Another Newb with questions on feathers and pave

[Chili_Willy]

First let me say hello and thank you to the experts posting here everyday. I appreciate the contributions you have already made to my understanding of diamonds and settings, I can not really offer much in return here except for possible business and a picture of the engagement ring I will be buying shortly, I hope that is enough.

I know pretty much what I''m looking for in a diamond. Round, AGS0, eye clean SI (which is about 50/50 at SI1 for me) or VS, Color G, somewhere around 1.75 carats. I''ve been to many stores and visited the NYC Diamond District, but in the end I think I''ll be most comfortable buying a AGS certified diamond online, provided I can evaluate and return it if needed. This one looks great - http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-1848226.htm - my only concerns being that the feathers around the outside might weaken it and what color the negligible florescence is?

As for the setting. I want (because she does) a thin, simple, six prong, platinum setting (like Tiffany''s). I''m debating the addition of micropave. She likes the look of it but I am concerned about cleaning, loosing stones and everyday comfort. My girl is always putting lotion on her hands so my first specific question regards pave with a closed smooth back or open drilled holes. I imagine the open back is both easier to dirty and easier to clean - is this true, and should this be a consideration? Anything else regarding the two styles, I prefer the closed back, all else equal.

The look we like in pave is where the whole ring glitters like diamond, with no discernible rows. Am I correct in assuming these rings will always be bead set, or is there a stronger method? Does anyone know who may use six beads per diamond versus 4 or 3? I am assuming more is better...

Also we like the ring to be pretty much just round with only the main diamond raised, but many rings seem to raise around the center stone. Anyone have a suggestion for where I should look?

Last questions for now regard wearability. We assume that the lower the center diamond is set the less bothersome it will be correct? Also we prefer to go as thin as possible on the band but what is the realistic lower limit with a 1.75 carat center?


Longer than I intended, thanks for your time.

 

[JulieN]

Date: 1/9/2009 12:44:10 PM
Author:Chili_Willy
First let me say hello and thank you to the experts posting here everyday. I appreciate the contributions you have already made to my understanding of diamonds and settings, I can not really offer much in return here except for possible business and a picture of the engagement ring I will be buying shortly, I hope that is enough.


I know pretty much what I'm looking for in a diamond. Round, AGS0, eye clean SI (which is about 50/50 at SI1 for me) or VS, Color G, somewhere around 1.75 carats. I've been to many stores and visited the NYC Diamond District, but in the end I think I'll be most comfortable buying a AGS certified diamond online, provided I can evaluate and return it if needed. This one looks great - http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-1848226.htm - my only concerns being that the feathers around the outside might weaken it and what color the negligible florescence is?


As for the setting. I want (because she does) a thin, simple, six prong, platinum setting (like Tiffany's). I'm debating the addition of micropave. She likes the look of it but I am concerned about cleaning, loosing stones and everyday comfort. My girl is always putting lotion on her hands so my first specific question regards pave with a closed smooth back or open drilled holes. I imagine the open back is both easier to dirty and easier to clean - is this true, and should this be a consideration? Anything else regarding the two styles, I prefer the closed back, all else equal.


The look we like in pave is where the whole ring glitters like diamond, with no discernible rows. Am I correct in assuming these rings will always be bead set, or is there a stronger method? Does anyone know who may use six beads per diamond versus 4 or 3? I am assuming more is better...


Also we like the ring to be pretty much just round with only the main diamond raised, but many rings seem to raise around the center stone. Anyone have a suggestion for where I should look?


Last questions for now regard wearability. We assume that the lower the center diamond is set the less bothersome it will be correct? Also we prefer to go as thin as possible on the band but what is the realistic lower limit with a 1.75 carat center?



Longer than I intended, thanks for your time.

She will learn to take off her ring when putting on lotion.

Holes are debatable. It is easier to clean, but also easier to dirty.

The Tiffany one is bead-set. But have you looked at shared prong? That is the least "metally" look.

You really don't need 6 beads to hold in the melee. It also would look more metally.

It's really quite difficult to go less than 2 mm.

 

[Chili_Willy]

Date: 1/9/2009 12:54:30 PM
Author: JulieN


She will learn to take off her ring when putting on lotion.


Holes are debatable. It is easier to clean, but also easier to dirty.


The Tiffany one is bead-set. But have you looked at shared prong? That is the least ''metally'' look.


You really don''t need 6 beads to hold in the melee. It also would look more metally.


It''s really quite difficult to go less than 2 mm.

Thank you Julie. I can''t be sure whether I''ve seen shared prong or not, it''s hard for me to tell with pictures and even harder to search for that. Do you have a suggestion as to where I should look?

 

[JulieN]

Bead set:

 

[JulieN]

Shared prong:

 

[JulieN]

And the Whiteflash gallery is here: http://com.pricescope.com/photos/whiteflash/category1048.aspx

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi Chili, to answer a few of the points you raised:
1) There''s virtually no possibility that the feathers in the diamond you linked to could pose a durability problem
2) "Negligible" on an AGS report would be the equivalent of "Faint" on a GIA report. This is a degree of fluorescence which is difficult to see, even under a UV light.

Looks like a lovely stone you''ve picked!
Regarding the "micro-setting: no matter how well it''s made, theer''s a possibility that a diamond will pop out of a ring with small stones set into the shank.
I believe that''s a risk no matter who makes the ring.
The channel set wold be more protected in this case- but I still think you should buy what appeals to you and her visually

 

[Chili_Willy]

Date: 1/9/2009 3:20:59 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Hi Chili, to answer a few of the points you raised:

1) There's virtually no possibility that the feathers in the diamond you linked to could pose a durability problem

2) 'Negligible' on an AGS report would be the equivalent of 'Faint' on a GIA report. This is a degree of fluorescence which is difficult to see, even under a UV light.


Looks like a lovely stone you've picked!

Regarding the 'micro-setting: no matter how well it's made, theer's a possibility that a diamond will pop out of a ring with small stones set into the shank.

I believe that's a risk no matter who makes the ring.

The channel set wold be more protected in this case- but I still think you should buy what appeals to you and her visually

Thank you David. I just called them up and bought the stone, should have it next week! I feel pretty safe about it as James there assured me that no feather breaks the surface. As the inclusions are near the edges and hard to see in the 40x image I'm sure it will be clean to my eye, and the AGS 0 and cut quality images looks great so I'm sure I'll be happy with it.

I may have found a setting as well at Art of Platinum (Leon Mege), see image r968 (which is a great car as well)
but it may end up being cost/time prohibitive, so I'm soliciting other recommendations.


Julie - thank you for the examples, they work to illustrate the settings but I'm looking for more of an all-over look.

Any other input is very welcome, but I won't be back here till Monday in the hopes that this will be a surprise to her. Hopefully I don't give it away, I'm a bit giddy to be honest!