Feedback on diamond proportions

[meatyogre]

@sledge @kmoro @lovedogs what would be the main difference between the 2 ACA's here? https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4001982,3872128,3986343,4027973 / would the last one justify the higher price? Appreciate your help with this!

 

[sledge]

If money isn't a concern I like the 1.20ct H VS2 stone. Great proportions and love that 55 table. Also, looking at the still pictures and video the H seems noticeably more white to me. This could just be a visual effect because of so much technology (video cameras, computer screens, etc). Also, while both have lots of sparkle, the 1.20 seems to dance a little more in the video to me. I suspect it's from the smaller table (as smaller tables = more fire). Also, I'm being nit picky here that little imperfection in the heart near the 1 o'clock position on the 1.216 I ACA would drive me bonkers (mind issue, doubt you'd see anything appreciable).

You could always have WF pull both stones and give you an evaluation, as it's almost a $1,500 jump to go from the 1.218 I VS2 to the 1.20 H VS2. And if you aren't as bothered by color, it may not be worth the premium to you.

Of course, if I was trying to save a few bucks I'd have to give that 1.20 I SI1 a serious look. It seems to me to be very close in color to the 1.20 H VS2 ACA stone. It's GIA certified and a near ACA miss so it gets the moniker, premium select. The expert selects are near ACA misses that are AGS certified. Although this stone isn't AGS certified, I have little doubt it'd receive AGS Ideal 0 status if submitted. It's very well cut and all the performance images prove it. It appears to miss the ACA mark for the following reasons:

• Depth of 62.3 (ACA max allowed is 62.0)
• Lower facets of 75 (ACA allows 76-80)
• Website reports the pavilion angle as 42.5 (ACA allows 40.6-40.9). This is just a typo FYI. The pavilion angle is actually 40.6 and the depth is 42.5% as evidenced on the GIA cert.

Looking at the video and overall assessment, the only thing that would concern me is making sure the stone is truly eye clean. Again, I'd have WF pull the stone and evaluate it in-person for you. If acceptable, it'd come with all the same great trade-in policies, etc as the ACA and save you about $2,300. There is one trade off. Notice how the dimensions of the stone is about 0.10mm smaller on this stone than the ACA? This is due to the depth differences. Although 0.10mm difference isn't really detectable by (normal) human eyes.

 

[meatyogre]

Thanks for the detailed analysis.

 

[meatyogre]

@sledge To clarify, would you rank the 1.218 I VS2 above the 1.20 I SI1 still? WF has said that the 1.20 I SI1 is eye clean. I am mostly narrowing down between these 2 at this point.

WF has said that if any of these were side by side it'd be hard for an untrained eye to tell the difference but wanted your take.

Thanks so much.

 

[meatyogre]

bump

 

[sledge]

@sledge To clarify, would you rank the 1.218 I VS2 above the 1.20 I SI1 still? WF has said that the 1.20 I SI1 is eye clean. I am mostly narrowing down between these 2 at this point.

WF has said that if any of these were side by side it'd be hard for an untrained eye to tell the difference but wanted your take.

Thanks so much.

bump

Sorry I didn't see your post before now. I was traveling this weekend.

Just to clarify -- are you wanting an opinion on the 1.20 SI1 and the 1.216 VS2? Or the 1.20 SI1 and the 1.218 SI1?

 

[meatyogre]

Ah, I am wondering if you would still rank the 1.216 I VS2 above the 1.2 I SI1. I am not considering the 1.218 since you didn't discuss it, I am assuming it's slightly worse than the other options.

For us, I am fairly certain that the 1.201 H VS2 is not worth the price jump, so am mainly considering the 1.216 ACA or the PS option here https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4001982,3872128,3986343,4027973

Thanks again!

 

[meatyogre]

Also, when I buy from WF, would you feel comfortable buying the stone+setting it without seeing the stone on its own, based on these pictures/videos?

 

[meatyogre]

bump @sledge sorry for all the questions, but am really thankful for your guidance here.

 

[sledge]

Ah, I am wondering if you would still rank the 1.216 I VS2 above the 1.2 I SI1. I am not considering the 1.218 since you didn't discuss it, I am assuming it's slightly worse than the other options.

For us, I am fairly certain that the 1.201 H VS2 is not worth the price jump, so am mainly considering the 1.216 ACA or the PS option here https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4001982,3872128,3986343,4027973

Thanks again!

Before I get too far into this, I did go back and also look at the 1.218 I SI1. Looking at the still images only, it appears to me that stone is less white than the other two but again technology could be interfering with this appearance. A live evaluation with human eyes would be much more accurate & determining. Also, looking at the cert the crown side is very clean for an SI1. It appears the grade setting inclusion was the knot that is located on the pavilion of the diamond. I suspect the knot and the little green mark on the outside edge of the ASET near the 1 o'clock position is likely why it missed ACA; however, it is still a very nice diamond.

I am having a tough time deciding between the 1.20 I SI1 and 1.216 I VS2. To me, the still images still make the 1.20 SI1 look more white (which I prefer). Also, looking at the videos I think there is just a tad more fire in that particular stone. The 1.216 VS2 is no slouch and also very awesome. Where the VS2 shines to me is the clarity in both the video and the actual cert. However, I have to always remind myself these videos are MAGNIFIED and that if the SI1 was eye clean (to my standards) then I woud likely choose the 1.20 SI1 based on the fact it appears more white and has a smidge more fire. If it wasn't eye clean to me, then I'd go with the 1.216.

Have you directly asked WF about the stone being eye clean? What explanation did they give you?

Also, when I buy from WF, would you feel comfortable buying the stone+setting it without seeing the stone on its own, based on these pictures/videos?

There is no reason to NOT trust WF; however, I would prefer to see the stone prior to setting if I were you. When I bought my fiancee's stone, I did not inspect prior to setting and while it all worked out in the end, I do wish I had done so.

WF is great about working with customers and will send you a return label and include insurance in both directions. You do need to ask them if their insurance covers the time period you "review" the stone. If not, perhaps putting a policy in-place would be smart.

bump @sledge sorry for all the questions, but am really thankful for your guidance here.

No problem. Sorry I was so slow in responding. Between travel and just being busy at work I've not spent as much time here as I'd like.

 

[meatyogre]

Thanks @sledge, I asked WF, here's what they said (they've been really helpful as well) regarding 1.20 I SI1 and 1.216 I VS2

"Both of these are gorgeous options and only separated in size by 1/10th of a mm (thickness of a single sheet of paper), so they face up the same there too. The SI1 has a combo of tiny light and dark inclusions I could see with a 10x loupe but not with the naked eye at all. They both have the same great white color and honestly match up great! I snapped two images on my hand for you. The 1.2ct GIA is on the left (closest to my palm) and the 1.216ct ACA is on the right. You can’t go wrong with either choice, honestly."

What do you think?

 

[sledge]

WF are good people. Plain & simple.

I'm sure it's just the camera angles as I agree you shouldn't see a size difference between the two stones but the 1.20 does look slightly bigger to me. My biggest concern was the 1.20 being eye clean but they have pulled and confirmed you are good to go.

With that said, I don't see any reason to spend an extra $1k for VS2 clarity and I'd pocket that money and roll on with the 1.20 myself.

 

[ringo865]

+1 for the 1.2

 

[Dancing Fire]

@sledge @kmoro @lovedogs what would be the main difference between the 2 ACA's here? https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4001982,3872128,3986343,4027973 / would the last one justify the higher price? Appreciate your help with this!

IMO, yes, one clarity and one color higher. The H VS2 would be my pick.

 

[Stephan]

The H-VS2 would be my pick too.
If there were only the 2 I diamond, I would pick the 1.2 I-SI1.
It looks slightly brighter to me and I like the numbers.
The cut is very nice.
My problem would be the graining, I think it makes some diamonds look look like plastic.
It really depends on the extend of this graining.
If the graining is heavy and the fluorescence more faint-medium than "none", I would reject it.
As WF offers good return policy, you can give it a try; they also gave you their honest opinion.
But if money is not that important, I prefer the H.

 

[kmoro]

imo, if you’re trying to save money, the I SI1 ... if you decide that you can afford a bit more, I’d go with the H.
I think you’re getting closer! lol

 

[meatyogre]

Thanks for the responses everyone. I asked WF about the graining and fluorescence of the 1.2 I SI1

"The H and G will really look the same to the eye in terms of color. The only real way to appreciate the difference in clarity would be under 10x magnification. Graining is something you’d need magnification to see within a diamond and it’s so tiny that it can be hard to pick up then. It has no adverse effect to the GIA stone at all. For fluorescence “None” isn’t the most technically precise term as it truly encompasses amounts up to faint. Negligible is the best term when it’s so insignificant that it doesn’t play into the look of the diamond. So nothing to worry about there."

Does that change anything @Stephan?

Thanks!

 

[Stephan]

As I said, it depends. I had a bigger VS2 stone with surface graining, GIA 3-EX and I had to return it. Under strong lighting, it was visible with the naked eye. (With a smaller diamond, it should be less visible.) Of course it was not obvious, but when showing my friends where to look, they also could see it. The only way to know if you can see it, is to order it. If you don't like it, you can return it, and buy the H for example.
As for the fluorescence, I don't know what question you did ask, but the answer doesn't tell you if your diamond has almost faint fluorescence or really no visible fluorescence. Faint fluorescence can be visible, no fluorescence can not be visible. It sounds like you received a definition for GIA none (invisible fluorescence up to faint), but you still don't know if there is some fluorescence visible or not.
Now WF told you it looks great, and it will look great.
It only depends how picky you are about clarity and if you will be able to see some imperfections with the naked eye during close inspection.

 

[sledge]

@Stephan I think you are being overly critical of the stone. While some stones with surface graining can be a problem, not all of them are an issue. The fact you could see it on a VS2 tells me perhaps you have above average vision.

Also while I understand you prefer to have NO fluor, that is a preference. Stones marketed as none/faint/negligible seem to trade at normal market values. Furthermore, only a handful of stones exhibit milky or oily issues which is a true performance flaw. I believe the last GIA report I read about the matter was 1-2% meaning roughly 98% are okay.

Unless you hang out in night clubs or other areas with black UV lights it's really a non issue. My fiancee has a stone with medium fluor and we see nothing negative.

More importantly WF has vetted the stone and then pulled and reviewed at the OP request. They are very honest in their reviews so I don't think the stone is a risk.

 

[meatyogre]

I purchased the 1.2 I SI2 as recommended by @sledge. Thanks again, I was really dreading this process, especially after having gone to a few B&M stores to start, which was really stressful and salesy. You helped me out a lot and made the process much more enjoyable, so thanks for volunteering your time to help out. Happy holidays!

 

[sledge]

I purchased the 1.2 I SI2 as recommended by @sledge. Thanks again, I was really dreading this process, especially after having gone to a few B&M stores to start, which was really stressful and salesy. You helped me out a lot and made the process much more enjoyable, so thanks for volunteering your time to help out. Happy holidays!

You are very welcome! And thank you for the extremely kind words. It makes my day to know that I was able to make this process less stressful and more enjoyable for you.

Happy Holidays my friend, wishing you and yours nothing but the best!

And please don't forget....bling pics are now required.

 

[meatyogre]

Just received the ring and wanted to share some pics. Looks good to me, but I don't have an eye for this so would appreciate any thoughts you may have or if anything stands out as strange.

If things look yellow it's most likely because I don't have great lighting, I don't see it in the stone.

Attached images from Whiteflash, as well as my own... I think it's clear which is which If there are any other images or if a video would be helpful I can provide as well. Appreciate any feedback, thanks so much again!

 

[rockysalamander]

Nice choice. I love that the photos really show how powerfully stones reflect their surroundings. Under the blue sky, I bet you'll see blue.

 

[meatyogre]

also a newbie question, but in the 6th photo you can see there's some thin circle going around the circumference of the middle of the diamond. What is that / why is that? You also see that below the table closer to the top of the diamond which I can intuitively understand to make the shape, but the one in the middle of the diamond is less obvious to me.

 

[rockysalamander]

That line is a reflection of the girdle in the stone Totally normal.

 

[sledge]

Wow @meatyogre, the stone and ring look absolutely amazing!

Congratulations, you did well my friend. When are you popping the question? Now the real stress begins, lol.

 

[kmoro]

Congrats on a beautiful diamond and ring!!!
Absolutely gorgeous!

 

[meatyogre]

Thanks for your help everyone, so I'm good to go? I don't need to see an appraiser or anything right?

Wouldn't know what to do without you all, so thanks so much!

 

[kmoro]

Thanks for your help everyone, so I'm good to go? I don't need to see an appraiser or anything right?

Wouldn't know what to do without you all, so thanks so much!

You will probably want to insure it! You don’t necessarily need an appraisal... will need a receipt with item description, proof of ownership ... you definitely don’t an appraisal if you go with JM who partners with WF ... follow the links on the WF web page ...

Beatud diamond and ring!!! Congratulations!!

 

[meatyogre]

Awesome thanks so much.