Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Buying an Engagement ring - Princess Cut - Help please

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Date: 6/26/2009 8:15:50 PM
Author: sniggity
I think a three chevron is what i should be looking for. I would perform more smaller events as oppose to bigger but fewer.

The fact that the one from GOG is AGS Ideal makes me smile as i know the cut shows to be excellent(my main point in purchase).

Is there any other comments that can be made on the one from GOG?
Click to expand...
Then thats what to look for.
 
I think i have made my decision. I 90% sure this is the rock in going with.

Ring For My Fiancee

Unless someone can see something wrong that i cant
9.gif
 
Its a nice Princess, not cut to top standards but should be a pretty stone, it depends on you - I thought you wanted one which was cut to the highest standards? Thats fine if not, just to point out that this one is what we call a nice make of cut but isn''t up to the standards of the top cut Princess.
 
I figure to get exactly what i want within my budget i need to make some sacrifices, hence dropping my expectations on cut to get into the carat size and clarity i want.

Do you think this is worth the price tag?
 
Date: 6/29/2009 10:18:11 AM
Author: sniggity
I figure to get exactly what i want within my budget i need to make some sacrifices, hence dropping my expectations on cut to get into the carat size and clarity i want.

Do you think this is worth the price tag?
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that it is cut that gives the diamond life through light return--the "sparkle". I would drop in clarity &/or color before dropping cut quality.
 
Date: 6/29/2009 10:18:11 AM
Author: sniggity
I figure to get exactly what i want within my budget i need to make some sacrifices, hence dropping my expectations on cut to get into the carat size and clarity i want.

Do you think this is worth the price tag?
Click to expand...
I understand, I would also look around to see what else is out there for lower colour and clarity but if you want these particular specs then this one is not a badly cut Princess, just not up to the top standards of so many we see here. If you understand that it isn''t cut to the very highest standards and are ok with that then fine, otherwise see what is out there maybe in SI clarity if you are open to that.
 
As usual, agreed with Lorelei, jet, and Stone-cold! Not a bad/ugly princess by any standards, but you can do better. Most of us here at PS will loosen up on color/clarity and even size before cut. We say "Cut is king of the 4 Cs," meaning that it is the single most important factor for sparkle.

Based solely on the Idealscope, I think this one has better light return and is in your color/clarity parameters:
1.0 G/VS1 from JA

However, my choice for you right now would still be the GOG J stone, given that you prefer a 3-chevron look over a 2-chevron look. GOG can make you a video if you're interested in it. Or perhaps have WF call in the other one that SC found and see if it's any better.

Another option would be this Infinity, which is extremely well-cut. However, it too is a 2-chevron princess, so feel free to ignore! Just wanted to show you another example of what a well-cut princess can look like. The vendor can provide videos and pictures for you.

Finally, this one from JA also has potential; just ask them whether or not the "good" symmetry is perceptible to the eye, and of course get the IS. It actually looks like a 4-chevron princess, and a nice one at that.
 
Definitely prefer the JA G VS1 then this.
 
wow!!! I really do have alot to learn still(I''m so glad you guys dont mind helping me out).I thought for sure the WF was nicer then the JA.

Could someone please explain to me were my judgement is misleading?
I know the G-VS1 is rated better cut, but comparing the IS image of that vs. WF .092H, does the WF not look better?
 
WF stones has significant leakage near the edge, will result in the stone looking smaller, edge to edge brightness will make a stone look bigger, and is not that symmetrical.
 
Date: 6/29/2009 12:50:28 PM
Author: sniggity
wow!!! I really do have alot to learn still(I'm so glad you guys dont mind helping me out).I thought for sure the WF was nicer then the JA.

Could someone please explain to me were my judgement is misleading?
I know the G-VS1 is rated better cut, but comparing the IS image of that vs. WF .092H, does the WF not look better?
Click to expand...

What is happening in the image to try to put it simply, is that the intense light return you want in ASET which shows as red, is not evenly distributed throughout the diamond, there is too much green which is reflected light, not the direct light as in red which you want bouncing out of the diamond, spread evenly throughout. Some green is acceptable, and some blue, but red is the main colour you want which is coming out of the diamond in all directions.

See here from the tutorial Jet linked.

RED is Direct Light (drawn from 45-75 degrees). Red will be the most intense. It comes directly from the source.

GREEN is Reflected Light (drawn from 0-45 degrees). Green has less intensity. It is light reflected from walls, the environment, etc.


BLUE represents light Obscured by the observer (your head blocks this light from reaching the diamond). These areas will light up when the diamond is tilted and other areas will become shaded.


WHITE (if the diamond is backlit, as above) or BLACK (if not) is Leakage. These areas show where pavilion facets are acting as windows rather than mirrors. You see white because those windows allow you to look through the diamond and see the light underneath. White should be minimized.
 
Thank you for the reference material, it really helped!

Judging by the article, the WF is an above average cut (may seem like im biased towards WF, but really im not).
The JA diamond like stonecold had said, will show the diamond to appear larger.

The one thing about the JA diamond that worries me is that there appears to be alot of light leakage at the centre of the stone. What would creat this leakage (inclusion, clarity issue), and would it be noticeable to the human eye?
 
Understood.

Abundant of red is always better then any reflected light(green).
 
Date: 6/29/2009 1:20:31 PM
Author: sniggity
Thank you for the reference material, it really helped!

Judging by the article, the WF is an above average cut (may seem like im biased towards WF, but really im not).
The JA diamond like stonecold had said, will show the diamond to appear larger.

The one thing about the JA diamond that worries me is that there appears to be alot of light leakage at the centre of the stone. What would creat this leakage (inclusion, clarity issue), and would it be noticeable to the human eye?
Click to expand...
The last JA diamond Jstar posted looks good, as for the centre an Idealscope image would help determine that and the extent. Jstar can pull a good looking Princess out of a haystack!
 
Date: 6/29/2009 1:24:11 PM
Author: sniggity
Understood.

Abundant of red is always better then any reflected light(green).
Click to expand...
Yes, evenly spread throughout the diamond, some green is always seen ( rhymes - heh) in fancy shapes, but you want minimal green ideally. You don't want a solid red image like you see with Idealscope but really abundant and evenly spread red which reaches the corners, a little green and a small amount of blue is normally present.
 
Date: 6/29/2009 1:20:31 PM
Author: sniggity
Thank you for the reference material, it really helped!

Judging by the article, the WF is an above average cut (may seem like im biased towards WF, but really im not).
The JA diamond like stonecold had said, will show the diamond to appear larger.

The one thing about the JA diamond that worries me is that there appears to be alot of light leakage at the centre of the stone. What would creat this leakage (inclusion, clarity issue), and would it be noticeable to the human eye?
Click to expand...
The center leakage is a result of the angles near the culet, how much it is noticeable is still a question to me. It seems to be pretty common in princess and GOG has some videos of Signature princesses that show leakage there in ASET but still look great on the video (and I assume in person, since the Signature series are all hand selected). Keep in mind the overall size of the stone and how small that spot is IRL--magnified images make it look worse that it really is.
 
So hear is all the information i have regarding 1.00 Carat G-VS1 Ideal Princess

Weight 1.007Ct
Width/Length 5.40 -5.42L/W : 1.00
Total Depth %73.5 3.97mm
Crown Angle `41.1
Crown Height %11.3
Pavil Angle `54.3
Pavil Depth %58.3
Model Angle `71.1
Table Size %74.1 - 4mm
Girdle Tickness 4%
 
1055964G.jpg


ISscope
 
Still looks good. I would ask JA to pull both that stone and my last suggestion above, the 4-chevron, and take a photo side-by-side (as well as IS for the 4-chevron stone). JA has taken comparison photos before and hopefully will be able to do this for you. From there you can determine which chevron configuration is right for you, or if you''d rather go middle-of-the-road and select a different 3-chevron princess.
 
Date: 6/29/2009 2:18:14 PM
Author: jstarfireb
Still looks good. I would ask JA to pull both that stone and my last suggestion above, the 4-chevron, and take a photo side-by-side (as well as IS for the 4-chevron stone). JA has taken comparison photos before and hopefully will be able to do this for you. From there you can determine which chevron configuration is right for you, or if you'd rather go middle-of-the-road and select a different 3-chevron princess.
Click to expand...
Agree!
 
I asked about the comparison shot, but they are not able too. However the IS image for the Last JA suggested diamond should be here tomorrow.


I'm assuming that's a 10x loupe used to view the diamond and the inclusions seem very noticeable. Do you think those inclusions in the middle of the table will be noticeable?
 
Date: 6/30/2009 7:49:14 AM
Author: sniggity
I asked about the comparison shot, but they are not able too. However the IS image for the Last JA suggested diamond should be here tomorrow.


I'm assuming that's a 10x loupe used to view the diamond and the inclusions seem very noticeable. Do you think those inclusions in the middle of the table will be noticeable?
Click to expand...
I believe the shot is taken with a 10x loupe then the image is magnified something like 40 times, the only way to know if the inclusions will be visible or not to the eye is to ask the vendor and make your expectations extremely clear. For example if you don't want to see any visible inclusions from any angle or distance, make sure the seller understands this.
 
Date: 6/30/2009 7:49:14 AM
Author: sniggity
I asked about the comparison shot, but they are not able too. However the IS image for the Last JA suggested diamond should be here tomorrow.

I''m assuming that''s a 10x loupe used to view the diamond and the inclusions seem very noticeable. Do you think those inclusions in the middle of the table will be noticeable?
Click to expand...

That''s too bad about the comparison! I swear I''ve seen it done here before. I guess we''ll just have to use the current pics from JA as well as the IS that should be arriving soon.

At a GIA-graded VS1 clarity, the inclusions will not be a problem. It''s pretty much guaranteed to be eye-clean. Ask JA if you have any concern, but it should be fine!
 
Let me know what you guys think....Personally, i think this one might be the winner.
9.gif


92H.jpg
 
Fabulous! It looks just as nice as the 2-chevron, so it all comes down to the personality of each stone. If you like 3 chevrons, this is the winner.
 
I think it looks good.
 
Awesome!!! Looks like it should be a bright & sparkly stone with the personality you prefer.
 
Looks Good.
 
This is a super IS, yes from me!
 
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