuff they do, it'd be pretty shiny.
Click to expand...
Think of it as, um, buffing a car. You could use cheap polish and just give it a cursory buff to get the polish off and, yeah it'll be shiny. But if you're a car maniac and use ultra high polish and buff, and buff, and then get out a chamois cloth and buff some more. That car will be blindingly shiny. So the better the polish the better the quality of light will reflect off the facets. (while most of the light goes in the diamond, some of the light you see reflects straight off of the diamond). I've also heard that it helps the diamond stay sparklier/cleaner longer since dirt and skin oils don't stick as well to a high polish.
Girdle I have read many threads on, but I have yet to understand exactly what it is, or why it matters how 'thick' the side of the diamond is.
Click to expand...
It's the waist of the diamond where the top and bottom halves meet. It's usually not faceted. If it's too thick, you're wasting diamond weight. If it's too thin, the diamond could be chipped or damaged right there since that's the thing that sticks out the most, and it's the thing that gets whacked first. (Yes, while diamonds don't scratch, they do sometimes chip.)

So, a good student I will be, and during my breaks at work today, I will try to come up with information to answer these questions, and maybe tonight when I do a little searching, I'll get praises for my increased ability to choose a diamond for my wonderful girl.


(Size bumps... how do those work? When we first started dating, I knew she was something special, so I got her a birthday ring, and I remember the trials I went through to get her size... At that time of year, late spring, she was a 4 1/2; luckily she brought up sizing again around Christmas, so we both went in to be sized, and she was a 3 1/2!! Is that normal? I went into near hysterics, telling her she needed to eat more and all that. She said she's always done that, but I was still worried. Maybe that's a weather issue?)
Click to expand...
Fingers swell up a bit when it's hotter. But our knuckles tend to stay the same size and are hard, not squishy. The little bumps on the inside of the ring prevent the ring from slipping over our knuckles accidentally when it's colder, and helps prevent the ring from rotating on the finger. (which isn't really round anyway). But when it's hotter, our fingers can swell up and with the space between the bumps there's somewhere for the extra squishy stuff to go. Ok, maybe not very clear.


The best thing I can recommend is going onto a diamond site where their diamonds have the pavillion and crown angles listed. Then enter the information into the cut advisor on pricescope. (Called HCA, Halloway Cut Advisor). It'll then tell you how sparkly and stuff the diamond will look. Do that with a bunch of differently cut diamonds, and you'll start to get a feel for how pavillion depth and the other stuff is going to affect the light return of any particular diamond.
 
Can you swing $1263 for the stone? This diamond http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=AGS-6640304 is $1263 with the Pricescope discount. You only have to tell Whiteflash that you found them on PS.

Report: AGS
Shape: A Cut Above H&A
Carat: 0.506
Color: I
Clarity: VS2
Depth: 60.8
Table: 55.4
Crown Angle: 35.1
Crown %: 15.8
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Pavilion %: 42.9
Girdle: Thin to Medium
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Culet: Pointed
Fluorescence: Negligible
Measurements: 5.18-5.19X3.15

It was the best and largest one I could find using the Cut Quality Search at the top.
 
VERY NICE Ebree! Great Pick!
 
Here''s another stone, only $726 with the PS discount:

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=AGS-6639401

Report: AGS
Shape: Round Ideal Cut
Carat: 0.420
Color: H
Clarity: SI1
Depth: 61.7
Table: 55.6
Crown Angle: 34.7
Crown %: 15.6
Pavilion Angle: 40.8
Pavilion %: 43
Girdle: Thin to Medium Faceted
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Culet: Pointed
Fluorescence: Negligible
Measurements: 4.81-4.84X2.97
 
Kim,

I was thinking about that stone too...but what in the heck are those weird gray spots in the idealscope?
 
Ebree, I''m guessing they''re small areas of leakage? I do like the stone you picked a lot, probably a better bet overall.
1.gif
 
Date: 2/28/2006 12:39:13 PM
Author: Kim N
Ebree, I''m guessing they''re small areas of leakage? I do like the stone you picked a lot, probably a better bet overall.
1.gif
Click to expand...
Oh okay...I thought they might have had something to do with the inclusions. Perhaps not.
1.gif
 
Date: 2/28/2006 7:57:24 AM
Author: argh&stuff
Clarity is how clear it is (I want a V or an S, no?)

Since you''re working with a budget, an eye-clean SI1 or a VS2 would be great. You can find out whether a diamond is eye-clean or not by calling the vendor and asking.

Color (from what I''ve gathered, anything down to a J can work with white gold).

Yes, J would help you save a lot of money. A few people on this board have even gotten K color stones. The CUT makes all the difference. A well-cut J or K stone will look much whiter from the top than a poorly cut one. Well-cut stones also mask clarity because all you see is sparkle.
1.gif


How do the above mentioned things fit into the 4Cs? I''m assuming the depth of the diamond is a ''bad'' thing because the deeper it goes down, the less ''face'' it has, making the diamond appear smaller?

I''d look for a depth maybe around ~60.3 to ~61.2. Most people don''t like to go too far above 61 because you lose carat weight where you can''t see it.

Polish, well I don''t what that means. I guess the shininess, but I don''t think I''ve ever seen a non-shiny diamond, so I assumed once they finish cutting them and setting them and all that fancy stuff they do, it''d be pretty shiny.

I just wanted to agree with Coda here that most people look for Very Good or better. It''s a sign that the cutter cut the stone for quality.
Click to expand...
 
Wow, you guys have been hard at work on my behalf today. Thanks!

I''ve read up, and have tried to comprehend as much as possible, and will go "shopping" tonight for a diamond.

I must say, though, that I am a bit apprehensive about purchasing something that''s such a fat chunk of change that I can''t see prior to purchasing. I mean, the numbers and figures and all that in the blurbs mean something, but still, I have seen a few diamonds that just took my girl''s breath away... I want that same thing, the mega sparkle factor. Lucky for me, she doesn''t know a ton about ''good'' diamonds, either, but she sure does know that some sparkle and glitter. If you all could have seen her waggling her fingers around when the shop dropped in a diamond that had a HUGE sparkle factor. I want her to have that feeling every time she looks down at her hand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top