Engagement Ring Help

[msop04]

I think I'd still want to see it for myself... OP, are you open to your girl seeing anything, or are you being more secretive?

 

[msop04]

If you want to avoid the loan, you could consider the 1.890 carat. There is a difference of 0.06 x 0.09mm which isn't detectable to the human eye. It's your next best choice to meet your budget constraints assuming it's eye clean (which the WF page says "yes" it's eye clean -- still need them to pull and confirm though, IMO).

This was my thought... but just by looking at the still photo of each, if the 1.923 isn't eye clean, I would venture to say that the 1.890 is even less eye clean IMO.

 

[sledge]

Yeah, I realized that about 10 seconds after I posted. Honestly, I'm a little shocked that they'd brand a stone ACA that they didn't feel eye clean...

I'm kind of surprised with this as well. You almost have to assume if someone wants and will pay for an ACA then the majority will also want eye clean.

But I'm sure they know their demographic pretty well and knows it will sell to a size driven buyer and/or someone with less than 20/20 vision. Or perhaps with an attitude of inclusions isn't bad, it's just a birth mark attitude.

I think I'd still want to see it for myself... OP, are you open to your girl seeing anything, or are you being more secretive?

I personally dislike the idea and hassle of shipping with intent it has a good shot of being unacceptable. I would ask WF for additional photos and videos at 10" away so you can see what they see (hopefully).

The problem is that it's very hard to always capture things in photos or videos.

This was my thought... but just by looking at the still photo of each, if the 1.923 isn't eye clean, I would venture to say that the 1.890 is even less eye clean IMO.

I will be mobile for the next hour or so and cant pull the cert right now. I personally think all SI1 and VS2 sto e need to be confirmed as eye clean but the fact the the 1.89 listed as eye clean instead of inquire gives me hope.

Can someone compare the 1.923 to the 1.890 on diamdb.com and screen cap results for the OP to see? Be sure to use ACTUAL dimensions. There should be NO visible difference. And if there is then the 1.923 should be out too as you have eagle eyes and will see the tiniest of differences.

 

[SimoneDi]

OP, since you are now considering a custom setting through DK, perhaps you can also look for stones elsewhere.

I need to look more, but this stone caught my attention:
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...DiamondDetails&action=newTab&catalogView=true

It is a bit outside of the preferred range and it will favor more scintillation vs fire, but it is gorgeous, white, clean, over 2ct and within budget.

 

[soxfan]

I would call Yekutiel at IDJ and tell him what you are looking for. He can source Ideal cut stones, and his prices are amazing.

 

[sledge]

I would call Yekutiel at IDJ and tell him what you are looking for. He can source Ideal cut stones, and his prices are amazing.

I've not worked with IDJ, but heard others that have with good results. From what I've read, it's important you tell him you are looking for "PS quality stones" and he will know the exacting specifications we expect.

Looking at his website, I saw a couple that looked promising. Just no actual certs, images, etc are loaded to really make a determination. All are AGS certified and ideal cut 0.

https://idjewelry.com/round-jb16012.html
https://idjewelry.com/round-jb16991b.html
https://idjewelry.com/round-jb18392.html

 

[Matty23]

Hey all! I will take time to read through these posts more thoroughly but just wanted to provide an update that I was able to get some family financial help and will be able to swing the 1.957.

With this update, do you think this would be the one I should go with? I like the peace of mind knowing it’s eye clean and thanks for linking it earlier @sledge !

 

[Matty23]

OP, since you are now considering a custom setting through DK, perhaps you can also look for stones elsewhere.

I need to look more, but this stone caught my attention:
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...DiamondDetails&action=newTab&catalogView=true

It is a bit outside of the preferred range and it will favor more scintillation vs fire, but it is gorgeous, white, clean, over 2ct and within budget.

This one is very nice! With my update above- how would you compare this to the WF ACA Hearts and Arrows 1.957?

 

[Matty23]

I think I'd still want to see it for myself... OP, are you open to your girl seeing anything, or are you being more secretive?

I would love to pick one and not have her see it until popping the question but if necessary, I can certainly seek her thoughts!

 

[Matty23]

Sorry to hear this! I know it can be frustrating and disappointing to hear that sort of news when you were getting excited about the option. Did they happen to give you details that you care to share?

LOL, by the way....that 1.957 is one I had also suggested earlier.

If you want to avoid the loan, you could consider the 1.890 carat. There is a difference of 0.06 x 0.09mm which isn't detectable to the human eye. It's your next best choice to meet your budget constraints assuming it's eye clean (which the WF page says "yes" it's eye clean -- still need them to pull and confirm though, IMO).

If that isn't satisfactory and you are considering a loan from dad that kind of puts the 2.108ct J VS2 back on the table too, although I understand your concern with color. Still, WF's gemologist could pull that 1.890, 1.957 and 2.108 and compare all 3 at the same time for some real valuable feedback.

Just a thought.

Thanks for so much awesome feedback today! With the financial help I am able to swing the 1.957. I am okay with it being slightly less than 2 and think I would prefer it to the larger J. This goes back to SO seeing some yellow in a J at the mall. I do understand this may be different being of much better quality but it still worries me a bit. What do you think with this new info?

 

[SimoneDi]

This one is very nice! With my update above- how would you compare this to the WF ACA Hearts and Arrows 1.957?

I do like the BN a lot (I suggest you put it on hold). It is very white, much whiter than an I and it hits the 2ct mark. It has a great spread at 8.2mm and it is cheaper. I personally don’t think it is worth going in debt or borrowing finances from family for an engagement ring, but that is for you to decide.
I would pick G over I any day and I do have a super-ideal I color diamond. You will hear different opinions about super ideals being much better and worth the premium, but I would disagree that for the average consumer that is not always true. If upgrade was a consideration, I would absolutely advice to go with WF, but since you indicated that this would be a forever diamond, I would personally get the biggest,whitest, still excellent cut diamond that your money can buy.

 

[sledge]

You're welcome for pointing that out.

Totally understand about the J. I wouldn't do a J myself. Hell, if I'm being honest I had a tough time doing an H for my girl and when/if the times comes to upgrade I will probably go F or G as that is just what I prefer for her.

But that is the beauty of diamonds. It bothers me past an H, but you guys didn't notice anything until you got beyond an I. So there is some validity in the fact that you shouldn't pay extra for anything that you can't see. That is why many people push SI1 and some SI2 clarity stones.

FYI, once you get past H, there tends to be more subjectivity and variation in the color grading. So it's possible to get a great, medium or bad I or J color stone. In fact I would have WF pull an H of comparable size, etc. and compare the 1.957 to it. My hopes would be that you have an I that is nice and icy white so it's closer to an H.

So about the 1.957, I was looking it over and I do like it, but I have an issue with the cavity. Overall, it's a very clean VS2 and I think the reason it got that marking is because of teh cavity, although the grade maker is the feather (as it's listed first on the AGS cert). Here is a link to more information about cavities:

https://beyond4cs.com/grading/clarity-characteristics/cavity/

I don't know that it is a problem, but I know I'd want to talk to WF and verify the extent of it before I pulled the trigger.

Also, earlier it got mentioned that if the 1.923 is not eye clean than the 1.890 may not be either. I went back and pulled the certs on both stones and can understand why. See the images below. That said, WF states the 1.923 as an "inquire" on the eye clean status but gives a "yes" to the 1.890 on the eye clean status. So perhaps it's the location of the inclusions (more on the outsides and not directly under table) or perhaps smaller inclusions. Either way, for some reason WF has deemed the 1.890 as eye clean. Still, with any SI1 or VS2, you should always verify.

1.890 cert:


1.923 cert:


Finally, we get to the BN stone. Love the size, price and color. Not loving the angles so much. CA 33.0 and PA 40.8 falls outside the recommended angles. Below is a chart showing the angles list this stone as "excellent". However, the bigger issue I have is that GIA is known to average and then round their values so it could be better, or worse than the values shown on the cert. I tried to draw a box around the possible cuts.



Also the stone has strong fluor which is a love/hate thing, depending on the person and can make the stone look hazy/milky if not well cut. Most the time fluor is NOT an issue, but it can be and is something that needs to be asked prior to purchasing. In all cases, with strong fluor the stone will turn a bluish color when the fluor atoms get excited by UV lighting (outside, garage lights, etc). That said, many people absolutely love this. I fall in the camp of love. I bought my girl a BGD Blue stone, which has medium fluor.

To consider this BN stone I would want you to verify it's eye clean, that the fluor does not cause any visibility issues (milky/haziness) and request an idealscope and/or ASET image to confirm cut quality and light leakage.

While bigger and whiter, it comes with more risk. The ACA's are guaranteed performers. IMO, this stone is borderline until more data is presented to prove otherwise. I'm not hung up on carat size, but this does have a nice dimensional spread, yet it's not massively bigger than the 1.957.

If you want a GIA triple X stone then we can look for one of those too.

 

[Matty23]

You're welcome for pointing that out.

Totally understand about the J. I wouldn't do a J myself. Hell, if I'm being honest I had a tough time doing an H for my girl and when/if the times comes to upgrade I will probably go F or G as that is just what I prefer for her.

But that is the beauty of diamonds. It bothers me past an H, but you guys didn't notice anything until you got beyond an I. So there is some validity in the fact that you shouldn't pay extra for anything that you can't see. That is why many people push SI1 and some SI2 clarity stones.

FYI, once you get past H, there tends to be more subjectivity and variation in the color grading. So it's possible to get a great, medium or bad I or J color stone. In fact I would have WF pull an H of comparable size, etc. and compare the 1.957 to it. My hopes would be that you have an I that is nice and icy white so it's closer to an H.

So about the 1.957, I was looking it over and I do like it, but I have an issue with the cavity. Overall, it's a very clean VS2 and I think the reason it got that marking is because of teh cavity, although the grade maker is the feather (as it's listed first on the AGS cert). Here is a link to more information about cavities:

https://beyond4cs.com/grading/clarity-characteristics/cavity/

I don't know that it is a problem, but I know I'd want to talk to WF and verify the extent of it before I pulled the trigger.

Also, earlier it got mentioned that if the 1.923 is not eye clean than the 1.890 may not be either. I went back and pulled the certs on both stones and can understand why. See the images below. That said, WF states the 1.923 as an "inquire" on the eye clean status but gives a "yes" to the 1.890 on the eye clean status. So perhaps it's the location of the inclusions (more on the outsides and not directly under table) or perhaps smaller inclusions. Either way, for some reason WF has deemed the 1.890 as eye clean. Still, with any SI1 or VS2, you should always verify.

1.890 cert:


1.923 cert:


Finally, we get to the BN stone. Love the size, price and color. Not loving the angles so much. CA 33.0 and PA 40.8 falls outside the recommended angles. Below is a chart showing the angles list this stone as "excellent". However, the bigger issue I have is that GIA is known to average and then round their values so it could be better, or worse than the values shown on the cert. I tried to draw a box around the possible cuts.



Also the stone has strong fluor which is a love/hate thing, depending on the person and can make the stone look hazy/milky if not well cut. Most the time fluor is NOT an issue, but it can be and is something that needs to be asked prior to purchasing. In all cases, with strong fluor the stone will turn a bluish color when the fluor atoms get excited by UV lighting (outside, garage lights, etc). That said, many people absolutely love this. I fall in the camp of love. I bought my girl a BGD Blue stone, which has medium fluor.

To consider this BN stone I would want you to verify it's eye clean, that the fluor does not cause any visibility issues (milky/haziness) and request an idealscope and/or ASET image to confirm cut quality and light leakage.

While bigger and whiter, it comes with more risk. The ACA's are guaranteed performers. IMO, this stone is borderline until more data is presented to prove otherwise. I'm not hung up on carat size, but this does have a nice dimensional spread, yet it's not massively bigger than the 1.957.

If you want a GIA triple X stone then we can look for one of those too.

Thanks for all of this. Lots of info! I read the article about how a cavity affects a diamond and noticed the author says they try to avoid them in SI 1 and 2's but they are usually fine in VS' with usually being the key word.

You had also said I should check with WF about this. Being a novice, what exactly would I want to ask them in regards to the cavity being on the stone? I am having them hold this one for me today and am looking at the BN as well right now.

Thanks again!

 

[Matty23]

I do like the BN a lot (I suggest you put it on hold). It is very white, much whiter than an I and it hits the 2ct mark. It has a great spread at 8.2mm and it is cheaper. I personally don’t think it is worth going in debt or borrowing finances from family for an engagement ring, but that is for you to decide.
I would pick G over I any day and I do have a super-ideal I color diamond. You will hear different opinions about super ideals being much better and worth the premium, but I would disagree that for the average consumer that is not always true. If upgrade was a consideration, I would absolutely advice to go with WF, but since you indicated that this would be a forever diamond, I would personally get the biggest,whitest, still excellent cut diamond that your money can buy.

Thank you for your input. It really does look like a great stone. I am going to see if it is eye clean and then comparing this and the WF today.

Thanks again!

 

[msop04]

@Matty23, I'm glad you have the option of a small loan if you choose to do the 1.957, as it is a gorgeous stone. That said, I really love the 2+ ct BN G color stone @SimoneDi posted. You just have to weigh the pros and cons of each stone...

ACA 1.957 I/VS2 (8.02 x 8.00 mm)
Pros: it's an ACA, WF upgrade policy if you think that's in the future (disclaimer: it will be) , totally eye clean, nice size
Cons: more expensive than the BN, less than the 2 ct mark she wants, smaller than the BN 2+ G, 2 shades lower in color

BN 2.02 G/SI1 (8.21 x 8.17 mm)
Pros: amazingly white color (so no worries there), less expensive than the ACA, surpasses the 2 ct mark she wants, larger in size than the ACA
Cons: BN's upgrade policy is not as nice as WF's, will need to be assessed to assure it's eye clean

Here is a size comparison on a size 6.5 finger. ACA on left, BN on right. As you can tell, they are very close in visual size, but I know I can tell a difference.


Both stones are really nice. If you are SURE this will be her forever stone, I would choose the BN for obvious reasons listed above and mentioned by SimoneDi... HOWEVER, If you think your lady will want to upgrade at all in the future, I'd go with WF. I know she says that she'll never want to upgrade, but I said that too when I found my 2.01 ct... then I found my 2.43 ct... then my current 3.33 ct held a gun to my head, and, well... you know how that can happen, right?? I thought so. LOL DSS is real, son. Very few are immune to it's grasp, and once it takes hold, it's upgrade time.

 

[Matty23]

@Matty23, I'm glad you have the option of a small loan if you choose to do the 1.957, as it is a gorgeous stone. That said, I really love the 2+ ct BN G color stone @SimoneDi posted. You just have to weigh the pros and cons of each stone...

ACA 1.957 I/VS2 (8.02 x 8.00 mm)
Pros: it's an ACA, WF upgrade policy if you think that's in the future (disclaimer: it will be) , totally eye clean, nice size
Cons: more expensive than the BN, less than the 2 ct mark she wants, smaller than the BN 2+ G, 2 shades lower in color

BN 2.02 G/SI1 (8.21 x 8.17 mm)
Pros: amazingly white color (so no worries there), less expensive than the ACA, surpasses the 2 ct mark she wants, larger in size than the ACA
Cons: BN's upgrade policy is not as nice as WF's, will need to be assessed to assure it's eye clean

Here is a size comparison on a size 6.5 finger. ACA on left, BN on right. As you can tell, they are very close in visual size, but I know I can tell a difference.


Both stones are really nice. If you are SURE this will be her forever stone, I would choose the BN for obvious reasons listed above and mentioned by SimoneDi... HOWEVER, If you think your lady will want to upgrade at all in the future, I'd go with WF. I know she says that she'll never want to upgrade, but I said that too when I found my 2.01 ct... then I found my 2.43 ct... then my current 3.33 ct held a gun to my head, and, well... you know how that can happen, right?? I thought so. LOL DSS is real, son. Very few are immune to it's grasp, and once it takes hold, it's upgrade time.

Thank you for the pro and con comparison! That will help me a lot today. As I said I am pretty positive she won't want to upgrade but there is a little voice in my head that says maybe she will change her mind in 10, 15 or 20 years down the road and want to get something a little bit better. So maybe the additional price would end up being worth it right now to have that piece of mind.

But I do like that the BN is cheaper and is a better color. I am asking if it is eye clean to start out and am inquiring further into the fluorescence.

At the very least, it seems like everyone is in agreement that they both would be a good choice so that makes me feel better as I go back and forth!

Also: That finger comparison tool is really cool to have. I have a very hard time telling a difference though but it is amazing that you can!

 

[msop04]

Thank you for the pro and con comparison! That will help me a lot today. As I said I am pretty positive she won't want to upgrade but there is a little voice in my head that says maybe she will change her mind in 10, 15 or 20 years down the road and want to get something a little bit better. So maybe the additional price would end up being worth it right now to have that piece of mind.

But I do like that the BN is cheaper and is a better color. I am asking if it is eye clean to start out and am inquiring further into the fluorescence.

At the very least, it seems like everyone is in agreement that they both would be a good choice so that makes me feel better as I go back and forth!

Also: That finger comparison tool is really cool to have. I have a very hard time telling a difference though but it is amazing that you can!

Honestly, the major difference worth consideration is the upgrade program. It may be best to stick with WF... you can always do "baby step" upgrades for big anniversaries/birthdays/etc and go up in color or size if she wants that, whereas you'd have to spend a lot more each time with BN. And I don't want to scare you about the I color... it will be white.

 

[msop04]

@Matty23... the size comparison is via a website called diamdb.com (like "diamond database")... at least that's how I remember it. It's very helpful, especially when you need to do more IRL comparisons.

 

[SimoneDi]

I agree with what much of what @msop04 said, but it is also worth noting that BN has an upgrade policy, it is just a lot more restrictive at 2x the value. However, if a potential upgrade could be in the works in 10, 20 years, spending 2x the money might not even be a problem. WF’s upgrade policy is geared toward incremental upgrades, it is a nice policy to have for people who upgrade rather frequently. That said, a 2ct G SI1 ACA starts trading at about $23k. Again, we are not comparing exactly apples to apples in terms of cut, but I am willing to bet that the average eye will not discern the difference easily. Lastly, cavity inclusion near the girdle is a big no for me personally. Knot, cavity and etch channel are inclusions that I personally like to avoid.

OP, at least put the BN stone on hold while you are thinking about it because someone else might buy it in the meantime.

 

[SimoneDi]

@Matty23 one more suggestion, contact IDJ and see if they can source that BN stone for you and ask at what cost.

IDJ carries Vatche (design brand) and provides probably the best pricing. Vatche has two comparable styles:
http://www.dvatche.com/index.php?page=collection&catID=3,11&startRow=78&id=190
http://www.dvatche.com/index.php?page=collection&catID=3

So this can be a one stop shop for you. Not sure on IDJ upgrade policy, however. You can ask. But I have worked with them on several occasions on behalf of friends and they have always been pleasant to work with.

 

[sledge]

I would agree about putting both stones on hold while you decide. Also I'd like to add a few more comments for you to consider before deciding.

• BN upgrade program requires you spend 2x the money to upgrade -- so it requires $35k to make the next jump.
• WF upgrade program only requires you spend $1 more to upgrade -- so you have ALOT more flexibility about how & when you upgrade.
• Request idealscope & ASET images from BN and review them before pulling the trigger. While the 40.8 PA is pretty normal that 33.0 CA worries me. See article below for more info.
• Biggest pro of the 1.957 is that it's a true H&A stone and a super ideal.
• Biggest con of the 2.02 is that it's just a GIA triple X.
• Generally speaking it ranks as this:
  • Good = GIA XXX (BN stone)
  • Better = AGS 0 (no comparable stone)
  • Best = AGS 000 (WF stone)
• BN = 8.21 x 8.17mm
• WF = 8.00 x 8.02mm
• Difference = 0.21 x .15mm
• As previously noted, it takes about 0.20mm before there is a visual difference. I can see a size difference when compared side to side; however, to me, I am not certain I would ever consider that a significance difference as I wouldn't walk away and think "wow that 2.02 is just much bigger than the 1.957". In fact if they weren't side by side, I'm not sure we would even see one or the other as larger or smaller if we didn't know the stats.
• Without knowing the stats, I am relatively certain I could tell a difference in color, but I am more sensitive to color than you and your SO.
• Without knowing the stats, I am relatively certain I would see the WF be more sparkly and full of fire than the BN (pending image confirmations -- assumptions are based on angles only).
• When looking at GIA diamonds, keep in mind the percentages and angles reported are averages that are then rounded up or down by sometimes considerable amounts. So while the GIA cert reports a 33 CA which is marginal, some of the actual values could be much worse.

Please read. Below is what I am concerned about with the 33 CA:

https://www.prosumerdiamonds.com/crown-angle/

Shallow-end of the Ideal Crown Angle
Within this range, a shallow crown angle is expected to have better light return as it ensures that there’s no leakage from the diamond. But apart from brightness, varying the crown angle changes how the diamond exhibits fire by changing its dispersion.

Dispersion is a material property but it is also affected by the angle of incidence of light rays that hits the crown as it leaves the diamond. Light is dispersed less with a shallower crown angle so a diamond with a 34-degree crown angle has less fire than one with a 35-degree crown angle.

If you have a preference for a bright diamond and do not mind sacrificing fire, then you can choose a diamond with a 34-degree crown angle provided that it is paired with a 41-degree pavilion angle. Bear in mind that in this combination, you need to make sure the diamond has excellent optical symmetry. Diamonds with a shallow crown (<33.5 degrees) will have significantly less fire. With a shallow crown, there's the benefit of having better spread. However, it is important to be aware that diamonds with very shallow crown angles (<32.5 degrees) have a durability issue when coupled with thin girdles due to the increased risk of chipping at the girdle edge.

 

[sledge]

If you want to go with a GIA XXX here are some more options for you:


2.16ct I VS2, $17,699, 8.23 x 8.28mm, 1.4 HCA (looks promising, request images)
https://www.adiamor.com/Diamonds/I-VS2-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond/D33801428


2.05ct I VS1, $17,945, 8.10 x 8.14mm, 1.6 HCA (click on "see video" and then you can see ASET & IS images)
https://taylorandhart.com/us/diamond-search/CD-182701703-GIA-6271697661

Same 2.05ct I VS1 as above @ Taylor & Hart -- but cheaper. $16,802 wire
https://www.fourmine.com/shop/diamond/182701703

 

[Matty23]

I agree with what much of what @msop04 said, but it is also worth noting that BN has an upgrade policy, it is just a lot more restrictive at 2x the value. However, if a potential upgrade could be in the works in 10, 20 years, spending 2x the money might not even be a problem. WF’s upgrade policy is geared toward incremental upgrades, it is a nice policy to have for people who upgrade rather frequently. That said, a 2ct G SI1 ACA starts trading at about $23k. Again, we are not comparing exactly apples to apples in terms of cut, but I am willing to bet that the average eye will not discern the difference easily. Lastly, cavity inclusion near the girdle is a big no for me personally. Knot, cavity and etch channel are inclusions that I personally like to avoid.

OP, at least put the BN stone on hold while you are thinking about it because someone else might buy it in the meantime.

That is a good point about 2X in 20 years or so not being as big of a deal. I am curious to ask about something though... if the diamond is determined to be eye clean from 10 in, would the cavity really be much of a factor? Or is it something where you might be able to see it from the side? I am clueless as to the different inclusions as I have not had enough experience of seeing them in person to know which ones would or wouldn't bother me. In addition, I don't know if fluorescence will bother us either. It seems like people are split on it in general as to who likes it and who doesn't. I can't imagine it would be a big deal as our eyes are not any where near as trained as most of the fine people on this site.

 

[Matty23]

If you want to go with a GIA XXX here are some more options for you:


2.16ct I VS2, $17,699, 8.23 x 8.28mm, 1.4 HCA (looks promising, request images)
https://www.adiamor.com/Diamonds/I-VS2-Excellent-Cut-Round-Diamond/D33801428


2.05ct I VS1, $17,945, 8.10 x 8.14mm, 1.6 HCA (click on "see video" and then you can see ASET & IS images)
https://taylorandhart.com/us/diamond-search/CD-182701703-GIA-6271697661

Same 2.05ct I VS1 as above @ Taylor & Hart -- but cheaper. $16,802 wire
https://www.fourmine.com/shop/diamond/182701703

I am not really set on going with GIA or AGS as I did not really understand the difference before today. Do you prefer any of these to the WF or the BN? Honestly, I value all of your opinions way more than my own due to my limited knowledge so whatever you guys are leaning towards is what I will most likely be getting. Again, if it is sparkly, has fire and is eye clean... I think that SO and I will both be more than happy. Knowing that the experts on here think its a solid choice will provide great peace of mind!

 

[sledge]

Here is some more information on fluor. Keep in mind BGD stones are super ideals and cut to one of the highest standards. Additionally Brian is very selective in his process of vetting rough with fluor so he can create a finished stone with none of the negative effects associated with fluor.

Not all diamond cutters put in the same amount of attention and detail, which is why I warned you to ask questions earlier. But honestly, most the time it's not an issue.

The bigger issue is that the stone can look blue under certain conditions. This is a PREFERENCE, and some love it and others hate it. You need to decide where you two fall in that category.

Read this:
https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond/brian-gavins-blue-diamonds-with-fluorescence/

Also watch these:

 

[sledge]

I am not really set on going with GIA or AGS as I did not really understand the difference before today. Do you prefer any of these to the WF or the BN? Honestly, I value all of your opinions way more than my own due to my limited knowledge so whatever you guys are leaning towards is what I will most likely be getting. Again, if it is sparkly, has fire and is eye clean... I think that SO and I will both be more than happy. Knowing that the experts on here think its a solid choice will provide great peace of mind!

I have concerns with the BN stone as I've already pointed out, but until we see the images I simply don't know.

I think the 2.05ct stone has pretty good images. Not perfect, but not very good. I still think the WF stone will have the most sparkle. But the 2.05 hits your magic carat number, is slightly larger and closer to budget (assuming you have IDJ source it, or simply play the vendors against each other to get yourself the best price).

I know you said you can take a family loan, I am just not sure how that really sits with you internally. While my family has always offered to help me as I needed, I rarely take it as I personally have an issue with being indebted to my family. It kind of makes those turkey dinners taste a little different, IMO. So the time or two I did take help, I was pretty adamant about getting it repaid. Don't take me wrong, my family didn't make it difficult on me. I did it to myself as that is how I am built. So I would understand if you preferred not to take a loan is all I'm saying.

 

[SimoneDi]

That is a good point about 2X in 20 years or so not being as big of a deal. I am curious to ask about something though... if the diamond is determined to be eye clean from 10 in, would the cavity really be much of a factor? Or is it something where you might be able to see it from the side? I am clueless as to the different inclusions as I have not had enough experience of seeing them in person to know which ones would or wouldn't bother me. In addition, I don't know if fluorescence will bother us either. It seems like people are split on it in general as to who likes it and who doesn't. I can't imagine it would be a big deal as our eyes are not any where near as trained as most of the fine people on this site.

Cavity or other inclusions near the girdle of the stone can create a risk of chipping the stone. Yes, it is a VS2 stone, however, I personally don’t like to see external inclusions (marked in green on the report). Cavity inclusion is a small hole within the crystal structure of the diamond. It can get filled up with dirt and then may become noticeable, but that is solvable by keeping the diamond clean. It is not an inclusion that I like to see even in VS stones, but again, I am not sure if that should necessarily be a concern for you.

Flourescence in my opinion can be a plus and a cool feature. I have personally owned 3 fluorescent stones. When exposed to UV light, the diamond might take on a lavender-ish hue, but again, I am not sure how much you will be able to notice that. Flouro also greatly helps improve color, but that is not really an important factor when already looking at a G colored diamond. Haziness, I find to be generally caused when the diamond has clouds. I have also seen hazy stones that did not exhibit fluorescence.

I know that the common knowledge on the site is that GIA XXX < AGS000, however, please don’t be fooled that it stands true on the general market outside of PS. GIA is still more well recognized than AGS by the greater market and 2ct G SI1 GIA XXX will in most cases be worth more than 1.9 I VS2 AGS000. I am saying this as an owner of AGS000 2ct I SI2.

That said, BN has a generous return policy. You can always order the stone and return it if you don’t like it. Again, I would also contact IDJ and see if they can source that stone or see if they have anything else to offer. Tell them that PS sent you.

 

[Matty23]

I have concerns with the BN stone as I've already pointed out, but until we see the images I simply don't know.

I think the 2.05ct stone has pretty good images. Not perfect, but not very good. I still think the WF stone will have the most sparkle. But the 2.05 hits your magic carat number, is slightly larger and closer to budget (assuming you have IDJ source it, or simply play the vendors against each other to get yourself the best price).

I know you said you can take a family loan, I am just not sure how that really sits with you internally. While my family has always offered to help me as I needed, I rarely take it as I personally have an issue with being indebted to my family. It kind of makes those turkey dinners taste a little different, IMO. So the time or two I did take help, I was pretty adamant about getting it repaid. Don't take me wrong, my family didn't make it difficult on me. I did it to myself as that is how I am built. So I would understand if you preferred not to take a loan is all I'm saying.

No, I definitely feel the same way. This would be paid back in a matter of 3 weeks so that is why I am not too concerned about it. If it was going to be several months or even years then that would be a different story. The main reason for this is I am just ready to propose right now and want to snatch one up. We want to book a wedding venue and all of that for next summer so that has sped up the process just a bit.

 

[Matty23]

Here is some more information on fluor. Keep in mind BGD stones are super ideals and cut to one of the highest standards. Additionally Brian is very selective in his process of vetting rough with fluor so he can create a finished stone with none of the negative effects associated with fluor.

Not all diamond cutters put in the same amount of attention and detail, which is why I warned you to ask questions earlier. But honestly, most the time it's not an issue.

The bigger issue is that the stone can look blue under certain conditions. This is a PREFERENCE, and some love it and others hate it. You need to decide where you two fall in that category.

Read this:
https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond/brian-gavins-blue-diamonds-with-fluorescence/

Also watch these:
Wow, this was cool to learn about. Those videos were cool too to see the effects in different lighting environments. I don't think it would bother me as I find the blue to be pretty neat. I would have to run it by SO to see her thoughts but I don't think she would be opposed.

 

[Matty23]

Cavity or other inclusions near the girdle of the stone can create a risk of chipping the stone. Yes, it is a VS2 stone, however, I personally don’t like to see external inclusions (marked in green on the report). Cavity inclusion is a small hole within the crystal structure of the diamond. It can get filled up with dirt and then may become noticeable, but that is solvable by keeping the diamond clean. It is not an inclusion that I like to see even in VS stones, but again, I am not sure if that should necessarily be a concern for you.

Flourescence in my opinion can be a plus and a cool feature. I have personally owned 3 fluorescent stones. When exposed to UV light, the diamond might take on a lavender-ish hue, but again, I am not sure how much you will be able to notice that. Flouro also greatly helps improve color, but that is not really an important factor when already looking at a G colored diamond. Haziness, I find to be generally caused when the diamond has clouds. I have also seen hazy stones that did not exhibit fluorescence.

I know that the common knowledge on the site is that GIA XXX < AGS000, however, please don’t be fooled that it stands true on the general market outside of PS. GIA is still more well recognized than AGS by the greater market and 2ct G SI1 GIA XXX will in most cases be worth more than 1.9 I VS2 AGS000. I am saying this as an owner of AGS000 2ct I SI2.

That said, BN has a generous return policy. You can always order the stone and return it if you don’t like it. Again, I would also contact IDJ and see if they can source that stone or see if they have anything else to offer. Tell them that PS sent you.

Thank you for this additional info! And thank you for telling me why a cavity would bother you. That does cause some concern for sure.

I have email BN early this morning to request the hold and images but have not heard back quite yet. I am unable to call during my work hours unfortunately but hopefully will hear back from them shortly.

Thanks again!