Down to two stones....which one?

[Ellen]

Date: 7/3/2007 12:27:24 PM
Author: joker382
Will you sparkle in the light for me and look beautiful??

LOLOL ahhh, that was funny.

 

[chrono]

Date: 7/2/2007 8:46:01 PM
Author: snlee
Have you confirmed that both are eye clean? Assuming they both are, I''d go with the 1.238ct H VS2, because it''s slightly larger and cheaper. Both are beautiful though. You can''t go wrong with ACAs!

Ditto. Both are very beautiful and you can''t go wrong with either choice. But if I had to pick, the the 1.238ct H VS2 for the same reasons as snlee.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

Date: 7/3/2007 11:57:46 AM
Author: diamondseeker2006
You don't even need to look at all those images on an ACA! I promise you won't be able to tell the difference! ACA's are the cream of the crop, so you need to choose whether you want the tiny size difference on the VS2 or the higher VS1 clarity. That's the only decision-making factor here, IMO.

I think you know I respect you but I am going to have to respectfully disagree here. In regards to size we are looking at a difference of .04 and .05mm--plus there is some margin of error in the actual measuring procedures. Thus they are quite literally going to look the exact same, even holding them right next to each other or transposing one on top of the other. Thus, the size issue is totally irrelevant.

As to clarity, if they are all white or clear inclusions and they are both eyeclean from every angle then the clarity is only a question if you care about how difficult it is to find the inclusions with a loupe. Thus, eye cleanliness is probably a complete non-issue as well.


Thus the only two things left to really differentiate between the two diamonds is A) the price. and B) the light quality characteristics.

Looking at the two IS images there is very clearly a difference in the two diamond's characteristics. However, exactly how those two differences will be portrayed and how significant they will be in the actual diamond I couldn't say for sure. But I have a suspicion that there would be a somewhat noticable difference in the performance of the two. Not necessarily that one is "better" than the other, but only that they would be subtly different. As we know, AGS0's can have a broad range of light performance characteristics, and so can ACA diamonds, as they are selected as ACA based on cut parameters and meeting a level of beauty that is satisfactory to Brian over at WF, and I am sure the he finds several different subtle combinations of light performance to be beautiful.

Regardless, I am sure they will both be FANTASTIC and I am quite jealous. But assuming the above the only real possible visual differences would be those subtle differences of performance, and then of course the price.

And remember, if simply knowing that it was an ACA was enough to make a completely informed decisoin as to the light performance of the diamond then they would not need to provide IS images, Sarin analysis and grading reports to check how angles and star, LGF table percentages etc will affect light performance characteristics, magnified images, asets or any of the rest. Yet they do, and I think they should at least be taken into consideration, even for an ACA, especially for two this similar.

 

[Harleigh]

I really like the looks of the first one...but any girl would be thrilled to have either of these gorgeous stones! Did you decide on one yet as I see a sold sign on the second one! Best of luck to you!

Harleigh

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 7/3/2007 12:36:56 PM
Author: belle

Date: 7/3/2007 12:27:24 PM
Author: joker382
Will you sparkle in the light for me and look beautiful??

hahaha....i meant, pick me to answer the question!

diamondseeker would pick the higher clarity.

you just need to decide what is the most important ''mind clean'' issue for you. if they are all equal, price may be the only factor.

Darn, I am sorry I missed this!!! Belle knows me reeeeaaallly well!

(Just so you know joker, my stone is H VS1!)

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 7/3/2007 1:33:17 PM
Author: WorkingHardforSmallRewards

Date: 7/3/2007 11:57:46 AM
Author: diamondseeker2006
You don''t even need to look at all those images on an ACA! I promise you won''t be able to tell the difference! ACA''s are the cream of the crop, so you need to choose whether you want the tiny size difference on the VS2 or the higher VS1 clarity. That''s the only decision-making factor here, IMO.

I think you know I respect you but I am going to have to respectfully disagree here. In regards to size we are looking at a difference of .04 and .05mm--plus there is some margin of error in the actual measuring procedures. Thus they are quite literally going to look the exact same, even holding them right next to each other or transposing one on top of the other. Thus, the size issue is totally irrelevant.

As to clarity, if they are all white or clear inclusions and they are both eyeclean from every angle then the clarity is only a question if you care about how difficult it is to find the inclusions with a loupe. Thus, eye cleanliness is probably a complete non-issue as well.


Thus the only two things left to really differentiate between the two diamonds is A) the price. and B) the light quality characteristics.

Looking at the two IS images there is very clearly a difference in the two diamond''s characteristics. However, exactly how those two differences will be portrayed and how significant they will be in the actual diamond I couldn''t say for sure. But I have a suspicion that there would be a somewhat noticable difference in the performance of the two. Not necessarily that one is ''better'' than the other, but only that they would be subtly different. As we know, AGS0''s can have a broad range of light performance characteristics, and so can ACA diamonds, as they are selected as ACA based on cut parameters and meeting a level of beauty that is satisfactory to Brian over at WF, and I am sure the he finds several different subtle combinations of light performance to be beautiful.

Regardless, I am sure they will both be FANTASTIC and I am quite jealous. But assuming the above the only real possible visual differences would be those subtle differences of performance, and then of course the price.

And remember, if simply knowing that it was an ACA was enough to make a completely informed decisoin as to the light performance of the diamond then they would not need to provide IS images, Sarin analysis and grading reports to check how angles and star, LGF table percentages etc will affect light performance characteristics, magnified images, asets or any of the rest. Yet they do, and I think they should at least be taken into consideration, even for an ACA, especially for two this similar.

Actually ACA''s have a pretty narrow set of qualifications, so it is likely these two stones look almost identical to the eye! There is a mental factor of larger, though. A girl might rather say I have a 1 and a quarter carat diamond that 1.2! And there is definitely a mental factor to clarity level. Some people don''t care as long as the stone is eyeclean and others can''t handle less than VVS. Since the stones probably look the same outwardly, the deciding factors to me are still the size and clarity, and of course price might matter to joker, too!

Which stone did you decide on, joker?

 

[joker382]

Hey everyone...I can''t thank you enough for all of the input. In the end, I spoke to Brian (at least it was someone named Brian) and he explained to me exactly what he was seeing. As most of you said, he said they were identical in size (to the eye) and said if they were earrings, they would be a perfect match. However he talked me into the slightly more expensive smaller stone with better clarity. He said he could not say why, he just said in his opinion it just caught his eye more than the other one. And he said for a difference of $200 he would get the better clarity since everything else was virtually identical. But he left it entirely up to me and told me if I wanted to save a couple bucks, to get the cheaper one because there was really not a significant difference between the two stones. He also said he has been looking at diamonds most of his life and he would have difficulty telling the two apart. I was very happy he did not try to push on or the other on me, he simply explained the differences and what he was seeing.

If anyone ever has questions, I highly recommend talking to him because he explained everything very clearly. We spent about 30 min on the phone going though all the numbers and the ASET, Ideal scope images until I completely understood what I was seeing. I am excited to get the stone and I will keep everyone posted as to what setting I end up with. I am leaning towards a Hearts on Fire setting, but we will see. THANKS AGAIN!!!!