diamond comparison

[jwbernick]

I''m continuing to narrow down my diamond search, and wanted to know what everyone thought of these:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/1445/

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-703951.htm#

I''m a little concerned by the SI1 clarity, but I''m also reluctant to spend much more money for clarity I can''t see... What do you guys think? Is it worth paying more for a VS? Or, in my case, would it be worth getting a smaller stone (0.9 ct.) so I could afford higher clarity? Many thanks!

 

[RockDoc]

I llooked at both AGS reports.

Considering CLARITY grade only. They both appear to be "very light" SI-1''s. Since I am not looking at the original report, I am limited as to how well the copy posted on both sites is displayed.

On the GOG grading report there appears to be a mark at the edge at 9 oclock on the stone. This could be either a small feather or it could be an extra facet. If it is a feather I would ask them for a microphotograph of that if it is a feather, to see if it breaks the girdle surface.

On the WF grading report the image is not as good as it could be, so it is hard to tell what is drawn on the plot. I''m sure however, that WF would what is on the original plot, vs the image that appears on their website.

CLARITY wise ONLY they look sort of equal, both being very light as compared to other SI-1''s

Rockdoc
.

 

[valeria101]

As far as I can tell, both are very much eye clean... and high SI1s.

Whether it is worth paying for higher clarity grades beyond this (i.e. various levels of strictly invisible inclusions), beats me. This seems to be a matter of personal opinion and choice.


Good Old Gold makes it clear what the inclusions are. Can''t see a thing on the plot or picture at WF. ''Wish the scan of the lab report would be better. That nothing appears visible in the magnified picture is a good thing, I guess.

 

[firebirdgold]

I''d go for #1, the GOG diamond. I''m not entirely sure why, but it really appeals to me much more than the ACA. Also I''d be very happy to have an si1 whose main inclusions are clouds like that. I can spot feathers, but not clouds.
Just my .02

 

[strmrdr]

I dont care for painted girdle diamonds so id go with the first one for myself.
Its a issue thats up for a huge debate but thats my personal opinion and others may feel otherwise.

 

[belle]

what are you looking for clarity wise? do you want to not be able to see anything at all, or would a small inclusion that is not readily visible bother you? i don''t think vs clarity is worth paying extra for, but if you want to be assured of getting a completely eye clean diamond, you may need to to that route.

best of luck!

 

[Mara]

they both look verra nice...i''d go with whichever one has the cleanest clarity, or the most hidden inclusions, otherwise they are very similar.