First-timer seeking advice!

[rotsisermho]

Hello everyone!

I'm new here. I'm planning on getting an engagement ring in the near future and was told this site was a good one to check out. I've been lurking for a while, trying to come up to speed on everything. If anyone here can offer some advice, I'd appreciate it!

I've already narrowed down the basics. I'm looking for the following:

Solitaire ring, cathedral setting
Round Brilliant Cut
0.9 - 1.1 carats
D-F color (saw a G as graded by EGL in a store and it looked yellow to me)
IF-SI1 clarity (if it's "eye clean")

I'm hoping I can find something for around $5,000 all told. I'm prepared to spend a little more if it's worth it.
I've been doing some research here and there and I think I'd be a fan of the FIC class of diamonds. I really like fire in a diamond and I believe my girlfriend would too. I'm not particular about the diamond actually being 1ct so long as it looks like it's 1ct

.

Basically, I'm looking for opinions and a little guidance. I've come across a diamond with the following stats:

.91 carats
E, VS1
Depth: 62.1%
Table: 57%
Crown angle: 36.5
Pavillion angle: 40.3
Lab: GIA

Price for just the stone: $4,380

I'm wondering if anyone can tell me if this is a decent deal or not. I'm hoping to have Idealscope pics soon.

Any thoughts anyone has would be appreciated. I'm not married to the stone above

, it just seems to come close to what I'm looking for. What do you all think?

Thanks!

Dan

 

[whatmeworry]

seems reasonable although I guess I''d like to see smaller tables (53-54) for a FIC. The other thing with a FIC is because of the small tables/high crowns/larger depths you will lose some spread. So I wouldn''t expect it to look like a 1 ct. Just 1 carat-ish. But that''s a tradeoff some people would gladly make. Also look for a longer lower girdle facet length 80-85.

 

[Cleo]

Hello Dan

Just wanted to mention that there''s a very good chance that the ''G'' colour diamond you saw in real life may well have been a lot closer to an I colour.

EGL have a reputation for not being as strict with their colour & clarity grading as GIA and AGSL.

There''s a good chance AGSL or GIA may have graded that stone H, I... or maybe even J - who knows.

Three things come from this:

1) It''s a good idea to insist on GIA or AGS certs when buying a diamond for decent money
2) You might like to consider viewing G and H colour diamonds which have been certed by AGS or GIA. You might find that they are much whiter than you think - and if you are able to extend your diamond search to include even just G colour diamonds then it will enable you to get a bigger stone for your money.. and perhaps much closer to that elusive 1ct mark.
3) A very well cut stone (eg AGS0 or GIA Ex/Ex) will face up a lot whiter. If the EGL stone you viewed wasn''t well cut, this would have exacerbated the problem with the colour even further.

x x x

 

[Lorelei]

Welcome!

Regarding EGL reports, EGL USA is considered to be the strongest division of the EGL labs, some in the industry believe that others may be less so. It is best to not perhaps dismiss an EGL diamond instantly without finding out more, if one ever finds an EGL diamond they like, especially if a large diamond for the budget is desired it can be a way to get this, for those who may be reading and considering one. An independant appraisal can always be done to check the diamond out, as I did with my EGL graded diamond, I got a great diamond for an excellent price in this way.

Anyway, onto your query! Good numbers for a FIC are as follows.

Crown angle should be 35.5 deg or more, and a small table - 55% or under as a suggestion. Pavillion angle needs to be shallow and no more than 40.6 degrees.

You still want a HCA score of below 2. The depths on this diamond are often increased on a FIC diamond, and the trade off is that it may look a little smaller or lose spread, than a non FIC of similar weight.So the diamond you are considering looks like it falls into FIC range and may be promising.

 

[rotsisermho]

Hi again,

Thank you all for your thoughts!

@whatmeworry

I haven''t yet decided how "true" of a FIC I''d like. I think I''m leaning more towards a FIC that''s almost a TIC so that the spread is still decent as I don''t know if I can quite afford a nice 1ct FIC. I''ll keep your advice in mind though.

@Cleo

Thank you very much for your input. I hadn''t really considered that the EGL diamond color rating could be off. Does anyone have pictures comparing a GIA E or F to a GIA G? I''d interested to see if I could tell the difference. I don''t know where I could find a store that sells GIA certed diamonds locally, but I''ll try to take a look. I think if it came down to it and I can get much more for my money if I go with a G that''s a pretty good idea. I''m wondering, my girlfriend works in an office with fluorescent lighting and such...would a G look yellowish compared to say, a piece of white paper? How closely would one have to look?

@Lorelei

You bring up a good point. While I don''t think I''m going to risk getting an EGL diamond as I don''t know that I could really know I was getting a deal, should I get a diamond I plan on buying from a Pricescope-friendly vendor appraised? How does this work? Do I have them send it to someone before buying?

Also, it would seem that if I go for a FIC, I should probably go a bit bigger as the smaller spread will make the diamond face up slightly smaller?
Attached is the Idealscope image of the diamond I mentioned, although now I''m tempted to go down to a G and find something bigger. Let me know what you think!

 

[rotsisermho]

Well I hate to reply to myself, but I''ve been having a rough time tracking down other FICs! I''ve been searching for diamonds with tables of less than 56% but most of the ones I''ve found don''t have certificates. Is this something a vendor might help me with? Will they look through their inventory hunting down crown angles > 35.5 degrees? Are there any tricks to finding them? Any help is appreciated! Thanks!

 

[whatmeworry]

Hi Rotsi,
G and bigger is a good idea. The IS looks good. You are getting some "paddles" instead of arrowheads because of the smaller pavilion angle. You can ask a vendor to help you look for what you are looking for. If the report is not online and you can get a report number, then you can look up the report online for GIA and AGSL reports. The loss of spread is small and not really a huge amount.

What you really are looking for is a higher crown height. You can get there either by using a small table or a larger crown angle or both. But either one in itself is no guarantee of a higher crown, so you really need to check the crown height. Most grading reports should report the crown height. And by larger, lets say high 15%, just so you can have something to search for. That should weight things more on the fire side. But don''t pick one that has a high crown and a deep pavilion. Those are referred to as steep/deeps and not good performers.

 

[rotsisermho]

Hmmm, I''ve really been having a hard time searching and such. I''ve been working with a couple vendors but they don''t seem to be very familiar with FICs. Do you know of an easy way to at least weed out which diamonds I should inquire about a cert #?

I''m tempted now to get the one I''ve posted about, but I just don''t know. Would I be paying too much for something I can''t really see? The Idealscope image looks pretty nice to me -- I''m not as concerned about the arrows and symmetry. I figure that will only add to the fire effect, correct?

Thanks for your help!

 

[whatmeworry]

Hi Dan,
There''s no easy way. FIC is a term popularized by Garry Holloway and used here. Not surprising that most vendors haven''t heard of it. And there is no official defiintion. I think Garry would be the first one to tell you that the fire score in the HCA was not quite there when he came up with the HCA. He and the cut group have gone back to the drawing board and are trying to figure out a better metric for fire. So take the HCA as a guide but not as an absolute rule. All other measurements being equal, I would pick whichever one had the largest crown height for fire. Just my opinion. What''s the crown height on this one?
As far as whether you can see the difference or not, you know people have different eyes (I''ve seen posts discussing whether eyeglasses or near sightedness makes a difference in seeing fire!) And some people look at diamonds with more than their eyes!

 

[whatmeworry]

Why don''t you post all the stats of the diamond above here. angles, crown heights, tables, diameters, etc?
I want to try running a dynamic ETAS (the new fire metric I mentioned above) picture of it and compare it against the diamond that JulieN found in your other post.

 

[whatmeworry]

I can''t seem to get an IS image in DiamCalc to look like the IS image above. I can''t seem to get those paddle-arrow heads with the crown/pav angles that you listed. Normally you see paddle-arrow heads in shallow/shallow combos. Maybe a DiamCalc expert will chime in here and help me out.

 

[rotsisermho]

whatmeworry, thanks for looking into this for me! I really appreciate it. I admit, I don''t know if I could tell the difference myself, but I have a keen eye and believe it''s possible. That''s why if I can find a FIC, I''d rather get one than not. If I can''t find one, I''ll either get the one listed above or find a TIC that''s close to a FIC. Below are the exact numbers for every parameter I can find. They differ from those above because I didn''t want someone else to find the diamond and buy it! But I think I''m okay at this point.

Here you go:

6.10 - 6.16 x 3.80 mm

Depth: 62%
Table: 57%
Crown Angle: 36.5 degrees
Pavilion Angle: 40.2 degrees
Crown Height: 16%


There are three other percentages that I can''t tell what they are describing. One is 50% and it is near the 57% on the picture. One is 80% listed at the bottom of the image, and one is 42% listed in the middle near the right side.

Hopefully that''s enough to make sense of it! Thanks again for your help! Let me know if you need more info.!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/27/2008 9:36:37 PM
Author: whatmeworry
I can''t seem to get an IS image in DiamCalc to look like the IS image above. I can''t seem to get those paddle-arrow heads with the crown/pav angles that you listed. Normally you see paddle-arrow heads in shallow/shallow combos. Maybe a DiamCalc expert will chime in here and help me out.

good catch that is not the right IS image.

57 table is a bit on the large size for those angles.
55% table and 40.4 pavilion would be a better combo.

 

[rotsisermho]

Hmmm, now you have me worried. I would hope the vendor would not make such an obvious mistake with the IS! If it''s helpful to anyone, attached is the Sarin report.

 

[whatmeworry]

okay I got the paddles but I had to use pav angles of 40 degrees per the Sarin. Grrr, GIA an its rounding.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/27/2008 10:44:50 PM
Author: rotsisermho
Hmmm, now you have me worried. I would hope the vendor would not make such an obvious mistake with the IS! If it''s helpful to anyone, attached is the Sarin report.

bad scan by the looks of it.
either that the stone is a mess which brings the IS into even more question.
overall id pass on it.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/27/2008 11:09:20 PM
Author: whatmeworry
okay I got the paddles but I had to use pav angles of 40 degrees per the Sarin. Grrr, GIA an its rounding.

sarin actually ogi I think missed on the table so the whole thing is questionable.
GIA 40 would stay 40 not round too 40.2...
trying to model this one is an exercise in gigo
garbage in garbage out

 

[whatmeworry]

Storm, I think the problem was the "head" size in DC is different from the IS setup used for the image.

Dan,
Anyway so I modeled the 2 candidates in DiamCalc. The FICish TIC that JulieN found will be slightly brighter (not by much) than the one posted here. As far as fire, you need Garry or Serg to explain these plots. I have no idea how to read them. I suspect the one on left will be better at your grocery store and the one on the right would be better at a candlelight dinner. But now I'm guessing. Hopefully one of them will chime in. This was a good academic exercise for me. Good luck. When you finally get your FIC do me a favor and compare it to a TIC and let us know if there is a difference to you.

 

[rotsisermho]

Thanks again for your help! I think based on the comments here that I will try to avoid the first diamond. I found another, larger one (.96ct). I am waiting on the Sarin and IS images. Here are the specs according to the cert.

Depth: 61.8%
Table: 57%
Crown Height: 16%
Crown Angle: 36.5
Pavilion Angle: 40.2
6.29 - 6.33x3.90mm

It''s a G VS2, VG symmetry, VG polish.

What do you think of this one?

 

[rotsisermho]

Attached is the IS image. I think this one looks much nicer on this one, but then I am more than a bit inexperienced.

 

[rotsisermho]

Here is the Sarin report.

 

[strmrdr]

much better
I like it.
The pavilion mains will likely be a little darker than a 40.4 or 40.5 pavilion but its not bad.
Its an AGS0 canidate according too the cutting charts.

 

[whatmeworry]

Very nice.

 

[rotsisermho]

Really? What would make it AGS 0? Is that similar to a hearts and arrows? I notice this one looks much more like an H&A diamond. This one''s going for just under $5,000. Think it''s a good deal? whatmeworry, I am intrigued by your ETAS images. Would you mind running this one? I''m curious to see if it makes a difference. Also, people have been saying I should be looking for a smaller table...is the fact that this one is 56ish going to make a difference? I figure I''m not going to find something much better than this.

Thanks again!

 

[whatmeworry]

Here you go brother. Left to right: the first in this post, the one JulieN found, the second in this post. Really interesting, those 8 arrow rays in the image on the right. Those are empty spaces and my understanding is if there were a light source at those location you would not get a scint event. Since your vendor has two of the stones, why don''t you ask them for an visual opinion.

 

[strmrdr]

a less dense etas is what you would expect from a fic, they work like a disco ball with greater dispersion than a tic.
They will be bright around the pavilion mains because that will be the most directional part of the diamond if not blocked by head shadow.

 

[strmrdr]

to give a comparison, are you familiar with the mini-mag flashlight? or other flashlight that goes from a narrow to a wide beam?

Point it at a wall:
Adjust the beam to its narrowest that a BIC
Adjust it too the middle that is a TIC
Adjust it for the widest beam and that''s a FIC

In all 3 cases the total amount of light returned can be the same(with the flashlight it will be) but it is returned to different places and too different sized areas.

 

[whatmeworry]

Okay ignore my last photo. I made lots of mistakes, that change looked too dramatic. Here you go. Left to right as above

 

[rotsisermho]

To be honest, I''m not too sure what these pictures are saying. The one on the right looks brighter in the middle, and the one on the far left looks like the light is spread out more. Which one would be more fiery?

 

[whatmeworry]

I don''t know what these pictures are saying either! So which one is more fiery? Depends on the lighting. The one on the left that is spread out more may be better when the light source is not directly overhead. The one that looks brighter in the middle may be better when the light sources are overhead . Where are you going to propose? On the beach at sunset or in the grocery store?

Yikes!. The smart guys who came up with this software are trying to come up with a scoring system to tell you which one is more fiery.