Diving In...

[248N8]

So I''ve been sitting by the side here admiring the viewpoints and knowledge on this site for about 2 months now and I think I am ready to buy. I have learned a lot over the past couple months so many many thank you''s go out to everyone I''ve been lurking off of.

Now down to the fun part...

I have a fairly good idea of what I am looking in an engagement ring and now just need some better investigative eyes looking over my shoulder. I am looking for a round brilliant somewhere in the 1.15 to 1.25 ct range. I am looking for something eye clean from all viewing angles from about 2 feet away, although I am having a hard time with the "eye clean vs mind clean" decision in my head and have decided I want to stay above VS2. As far as color goes I am thinking about G or H. And then when it comes to cut I have been using the HCA and IS images to determine my light return rather than relying on cuts listed on certs.

And the most fun part is the $$ so my budget for the stone is around $7000.

I have found a few that I like and here are the specs:

#1
Carat weight: 1.22
Cut: Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: AGS
Depth: 60.7%
Table: 56.0%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to medium
Culet:
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.92*6.96*4.22


#2
Carat weight: 1.22
Cut: Premium
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 60.9%
Table: 59.0%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.87*6.88*4.19


#3
Carat weight: 1.27
Cut: Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 61.1%
Table: 57.0%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.97*7.01*4.27

And the third I am waiting on the IS image to come back so once I have that I will post it... The reason I am getting that one rather than the others is because it seems a little deep to me compared to the others so I wanted a quick look at it.

So thank you very much in advance for helping me and my soon to be fiance in this very important decision!!

 

[jet2ks]

Welcome to PS.

Could you please post crown and pavillion angles? Star and lgf are helpful as well, but the first two are essential.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/2/2009 4:48:31 PM
Author: jet2ks
Welcome to PS.

Could you please post crown and pavillion angles? Star and lgf are helpful as well, but the first two are essential.

Ditto Jet, all your depths are fine by the way and welcome out of lurkdom!

 

[stone-cold11]

Thritto.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 7/2/2009 4:44:17 PM
Author:248N8

I have a fairly good idea of what I am looking in an engagement ring and now just need some better investigative eyes looking over my shoulder. I am looking for a round brilliant somewhere in the 1.15 to 1.25 ct range. I am looking for something eye clean from all viewing angles from about 2 feet away, although I am having a hard time with the ''eye clean vs mind clean'' decision in my head and have decided I want to stay above VS2. As far as color goes I am thinking about G or H. And then when it comes to cut I have been using the HCA and IS images to determine my light return rather than relying on cuts listed on certs.

Ditto the others re cut, but re the highlighted part, most PS vendors define "eye-clean" as not seeing inclusions from about 8 to 10 inches face up, and with that definition and a good pair of eyes to verify, you can easily go to SI1 and sometimes SI2. Generally speaking, VS2 graded diamonds will have inclusions that are not visible to the naked eye and are actually hard to find at 10x! Sooooo if you really are comfy going with a 2 foot definition of eye clean, you can probably go as low as I3

Kidding... but just thought I''d point that out in case the 2 foot rule was pushing you to go higher in clarity.

 

[248N8]

Sorry about leaving those out guess I got a little too excited and left out some of the most important numbers...

#1
Carat weight: 1.22
Cut: Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: AGS
Depth: 60.7%
Table: 56.5%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.92*6.96*4.22
Crown Angle: 34.3
Pav Angle: 40.9


#2
Carat weight: 1.22
Cut: Premium
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 60.9%
Table: 59.0%
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Thin to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.87*6.88*4.19
Crown Angle: 34
Pav Angle: 40.8

#3
Carat weight: 1.27
Cut: Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS1
Certificate: GIA
Depth: 61.1%
Table: 57.0%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.97*7.01*4.27
Crown Angle: 35
Pav Angle: 40.8

Date: 7/2/2009 5:26:10 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 7/2/2009 4:44:17 PM
Author:248N8

I have a fairly good idea of what I am looking in an engagement ring and now just need some better investigative eyes looking over my shoulder. I am looking for a round brilliant somewhere in the 1.15 to 1.25 ct range. I am looking for something eye clean from all viewing angles from about 2 feet away, although I am having a hard time with the ''eye clean vs mind clean'' decision in my head and have decided I want to stay above VS2. As far as color goes I am thinking about G or H. And then when it comes to cut I have been using the HCA and IS images to determine my light return rather than relying on cuts listed on certs.

Ditto the others re cut, but re the highlighted part, most PS vendors define ''eye-clean'' as not seeing inclusions from about 8 to 10 inches face up, and with that definition and a good pair of eyes to verify, you can easily go to SI1 and sometimes SI2. Generally speaking, VS2 graded diamonds will have inclusions that are not visible to the naked eye and are actually hard to find at 10x! Sooooo if you really are comfy going with a 2 foot definition of eye clean, you can probably go as low as I3

Kidding... but just thought I''d point that out in case the 2 foot rule was pushing you to go higher in clarity.

Also in thinking about the SI I suppose if I had someone checking them out for me I could consider it but it wouldn''t be my frist choice because it is just a little nerve racking to me for some reason...

 

[Lorelei]

My choice would be for the first with the info given, do you have an Idealscope image for any of these please?

 

[stone-cold11]

Numbers looks good, prefer #1 but IS will be the decider if available.

 

[248N8]

I have requested them... They typically take a day or two.

Thanks!

Also, I know this might be a dumb question since it is a VS2 but would someone be able to see the inclusion on this diamond since it is right in the middle of the table?

 

[stone-cold11]

Not necessary visible, a stone with great light performance can hide a center inclusion quite well too. The only way to really know is to ask JA if that stone is eye-clean as they can view the stone in person. So give them a call and ask.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/6/2009 11:32:46 AM
Author: 248N8
I have requested them... They typically take a day or two.

Thanks!

Also, I know this might be a dumb question since it is a VS2 but would someone be able to see the inclusion on this diamond since it is right in the middle of the table?

The ONLY way to know that is to ask the vendor and make your expectations clear, VS2 should be ok but no guarantees.

 

[248N8]

While waiting for those to come back I was wondering if anyone had experience getting a stone online and then getting a setting at a local shop. I'm wondering how they handle those situations and if they have a problem setting a stone they didn't sell.

Thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/7/2009 10:23:34 AM
Author: 248N8
While waiting for those to come back I was wondering if anyone had experience getting a stone online and then getting a setting at a local shop. I''m wondering how they handle those situations and if they have a problem setting a stone they didn''t sell.

Thanks!

No direct experience but have seen this discussed a few times, the thing is that most jewellers won''t assume responsibility should anything happen to a diamond they didn''t sell, this is unusual that anything does happen especially with round diamonds but it isn''t unheard of.

You might be able to get insurance to cover this with www.jewelersmutual.com but I am not altogether sure.

 

[248N8]

What about these specs? I thought this one looked pretty good.

Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.18
Cut: Ideal
Color: H
Clarity: VS2
Certificate: AGS
Depth: 61.7%
Table: 55.0%
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle:
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.77*6.82*4.20
Crown Angle: 33.9
Pav Angle: 40.9
HCA: 1.1

 

[stone-cold11]

specs looks good.

 

[248N8]

I finally got it...

What are you thoughts??

 

[stone-cold11]

Which round is the IS image for?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/12/2009 1:08:44 AM
Author: 248N8
I finally got it...

What are you thoughts??

This is for the third diamond yes? Its a good image, looks as if the stone might have been slightly tilted when the image was taken - I have seen better but it is still an excellent image.

 

[248N8]

The image is for this stone:

Measurements: 6.84 - 6.89 x 4.21 mm
Carat Weight: 1.22 carat
Color Grade: H
Clarity Grade: VS2
Cut Grade: Excellent
PROPORTIONS:

Depth: 61.3%
Table: 57%
Crown Angle: 35.0°
Crown Height: 15.0%
Pavilion Angle: 40.6°
Pavilion Depth: 43.0%
Star length: 50%
Lower Half: 75%
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted (3.5%)
Culet: None


Also, is it the leakage on the one side that would make you think it was tilted?

Thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/12/2009 11:14:45 AM
Author: 248N8
The image is for this stone:

Measurements: 6.84 - 6.89 x 4.21 mm
Carat Weight: 1.22 carat
Color Grade: H
Clarity Grade: VS2
Cut Grade: Excellent
PROPORTIONS:

Depth: 61.3%
Table: 57%
Crown Angle: 35.0°
Crown Height: 15.0%
Pavilion Angle: 40.6°
Pavilion Depth: 43.0%
Star length: 50%
Lower Half: 75%
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted (3.5%)
Culet: None


Also, is it the leakage on the one side that would make you think it was tilted?

Thanks!

Its the length of the arrow shafts and heads, if you look they look shorter on the bottom side than the top, it isn''t always the case but very often this is due to the diamond being slightly tilted when the image was taken. Its a good image, like I say not the best I have seen but still good.

 

[stone-cold11]

Ditto, not the best, but quite good.

 

[248N8]

I got another one back and here are the measurements:

Measurements: 6.79 - 6.84 x 4.09 mm

Carat Weight: 1.17 carat
Color Grade: H
Clarity Grade: VS1
Cut Grade: Very Good


Proportions:
Depth: 60.0%
Table: 59%
Crown Angle: 33.5°
Crown Height: 13.5%
Pavilion Angle: 40.6°
Pavilion Depth: 42.5%
Star length: 55%
Lower Half: 75%
Girdle: Thin to Slightly Thick, Faceted (4.0%)
Culet: Very Small


Finish:
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluorescence: None


What will a "Very Small" cutlet do to the diamond?


And here is the IS image:



Thank you!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/17/2009 9:08:47 AM
Author: 248N8

I got another one back and here are the measurements:

Measurements: 6.79 - 6.84 x 4.09 mm

Carat Weight: 1.17 carat
Color Grade: H
Clarity Grade: VS1
Cut Grade: Very Good



Proportions:
Depth: 60.0%
Table: 59%
Crown Angle: 33.5°
Crown Height: 13.5%
Pavilion Angle: 40.6°
Pavilion Depth: 42.5%
Star length: 55%
Lower Half: 75%
Girdle: Thin to Slightly Thick, Faceted (4.0%)
Culet: Very Small



Finish:
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Fluorescence: None


What will a ''Very Small'' cutlet do to the diamond?


And here is the IS image:



Thank you!

Its a hair shallow, check with the gemologist at JA that the diamond doesn''t darken at close scrutiny, this is known as obstruction - if not then you should be ok. It has potential, also very small culet is no issue and you won''t even see it.

 

[248N8]

In comparing the two IS images which would you prefer? I think I like the first one better than the second, but I can see where they both aren''t the greatest images.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 7/17/2009 9:28:02 AM
Author: 248N8
In comparing the two IS images which would you prefer? I think I like the first one better than the second, but I can see where they both aren''t the greatest images.

I agree. And I''m wondering how much is the image and how much is the actual stone, on the first in particular. All in all, I''d pick the first one myself.

 

[stone-cold11]

I would go for #1.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/17/2009 9:34:38 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 7/17/2009 9:28:02 AM
Author: 248N8
In comparing the two IS images which would you prefer? I think I like the first one better than the second, but I can see where they both aren''t the greatest images.

I agree. And I''m wondering how much is the image and how much is the actual stone, on the first in particular. All in all, I''d pick the first one myself.

threetoes.

 

[248N8]

Hello again...

Based on some new numbers what your thoughts? I''m thinking about requesting an IS image, but not sure if based on numbers if it is "better" than the first IS image stone I have listed in the thread.

Shape and Style: Round Brilliant
Measurements: 6.77 - 6.82 x 4.20 mm
Cut Grade: AGS Ideal 0
Color Grade: AGS 2.0 (H)
Clarity Grade: AGS 4 (VS2)
Carat Weight 1.185
Fluorescence: Negligible
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Table: 55.7%
Crown Angle: 33.9
Crown Height: 15.0%
Girdle: Faceted, 1.5% to 3.9%
Pavilion Angle: 40.9
Pavilion Depth: 43.2%
Star Length: 51%
Lower Girdle Length: 80%
Total Depth: 61.7%
Culet: Pointed

 

[Lorelei]

Definitely shows promise and could be worth calling in.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 7/20/2009 10:22:59 AM
Author: 248N8
Hello again...

Based on some new numbers what your thoughts? I'm thinking about requesting an IS image, but not sure if based on numbers if it is 'better' than the first IS image stone I have listed in the thread.

It's hard to say. The crown angle is possibly a hair more accomodating to the pavilion angle. But really, we'd need IS pics to compare, to really know/see. It could be no difference at all.