Color vs. Size - Your Opinion

[mrs-b]

I haven't decided on anything quite yet, but hope to today or tomorrow - why do you say that? The inclusions?

Hi @crimsonbear -

Did you see my initial comments on that stone? It's HORRIBLY cut. It's WAY too deep. It's sacrificing size hand over fist and its light return will be comparatively poor because of its depth. The faceting pattern is indistinct and unattractive. And it's flat as a pancake.

GIA has such slack grading - there is no way on earth this is an ideally cut diamond! Just an ugly stone that will have poor performance.

 

[crimsonbear]

Hi @crimsonbear -

Did you see my initial comments on that stone? It's HORRIBLY cut. It's WAY too deep. It's sacrificing size hand over fist and its light return will be comparatively poor because of its depth. The faceting pattern is indistinct and unattractive. And it's flat as a pancake.

GIA has such slack grading - there is no way on earth this is an ideally cut diamond! Just an ugly stone that will have poor performance.

Ah yes, sorry, I thought you meant the 1.41 from @sledge's post (from WF). I did rule out the 1.41 from BN based on your earlier advice. Thanks!

Also, I did have BN confirm the 1.52 is eye clean, but it was a bit of a hedge (I don't know if that's standard, or they were worried if you looked at it for more than a split second it wouldn't be eye clean).

 

[sledge]

Ah yes, sorry, I thought you meant the 1.41 from @sledge's post (from WF). I did rule out the 1.41 from BN based on your earlier advice. Thanks!

Also, I did have BN confirm the 1.52 is eye clean, but it was a bit of a hedge (I don't know if that's standard, or they were worried if you looked at it for more than a split second it wouldn't be eye clean).

The WF stones are super ideals and guaranteed performers. They all have ideal cut and will be stunners.

Basically an easy button solution with all the data to prove it.

 

[mrs-b]

The WF stones are super ideals and guaranteed performers. They all have ideal cut and will be stunners.

Basically an easy button solution with all the data to prove it.

@sledge -

Read the man's posts. He said he specifically wanted something from BN.

 

[AV_]

The main clarity characteristic of the 1.52 is one translucent smudge under the table about the size of a "

I remember that BN allows two returns. This one is worth one of those three shots.

Once you have tasted a J / SI , you will know if you want anything very different & still possible.

 

[sledge]

@sledge -

Read the man's posts. He said he specifically wanted something from BN.

If you are going to police me and this thread then do a better job. He posted the following, which then prompted me to seek some WF stones.

Thanks! I'm completely open to the idea of different stones than what I've found (although I'd prefer Blue Nile because she's in love with a setting by them).

My last response about the WF stones was simply a clarification as he (mistakenly) thought one of the WF stones I recommended was garbage. Funny enough, he thought that because of your comments about a 1.41 BN stone.

I do not feel clarifying the quality of the WF stones was out of order. I am sorry that somehow angered you.

 

[mrs-b]

If you are going to police me and this thread then do a better job. He posted the following, which then prompted me to seek some WF stones.



My last response about the WF stones was simply a clarification as he (mistakenly) thought one of the WF stones I recommended was garbage. Funny enough, he thought that because of your comments about a 1.41 BN stone.

I do not feel clarifying the quality of the WF stones was out of order. I am sorry that somehow angered you.

Unnecessary over-reaction. Try to stay on topic and help the OP.