Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Comparing diamonds for engagement ring

R

r1rjj

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 22, 2022
Messages
10
Hi everyone, I'm comparing below 2 diamonds for my engagement ring, both score 0.9 on HCA.
Can I get some advice on which one I should pick? (or neither of them)

1. GIA 6411195677
1645673990287.png

1645673525836.png

2. GIA 6227091117
1645674014446.png
small black crystal inclusion on the surface, not sure if that will be a deal breaker
1645673652062.png
1645673735339.png
1645673802662.png
 
The second stone has far better proportions than the first.

I would personally pass on the first stone - don't like the proportions. It'll have a flat crown which is unappealing IMO.
 
Diamond_Enthusiast said:
The second stone has far better proportions than the first.

I would personally pass on the first stone - don't like the proportions. It'll have a flat crown which is unappealing IMO.
Click to expand...

Thanks! What's the acceptable range of Crown Angle?
 
r1rjj said:
Thanks! What's the acceptable range of Crown Angle?
Click to expand...

I personally prefer CA 34-36 but also need to look at table size, length of lowers and star - it is a combination that needs to work together. The first stone has a large 58 table + 32.5 CA, so crown will be flat and 45 star makes it even flatter.

You want to ensure that crown and pavilion angles are complimentary (generally higher CA will work better with lower PA and vice versa) and that it works with the table size etc. Here is a page with PS recommended proportions:

www.pricescope.com

Diamond Proportions

The physics of light-behavior within a diamond are reliably consistent, which means proportions measurements can be useful.
www.pricescope.com

Try to go for the 'All Around (near Tolkowsky)' green column if you can. The 'Firey Balanced' and 'Bright Balanced' columns beside it can be nice too.
 
Diamond_Enthusiast said:
I personally prefer CA 34-36 but also need to look at table size, length of lowers and star - it is a combination that needs to work together. The first stone has a large 58 table + 32.5 CA, so crown will be flat and 45 star makes it even flatter.

You want to ensure that crown and pavilion angles are complimentary (generally higher CA will work better with lower PA and vice versa) and that it works with the table size etc. Here is a page with PS recommended proportions:

www.pricescope.com

Diamond Proportions

The physics of light-behavior within a diamond are reliably consistent, which means proportions measurements can be useful.
www.pricescope.com

Try to go for the 'All Around (near Tolkowsky)' green column if you can. The 'Firey Balanced' and 'Bright Balanced' columns beside it can be nice too.
Click to expand...

Thanks, comparing with the table, does that mean the 2nd diamond is close to All Around? and should look good for an engagement ring?

Crown Angle = 35 (within the 34-35 range)
Pavillion Angle = 40.6 (0.2 degree different from 40.8, is that a deal breaker?)
Lower Halves = 75 (fall within the 74-82 range)
Table% = 57% (within the 54-59 range for 1.00-1.99 ct)
 
Diamond_Enthusiast said:
The second stone has far better proportions than the first.

I would personally pass on the first stone - don't like the proportions. It'll have a flat crown which is unappealing IMO.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. The second stone looks beautiful, and I don't think that inclusion will be visible to the naked eye.

r1rjj said:
Thanks, comparing with the table, does that mean the 2nd diamond is close to All Around? and should look good for an engagement ring?

Crown Angle = 35 (within the 34-35 range)
Pavillion Angle = 40.6 (0.2 degree different from 40.8, is that a deal breaker?)
Lower Halves = 75 (fall within the 74-82 range)
Table% = 57% (within the 54-59 range for 1.00-1.99 ct)
Click to expand...

Yes, the second diamond will look great for an engagement ring and is within Tolkowsky (all around) ideal proportions.
 
Kim N said:
Completely agree. The second stone looks beautiful, and I don't think that inclusion will be visible to the naked eye.



Yes, the second diamond will look great for an engagement ring and is within Tolkowsky (all around) ideal proportions.
Click to expand...

should i get an ideal scope or aset scope to compare the two diamonds myself?
or there's no point looking at the 1st diamond given its poor proportions ?
 
r1rjj said:
should i get an ideal scope or aset scope to compare the two diamonds myself?
or there's no point looking at the 1st diamond given its poor proportions ?
Click to expand...

Can you ask the vendor to provide an Ideal-Scope or ASET image, at least for the second stone? I don't think the first one is worth pursuing IMHO.
 
1645685111943.png

Just asked for the ASET, what do you think? does the ASET image matches with the proportions ?
Kim N said:
Can you ask the vendor to provide an Ideal-Scope or ASET image, at least for the second stone? I don't think the first one is worth pursuing IMHO.
Click to expand...
 
Kim N said:
Completely agree. The second stone looks beautiful, and I don't think that inclusion will be visible to the naked eye.



Yes, the second diamond will look great for an engagement ring and is within Tolkowsky (all around) ideal proportions.
Click to expand...

Kim N said:
Can you ask the vendor to provide an Ideal-Scope or ASET image, at least for the second stone? I don't think the first one is worth pursuing IMHO.
Click to expand...

Agree with both comments from @Kim N
 
r1rjj said:
1645685111943.png

Just asked for the ASET, what do you think? does the ASET image matches with the proportions ?
Click to expand...

There is some digging at the girdle (there will be a reduction in brightness where it's green along the circumference), but overall I'd say it's a good diamond.
 
Agree with the others...the proportions and angles of the second one are far more favorable.
The ASET looks great, even with the bit of digging going on. Because of that, you may want to ask the seller to provide videos of it in direct and indirect lighting so that you can determine if the digging will cause dull spots along the perimeter.
 
Despite the a bit of digging, this is one of the better GIA XXX diamonds. Worth going for IMHO if the price is good.
 
r1rjj said:
Price is 13,390 USD, is it good or bad?
Click to expand...

That seems like a reasonable price but at that price, this one is better IMO:

Diamond | 1.28 ct E VS2 Premium Select Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 4463497

This fabulous 1.28 carat Round Excellent cut diamond has a clarity grade of VS2 and color grade of E.It is an excellent choice for diamond engagement rings or other fine diamond jewelry. | 4463497
www.whiteflash.com

Higher color, better performance and WF has an excellent policy in case you want to upgrade down the track. Same face up size and cost marginally less.
 
Diamond_Enthusiast said:
That seems like a reasonable price but at that price, this one is better IMO:

Diamond | 1.28 ct E VS2 Premium Select Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 4463497

This fabulous 1.28 carat Round Excellent cut diamond has a clarity grade of VS2 and color grade of E.It is an excellent choice for diamond engagement rings or other fine diamond jewelry. | 4463497
www.whiteflash.com

Higher color, better performance and WF has an excellent policy in case you want to upgrade down the track. Same face up size and cost marginally less.
Click to expand...

Absolutely winner.
@r1rjj put this WF ACA diamond on hold immediately so that it doesn't get sold out from under you while you are weighing your options. Each ACA diamond is custom cut to very tight specifications, heavily vetted, and will outperform just about any other MRB on the planet...not kidding.
 
The one I suggested is actually from WF's Premium Select range and is well cut like their ACAs (difference is ACA is certified by AGS while PS stones are GIA certified). Both enjoy the same generous WF upgrade policy too.
 
Diamond_Enthusiast said:
The one I suggested is actually from WF's Premium Select range and is well cut like their ACAs (difference is ACA is certified by AGS while PS stones are GIA certified). Both enjoy the same generous WF upgrade policy too.
Click to expand...

My mistake. Looking over the specs, videos, and advanced images (Ideal-Scope and ASET), this particular WF PS diamond is still one heck of a stout performer and would put many other GIA 3X diamonds to shame.
 
Diamond_Enthusiast said:
The one I suggested is actually from WF's Premium Select range and is well cut like their ACAs (difference is ACA is certified by AGS while PS stones are GIA certified). Both enjoy the same generous WF upgrade policy too.
Click to expand...

Thanks guys! The proportions of this diamond looks amazing.
Tried matching it with "All Round" figures:
www.pricescope.com

Diamond Proportions

The physics of light-behavior within a diamond are reliably consistent, which means proportions measurements can be useful.
www.pricescope.com
Crown Angle = 34.5 (within the 34-35 range)
Pavillion Angle = 40.8 (matches 40.8)
Lower Halves = 75 (fall within the 74-82 range)
Table% = 57% (within the 54-59 range for 1.00-1.99 ct)

The only question I have is if the clouds on the surface / "Additional clouds are not shown" in Comments will be a problem (that may make the stone look hazy/milky? doesn't look like it from the video though)?
 
r1rjj said:
Thanks guys! The proportions of this diamond looks amazing.
Tried matching it with "All Round" figures:
www.pricescope.com

Diamond Proportions

The physics of light-behavior within a diamond are reliably consistent, which means proportions measurements can be useful.
www.pricescope.com
Crown Angle = 34.5 (within the 34-35 range)
Pavillion Angle = 40.8 (matches 40.8)
Lower Halves = 75 (fall within the 74-82 range)
Table% = 57% (within the 54-59 range for 1.00-1.99 ct)

The only question I have is if the clouds on the surface / "Additional clouds are not shown" in Comments will be a problem (that may make the stone look hazy/milky? doesn't look like it from the video though)?
Click to expand...

It looks crisp in the video, but call WF to double-check, and be sure to put it on hold as well!
 
Adding this 1.4 F SI1 ACA to the mix...have WF also double-check it like Kim N suggested, and maybe even request that they send you side-by-side videos of it and the 1.28 E VS2.

It has a 7.22mm spread compared to the 7.00mm spread of the 1.28 which is around the minimum size increase of 0.2mm that most people can discern. The plot looks a little busy, but all of the SI1-sized inclusions are multiple smaller crystals which appear to be advantageously positioned under the crown...plus they all appear to be white/lighter gray, which is further advantageous for making them harder to see without magnification.
The 40.7/34.8/55.2 combo with a taller 15.6% crown height with 76% lowers should help make some serious fire.

Diamond | 1.408 ct F SI1 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4417918

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.408 carat F color SI1 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4417918
www.whiteflash.com
 
Thanks! Looks like there are better options on WF, have been using Bluenile and James Allen mainly earlier when searching diamonds.
 
r1rjj said:
what do you think about this? i was trying myself on WF and followed similar criteria on WF, but lowered the color to G:

Diamond | 1.390 ct G SI1 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4443699

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.390 carat G color SI1 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4443699
www.whiteflash.com
Click to expand...

The larger clouds containing an array of small needle inclusions under the table would be my primary concern: definitely have them double check it and send you videos so that you can put forth due diligence.
Other than that, everything else looks spectacular.
 
r1rjj said:
what do you think about this? i was trying myself on WF and followed similar criteria on WF, but lowered the color to G:

Diamond | 1.390 ct G SI1 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4443699

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.390 carat G color SI1 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4443699
www.whiteflash.com
Click to expand...

That one is beautiful too. I'd ask WF if it's eye-clean to your standards and if they can take side-by-side photos of all three diamonds.
 
Kim N said:
That one is beautiful too. I'd ask WF if it's eye-clean to your standards and if they can take side-by-side photos of all three diamonds.
Click to expand...

This is a great idea! With these in-house stones from WF, you can request for side-by-side comparison photos and videos of the three options to help you decide.
 
ASET scope of the first stone (GIA 6411195677)
aset.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top