Engagement ring help needed - 1.5, G, SI1 Diamond

[mike899]

just want to give the final verdict for all that helped me.


so i went to the store thinking i was totally against this diamond. however it came out, it was exactly what i wanted, the exact looking size i wanted, the diamond looked fine to me. I am not a diamond expert.. it was the exact price i wanted to spend.

sssooo i bought it. i can still return it for a different diamond if i want or she wants.. i took 2 pictures (not sure what angle is right) its now tucked away where she will not find it till i decide its time.



let me know honest opinions, also factor in price.. wasn't looking to spend 20k.

 

[mike899]

is it that bad =( ?

 

[tyty333]

Can you post some more up close pictures? Really cant tell much from that picture. The overall ring does look nice.

 

[mike899]

Well its in the closet now and she's home so no shot at that. I'll have to wait for the right time to get a better shot

 

[ChrisES]

It looks like a handsome ring overall, and I love the setting - I think even if the center stone is a little subpar, the setting will make the ring as a whole look great. But the picture is dark, and by dark I mean poorly lit, which makes it hard to see how much the stone itself will shine.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-to-take-good-photos-of-your-diamonds.102989/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-to-take-good-photos-of-your-diamonds.102989/[/URL] has good tips for pictures, but what I would suggest is trying to get the stone facing towards the camera in bright incandescent light or sunlight. Even then, a few pictures are no substitution for seeing a stone in person, from multiple angles and in various lighting, etc.

As for price, as I said earlier, there's no way you got ripped off - either you got a great price on a great stone or a very fair price for a middle-of-the road stone. Especially with that setting. If you and she both like it, that is all that matters, since this is about YOU - the diamond ring is just a symbol!

 

[Dancing Fire]

is it that bad =( ?

not good news when you see a stone cut to 64% depth.... the stone will look alot smaller for its weight.

 

[Madison2]

From the picture you posted, the ring is very beautiful! I love the setting too! May I ask what cut stone that is? Looks like a cushion?
Whatever you decide, I hope she loves the ring. Congrats!

 

[mike899]

As for the 64% .. personally It's the perfect size . Looking.. I don't want it to look any bigger.

I will try and get a better picture.

Its not a cushion cut. At least I don't think I have to check the certain, that is also in the closet.

You can't see any inclusions with the naked eye no matter how hard you look. I could not see them with the magnifier after he set it, he did a great job.

I guess it could be a lil more sparkling, but the setting does make up for it a bit.

 

[Dancing Fire]

As for the 64% .. personally It's the perfect size . Looking.. I don't want it to look any bigger.

i give up your helpless when it comes to educating you about diamonds..

 

[mike899]

Sorry.. my friend has a 1.2 center stone, mine clearly looks bigger and its the perfect size for me. I understand what you are saying but I am happy with the size.

Sorry that bothers you.

 

[ChrisES]

The issue is size vs. weight.

Your stone is unquestionably bigger than your friend's 1.2, and is the perfect size for you, but you could get the same diameter and a lower weight if the stone was less deep. And you pay by weight, not size.

That being said, you got a significant discount and it may be that an equally large but lighter stone would not in fact save you any money.

Like I've said, your opinion is the only one that matters, but you shouldn't ask for other people's opinions and then complain about them.

Good to hear that the stone is eyeclean.

 

[mike899]

Not sure where I complained anywhere . Poster pretty much mocked me when I was happy with the size and i replied. I have been loving all the feedback. Just don't feel like being mocked, its uncalled for

 

[yialanliu]

I am going to say you paid a fair price for a good diamond. It's not like you paid 20k for a 10k diamond. So you didn't get ripped off and it's unfair to say it's garbage. Many at PS would say they would go SMALLER. That just means they are trading 1 C for another C. Not a problem, and something people can do. Only time I would say you bought garbage is if you bought something that's 5k but spent 10k.

The diamond looks great. Just amused you are worried about it being too big when you chose that setting haha. Other than that, congraulations on your purchase.

 

[mike899]

Yea i understand what you mean with the setting. That's mainly why I was concerned but it was the one she likes .

Do you feel with the setting its too much ?

 

[FrekeChild]

The setting is likely fine. You voiced that you were worried that 1.5ct was too big. The little diamonds around the center stone make the entire ring look like it's much larger than it is.

It's the center stone that everyone is worried about.

Look, I mostly live in colored stones (another subforum for gemstones that aren't diamonds) and just about everyone knows over there that I prefer a precision cut stone. I don't like stones to have deep bellies. That means that I am paying for the weight and for the weight it's going to look smaller than it should because all of the stone's weight is in the bottom.

I am going to post a couple of examples from the Natural Sapphire Company so you can see a more obvious example (from the side) of what we're talking about as to reduced performance and paying for weight versus performance and face up size difference.

B4059 is what you want to see from the side-sleek and streamlined, if you look in the tiny face up photo (or go to the site) it looks nice.
This stone is .92cts
It faces up at 5.88 x 5.83 millimeters
This stone costs $1,794.00
http://www.thenaturalsapphirecompany.com/Sapphires/Blue/B4059/Round/stoneid=B4059

B4520 is NOT what you want to see from the side. The pavilion angles are totally off, and this stone was cut for weight. What's bad is it's not as bad as some out there. If you look at the face up picture, you can see through the stone in the middle.
This stone is 1.3cts
It faces up at 6.06 x 6.01 millimeters
This stone costs $2,080.00
http://www.thenaturalsapphirecompany.com/Sapphires/Blue/B4520/Round/stoneid=B4520

I'd pick B4059 because it is visually almost the same size facing up as the heavier stone.

Visually there is very little difference between the two stones - the diameters are fairly similar at .18mm difference (6.06-5.8. There is almost a half carat difference in weight.

What people are trying to say is that your diamond is the diamond equivalent to B4520. It's performance is not going to be as nice as it would if it had a better cut quality. Your diamond was cut for weight, NOT performance. You are paying not only for something you DON'T SEE, but also something that is diminishing the diamond's beauty and making it look smaller than it is.

There is a premium attached to the one carat mark, another premium attached to the carat and a half mark. YOU ARE PAYING THAT PREMIUM and you're getting a diamond that is not as nice as it could be, and looks smaller than it is. You are getting a diamond with the 1.5ct price tag that looks face up like a diamond that's probably around 1.25 carat.

You still haven't posted what the diameter on your diamond is, and I'm not GIA savvy enough to go look it up, but you could get an ideal cut diamond (best cut for performance!) that's about .25ct smaller, therefore getting rid of the 1.5ct price premium, and it would still be a very similar diameter, and it would perform even better than the one you bought.

I went to Whiteflash (I find their site to be easy to navigate, there are many other vendors out there to choose Ideal cuts from) and I found these:

1.265cts
VS2
I color
Ideal cut
Depth: 62%
Diameter 6.92x6.94
$9,733
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2676035.htm

1.53cts
VS2
I color
Ideal cut
Depth: 61.9%
Diameter: 7.39x7.41
$15,389
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2632200.htm

Note that both of these stones are Ideal cut, exact same specs as far as color/clarity/depth/cut and notice that price jump. Your stone likely looks like it's the same size as the 1.265ct stone, and the 1.5 ct stone is a half of a millimeter difference in the face up/diameter size. That doesn't sound like a lot, but it really is.

I do not blame people for being upset and having their frustration come out. DancingFire has been an avid poster for 8 years. He is a diamond nut(case) and he doesn't mince his words. You asked for advice, people gave it to you, and you still went out and went against everyone's advice. When you came back and asked for thoughts again, it's no wonder people aren't receptive to your decision. People that post here know their stuff about stretching their money to get the most beautiful diamonds they can for a fair price.

I hope that this helps. I'll be the first person to tell you that I'm not good with diamonds, but as I said, I'm a crazy cut person when it comes to gemstones. Your diamond is not bad, its just not as nice as it could be. I'm hoping that the sapphire pictures can give you an idea of what everyone is talking about as far as the face up difference that you're looking at. No one has said that you need to go bigger. In fact, if anything, people have been suggesting that you go smaller in weight and get a better cut diamond that will be more sparkly and still LOOK like the same size that you already have!

 

[FrekeChild]

Sorry.. my friend has a 1.2 center stone, mine clearly looks bigger and its the perfect size for me. I understand what you are saying but I am happy with the size.

Sorry that bothers you.

The visual difference could also be due to the fact that yours is in a halo. Those tiny diamonds can pack a punch and it's a common tactic for people who are wanting a bigger diamond to put their stones in a halo to make it look bigger without the huge price difference.

A 1.5ct (ideal cut) diamond (7.5mm ish) in a halo that has diamonds that are 1mm on all sides is going to have the visual impact that a 3 carat (ideal cut) diamond would have (9.5mm ish) in a solitaire without the $70-100k price tag. The 1.5 is likely somewhere in the $10-20k mark.

 

[Gypsy]

Okay so. Here is your VERY DEEP diamond in terms of performance:

You diamond IS smaller than it should be because it is too deep AND because it isn't going to reflect light correctly it is going to look EVEN SMALLER.

YOURS IS THE FAR RIGHT:


The ONLY reason your diamond looks as big as it does is the SETTING. NOW, imagine if you had a PROPER 1.5 carat diamond (One that actually LOOKS like a 1.5 carat diamond) in there. It would look even bigger and MUCH better.

And for all you know, your friends 1.2 carat could be a crappy stone that is too small for it's carat weight. That's not a good comparison. I'm telling you, that's a crappy stone.

 

[yialanliu]

I don't mind the setting. I only mentioned it because a halo makes your ring bigger and you said you were worried in making it too big. So that's why I was amused since they seem to be at odds.

No one here will saythe setting is a bad/good choice since its all personal preference.

People however will say they don't like the diamond. However, I also believe that's personal preference.

People here at PS are quite special. We prefer super well cut stones that look great. If you look at diamond numbers, the stones we buy (HCA <2 with great Idealscope) represent maybe 1-2% of all diamonds. What do you think the other 98% diamonds go? They don't rot in the warehouse I will tell you that. PS members wont buy it but it doesn't mean it's horrible or junk. We have our preference and others have theirs.

I live in China right now and I'll tell you, lots of people here have completely different preferences and there's nothing wrong with that.
If I rated ligh performance as secondary to carat and value (happens to be the case for many people outside of PS), then the type of diamond you'll be look for is different. If anyone tells you that you are stupid for doing that, then I would just laugh it off because your priority is different.

So everything being said here is from the perspective of the majority of PSers and I think I speak for a majority when I say we value getting the most bang for the buck with the best light performance. That however is not true for everyone and may not be for you.

If you are happy, then you shouldn't worry at all. From a money perspective, you are good. People here don't value the same thing mainstream majority does (they set the prices and you paid a fair price). If you haven't noticed, if you wanted what everyone said, you'd be looking at closer 1.2, not 1.5 carats. So obviously what PSers want is something more expensive per carat and we are trading 1C for another C. No one here is saying you got scammed and that's the important part.

 

[mike899]

Well I thank everyone for the feedback Trust me, I totally understand the weight explanations. I understood them the first time before I went to the store. Most of you are sighting the "imagine how much bigger it could look if was not as deep a cut" and i have said it a few times, the last thing i want it to do is look bigger, so i am fine there.

I understand my purchase upsets some of you, I was just simply asking what people thought of the pictures of the ring, only one or 2 people have responded with that feedback.

 

[mike899]

Oh this is the second picture i took. Its a similar angle but the lighting is different. Not sure if this helps anyone look at the actual diamond.

 

[ChrisES]

The second angle definitely helps. You can sort of see the symmetry in the stone and can definitely see how well it goes with the setting...would still like to see shot closer to the stone and in better light, and honestly it does look a *little* dark (dark compared to the stones people post here on pricescope...not dark compared to stones I see out and about each day). I really doubt you could do better for the price you paid, assuming you want a stone of that weight...

If you get another chance to take pictures, do look at that page I linked to about macro mode and distance and such. It took me, let me check, 229 pictures of my fiancee's ring before I got the one I was trying to get all along (which, it occurs to me, I never posted). (I am a slightly obsessive but VERY amateur photographer!)

 

[mike899]

I can see what you mean by the "dark", i do see a lil less sparkle in it when i stare at it.. but like you said, i feel it goes really well with that setting and the ring as a whole looks great.

I am not sure what stat or attribute accounts for the dome of the diamond, but i like that my "dome" is on the larger size. if thats b/c its deep, i don't know.

 

[slg47]

Well I thank everyone for the feedback Trust me, I totally understand the weight explanations. I understood them the first time before I went to the store. Most of you are sighting the "imagine how much bigger it could look if was not as deep a cut" and i have said it a few times, the last thing i want it to do is look bigger, so i am fine there.

I understand my purchase upsets some of you, I was just simply asking what people thought of the pictures of the ring, only one or 2 people have responded with that feedback.

you likely could have gotten a well-cut smaller carat weight *same diameter* diamond and paid less because you would have avoided the 1.5 carat premium.

can you get closer up shots of the ring?

 

[ChrisES]

I can see what you mean by the "dark", i do see a lil less sparkle in it when i stare at it.. but like you said, i feel it goes really well with that setting and the ring as a whole looks great.

I am not sure what stat or attribute accounts for the dome of the diamond, but i like that my "dome" is on the larger size. if thats b/c its deep, i don't know.

The dome is the crown....the pavilion is what people are talking about when they say deep.

See: http://goodoldgold.com/4Cs/Cut/PartsAndFacets/

 

[mike899]

ahh, thanks.

 

[Laila619]

I think it looks very pretty! Good luck with the proposal!

 

[mike899]

I think it looks very pretty! Good luck with the proposal!

Thank you! i'm going to wait a lil while on the proposal.. i need the stress of the ring to wear off b4 i take on the stress of the wedding planning ruining my life.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think the diamond looks about like I would expect from the lab report. You paid a fair price for the diamond, so from a consumer advocacy perspective I can say you made a good buy. From a cut perspective I would have personally bought a smaller stone of the same spread for similar price, but you seem committed to this choice. Good luck with your proposal!

 

[mike899]

I think the diamond looks about like I would expect from the lab report. You paid a fair price for the diamond, so from a consumer advocacy perspective I can say you made a good buy. From a cut perspective I would have personally bought a smaller stone of the same spread for similar price, but you seem committed to this choice. Good luck with your proposal!

yea that seems to be consensus so far and thank you. wasn't that i was committed, i went there ready to ask for another diamond, but it came out and it was exactly what i wanted and thought it would look like. wasn't gonna bust my balls and their jewlers balls when it was already exactly what i wanted.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Most people have never seen a really well cut diamond. They are very uncommon in the general population. If you compared your diamond to a known ideal performer you may have seen a difference in performance if you looked in different lighting. This is one reason I think it is not always the best advice to suggest that people who are newer to diamonds "use their eyes" only to examine potential diamonds. Jewlers will often select the comparison stones so that a particular diamond they prefer a consumer to buy looks its best. And, all diamonds looks really pretty and sparkly under jewelery store lighting. That is why the lab cut grade matters, as does comparing a potential diamond to many other exemplars accross many different lighting environments (if you choose to use your eyes to select), or shopping at multiple vendors to avoid being steered into a particular decision by a particular jewlers agenda or inventory. Based on the lab report for the diamond you bought and the photos you posted, I am certain that most people, given the right comparison of a really well cut stone of lower weight and similar spread (and likely price) would be able to see a difference in optics -- sparkle, scintillation, life. You made a choice not to pursue that option. At the end of the day, it is your choice! You paid a fair price, at least. We do see people come here and pay too much for much worse cut stones.