Evaluate a pair of stones for ~1ctw studs

[boston_jeff]

Hey friends--

Just reserved a pair of H/SI1 ACA''s for the fiance''s new diamond studs.

Please find the stats below and feel free to comment good, bad, and ugly. I''m particularly interested in if the stones are close enough to match, or any other red flags you see. I am not in a huge rush so if these are not the ones I could live with waiting, but on the other hand I don''t need to chase something better just for the thrill.

The stones are new inventory and the pictures are not up yet, but I will post them as soon as they are. But for now I thought some of you would have initial comments based on the numbers.

Thank you in advance. As you all know, I''m very new to the world of rounds.

~Jeff

Stone #1
. Shape: A Cut Above H&A
. Carat: 0.530
. Depth %: 61.8
. Table %: 56.6
. Crown Angle: 34.8
. Crown %: 15.1
. Star : 52
. Pavilion Angle: 40.9
. Pavilion %: 43.1
. Lower Girdle %: 78
. Girdle: Thin to Medium Faceted
. Measurements: 5.18-5.20X3.21
. Light Performance: 0
. Polish: Ideal
. Symmetry: Ideal
. Culet: Pointed
. Fluorescence: Negligible


Stone #2
. Report: AGS
. Shape: A Cut Above H&A
. Carat: 0.528
. Depth %: 61.8
. Table %: 55.2
. Crown Angle: 34.9
. Crown %: 15.7
. Star : 48
. Pavilion Angle: 40.9
. Pavilion %: 43.1
. Lower Girdle %: 77
. Girdle: Thin to Medium Faceted
. Measurements: 5.18-5.21X3.21
. Light Performance: 0
. Polish: Ideal
. Symmetry: Ideal
. Culet: Pointed
. Fluorescence: Negligible

 

[boston_jeff]

hey, look at me over here!

wow i''m impatient.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

They are perfect!!! Diameters are the same, tables close, both ACA''s....doesn''t get much better than that!

You and sna77 are really going great in terms of taking care of your fiance''s jewelry needs!!!

 

[Sundial]

Wow those should be stunning and they appear to be quite well matched. You can''t go wrong with those Whiteflash ACA diamonds and there is nothing like a beautiful pair of classic diamond stud earrings. Are you setting them in three prong martinis?

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/11/2008 6:38:32 PM
Author: Sundial
Wow those should be stunning and they appear to be quite well matched. You can''t go wrong with those Whiteflash ACA diamonds and there is nothing like a beautiful pair of classic diamond stud earrings. Are you setting them in three prong martinis?

Hey Sundial--

They will be set in WF''s handmade 3-prong martinis in platinum. Thanks for taking the time to comment!

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/11/2008 6:37:47 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
They are perfect!!! Diameters are the same, tables close, both ACA''s....doesn''t get much better than that!

You and sna77 are really going great in terms of taking care of your fiance''s jewelry needs!!!

Hey ds-- Thanks so much for the compliments/verification. I knew I could count on you to chime in!

Best,
Jeff

 

[Skippy123]

They sound beautiful; can''t wait to see the pictures!!!! Nice size stones too!

 

[Sundial]

Date: 2/11/2008 6:40:20 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Date: 2/11/2008 6:38:32 PM
Author: Sundial
Wow those should be stunning and they appear to be quite well matched. You can''t go wrong with those Whiteflash ACA diamonds and there is nothing like a beautiful pair of classic diamond stud earrings. Are you setting them in three prong martinis?

Hey Sundial--

They will be set in WF''s handmade 3-prong martinis in platinum. Thanks for taking the time to comment!

Perfect!!!

 

[cutes814]

they seem like a perfect match! she will love them! i love the 3 prong martini setting, good choice.

 

[boston_jeff]

I am a *little* concerned that the stones are only Ex/Vg/Vg/Vg on the HCA (1.8 and 1.9, respectively), and that I might be losing a little bit of spread (the HCA page suggests shallower stones for earrings and pendants, but that may be just because head shadow is not much of a concern so they suggest a shallower stone because you get more spread without any sacrifice).

Am I getting a little too picky?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 2/11/2008 6:52:34 PM
Author: boston_jeff
I am a *little* concerned that the stones are only Ex/Vg/Vg/Vg on the HCA (1.8 and 1.9, respectively), and that I might be losing a little bit of spread (the HCA page suggests shallower stones for earrings and pendants, but that may be just because head shadow is not much of a concern so they suggest a shallower stone because you get more spread without any sacrifice).

Am I getting a little too picky?

Yes, they are ACA''s! Relax!!!

 

[kcoursolle]

I''m not sure I''ve ever seen a better matched pair of stones! The diameters are practically identical and the cut parameters are pretty similar too. They look great and if they are ACA''s you have nothing to worry about! They are probably eye clean, but did you ask to make sure?

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/11/2008 7:03:21 PM
Author: kcoursolle
I''m not sure I''ve ever seen a better matched pair of stones! The diameters are practically identical and the cut parameters are pretty similar too. They look great and if they are ACA''s you have nothing to worry about! They are probably eye clean, but did you ask to make sure?

Umm... what do you think? Although I understand your hesitation knowing how laid back I am when it comes to diamond selection...

They said they were confirmed eye-clean per WF''s standards... for an e-ring stone I would have pressed further, but for earrings I think their definition (I think 8 inches) is fine.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yeah, eye clean is fine on stones that size. No one but you, I hope,

will be that close to her ears!

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 2/11/2008 7:13:52 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Date: 2/11/2008 7:03:21 PM
Author: kcoursolle
I''m not sure I''ve ever seen a better matched pair of stones! The diameters are practically identical and the cut parameters are pretty similar too. They look great and if they are ACA''s you have nothing to worry about! They are probably eye clean, but did you ask to make sure?

Umm... what do you think? Although I understand your hesitation knowing how laid back I am when it comes to diamond selection...

They said they were confirmed eye-clean per WF''s standards... for an e-ring stone I would have pressed further, but for earrings I think their definition (I think 8 inches) is fine.

That would be good enough for me!

 

[boston_jeff]

I have the IS and ASET images on the stones now-- I see a little leakage under the table, maybe a little more than I would expect with an ACA-- anything to be concerned about?

Thanks as always!
Jeff

 

[boston_jeff]

STONE #1 IS

 

[boston_jeff]

STONE #1 ASET

 

[boston_jeff]

STONE #2 IS

 

[boston_jeff]

STONE #2 ASET

 

[Ellen]

You're right, they don't look quite as spiffy as one would think.....

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/14/2008 12:09:18 PM
Author: Ellen
You''re right, they don''t look quite as spiffy as one would think.....What are the numbers?

Hi Ellen!

Numbers are posted at the top of the thread.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/14/2008 12:10:30 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Date: 2/14/2008 12:09:18 PM
Author: Ellen
You''re right, they don''t look quite as spiffy as one would think.....What are the numbers?

Hi Ellen!

Numbers are posted at the top of the thread.

I edited my ignorance, but not in time! DUH!!! lol

Well, I know Brian wouldn''t give them his seal of approval if they weren''t nice. I dunno.

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/14/2008 12:12:56 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 2/14/2008 12:10:30 PM
Author: boston_jeff

Date: 2/14/2008 12:09:18 PM
Author: Ellen
You''re right, they don''t look quite as spiffy as one would think.....What are the numbers?

Hi Ellen!

Numbers are posted at the top of the thread.

I edited my ignorance, but not in time! DUH!!! lol

Well, I know Brian wouldn''t give them his seal of approval if they weren''t nice. I dunno.

I know that too-- I was looking at a few other ACAs with similar specs and saw the same thing on many of the pictures...

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=540877&file_name=3
http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=540892&file_name=3
http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=540875&file_name=3

 

[Ellen]

Yeah, it''s not the first time I''ve seen that, but it always makes me wonder why I see it at all, yanno? You''d just think you wouldn''t. I''m sure they''re fine, and they are for earrings. But, have Brian look them over together anyway and see what he says. Can''t hurt.

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/14/2008 12:22:07 PM
Author: Ellen
Yeah, it''s not the first time I''ve seen that, but it always makes me wonder why I see it at all, yanno? You''d just think you wouldn''t. I''m sure they''re fine, and they are for earrings. But, have Brian look them over together anyway and see what he says. Can''t hurt.

That''s not a bad idea.

Anyone else have any thoughts?

 

[boston_jeff]

Quick bump for the post-lunch crowd...

 

[sna77]

Date: 2/11/2008 6:37:47 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
They are perfect!!! Diameters are the same, tables close, both ACA''s....doesn''t get much better than that!

You and sna77 are really going great in terms of taking care of your fiance''s jewelry needs!!!

Hey jeff! Looks like we are both in the market for practically the same thing... I actually just got a pair of studs from WF. I went with the handmade martini settings in platinum and gave them to my FI this AM... She was thrilled... Here''s my thread showing them off: https://www.pricescope.com/forum/show-me-the-ring/new-studs-arriving-tomorrow-pics-t78495.html .

BTW, I did the smae thing you did--took my FI to Tiffany and had her try on earrings as well... She liked apx .6 to . 7ct each per ear and though that 1ct per ear was too much... I comprimised by going to .9ct. She didn''t seem to mind I suppose...

BTW, where are you guys in Boston? We live in Brookline... FI works in the financial district, but I''m stuck in suburban hell in Waltham for the day job...

 

[boston_jeff]

Date: 2/14/2008 3:15:32 PM
Author: sna77

Hey jeff! Looks like we are both in the market for practically the same thing... I actually just got a pair of studs from WF. I went with the handmade martini settings in platinum and gave them to my FI this AM... She was thrilled... Here''s my thread showing them off: https://www.pricescope.com/forum/show-me-the-ring/new-studs-arriving-tomorrow-pics-t78495.html .

BTW, I did the smae thing you did--took my FI to Tiffany and had her try on earrings as well... She liked apx .6 to . 7ct each per ear and though that 1ct per ear was too much... I comprimised by going to .9ct. She didn''t seem to mind I suppose...

BTW, where are you guys in Boston? We live in Brookline... FI works in the financial district, but I''m stuck in suburban hell in Waltham for the day job...

Hi sna-- I saw your recent purchase, and they were perfect. Well done. I''m sure your fiance is beaming.

I consider myself really lucky that my fiance has *tiny* earlobes and it seems that the .53''s will be more than enough. I''m considering a pair of .60''s that are also available, but I''m not sure they will make much of a difference, and the pair I have on reserve are a really good match. Maybe she''ll want to upgrade in the future to something significantly bigger, but I think this will be a nice start.

We are actually in NYC now-- I grew up very close to Brookline, but a down a few circles of suburban hell, so I feel your pain re: Waltham. I''m just a Sox fan trying to avoid getting beer spilled on me at Yankee Stadium.

 

[Tacori E-ring]

She will LOVE them!