Finally got the Idealscope! How does this look?

[newbie124]

So I have one more day left to decide if we''re going to keep this WF stone or get something else.

I''ve been waiting for the Idealscope on this other diamond and finally received it. How do you guys think it compares to the one I have?

The only thing I''m concerned about w/ this 2nd stone is that the diameter measurements are 6.93-7.01mm, which seems like a big difference to me, but it did get a GIA excellent symmetry rating, so...

I think I posted the measurements before, but here they are again for easy comparison:

1.28 G SI1
Depth%: 62
Table%: 56
Crown: 35
Pavilion: 40.8
Girdle: medium
HCA: 1.6 (ex-ex-ex-vg)

 

[newbie124]

Here''s the Ideal for the WF stone:

 

[Skippy123]

Looks good to me

Beautiful stone!!

 

[Lorelei]

The only thing I'm concerned about w/ this 2nd stone is that the diameter measurements are 6.93-7.01mm, which seems like a big difference to me

Actually this is fine and well within tight tolerances, it is still a very finely cut and tuned diamond. Both of them are superb diamonds, may I ask why you would like to consider changing the original diamond?

 

[newbie124]

Date: 1/9/2008 11:30:30 AM
Author: Lorelei

Actually this is fine and well within tight tolerances, it is still a very finely cut and tuned diamond. Both of them are superb diamonds, may I ask why you would like to consider changing the original diamond?

Thanks, Lorelei! I'm mostly stuck on the size issue. I know it's a matter of millimeters (not even...more like tenths of a millimeter), but when I saw stones closer to 7mm next to ours, I kind of liked that size better. A couple days ago we saw a "Very Good" cut 6.94-ish diamond and an "Excellent" cut 7.04 diamond next to ours. I couldn't tell a size difference b/t the 6.94, but there was a somewhat noticeable difference against the 7.04. (Oddly enough, the 7.04 was also G color, but you could tell a difference b/t ours and that one...even though when we compared it to an E before, I couldn't tell...neither stone had fluorescence).

The price difference is $1000 more for the 2nd stone. It's table is also slightly larger (56 vs. 54) so that might also make it appear a little larger. The 7.04 local diamond was $2000 more, which I felt was too much to justify the slight upgrade. But $1000 difference is a little more tempting...I'm figuring it couldn't hurt to at least check out the 2nd stone and compare side by side to see if in person one looks better than the other?

 

[Lorelei]

I see, the other diamond may be more '' mind clean'' for you - nothing wrong with that! These are 2 excellent diamonds and you can''t go wrong with either, so go with the one which will make you happiest!

 

[newbie124]

Thanks, Lorelei! Ugh, it''s such a HARD decision!!

I saw the 2nd stone in person today. They are very similiar...however, side by side, the second one is ever so slightly larger to the eye and also sparkles a little more white b/c the table is larger than the first stone. Color-wise, they are both the same. However, I think the smaller table on the original stone makes it face up a bit darker (I did tend to notice this when comparing it to some of the retail stones).

The appraiser tried to help us decide by mixing up the diamonds then presenting them side by side and asking me to choose immediately the one that caught my eye the most. Although it was sometimes difficult to tell them apart, I did end up picking out the 2nd stone I think 5 or 6 times in a row My boyfriend admitted that he has grown an attachment to the 1st stone b/c we''ve had it for so long but during the test, he even picked the 2nd stone once even though he wanted to pick stone 2.

So, I think if the prices were the same, I would go w/ stone 2 and be totally happy. HOWEVER, the rub is that the 2nd stone is $1000 more

And I just can''t figure out if the minute differences, which are mostly noticeable when we compare side by side, justify a $1000 price increase. BF says he doesn''t think so, even though he''s originally the one who wanted a bigger stone...But I don''t know. I just don''t want to make a decision either way then continue to second guess my choice...Both stones are well within our budget (even after the setting cost), but $1,000 is still $1,000...There are just so many ways to look at both sides of the argument, that I''m driving myself crazy!

Any suggestions for what you would do in my position?

I guess since we''re buying through WF our upgrade options are fairly flexible. But I try not to think about that too much b/c w/ the setting that I want (a cushion halo), it''s going to be a bit more complicated to switch out stones so I wouldn''t want to do it too often or too soon.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Gosh, that is a big price difference for such a tiny size difference. But I do like a 56 table better. So I''d probably go for the second one if it is as clean as the first.

 

[newbie124]

Date: 1/10/2008 11:37:00 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Gosh, that is a big price difference for such a tiny size difference. But I do like a 56 table better. So I''d probably go for the second one if it is as clean as the first.

Yes, I know

But I think it''s b/c the ct weight difference is 1.28 vs 1.22, even though the diameters are pretty close.

The second stone has one feather near the edge but faces up eye clean. The first stone has more inclusions scattered around, but is also pretty eye clean and nothing on the table.

I''ve been doing some comparisons on Pricescope and I haven''t seen anything else currently available w/in the $1000 range that''s as good as what we have. Either the polish/symmetry aren''t both excellent, or the size is smaller, or there are more significant inclusions.

So I guess I''m saying that I''m still undecided!

 

[Lorelei]

Whew, this is a tough one!! I think you have to let your eyes and heart advise you, how do you feel now that you have had some time to reflect on both diamonds, which one do you keep thinking of?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 1/11/2008 12:39:49 AM
Author: newbie124


Yes, I know

But I think it''s b/c the ct weight difference is 1.28 vs 1.22, even though the diameters are pretty close.

The second stone has one feather near the edge but faces up eye clean. The first stone has more inclusions scattered around, but is also pretty eye clean and nothing on the table.

I''ve been doing some comparisons on Pricescope and I haven''t seen anything else currently available w/in the $1000 range that''s as good as what we have. Either the polish/symmetry aren''t both excellent, or the size is smaller, or there are more significant inclusions.

So I guess I''m saying that I''m still undecided!

It has been said by many true experts that the naked/untrained eye cannot see the difference the between these and Very Good.

I would definitely consider stones with VG Sym and Pol if everything else looked right.

 

[newbie124]

Date: 1/11/2008 5:52:24 AM
Author: Lorelei
Whew, this is a tough one!! I think you have to let your eyes and heart advise you, how do you feel now that you have had some time to reflect on both diamonds, which one do you keep thinking of?

Well...I do keep thinking about that other one now, b/c I did like it when I saw them side by side. It''s really the cost that is the major hang up. I think I''m going to pop over to the appraiser''s again at lunch time to get another look (it''s cloudy today, but at least it might help to see them in some daylight) and verify if I can really tell a difference when the stones are held up one at a time instead of side by side, since in "real life" I won''t have a side by side comparison.

Crossing my fingers that this will work and my gut will tell me to go one way or the other!

 

[isis~goddess]

i think mine sparkles more in the halo, no it does not look darker. it is surrounded by micropave, of the same color. if your halo consists of whiter diamonds, then it''s going to look darker. my table is 58.5%. i can''t comment on the shadow blocked light theory you got going. i dont see that happening on mine. i tried out a darker stone once and set it into a halo with really white diamonds, that made stone look almost brown. im willing to bet its a color issue.

 

[ImpatientOne]

Ohh how I feel your pain! I should have stopped looking at diamonds after I found my new one. It truly is gorgeous, but I found one that is a little bigger and two grades higher for $2k more. In a way, I can't wait untin the 30 day return period is over so that I won't have a choice, lol!!! I hate the way I agonize over decisions like this, always second guessing myself!!!

I hope you figure it out!

 

[newbie124]

Thanks, ImpatientOne. Glad to know I''m not the only one going through this!!

Yeah, I hope I figure it out soon, too

I''m so eager to get to designing the setting then getting engaged so I can start planning the wedding (officially, that is)!