Emerald Daimond Help - Dimensions and ASET included

[adam31]

Thank you for your input Chrono. I too was a little worried about the clarity on that one.

Thankfully, JA have granted me an exception - they are currently processing my request for ASET images and Sarin reports for two of Gypsy's choices as per above. Really looking forward to seeing them! I will post once received.

I have contacted GOG and they are trying to source me an EC which meets my criteria.

I've also been in contact with B2C Jewels and they also have a couple options for me - will post below shortly.

 

[adam31]

Thank you for your input Chrono. I too was a little worried about the clarity on that one.

Thankfully, JA have granted me an exception - they are currently processing my request for ASET images and Sarin reports for two of Gypsy's choices as per above. Really looking forward to seeing them! I will post once received.

I have contacted GOG and they are trying to source me an EC which meets my criteria.

I've also been in contact with B2C Jewels and they also have a couple options for me - will post below shortly.

 

[adam31]

This is the first option from B2C Jewels. The numbers looks pretty good:

Carat: 2.50
Colour: F
Clarity: VVS2
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Table: 68.5%
Depth:68.0%
Measurements: 8.86 x 6.34 x 4.34
L/W Ratio: 1.4
Cutlet: None
Fluorescence: None

Gemmologist comments: "completely white face up with excellent brilliance and fire."

I have the actual, ASET and IdealScope as per below. The ASET looks very different to those I received from JA, not sure why...?

 

[adam31]

Second option from B2C Jewels

Carat: 2.52
Colour: F
Clarity: VS2
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Table: 62.0%
Depth: 67.8%
Measurements: 9.31 x 6.68 x 4.53
L/W Ratio: 1.39
Cutlet: None
Fluorescence: Medium (is this a problem?)

Little bit worried about the spot in the centre though... think I prefer the first one.

 

[chrono]

If the B2C EC #1 is level, I would toss it out. Huge leakage in the center.
Not crazy about B2C EC #2 either.

 

[adam31]

Thanks Chrono, looks like it's back to the drawing board!

Really hoping the EC's Gypsy recommended from JA perform better on the ASET than the previous diamonds I have posted!

I've found a couple suitable diamonds from Brilliantly Engaged as well so will hopefully have some pics to share soon.

Once again, thank you for all your feedback - it has been invaluable and I'm so glad I decided to post here before purchasing!

 

[Gypsy]

I agree with Chrono.

 

[adam31]

Thanks for your opinions Chrono and Gypsy. I've continued my search and found another potential stone.

I've learnt my lesson not go by just the numbers, but nevertheless, I have listed them below:
Colour: E
Clarity: VS1
Carat: 2.31
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Thin - Medium
Dimensions: 9.41 x 6.49 x 4.28
Depth: 66%
Table: 61%
Fluorescence: None
L/W Ratio: 1.45

I have taken a liking to this stone due to its high colour, clarity and L/W ratio. I think at 9.41 it will appear bigger than most other 2.3 carats on the market (it's actually the same size as the 2.5 carat I was originally considering which was also quite big for a 2.5) and will hopefully look quite big on the hand.

Here is the video link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEDnw4-EVLQ

I am having trouble uploading images so I have attached the GIA Cert and the ASET - hopefully it works! Upon receiving the ASET, the gemmologist said "this is about as good as it gets in terms of the light performance".

As always, your thoughts and opinions are most welcome and appreciated!

 

[adam31]

Just an update - I'm still waiting on ASETs of the two diamonds Gypsy recommended from JA.

GOG is also getting back to me within the next 24 hours with potential options.

Interested to hear what you think about the diamond above!

 

[Gypsy]

Thanks for your opinions Chrono and Gypsy. I've continued my search and found another potential stone.

I've learnt my lesson not go by just the numbers, but nevertheless, I have listed them below:
Colour: E
Clarity: VS1
Carat: 2.31
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Girdle: Thin - Medium
Dimensions: 9.41 x 6.49 x 4.28
Depth: 66%
Table: 61%
Fluorescence: None
L/W Ratio: 1.45

I have taken a liking to this stone due to its high colour, clarity and L/W ratio. I think at 9.41 it will appear bigger than most other 2.3 carats on the market (it's actually the same size as the 2.5 carat I was originally considering which was also quite big for a 2.5) and will hopefully look quite big on the hand.

Here is the video link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEDnw4-EVLQ

I am having trouble uploading images so I have attached the GIA Cert and the ASET - hopefully it works! Upon receiving the ASET, the gemmologist said "this is about as good as it gets in terms of the light performance".

As always, your thoughts and opinions are most welcome and appreciated!

He's right. It's a really really REALLY lovely EC.

How long will he hold it for you?

I'm pretty smitten with it.

 

[adam31]

Hi Gypsy!

Not sure how long he can hold it for but I am quite happy with it too!

Can I ask exactly what you like about this diamond? I'm just really interested to hear as you know your EC's

Also, what do you think about my comment regarding size - will it look bigger than your typical 2.3 carat?

 

[Gypsy]

It's got bright even steps in red and the ones that are purple light up on the video. The combo of video and ASET show a very nice stone.

I don't know off the top of my head what the dimensions for a 2.5 carat EC are. You would know more than me, as you've been shopping for them!

You are right to look at the dimensions not the carat weight.

 

[adam31]

I agree, the ASET and the video really do make the stone seem like a good choice.

In regards to size, I've done some research and 9mm is the average length of an EC between 2.5 and 2.9 carats - so I guess it will look slightly bigger than a 2.3 carat.

At this stage, I will sit tight and wait on the ASETs from JA to compare with this one. I am hoping GOG can find a top shelf option too.

 

[chrono]

I like the BE EC too. A 2.5 ct EC will be around 9 x 7 mm.

 

[adam31]

Just received this ASETs from JA - not sure if they meet the standard of the BE EC...

I am going to request a Sarin report for the BE EC to check the crown height and double check the dimensions.

If all looks good, would the BE EC be a good purchase? Mark from BC has said "In my opinion this is by far the best Emerald cut diamond I've researched in the past few months". I know it's a good stone, but is it this good?

Still waiting on GOG to find some options but I don't want to wait too long!

 

[JulieN]

In order of introduction in your thread:

#1 JA, worth looking at in person (WLAIP) if it is JA's top pick
#2 JA, WLAIP
#3 JA, their bottom pick, no.

B2C 1/2, no

BE WLAIP

JA 4/5 please post the videos as well. You can also just kind of eye-ball the crown height... exact numbers are useless. Is it pancake flat or is it ok is all you really need.

JA 4? http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/2.51-carat-e-color-vs2-clarity-sku-356987
JA 5? http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/2.34-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-380367 Crown heights are fine on both of these two.

 

[Gypsy]

I disagree strongly with Julie. My pick would be this one:
It's GORGEOUS. A serious knock out.

 

[adam31]

Do you prefer that one over the BE emerald Gypsy?

If so, why?

 

[Gypsy]

I disagree strongly with Julie. My pick would be this one:
It's GORGEOUS. A serious knock out.

Link me to the JA page for this one please.

 

[adam31]

The two I'm deciding between (unless GOG find something special).

JA Emerald
Colour: E
Cart: 2.34
Clarity: VVS2
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Depth: 69.5%
Table: 64.0%
Girdle: Thick
Fluorescence: Faint
Dimensions: 8.58 x 6.53 x 4.40
L/W Ratio: 1.35
Video: http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/2.34-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-380367

BE Emerald
Colour: E
Carat: 2.31
Clarity: VS1
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Very Good
Depth: 66%
Table: 61%
Girdle: Thin - Medium
Fluorescence: None
Dimensions: 9.41 x 6.49 x 4.28
L/W Ratio: 1.45
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEDnw4-EVLQ

 

[adam31]

I disagree strongly with Julie. My pick would be this one:
It's GORGEOUS. A serious knock out.

Link me to the JA page for this one please.

Sure Gypsy

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/2.34-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-380367

 

[chrono]

The BE EC would be my personal choice.

 

[Gypsy]

I prefer the JA stone from the ASET and the video. But I prefer the dimensions of the BE stone and it is gorgeous as well.

I would probably go for the BE stone. .4 length is a lot of spread difference.

 

[adam31]

Thanks for your thoughts all. I too am leaning towards the BE diamond, mainly due to the dimensions and the L/W ratio.

I have just received the Sarin report for the BE diamond which are attached. I would be very interested in hearing your opinions on the gemmologist's' remarks below. Interesting he mentioned to keep the depth below 67% (the JA EC is 69.5% and he does not know I am considering that stone as well) and the number of steps.

"Based on your questions in your previous email and reviewing the SARIN report form a gemmological viewpoint the diamond is as good as there is in the market. The major reason as that anytime you can get the depth lower than 67 it increases the brilliance of the diamond. Higher numbers going towards 70% decrease the overall brilliance regardless of the steps. But you will notice that this diamond has 4 steps which is extremely rare as the vast majority of the emerald diamonds in the market have 3. Again this gives you better brilliance and scintillation. In addition look at the spread of the diamond and follow the market. Anything at a 9.40mm length will increase the overall appearance of the diamond. The smaller table also helps as it provides you with a higher crown thus more brilliance. The picture also indicates the step and corner angles are very close in numbers to each other. They are the ones marked in blue."

Is there anything that stands out in the Sarin report which is worth noting?

My understanding of them is limited and I'm a little weary of blindly taking the seller's advice - not that I believe BE to be untrusting but I do not want to be naïve and believe everything that is said without seeking out other expert opinions

 

[Gypsy]

The crown is within acceptable range (10% and up), though as noted on the video not as high as on the JA stone. Including that all is well. I do think it is a gorgeous stone and the spread is fantastic.

I think you'll be happy with it.

How are you planning on setting it?

 

[adam31]

Cool!

I think the rest of the ring will be quite minimalist.

My partner wants a dainty ultra thin rose gold band and the centre stone to be the only diamond on the engagement ring - so no halos. I'm not exactly on board with the idea but I know she would like it to be simple and elegant. I think a think a micro pave would look great but I'm undecided and am conscious of getting something she doesn't want. I've also heard that the diamonds in micro pave will dull quitter quickly.

I'm planning to set the stone in white gold. I was told that a rose gold setting will alter the colour of the diamond and tend to agree. The claws will be thin double claws in the corners, like the attached.

The wedding band will most likely be a shared prong diamond band in rose gold like the attached or thin micro pave rose gold band.

Thoughts?

 

[JulieN]

I prefer the BE stone.

 

[Gypsy]

If you don't mind my input, I highly suggest you get a solitaire with a rose gold shank and a platinum head. It will look great, keep the diamond set in white but have the rose gold shank she loves.

This is one of my all time favorite rings, and it is by BE (formerly ERD): http://www.pricescope.com/blog/jewel-week-rose-gold-solitaire-355-carat-old-european-cut-diamond See how the head is white and the shank is rose gold? It's gorgeous.


I highly suggest you do something like this and give her what she wants. A solitaire is the best choice. I wouldn't muck it up with pave or anything, it will give her the most options for bands. And is a classic look.

Also leave the wedding band up to her. Once she has the ring she can try on all different styles and see what looks best to her.

I also suggest that you ask BE to make the profile like this ring. Why? It will allow her to get any wedding ring she wants and allow for a flush fit with her eventual wedding band. It's a cathedral setting so it will be very structurally safe. And the bar in the basket will provide support for the head.

So give this picture to BE and tell them you want this exact profile both the prongs should split and hold the stone with two prongs on each corner. But with a "rose gold shank and platinum basket".

 

[adam31]

Of course I don't mind Gypsy, thanks for your input. That ring looks absolutely incredible. I think I'm leaning towards a plain band now!

That is kind of what I had in mind - a thin rose gold shank with a white gold basket. Why is platinum preferable over white gold?

Would that first setting work if the prongs stay split rather than join and then have two in each corner?

The cathedral setting is really nice but I'm a little concerned it is too much metal around the stone - she basically wants the diamond to look like it's sitting directly on top on the band (I hope this makes sense!) and that looks quite raised.

And yep, I am leaving the wedding band up to her - I just know that she is fond of the options I listed previously.

 

[chrono]

I prefer platinum prongs over white gold prongs due to its metal characteristics; white gold is more brittle and likely to break whereas platinum will move/shift under stress. Yes, it is possible for the setting suggesting to have wide double prongs. It is up to the bench to start the split lower down the basket. Based on the prong vs EC of the inspiration picture, I'm guessing the EC is huge, hence looks as though it is floating. Also note that you do not want overly thin prongs or they might be more prone to breakage or do not have enough strength to hold the EC safely for everyday wear.