Can someone please help me find a FIC?

[ForteKitty]

Honestly, i''d try to find one with the biggest spread while still in ideal ranges. When a stone is smaller, every bit counts. Even 61.5% is still too deep for me (in a pendant). I''d try to get it around 60%-61%, with a thin girdle. FICs are going to be too deep most of the time, and your stone will look a lot smaller. Besides, wont they be kinda darker looking too? (compared to a TIC)

 

[CinnamonTea]

Wow you guys are amazing!

Thank you sooo much!

What about this stone?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=53&item=955612

I thought it was a good canidate because of the 16% crown.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:30:13 PM
Author: CinnamonTea
Wow you guys are amazing!

Thank you sooo much!

What about this stone?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=53&item=955612

I thought it was a good canidate because of the 16% crown.

Same one as I picked in second set of recommendations page 1 here...consistent with your wanting an FIC.

But this is a pendant, yes.

At least note this chart from Garry.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:30:13 PM
Author: CinnamonTea
Wow you guys are amazing!

Thank you sooo much!

What about this stone?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=53&item=955612

I thought it was a good canidate because of the 16% crown.

Borderline tic/fic should be a nice stone. 76% lgf% should work in this stone to give you what you want.

Holloway Cut Adviser
Selected: 62% depth, 54% table, 35.2° crown angle, 40.6° pavilion angle
The result is for a symmetrical diamond with a medium girdle and very good polish
HCA scores were adjusted Dec. 15, 2001 and Feb. 6, 2003.


Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 1.1 - Excellent
within TIC range

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:25:56 PM
Author: ForteKitty
Honestly, i''d try to find one with the biggest spread while still in ideal ranges. When a stone is smaller, every bit counts. Even 61.5% is still too deep for me (in a pendant). I''d try to get it around 60%-61%, with a thin girdle. FICs are going to be too deep most of the time, and your stone will look a lot smaller. Besides, wont they be kinda darker looking too? (compared to a TIC)

I am inclined to agree with FK - below 1/2 or even 3/4ct you will not gain a lot with an FIC because the facets will appear to have smaller flashes.

 

[CinnamonTea]

Something I''ve been trying to figure out is the difference in spread size from a TIC to a FIC so I can see if it significant or not. (to me)

This might help me decide if looking for a FIC is worth it or not. (to me again lol)

To me a 4.0-4.60 mm round stone is not small. My ring has a 5.25-5.27 stone. That does not appear "small" to me either.

But I also think that in these smaller sizes a difference in spread size has much more of an impact.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:39:41 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 1/15/2007 10:25:56 PM
Author: ForteKitty
Honestly, i''d try to find one with the biggest spread while still in ideal ranges. When a stone is smaller, every bit counts. Even 61.5% is still too deep for me (in a pendant). I''d try to get it around 60%-61%, with a thin girdle. FICs are going to be too deep most of the time, and your stone will look a lot smaller. Besides, wont they be kinda darker looking too? (compared to a TIC)

I am inclined to agree with FK - below 1/2 or even 3/4ct you will not gain a lot with an FIC because the facets will appear to have smaller flashes.

I think this may have your big shoulders...given the described constraints.

 

[CinnamonTea]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:38:59 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 1/15/2007 10:30:13 PM
Author: CinnamonTea
Wow you guys are amazing!

Thank you sooo much!

What about this stone?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=53&item=955612

I thought it was a good canidate because of the 16% crown.

Borderline tic/fic should be a nice stone. 76% lgf% should work in this stone to give you what you want.

Holloway Cut Adviser
Selected: 62% depth, 54% table, 35.2° crown angle, 40.6° pavilion angle
The result is for a symmetrical diamond with a medium girdle and very good polish
HCA scores were adjusted Dec. 15, 2001 and Feb. 6, 2003.


Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 1.1 - Excellent
within TIC range

I noticed a difference in the numbers on the cert on that stone then what is posted on the site.

Is the difference going to matter? I think I should check both sets of numbers to find out.

 

[:)]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:36:47 PM
Author: Regular Guy

Date: 1/15/2007 10:30:13 PM
Author: CinnamonTea
Wow you guys are amazing!

Thank you sooo much!

What about this stone?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=53&item=955612

I thought it was a good canidate because of the 16% crown.

Same one as I picked in second set of recommendations page 1 here...consistent with your wanting an FIC.

But this is a pendant, yes.

At least note this chart from Garry.

Ira, the one you recommended did have a CA >35.5, this one is 35.2 - this is the one that you recommended..

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131&item=955577

 

[:)]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:48:24 PM
Author: CinnamonTea

Date: 1/15/2007 10:38:59 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 1/15/2007 10:30:13 PM
Author: CinnamonTea
Wow you guys are amazing!

Thank you sooo much!

What about this stone?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?cid=53&item=955612

I thought it was a good canidate because of the 16% crown.

Borderline tic/fic should be a nice stone. 76% lgf% should work in this stone to give you what you want.

Holloway Cut Adviser
Selected: 62% depth, 54% table, 35.2° crown angle, 40.6° pavilion angle
The result is for a symmetrical diamond with a medium girdle and very good polish
HCA scores were adjusted Dec. 15, 2001 and Feb. 6, 2003.


Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 1.1 - Excellent
within TIC range

I noticed a difference in the numbers on the cert on that stone then what is posted on the site.

Is the difference going to matter? I think I should check both sets of numbers to find out.

They looked like they correlated when I checked them - which #s in particular didn''t correlate when you looked?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:42:25 PM
Author: CinnamonTea
Something I''ve been trying to figure out is the difference in spread size from a TIC to a FIC so I can see if it significant or not. (to me)

This might help me decide if looking for a FIC is worth it or not. (to me again lol)

To me a 4.0-4.60 mm round stone is not small. My ring has a 5.25-5.27 stone. That does not appear ''small'' to me either.

But I also think that in these smaller sizes a difference in spread size has much more of an impact.

More often than not FIC''s have smallish tables and tend to have thicker girdles - so finding what you want can be harder.
But they can cost less so you might be able to find a heavier stone for the same prices with a same size diameter.

 

[Regular Guy]

Date: 1/15/2007 10:54:42 PM
Author:

No, Ira, the one you recommended did have a CA >35.5, this one is 35.2 - it was this one that you recommended..

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131&item=955577

Hard to keep up in this fast moving thread. I''ve recommended 4 now...with the 35.2 in the group of # 2 & 3.

#4 is a bit pricy, though, for the spread advantage. This one above that Storm & Cinnamon Tea and I pointed to may be the safe harbor.

 

[:)]

Gotcha Ira!

CT, at least take a peek at the GEMEX on the two GOG stones. the fire was max on both stones - I don''t think you are going to find any more fire!!

 

[CinnamonTea]

The Depth and the Table are posted as Depth: 62% Table: 54% on the website.

On the cert the numbers are posted as: Depth: 62.0 Table: 54.4%

(not much I guess, but at first I thought that I seen a higher depth then that on the cert) I think this happens when you look at so many stones!

 

[CinnamonTea]

I can''t thank you guys enough for all of this wonderful information and help!

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!

 

[simplysplendid]

Hi CinnamonTea,

I know you have found some FIC here (or TIC 1.1s). Don''t mean to cause you more headache, if you wish to set it in a ring, you may want to take a look at those that are well into the TIC in the HCA. I have a stone that scored 1.3 TIC and one that is a 1.1 TIC on the HCA. The 1.3 TIC stone is very very firey and it is a brighter. The stone that scored a 1.1 has a little more fire but it looks much obviously darker. Personally, I prefer a slightly brighter stone with lots of fire.

Rather than insist on one that is a FIC, may be worth the while to compare the looks of it (if possible) and see what you really prefer visually.

P/s: In case you would like to know, the TIC1.1 has crown angles 34.9, Pav angles 40.7, Table 53.7% and Depth 61.2. It is not too deep (so I did not sacrifice much spread) but already obviously darker. I''m not sure how dark it will be if it goes deeper as well.

 

[CinnamonTea]

Date: 1/15/2007 11:02:31 PM
Author:
Gotcha Ira!

CT, at least take a peek at the GEMEX on the two GOG stones. the fire was max on both stones - I don''t think you are going to find any more fire!!

I took a look at all of the stones you suggested. I am sorry to say but not one of them appealed to me. They all seemed to be like 34.9% or less closer to 34 then 35 % crown angle.

I am kind of stuck on having a steep crown scince I wanted one when I look for my ring stone yet couldn''t find one!

I am honestly willingly to loose 3-5% brilliance and spread size to gain 5% fire. Fire is what it''s all about to me!

 

[CinnamonTea]

Based apon everyone''s responses here is my new search criteria:

35-35.5 + crown angle (35.4 and below is a TIC/35.5 and above is a FIC)

40.6 pav angle and below

Depth varies (you can''t get everything you want) altho I will keep an eye out for 60-61.5% CUZ THIS WILL BE A PENDANT

I am really excited about this whole entire project!

I can''t wait to see stones with lots of fire!!!!

Another thing I wanted to bring up is this stone will most likely be surrounded in Ideal-cut melee.

I don''t think it''s right for me to be so picky over melee but think TIC range melee would be just fine?

I have heard good things about the melee Whiteflash uses.

So my pendant will most likely be a Custom-design Whiteflash peice with ACA melee.

Sound good to you?

 

[JulieN]

Sarin 1-2 mm stones?

 

[ForteKitty]

Date: 1/16/2007 2:07:06 AM
Author: CinnamonTea

Another thing I wanted to bring up is this stone will most likely be surrounded in Ideal-cut melee.


I don''t think it''s right for me to be so picky over melee but think TIC range melee would be just fine?

You''re kidding, right?

 

[simplysplendid]

Hi Cinnamon,

Have you seen a FIC and a TIC diamond side by side? Have you seen a FIC melee and a TIC melee side by side? Did you see the difference in fire between them?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 1/15/2007 11:02:31 PM
Author:
Gotcha Ira!

CT, at least take a peek at the GEMEX on the two GOG stones. the fire was max on both stones - I don''t think you are going to find any more fire!!

Gemex maxes out when chance (or cutters by design to achieve great Gemex results) create diamonds that gather light from the zones where the ring light is positioned just right for those stones.

Think about these images - see that one could have mostly ''misses'' and the other ould have mostly ''direct hits'' - and the most firey diamond might not score best

 

[CinnamonTea]

I am not going to debate just because some people don''t think there''s a visual difference. (not here for that)

The melee thing was a joke.

I thought it was funny.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 1/16/2007 3:58:31 AM
Author: simplysplendid
Hi Cinnamon,

Have you seen a FIC and a TIC diamond side by side? Have you seen a FIC melee and a TIC melee side by side? Did you see the difference in fire between them?

Here here FK and SS

Hey Cinamon

what I write.

Melle works best with bigger tables and trying to get FIC''s to work is pointless because the facets get so small you cant see the fire or sparkles.

 

[CinnamonTea]

Thank you Garry! I am not going to worrry about the melee. Just gonna get some Whiteflash ACA''s and call it good.

 

[Mara]

Date: 1/16/2007 3:58:31 AM
Author: simplysplendid
Hi Cinnamon,

Have you seen a FIC and a TIC diamond side by side? Have you seen a FIC melee and a TIC melee side by side? Did you see the difference in fire between them?

hehe i wondered this too. honestly i don't know that the human eye can pick up a 5% increase in something like fire from a 4-5mm stone. maybe superman eyes!

cinammon if you have not already, please try to see some stones in person that are ideal TIC's and well-cut FIC's. you may realize that again...you just think 'oh more fire is fabulous' without even really realizing what you really want to see in the stone. i have multiple TIC's and have owned a BIC and now know that i never want to 'sacrifice' one thing for the other when it comes to diamonds and how they return light. i want a TIC that shows me the best of all worlds. maybe a BIC for a pendant. or an OEC which is a FIC typically just because i like the old cuts. but a round ideal cut FIC? i wouldn't want the loss of spread as a tradeoff for something my eye really can't even pick up. and especially not for a pendant. anyway in my opinion, much of it is mental. but you should try to compare if possible in person. it might really help either show you that you can't really pick up a difference OR that you CAN...until you see a bunch of stuff in person it's hard to differentiate.

 

[CinnamonTea]

Date: 1/16/2007 1:05:07 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 1/16/2007 3:58:31 AM
Author: simplysplendid
Hi Cinnamon,

Have you seen a FIC and a TIC diamond side by side? Have you seen a FIC melee and a TIC melee side by side? Did you see the difference in fire between them?

hehe i wondered this too. honestly i don''t know that the human eye can pick up a 5% increase in something like fire from a 4-5mm stone. maybe superman eyes!

cinammon if you have not already, please try to see some stones in person that are ideal TIC''s and well-cut FIC''s. you may realize that again...you just think ''oh more fire is fabulous'' without even really realizing what you really want to see in the stone. i have multiple TIC''s and have owned a BIC and now know that i never want to ''sacrifice'' one thing for the other when it comes to diamonds and how they return light. i want a TIC that shows me the best of all worlds. maybe a BIC for a pendant. or an OEC which is a FIC typically just because i like the old cuts. but a round ideal cut FIC? i wouldn''t want the loss of spread as a tradeoff for something my eye really can''t even pick up. and especially not for a pendant. anyway in my opinion, much of it is mental. but you should try to compare if possible in person. it might really help either show you that you can''t really pick up a difference OR that you CAN...until you see a bunch of stuff in person it''s hard to differentiate.

I''ve seen all 3 types in person when we went searching for my ring stone. I even looked at smaller stones and noticed a difference. I think every stone has it''s own personality regardless of if it has the same exact crown angle and pav angle to the one sitting next to it. I am here to find a stone that speaks to me. That is what I will choose. I appreciate your suggestions and comments and I will consider them when chooising a stone. Thank you.