deciding between two diamonds

[ilovemygirlfriend]

which of these seems like a better buy based on the specifications?

http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/diamond_detail.cfm?did=7403452

or

0.80 H VS1 62.8% 57% PGS m-stk no vg vg no 5.89-5.93-3.71 $2806*SP

Is there one that looks a little better on paper...both seem about the same to me...Im not real educated on which one has the better angles.

any help greatly appreciated

-Kiel

 

[Kaleigh]

Not loving the depth of the second one.

 

[icemyster]

I would agree on the depth of the second stone...on the first one...I would like to see pavillion angles between 40.7 and 40.9....I know it may seem picky, but I have personally seen this difference make a notable difference on the GEMEX Brilliance Scope...Good luck in finding the perfect stone!!!

 

[ilovemygirlfriend]

what does it mean if the pavillion doesnt fall in those specs? Anybody else want to comment on the stones...I think everyone agrees the first one looks like a better buy due to the depth of the second

 

[ilovemygirlfriend]

well basically these stones fit in my budget (around 3000 plus or minus), and they are ideal H&A. I absolutely love the H&A cuts Ive seen, but they are more expensive. I am willing to not have H&A and just get an ideal as long as the performance is comparable. I was hopin to find a stone with a little more carat wieght but was having hard time keeping it H or better and SI1 or better.

any suggestions on strategy and what I should look for with my budget would help. If you were gonna drop $3000 or maybey a tad more what diamonds would you be looking at? Cut is of most importance to me, but I definately want ct weight to be .8 or over.

-Kiel

 

[Kaleigh]

Have you tried any of these vendors?? www.whiteflash.com , www.goodoldgold.com, www.diamonideals.com ??

 

[ilovemygirlfriend]

yes

 

[bluedawg]

My opinion is to definitely forego the H&A symmetry in favor of an ideal cut with excellent specs. Your diamond will sparkle like crazy, and sparkly diamonds appear larger than dull ones, too.

I am looking at some Expert Selection diamonds from Whiteflash for my 10th anniv upgrade; they are a great "value" and often very close to H&A. You can do a search for "Expert Selection" to read about them and why they make a great choice for someone on a budget, but who has discerning taste in diamonds.

This one might be nice: http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-1214454.htm
There are several others in your price range. Perhaps give them a phone call and they can probably help you out.

 

[Regular Guy]

Kiel,

Supposedly getting Jim to give you an idealscope of that first option is a good thing to do, or do it yourself to confirm it''s as nice as it promises to be. Not a lot of info is showing on that second one. And, if you do a more broad search on the search by cut database here, any of three other options you might want to consider are probably only marginally better, if they''re better at all, and you''d have to pay $400 - $800 to get them to boot, so you''d have probably optimized with that first one you''ve found, I''d say.

Best wishes!

 

[bluedawg]

I did a "Cut Quality Search" for G color, VS2, .8-1.0ct and found this one at Winfield''s
http://www.winkjones.com/xcart/customer/product.php?productid=16259&cat=272&page=1 It scores a 0.6 on the HCA.

I am sure there are other color/clarity combos you can find.

 

[ilovemygirlfriend]

The first one I posted scored a .7 on the HCA ... not sure what that means...I think closer to 2 is the best

any comments on that?

 

[bluedawg]

Date: 5/6/2005 5:31:18 PM
Author: ilovemygirlfriend
The first one I posted scored a .7 on the HCA ... not sure what that means...I think closer to 2 is the best

any comments on that?

Hee hee, I wish I could give you more help with comments on that-- but I haven''t yet mastered the subtle differences in the performance of a diamond that is 0.7 vs. 1.4. I have read many times that a score closer to 1 is "preferred" the most. I have only seen diamonds in person that score between 1 and 4. I could tell the difference, and preferred the 1s for certain. But I haven''t seen the super low scorers yet in person to compare.

I hope I haven''t confused you further.
BTW, if it helps-- an H color is VERY white. I have one, and I am really picky with color... and mine looks white. Don''t feel funny about settling for an H.

GL!

 

[ilovemygirlfriend]

I already purchased the setting. IT IS KILLER!!! WHite gold 3 sided pave diamonds that go 3quarters down on both sides. Ive seen diamonds of lower quality than what I want to purchase placed in it and it is still gorgeous.cant wait when all of this is finished...Im taking a sense of pride in it...I might look at it more than here lol!

 

[ilovemygirlfriend]

if I search by cut it is the first one that pops up:

https://www.pricescope.com/sift.aspx

however under the column AGS it doesnt have the symbol for H&A appear for it...but they tell me it displays strong H&A...what exactly does that mean? DId it not meet the approval of AGS to be called H&A?

Also which of the ones under 3300 on that link seem best to you guys. I''m scared to go I color but I keep hearing it is white, I think Ive just seen I colors that probably werent true I colors from Brick and Mortar stores.

 

[Rhino]

Just be careful with HCA scores of uncer 1.0. Our experience has been that they perform well in direct light conditions but not as well in diffuse light conditions. As I''m researching GIA''s new cut grade system (tutorial to come), technologies like red reflectors and the HCA are not accurate for determining the metric of *brightness* as they are grading it.

 

[Regular Guy]

For better or worse, after conducting a search on the search by cut option, the resulting link doesn't capture the resulting search. Nevertheless, the other pick you've mentioned is from Wink, and Bluedawg did the work for you above to find illustrate it.

It is a step better in both color and clarity, and the certifying agency -- while not famous, nor having the pedigree as AGS -- is known for it's accuracy, and my understanding is that the G & VS2 would be true. Also, as you'll read on today's boards, Winks supposed to be a very nice guy.

$400 is probably a fairly modest premium for that one. You could do well either way, surely. Unless you want Jim and Wink to go out back and fight it out, on the elements, I'd probably go for this new option that has entered the fray, but you can't go wrong either way.

(edited to add...that Rhino means what he said is no less complicated by the fact that the next to options up in price happen to be ones he offers. Despite my length of time here (now close to a year) and despite being a fan of the HCA...I'm not still certain of it's subtleties. This chart shows how its comprised...and I'm more a fan of how the 4 elements are iterated...brilliance, fire, scintillation & spread...than I am on ciphering the numbers between 0 and 2 as a total score, so long as it the total does land between 0 and 2. Even on the rendering of the HCA score itself, non-contradictory but seemingly differently favorable things are said about the meaning about a score between closer to 0, vs 2, i.e:

"Stones near the center of the red region, those with the lowest scores, are often the least affected by small symmetry variations."

and

"Deeper diamonds that have perfect or hearts and arrows grade symmetry, with scores around 2, will often perform far better than diamonds of lesser symmetry"

All four, as I said before, that are with $800 of each other are likely to be swell. I don't think I've actually added anything here, but I did want to share some of this additional info, on the chance it would spark some clarification.)

 

[hoorray]

Date: 5/6/2005 6

5:21 PM
Author: ilovemygirlfriend
however under the column AGS it doesnt have the symbol for H&A appear for it...but they tell me it displays strong H&A...what exactly does that mean? DId it not meet the approval of AGS to be called H&A?

H&A is a term for the internal symmetry of the stone. Some people brand H&A stones, but none of the big certifying agencies designate whether a stone is H&A or not. To make things confusing, some manufactures have inscribed H&A on the girdle, so agencies will notse the inscription. That doesn''t mean they agree the stone is a true H&A cut, it means that the girdle says "H&A" on it. Many stones show some form of H&A. It''s a matter of how perfectly the hearts and arrows are formed that people argue make it a true H&A stone or not.

That said, I haven''t looked at your list. I thought the first stone looked pretty nice, and if the numbers are sarin based, it could easily be off by .1 either direction, falling into or more out of Icemyster''s very narrow desirable range. Sarin machines vary -- everyone acknowledges that. I would call Jim Schultz and ask for a good idealscope picture. That gets you out of the numbers game and into the "what does it actually look like" game.

Good luck!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 5/6/2005 6:20:11 PM
Author: Rhino
Just be careful with HCA scores of uncer 1.0. Our experience has been that they perform well in direct light conditions but not as well in diffuse light conditions. As I'm researching GIA's new cut grade system (tutorial to come), technologies like red reflectors and the HCA are not accurate for determining the metric of *brightness* as they are grading it.

Welcome back from your adventures with the Super Heros Rhino.

Just a little refresher course.

HCA 1 can be a diamond that is slightly shallow, deep, steep and all sorts of things. It is impossible to generalise on the appearance.
Look at the chart for say 57% table and you will see the crown can be anywhere from 28 degrees to 38, pavilion can be 39.5 to 42. Of course there are very specific combinations for each of those angles based on the strict laws of physics.

It would be good to see the ideal-scope photo's of the candidates

 

[jigri2003]

Date: 5/6/2005 7:39:15 PM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)

Date: 5/6/2005 6:20:11 PM
Author: Rhino
Just be careful with HCA scores of uncer 1.0. Our experience has been that they perform well in direct light conditions but not as well in diffuse light conditions. As I''m researching GIA''s new cut grade system (tutorial to come), technologies like red reflectors and the HCA are not accurate for determining the metric of *brightness* as they are grading it.

Welcome back from your adventures with the Super Heros Rhino.

Just a little refresher course.

HCA 1 can be a diamond that is slightly shallow, deep, steep and all sorts of things. It is impossible to generalise on the appearance.
Look at the chart for say 57% table and you will see the crown can be anywhere from 28 degrees to 38, pavilion can be 39.5 to 42. Of course there are very specific combinations for each of those angles based on the strict laws of physics.

It would be good to see the ideal-scope photo''s of the candidates

Sorry to hijack someone else''s decision thread, but what''s this about HCAs under 1 performing poorly in diffuse light conditions?

I''m in the process of buying a stone that hit 4 ex and 0.5 on the HCA, seemed to have pretty decent coverage when looked at through IS, not perfect H&A but really good arrows through the viewer, is an AGS Ideal cut, and seemed to be a good performer through my beginner eyes, even when I tried blocking light sources (hands around it, held under a table). The only issue I was unsure about was that I was somewhat concerned it might have just a few too many dark areas, but I put that down to potentially not having seen as much contrast with prior stones viewed. Now I''m a little worried that it may be the phenomenon you describe, Rhino? Any input on this, Gary?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

You will need to get Rhino to tell you his theories - clearly I think he has missed something.

But if I can guess for him - he thinks stones that are a little shallow according to him and some others, but score well on HCA, are often under 1 and because they are shallow, score well on spread too.

The trouble is he has this diffused idea that comes somehow from the difference between ISee2 and Bscope results - and since some people think both are valuable - and they get different results for the same stone - therefore the stones can be better in this light or that light. I have read all that stuff on his site - and it sounds interesting, but does not make sense to me. Maybe I am thick as 2 planks?

Any way, this example using the AGS ASET idea shows that the shallow stone (left) still picks up heaps of light from the good red area. And it has a tiny bit less of the very low angle green light (which I would call diffuse light).

Hope that helps.
(and remeber that the shallow stone will outperform when it is dirty)

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Dont let a litle debate between Rhino and me confuse you.

HCA is a rejection tool - it is not rejecting anything. Rhino and I are good mates (in the Aussie sense that is) - we banter and carry on - but it is all good natured stuff. we just happen to be doing it at yourr party

The stone seems to be a great find. (But personally the H&A''s thing is a story - not a fact of life.)

 

[hoorray]

I''m with Regular Guy... I think the first stone is most likely going to be beautiful. At some point this becomes a numbers game of splitting hairs. I would call DCD and talk to Jim. Have him talk you though the stone as he looks at it, and send you a couple of pictures. I often find his pricing to be some of the best out there, so I would be happy, and not go into debt for a different stone. Instead, I''d check this one out. Send it to an appraiser who will help you evaluate it. (Tell them what you are looking for from them before hand to make sure they understand and agree.) A local, independent appraiser would be best, as you can view the stone there with them, but if there isn''t one near you, have it sent it to one of the top notch appraisers here and let them be your experienced eyes.

 

[icemyster]

I am not Rhino, but I work for him and sit next to him everyday...so I a privy to his great wealth of knowlege on a daily basis. I will say from personal experiane that I have intentially mixed stones that had good bscope and good ISEE2 results with stone that have great bscope and low ISEE2 results, on a tray, in no particular order, at the counter for customers in our store. In about 90% of the cases, stones that were lacking on the ISEE2, even despite outstanding bscope results, were rejected by my customers as a matter of straight choice, and before they saw any analysis on the stones.

I spoke with other people here and they have had the same experiance at the counter....a balance between brilliance scope and ISEE2 is something we definatly like to see.

 

[jigri2003]

Date: 5/7/2005 11:17:43 AM
Author: icemyster
I am not Rhino, but I work for him and sit next to him everyday...so I a privy to his great wealth of knowlege on a daily basis. I will say from personal experiane that I have intentially mixed stones that had good bscope and good ISEE2 results with stone that have great bscope and low ISEE2 results, on a tray, in no particular order, at the counter for customers in our store. In about 90% of the cases, stones that were lacking on the ISEE2, even despite outstanding bscope results, were rejected by my customers as a matter of straight choice, and before they saw any analysis on the stones.

I spoke with other people here and they have had the same experiance at the counter....a balance between brilliance scope and ISEE2 is something we definatly like to see.

Once again all apologies to ILMGF for interjecting this, but now I gotta know...

Ice, in your experiences, would the combo of 34.2 crown and 40.4 pavilion tend to qualify as the kind of stone that produces the low Isee2 scores you reference (60 depth, 56 table)? Is there some other way to test for this beside straight measurement by ISee2?

 

[Dancing Fire]

i bought a 3+ ct from Rhino last yr.i had (5) different report,the HCA score range from 1.1-1.8 depending on which report i want to believe but the stone looks amazing to me,no matter it''s a 1.1 or a 1.8 HCA score.

btw; the stone did score a VH,VH,VH on the B-scope,if you believe in the machine.

 

[Jimbo34]

Clarity: SI1
SI diamonds (which stands for "Slightly Included") have inclusions that can be seen fairly easily under 10x magnification. SI diamonds are the trickiest to purchase, since some SI diamonds are completely clean to the naked eye and others are not. Generally speaking, however, most SI diamonds will not contain any inclusions that can be located without using magnification.


I think I would opt for a diamond with a better Clarity if I couldn't see the Diamond myself before purchasing. But thats just me everyone is different.

"Most" is a scary word when putting out that much money.

Might go for something like this one......

http://www.diamondsonweb.com/shopping_dd/ddetail.pl?inset=rbidsg;shape=RB;cut=IdSg;cut=IdSgP;hascert=1&sortby=&sorto=&id=A13708&start=240 $2742

or something simliar to that one (VS1 Clarity Diamond........ would be a very clean Diamond)

Good Luck with your hunt

Jimbo34

 

[phoenixgirl]

I''m not sure if any of these have been listed before . . .

0.786 H SI2 ACA for $2779 (with PS discount) 1.3 on HCA

0.79 F SI2 H&A for $2813 (with PS discount) 1.8 on HCA

0.80 G SI2 H&A for $2827 (with PS discount) 1.4 on HCA

0.78 I VS2 H&A for $2887 1.5 on HCA

0.808 G SI2 ACA for $2985 (with PS discount) 1.9 on HCA

 

[ilovemygirlfriend]

Heres the ideal scope images. I realize they arent flawless, but Id like to hear some input, keep in mind that Im a college student who has been saving for quite some time. So far I think this stone is a great match for my budget.

I attatched the image...Im not sure how that works

 

[ilovemygirlfriend]

another image of it

 

[Maxine]

Garry...I know you have answered this, but why will the shallow diamond outperform when dirty....???