Did I do good?

[makhro82]

This is diamond that we bought (Mark @ ERD says it is BEAUTIFUL): http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI1-Premium-Cut-Round-Diamond-984485.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131

And this is the one I keep coming back to, just because the clarity and color are better:
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Premium-Cut-Round-Diamond-879929.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131

So what do you think, oh thee experts of Pricescope?

 

[iheartscience]

Well, it''s doubtful the color will show up at all in the one you bought, so I wouldn''t really worry about that. Also, is the diamond you purchased eyeclean? If so, I really wouldn''t worry about clarity either. What made you go for the one you bought over the one you keep looking at? The price and size difference are minimal, so I''m just curious!

 

[Ellen]

Hi mak,

There's nothing wrong with an H SI1, that's actually a nice spot for diamonds, unless one is terribly color sensitive and/or it's not eyeclean.

Did you happen to see an IS of the H? And did you ask if it's eyeclean?


And I'd personally pass on the second one, I'm not loving those angles, or depth.

 

[makhro82]

Thing2of2: Mark at ERD says it is eyeclean for the most part and that most of a feather will be captured by the prong. I think I keep vacillating because I am neurotic

I think that the one we got is better, but I am not easily pleased by anything unfortunately. We have already paid for it and for some reason I just keep searching to see if I can find better, I personally blame it on Pricescope.

Ellen: I did not see the IS image. Mark from ERD said it had a great one and given everything I have read on here I figured I could trust him. Is that a no-no? For the most part it is eyeclean as I mentioned above.

Does anyone think I could do better? We paid $3300 for the stone and that is the max for our budget since the setting is $2500. Many times I have wondered if I should get a less expensive setting and a bigger stone, but I figure the diamond can grow with us as our bank account does.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/27/2007 10:42:16 PM
Author: makhro82


Ellen: I did not see the IS image. Mark from ERD said it had a great one and given everything I have read on here I figured I could trust him. Is that a no-no? For the most part it is eyeclean as I mentioned above.

Does anyone think I could do better? We paid $3300 for the stone and that is the max for our budget since the setting is $2500. Many times I have wondered if I should get a less expensive setting and a bigger stone, but I figure the diamond can grow with us as our bank account does.

If Mark has seen it and gives it the thumbs up, then I''m sure you''re fine.

The only reason I asked is because the pavillion angle is a bit more shallow than we''re used to seeing. I looked around for one in that size with angles closer to what we typically see, and they are running a thousand more. So I''d stick with this one since it''s gotten the ok.

One other note. You mentioned getting a bigger diamond down the line. Does Mark have an upgrade policy? If not, you won''t be able to use this stone as a trade in, just a heads up.

 

[makhro82]

Ellen: From what I read on the website he does. Out of curiosity what numbers should I be looking for for a round?

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 9/28/2007 1:49:24 PM
Author: makhro82
Ellen: From what I read on the website he does. Out of curiosity what numbers should I be looking for for a round?

This largely boils down to preferences...but here are mine.

depth: 60-62
table: 54-57
girdle: anything besides ext thin or ext thick without too much variation
polish/symmetry: at least VG/VG or better
crown/pavillion angles: numbers that are consistent with an HCA score of under 2

 

[hearts-arrows_girl]

Date: 9/27/2007 10:42:16 PM
Author: makhro82

Does anyone think I could do better? We paid $3300 for the stone and that is the max for our budget since the setting is $2500. Many times I have wondered if I should get a less expensive setting and a bigger stone, but I figure the diamond can grow with us as our bank account does.

What does the setting look like? Did your future fiance pick it? It probably isn''t a bad idea to consider going bigger stone, less expensive setting. Diamonds are timeless, but settings go in and out of style, unless you have a classic solitaire setting. See how you fiance feels about future upgrades. Some girls don''t want to change there original diamond, and getting a reasonable size stone in her original e-ring may be the way to go. Otherwise, the .90 stone you picked sound really nice. Please send pics of the setting!

 

[strmrdr]

hca likes the angles:

Factor Grade
Light Return Excellent
Fire Excellent
Scintillation Excellent
Spread
or diameter for weight Very Good
Total Visual Performance 0.8 - Excellent
within TIC range

The picture shows long lgf%(GIA says 80 and likely its over that by the picture) which will mask the effects of the shallow pavilion.
optical symmetry looks vg at worst EX at best. (need heart images too tell for sure.)
ask Mark how it looks up close.
I think its an excellent value stone.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/28/2007 1:49:24 PM
Author: makhro82
Ellen: From what I read on the website he does. Out of curiosity what numbers should I be looking for for a round?

I assume you mean for pavillions? (since that''s what I spoke of). I personally prefer 40.6-41 (on paper).

However, when there is a great IS image, and a pair of trained eyes looking at the diamond, saying it''s a good one, that trumps everything.

And h-a''s girl does raise a valid point about the setting vs. stone, but that''s your call.

 

[makhro82]

Mark is doing a take on this Hearts on Fire setting for me: http://heartsonfire.com/JC_Search.aspx?item=WonBrdR&type=8&view=2 . I LOVE this setting and I think I will for awhile. The "real" setting is $6800 in Platinum, way too costly for me. My boyfriend actually picked this one from the many options I presented and he has no problem upgrading me in the future. Eventually I''d like to get up to a G-VSI/VS2 2ct..... One can dream!

 

[Ellen]

That setting looks very pretty, and I bet will be verrry sparkly!