Another Diamond Advice Thread

[Liquid]

I have been doing a fair bit of research on diamond buying, both on this forum (which is excellent) as well as through other avenues. I have narrowed the basics down to the following:

Carat: 1.25-1.55
Cut: Excellent/Ideal - Striving for perfection here
Clarity: VS1-VS2
Color: F-G

A search on Pricescope with the following variables yields 23 diamonds. This diamond is probably the leading candidate.

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-66418.htm

I would appreciate your general advice about this diamond, in terms of anything you see that will compromise its appearance, any adjustments you would make to my search criteria in order to get a more beautiful appearing diamond, as well as overall value.

Now, for a few more specific questions. Looking at the Idealscope for this diamond, there is very little white which I believe means very little light is lost through the diamond or a lot of light is reflected back which is obviously good. However I also read that there was some Russian research that states that humans perceive more brilliance where light is near a few dark spots. Is this saying that an ideally brilliant diamond will have an Idealscope with some white spots? Such as the following?

http://www.whiteflash.com/pimg/IdealScope/IS_AGS-7523405.jpghttp://www.goodoldgold.com/items/1782/ltsc.jpg

Is there any benchmark Idealscope for what a perfectly cut diamond might look like that I can use to compare? Obviously I understand that some of that is subjective but it may help me understand what to be looking for a bit better than a written description.

I also have questions about AGS 0 and H&A in the search criteria. My understanding is that these are both desired qualities for diamond cut, if this is the case why is there a search option to exclude them? Is H&A more of a marketing distinction or is there any industry standard certification of this? Thanks in advance for answering my questions.

 

[JulieN]

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-66418.htm

looks beautiful

However I also read that there was some Russian research that states that humans perceive more brilliance where light is near a few dark spots.

First graphic on the left of black and white checkerboard: http://diamonds.pricescope.com/brill.asp

The New Line of ACA does not have the white spots. It is personal preference.

Is there any benchmark Idealscope for what a perfectly cut diamond might look like that I can use to compare? Obviously I understand that some of that is subjective but it may help me understand what to be looking for a bit better than a written description.

There are many different Ideal Scopes that fall under "honkin', drop-dead gorgeous."

I also have questions about AGS 0 and H&A in the search criteria. My understanding is that these are both desired qualities for diamond cut, if this is the case why is there a search option to exclude them? Is H&A more of a marketing distinction or is there any industry standard certification of this? Thanks in advance for answering my questions.

There is no industry certification for Hearts and Arrows, but I would say a standard exists... You are going by the stringent standards of the brand. You may exclude AGS-0 and Hearts and Arrows in the Search by Cut because not everyone wants to pay more for them.

 

[Liquid]

Thanks for the opinion and the brilliance link. Apparently I was so engrossed in the text that I didn''t look at the illustrations on the side. Any other opinons on the board as to the overall quality and value of this diamond? Thanks all.

 

[Lorelei]

Liquid, welcome to PS.

The diamond you have picked is a sure fire winner, doesn''t get much better than that!

 

[belle]

you have picked the creme'' de le creme'' liquid. you can''t get better than that! well done.

 

[FacetFire]

Looks like a knockout stone. I like the small table (more fire) and shallower depth (more spread for the money). Nice pick!

 

[Liquid]

Hmmm, been looking around even more and I ran across this stone, which seems really perfectly cut except for the clefts in the hearts.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond.php?d=238&shape=1&ctMin=1.25&ctMax=1.55&clarity=48&color=4&resultsColumns=268435471&singleResult=1

Unforutnately there isn''t as much info on the first stone so there could be even more significant problems with it and I woulnd''t know at this point. Any opinions as to which stone is better? I am thinking of having them both sent to an appraiser and then determine at that point which is preferable. Although I probably won''t be able to tell the difference. Is this a good idea and which stone do you think is nicer?

 

[belle]

Date: 10/27/2006 9:59:59 AM
Author: Liquid

Unforutnately there isn''t as much info on the first stone so there could be even more significant problems with it and I woulnd''t know at this point.

that is not going to happen. ''a cut above'' is wf highly regarded brand of h&a. the precise optical symmetry needed for diamonds to be even considered for the label are absolute tops in cut. http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds_info/t/all_about.aspx?articleid=333&zoneid=28
if you are seriously interested in an aca, they will take hearts pic for you.

 

[Liquid]

Thanks for the WF information. If taken at face value then, it would seem that the second diamond would not adhere to the Whiteflash ACA standard, given the clefts in the hearts? Should I then assume that the visual performance of the diamond is likely to be very slightly compromised in the second diamond? Or is the "true H&A" just attempting to adhere to an additional level of optical precision in addition to the other performance variables such as clarity, brilliance, scintillation? Also, any feedback as to whether asking an appraiser to view these two diamonds (as well as obviously myself) to help determine which is better is a good/bad way to go? Or which company is regarded to be the standard bearer when it comes to selling diamonds with absolutly perfect cuts? Thanks.

 

[belle]

Date: 10/27/2006 11:42:30 AM
Author: Liquid
Thanks for the WF information. If taken at face value then, it would seem that the second diamond would not adhere to the Whiteflash ACA standard, given the clefts in the hearts?

i wouldn''t want to even try and venture how another diamond would fair under aca standards.

Date: 10/27/2006 11:42:30 AM
Author: Liquid
Should I then assume that the visual performance of the diamond is likely to be very slightly compromised in the second diamond?

"Never assume the obvious is true." William Safire

seriously, at this level there may or may not be any perceptable differences.

Date: 10/27/2006 11:42:30 AM
Author: Liquid
Or is the ''true H&A'' just attempting to adhere to an additional level of optical precision in addition to the other performance variables such as clarity, brilliance, scintillation?

actually, in a way it is.

Date: 10/27/2006 11:42:30 AM
Author: Liquid
Also, any feedback as to whether asking an appraiser to view these two diamonds (as well as obviously myself) to help determine which is better is a good/bad way to go?

if you don''t want to go on blind faith, there is no better way to pick a diamond than to see them side by side in a natural viewing environment. i would highly recommend it.
(don''t forget to bring a coin, just in case)

best of luck liquid!