Clarity or size... oh no she din''t

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/29/2009 12:46:52 PM
Author: february2003bride

Ok, if a halo is out, then I wouldn''t go smaller. You''ve said many times you really want to hit that 1.5 mark as your ideal size. Did the H/I colors that you looked at really have a tint to it? I''m sure you will love the color of the G, but then will you hate the size and regret not meeting in the middle at an ''I'' color but same size or larger?

The Lucida style isn''t boring!! It''s my favorite Tiffany ring! And that style setting may help oomph your stone''s size visual as well. For me, wider settings make a diamond look slightly larger.

Yes, I think a realistic goal is to try and get a diamond *just* under the 1.5ct mark one day. Maybe when I get tenure! Well, for sure when I get tenure

If I can hold out for 5 years.

I think I color is too low for what I am after. Although it would not look tinted at all, it would not feel different enough from my current diamond, it is still a warmish white IMO. I don''t think that the H diamond we looked at had any tint. It certainly looked whiter than my current diamond, no question about that. But there is something about the G that looked crisper, more "bah boom". Maybe it was just those diamonds? Still I remember so clearly how I felt when I brought home my F color diamond (see picture). There is something so crisp about those colorless stones. There is beauty in my K no doubt (see next post), but I do prefer that crisp look if I am honest

Something that attracts me to the BGD GSi2 is that Brian says it is actually closer to an F than a G... which is why he bought it.

 

[Dreamer_D]

My beautiful K showing her warmth.

 

[february2003bride]

Date: 11/29/2009 12:59:33 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 11/29/2009 12:46:52 PM
Author: february2003bride

Ok, if a halo is out, then I wouldn''t go smaller. You''ve said many times you really want to hit that 1.5 mark as your ideal size. Did the H/I colors that you looked at really have a tint to it? I''m sure you will love the color of the G, but then will you hate the size and regret not meeting in the middle at an ''I'' color but same size or larger?

The Lucida style isn''t boring!! It''s my favorite Tiffany ring! And that style setting may help oomph your stone''s size visual as well. For me, wider settings make a diamond look slightly larger.

Yes, I think a realistic goal is to try and get a diamond *just* under the 1.5ct mark one day. Maybe when I get tenure! Well, for sure when I get tenure

If I can hold out for 5 years.

I think I color is too low for what I am after. Although it would not look tinted at all, it would not feel different enough from my current diamond, it is still a warmish white IMO. I don''t think that the H diamond we looked at had any tint. It certainly looked whiter than my current diamond, no question about that. But there is something about the G that looked crisper, more ''bah boom''. Maybe it was just those diamonds? Still I remember so clearly how I felt when I brought home my F color diamond (see picture). There is something so crisp about those colorless stones. There is beauty in my K no doubt (see next post), but I do prefer that crisp look if I am honest

Something that attracts me to the BGD GSi2 is that Brian says it is actually closer to an F than a G... which is why he bought it.

Ok, gotcha. You NEED to be a G or higher. My original princess cut was an F color, and when we had it appraised by Martin Fuller, he said it was much closer to an E color. After he said that, my diamond looked crisper, whiter, more beautiful. So silly, right? It hadn''t changed obviously but in my mind it was suddenly a a better diamond!

 

[gemgirl]

Your stone is a great size. Really, don't go smaller and is that a new wedding band I see?

dd, can you get the actual images of the diamond you're thinking about?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/29/2009 1:08:03 PM
Author: february2003bride

Ok, gotcha. You NEED to be a G or higher. My original princess cut was an F color, and when we had it appraised by Martin Fuller, he said it was much closer to an E color. After he said that, my diamond looked crisper, whiter, more beautiful. So silly, right? It hadn''t changed obviously but in my mind it was suddenly a a better diamond!

Yup! But that is what mind clean, mind colorless etc is all about. THE MIND!

Gemgirl Photos are in the works. A photo came with the diamond information but it was so high contrast to show the cut that it was hard to see the inclusions.

 

[marym]

I''d take your K any day!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/29/2009 3:24:29 PM
Author: marym
I''d take your K any day!

Thanks! It is a stunning rock and I know that when I send it back someone will buy it and be very very very happy!

I hope it is a PSer I would like to know who gets it. Another PSer here has my first diamond, a .80ct J, and it is so cool to see her so happy and to see how she chose to set it (Bev K halo

)

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/29/2009 1:08:51 PM
Author: gemgirl
Your stone is a great size. Really, don''t go smaller and is that a new wedding band I see?

dd, can you get the actual images of the diamond you''re thinking about?

Nope it is my original wedding band! 4 prong half eternity with 8 pointers. Too big with the present setting but with my reset the heights will match and maybe I will wear it more!

 

[yssie]

I would definitely go with an eyeclean SI2. They do exist, and to me, eyeclean is boolean - the stone either is, or isn't, from whatever distance and angle.

That way when you look at your stone, you don't feel you've sacrificed anything to get what you want

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/29/2009 6:24:56 PM
Author: yssie
I would definitely go with an eyeclean SI2. They do exist, and to me, eyeclean is boolean - the stone either is, or isn''t, from whatever distance and angle.

That way when you look at your stone, you don''t feel you''ve sacrificed anything to get what you want

tee hee hee... big words

 

[HVVS]

lol at Boolean. "They''re all either ones or zeros to me."

 

[motownmama]

DD - I''m not trying to be a rainstorm on your parade, BUT, am I allowed to say I LOVE your current ring?! It looks wonderful on your hand. You haven''t had it very long, right? What happened to saving for the 2 ct dream ring in 5-7 years (Maybe that was someone else?)

Best of luck, of course!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/30/2009 12:28:31 AM
Author: motownmama
DD - I''m not trying to be a rainstorm on your parade, BUT, am I allowed to say I LOVE your current ring?! It looks wonderful on your hand. You haven''t had it very long, right? What happened to saving for the 2 ct dream ring in 5-7 years (Maybe that was someone else?)

Best of luck, of course!

LOL! Yes, that was me

Perhaps one day there will be a 2ct diamond in my life, but I doubt it. I don''t think it is realistic, given that I would like a higher color diamond and given my comfort level for spending on my diamond. I am nearing my limit for what I think is right. This change in addition to the setting change will be my last diamond change. I don''t want to keep thinking about "the next" thing.

I got this diamond in April of this year. Although the size change is a good thing, the color drop was a mistake. So this will be a change to make that right.

Thanks for the compliment about my ring, though! I think it will look even better with a colorless diamond.

 

[LGK]

Ok, I admit I haven't read this whole thread yet, so you may have come to a decision. However, I really think that over time, you'll be happier with a slightly larger size. And "mind clean" type issues tend to bug one less over time, if the stone is truly eye clean that is. Stones around the 1 ct mark really do show a slight increase or decrease in size pretty noticeably, even a teensy one.

Here's two things that make me think that. One, is that I put theoretically-1-ct Old European Cut "non diamond thing"

in the temp setting my (briefly owned) 1.08 ct diamond lived in. The diamond was dead on 6.5 mm. I kept thinking how weird it was that the diamond had looked bigger in the setting. I mean, the two stones were supposed to be identical so what the heck? Finally I measured the "thing" with calipers. It was actually 6.3mm. The .2 mm change was really noticeable to me. Even a year later it strikes me how much smaller the "thing" is. (Great travel ring, but the diamond looked much better

!) Bear in mind I never saw the two stones side by side- I only got the "thing" after the diamond was gone, and the size difference was still immediately apparent.

The other thing is that my larger OEC has a chip on the girdle. You can't see it with the naked eye even if you're an eagle eyed nutcase like me, but it bugged me when I got it for a few weeks, and it wasn't worth risking the really-really-thin girdle to recut it. I spent some time scrutinizing it in differennt lights, wondering if I could maybe see the chip if I tilted it just so, and if maybe it would be worth the jump in clarity fixing it (VS2 to IF) even with the risk of recutting it. Now, a year later, I rarely even remember it has one, let alone obsess over it.

So after living with that particular choice (though not quite in the same way you will!) I have to say the size difference in a near 1 ct stone is the one I think about and notice; however, bear in mind I'm no clarity nut either.

Your K is drop dead gorgeous BTW!

The only thing that would make me wonder if you'd react the same way, is that the K color wasn't one you could live with. However, there is a world of difference between something you can actually *see* day to day (color) and mind-clean issues, IMO. Those, you don't see. A visible inclusion however is totally different of course... it'd have to be a *really* clean SI2!

ETA: Seeing that inclusion plot on your current eyeclean SI1- I think you'd be fine with an really, truly eyeclean SI2. If the inclusions in your current stone don't bug you, because you can't see them, I'd absolutely go for slightly bigger SI2. By the way, it does look like it has a fascinating array of things going on in that rock- have you ever louped it, or used a microscope, while looking at the plot? I'd be so curious about some of them! (One of the jewelers I know put my 1.22 ct SI1 OEC in his microscope for me to play with and it was really fascinating- indented naturals look so cool.)

 

[Imdanny]

Date: 11/29/2009 1:00:33 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie
My beautiful K showing her warmth.

OMG. That''s beautiful. I''d just keep it. I''m no help.

 

[that_someone_special]

Date: 11/30/2009 7:00:51 AM
Author: Imdanny

Date: 11/29/2009 1:00:33 PM

Author: dreamer_dachsie

My beautiful K showing her warmth.

OMG. That''s beautiful. I''d just keep it. I''m no help.

I know... me too!!!

 

[tyty333]

*Knowing* that it is smaller would be a "mind" issue to me more that an eye-clean SI2 vs an eye-clean SI1.

 

[Laila619]

Date: 11/30/2009 8:57:27 AM
Author: tyty333
*Knowing* that it is smaller would be a ''mind'' issue to me more that an eye-clean SI2 vs an eye-clean SI1.

Me too!

Dreamer, I''m sure you will find the *One*! It pays to be patient.

 

[jill_s]

Buying diamonds is so hard, isn''t it? I think the key to buying successfully is to learn where you are and aren''t willing to compromise. For my last upgrade and for the earring upgrade I''m currently considering, I ranked the importance of each of the 4 C''s to me. My #1 is size, no matter how much I try to tell myself differently. My remaining preferences are cut, then color, and finally clarity. So my areas for compromise are on color/clarity, which is why I ended up with a K SI1. I do see color in my K and it''s not my preference, but I''m happy knowing that ultimately I''m at the size I wanted. I even picked size over a perfect idealscope image. The symmetry on my stone is a little off (the angle combo is good, though), but that was another compromise to get to my ideal size. I will probably upgrade one last time, to a similar size and cut J eye-clean SI2 when something like that becomes available. I would love a higher color/clarity, but that''s not financially in the cards for me right now. I''m ok with that, however, because I got what was most important to me. It''s a fine balance, but I think you need to determine what that balance looks like for you.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/30/2009 4:00:08 AM
Author: LittleGreyKitten
Ok, I admit I haven''t read this whole thread yet, so you may have come to a decision. However, I really think that over time, you''ll be happier with a slightly larger size. And ''mind clean'' type issues tend to bug one less over time, if the stone is truly eye clean that is. Stones around the 1 ct mark really do show a slight increase or decrease in size pretty noticeably, even a teensy one.

Here''s two things that make me think that. One, is that I put theoretically-1-ct Old European Cut ''non diamond thing''

in the temp setting my (briefly owned) 1.08 ct diamond lived in. The diamond was dead on 6.5 mm. I kept thinking how weird it was that the diamond had looked bigger in the setting. I mean, the two stones were supposed to be identical so what the heck? Finally I measured the ''thing'' with calipers. It was actually 6.3mm. The .2 mm change was really noticeable to me. Even a year later it strikes me how much smaller the ''thing'' is. (Great travel ring, but the diamond looked much better

!) Bear in mind I never saw the two stones side by side- I only got the ''thing'' after the diamond was gone, and the size difference was still immediately apparent.

The other thing is that my larger OEC has a chip on the girdle. You can''t see it with the naked eye even if you''re an eagle eyed nutcase like me, but it bugged me when I got it for a few weeks, and it wasn''t worth risking the really-really-thin girdle to recut it. I spent some time scrutinizing it in differennt lights, wondering if I could maybe see the chip if I tilted it just so, and if maybe it would be worth the jump in clarity fixing it (VS2 to IF) even with the risk of recutting it. Now, a year later, I rarely even remember it has one, let alone obsess over it.

So after living with that particular choice (though not quite in the same way you will!) I have to say the size difference in a near 1 ct stone is the one I think about and notice; however, bear in mind I''m no clarity nut either.

Your K is drop dead gorgeous BTW!

The only thing that would make me wonder if you''d react the same way, is that the K color wasn''t one you could live with. However, there is a world of difference between something you can actually *see* day to day (color) and mind-clean issues, IMO. Those, you don''t see. A visible inclusion however is totally different of course... it''d have to be a *really* clean SI2!

ETA: Seeing that inclusion plot on your current eyeclean SI1- I think you''d be fine with an really, truly eyeclean SI2. If the inclusions in your current stone don''t bug you, because you can''t see them, I''d absolutely go for slightly bigger SI2. By the way, it does look like it has a fascinating array of things going on in that rock- have you ever louped it, or used a microscope, while looking at the plot? I''d be so curious about some of them! (One of the jewelers I know put my 1.22 ct SI1 OEC in his microscope for me to play with and it was really fascinating- indented naturals look so cool.)

LGK thank you for this interesting and thoughful comparison! I think you are right that dropping size would make me batty. So that really means that something else has to give -- color or clarity. I am now rethinking the whole darn thing

 

[E B]

Date: 11/30/2009 12:39:32 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

LGK thank you for this interesting and thoughful comparison! I think you are right that dropping size would make me batty. So that really means that something else has to give -- color or clarity. I am now rethinking the whole darn thing

If the size is going to be more of a mind clean issue than the clarity, then the G/SI2 seems like your best bet, esp. if it's eye-clean. Just think of the inclusions as your stone's birthmarks- what makes it unique.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/30/2009 7:19:04 AM
Author: swedish bean

Date: 11/30/2009 7:00:51 AM
Author: Imdanny

Date: 11/29/2009 1:00:33 PM

Author: dreamer_dachsie

My beautiful K showing her warmth.

OMG. That''s beautiful. I''d just keep it. I''m no help.

I know... me too!!!

haha... I suppose that helps in some ways. A part of me feels that way too!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/30/2009 10:22:39 AM
Author: Laila619

Date: 11/30/2009 8:57:27 AM
Author: tyty333
*Knowing* that it is smaller would be a ''mind'' issue to me more that an eye-clean SI2 vs an eye-clean SI1.

Me too!

Dreamer, I''m sure you will find the *One*! It pays to be patient.

I think I agree with you on this one!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/30/2009 10:43:52 AM
Author: jill_s
Buying diamonds is so hard, isn''t it? I think the key to buying successfully is to learn where you are and aren''t willing to compromise. For my last upgrade and for the earring upgrade I''m currently considering, I ranked the importance of each of the 4 C''s to me. My #1 is size, no matter how much I try to tell myself differently. My remaining preferences are cut, then color, and finally clarity. So my areas for compromise are on color/clarity, which is why I ended up with a K SI1. I do see color in my K and it''s not my preference, but I''m happy knowing that ultimately I''m at the size I wanted. I even picked size over a perfect idealscope image. The symmetry on my stone is a little off (the angle combo is good, though), but that was another compromise to get to my ideal size. I will probably upgrade one last time, to a similar size and cut J eye-clean SI2 when something like that becomes available. I would love a higher color/clarity, but that''s not financially in the cards for me right now. I''m ok with that, however, because I got what was most important to me. It''s a fine balance, but I think you need to determine what that balance looks like for you.

Balance, what''s that

I need to think about it more and figure out what my real priorities are I guess.

 

[vanderaf]

I am a very impatient person. There were so many times I wanted to buy something just to end my search and be done with my dream ring. In the end I held out and found the perfect ring for me. It turned out to be nicer than anything I had seen and was priced better than the others. You will know in your heart when the right one comes along. If you have to question it at all than you should pass. My heart skipped a beat when I found the ring and I know you will feel the same when you find that perfect diamond within your budget. Hang in there...you have some time to find the one.

 

[coda72]

I would snatch up that BGD G, SI2 if I were you. If you know this is not your forever stone, and the color is bothering you on your current stone, I would live with the SI2 clarity until a size upgrade is possible if I were you. I already posted about how I got a J colored stone that is too tinted to be my forever stone, but it is a gorgeous stone for what I want right now.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/30/2009 3:53:54 PM
Author: coda72
I would snatch up that BGD G, SI2 if I were you. If you know this is not your forever stone, and the color is bothering you on your current stone, I would live with the SI2 clarity until a size upgrade is possible if I were you. I already posted about how I got a J colored stone that is too tinted to be my forever stone, but it is a gorgeous stone for what I want right now.

Here is something funny that Jon at GOG wrote about SI2 diamonds:

"If you do purchase an SI2 or SI3 and after viewing the diamond under a scope you can make out the inclusions under certain lighting or conditions, don''t have a cow. When a stone is termed "eye-clean", this generally means that as the casual observer looks at the stone (such as friends, relatives, etc.), there will be no large inclusions jumping out that are obvious."

 

[that_someone_special]

Hmm... about Si2 diamonds....

Before I found PS I COULD NOT see inclusions until I saw a rather icky I2 diamond in a maul store. Ok, that has nothing to do with my story... ok back to the topic...

The stone I inherited from my grandmother is an I si2. The first time I saw it, I thought it was the best money could buy-- I didn''t see ANYTHING wrong with it. Now, I can see the black carbon inclusion in it. It IS eyeclean, it''s just not photographic clean or loupe clean... lol. Anyways, this one inclusion can be seen from the side of the diamond and because of the facets, often looks like there are 3 or 4 of those puppies in there. Do I love the stone any less? no!!!! I show people the inclusion and they look at me like I''m crazy. Most people cannot see it. I think of it as ... personality! I guess it doesn''t hurt that it''s cut great too.

 

[EHR2009]

hahahahaha swedishbean I LOVE your avatar!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 11/30/2009 5:11:31 PM
Author: swedish bean
Hmm... about Si2 diamonds....

Before I found PS I COULD NOT see inclusions until I saw a rather icky I2 diamond in a maul store. Ok, that has nothing to do with my story... ok back to the topic...

The stone I inherited from my grandmother is an I si2. The first time I saw it, I thought it was the best money could buy-- I didn''t see ANYTHING wrong with it. Now, I can see the black carbon inclusion in it. It IS eyeclean, it''s just not photographic clean or loupe clean... lol. Anyways, this one inclusion can be seen from the side of the diamond and because of the facets, often looks like there are 3 or 4 of those puppies in there. Do I love the stone any less? no!!!! I show people the inclusion and they look at me like I''m crazy. Most people cannot see it. I think of it as ... personality! I guess it doesn''t hurt that it''s cut great too.

Yes, I think this is the exact thing I am worried about! I don''t realy scrutinize my diamonds as a rule, but I wonder if *knowing* the inclusions is there will cause me to look for it all the time... to "have a cow" as JOn puts it