shape
carat
color
clarity

Help as it’s getting close to time to purchase

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by Dcrafty1, Jan 10, 2019.

  1. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 10, 2019
    Here’s my post from last month https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/round-vs-princess-aca.245881/

    I have decided to go with Round ACA, F-H (although H has me a little worried about the warmth), between 1.4-1.6, clarity VS1-S1 (would need help since I can’t tell what would effect eye clean), budget 16k max

    I’ve decided on the vatsche 119 crown royal for the setting

    I would like to know what diamonds would fit my requirements. Of course I want the biggest but I prefer a stone that speaks to me vs size.

    Thanks for your help in advance.
     
  2. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,096
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 10, 2019
    We can find you a sparkle bomb. No worries there. ACA's are rather phenomenal anyhow.

    But you have to determine where you stand with color. WF sells super ideals and they will be AGS graded. Most local jewelers stock GIA certified stones. I'd recommend you go in and have them pull D-J colors, all the same size and cut quality and randomly place the stones in front of you.

    Eliminate the stones with tint you dont like. Once you get to a point they all look the same, ask the jeweler to reveal the remaining stone colors and this should give you a more reliable range.

    Also it can help WF further vet their available stones. Let's say GIA D-G looked the same to you. Then when we narrow a few stones we'd want WF to verify the AGS G stones would match a true GIA G stone so you will happy with the color.

    If you aren't the wearer, a similar exercise needs done for the person wearing the stone as color acuity varies person to person. And women are usually more sensitive to smaller changes than men -- typically, but not always.

    Obviously the colors you find acceptable will help drive the size and consequently dollars of the purchase.
     
    Dcrafty1, Nitedula and kipari like this.
  3. HappyNewLife
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,521
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    by HappyNewLife » Jan 10, 2019
    I have a WF "I" and I never see a tint. Not to say you wouldn't, as everyone has different eyeballs (that sounds gross). But I would absolutely get the biggest eye-clean H colored ACA that my budget afforded.

    I'd first ask WF to pull some diamonds you like of various colors and take photos of them in profile and face down with one another. Then you can actually see whether the hint bothers you
     
  4. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 10, 2019
    For some reason I’m not seeing much difference in size/g vs h pricing on WF. A few hundred dollars so thought might as well get the g.
     
  5. Matilda
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    467
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2018
    by Matilda » Jan 10, 2019
    I know you wanted a VS however it may be worth a look as it is guaranteed EYE CLEAN by WF:

    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4054985.htm

    it allows you to remain at G colour, increase size and stay in budget (to include the setting you chose).
    I would just contact vendor to ensure the clouds do not effect performance, as the plot on certificate looks clean.
     
  6. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,096
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 10, 2019
    Like the 1.591 G that @Matilda found. 56 table, 35/40.6 & some sexy fat arrows (76 LGF).

    Prefer no inclusions on the table, but the crystals are white. Have WF pull the stone and confirm it's eye clean. Also, have them confirm the "additional clouds not shown" in the notes isn't an issue.

    Doubtful. WF is honest about their stones and garbage doesn't make the ACA cut. But still good practice to ask.

    Also, totally in favor of the G color if price difference is so small. Bought my fiancee an H VS2 with medium blue fluor and get a smidge tint at certain angles. Of course, her setting has the majority of the pavilion exposed too and that's where you see most color. Top down it's nice and white.
     
    Dcrafty1 likes this.
  7. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 10, 2019
    Thanks @sledge and @Matilda I’ve asked Brittany to check. I like the size and color. I think I’ve found my ring.

    I’m having doubts about the thickness of the royal crown. But I love the flow just wish it was thinner. Any recommendations.
     
    sledge likes this.
  8. Matilda
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    467
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2018
    by Matilda » Jan 10, 2019
    @Dcrafty1 are 6 prongs very important to you? Just browsing the rings I see some sleeker/thinner settings with a "flow", so similar, BUT with 4 prongs...
     
  9. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,096
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 10, 2019
    I personally like the security and look of 6 prongs. Also I think the royal crown is a very pretty setting. Looking at the specs, the max width is 2.80mm. Obviously it tapers down from that. I'd ask WF if Vatche can skinny it up a bit.

    Keep in mind as you do that, the taper will become less pronounced. So if the taper is something you love, you may lose a little of that effect. Also, there may be restrictions on how much thinner you can go if you stick with the Vatche brand.

    I'd also ask WF if they have any non-glamour photos of the setting. It's been my experience that settings look fatter/thicker online where images are magnified vs in real life. Here's one they had on their webpage, but it doesn't really show the sides that well.

    [​IMG]
     
    Dcrafty1 and Matilda like this.
  10. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 10, 2019
    No I’m open to 4 prongs.
     
  11. Matilda
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    467
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2018
    by Matilda » Jan 10, 2019
    yes actually security is super important! and @sledge has an excellent point; magnified view is different. There was a thread recently similar magnified vs real life view of setting, real life view the setting appeared daintier/more elegant.
     
    sledge likes this.
  12. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,096
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 10, 2019
    I went through this myself when I designed my fiancee's custom setting. CAD's always looked bulky. Plastic casting they sent looked hideous. Final product was spot on.
     
    Dcrafty1 likes this.
  13. Matilda
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    467
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2018
  14. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 10, 2019
    You’re right that doesn’t look bad. I will ask Brittany tomorrow.
     
    sledge likes this.
  15. Dancing Fire
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    29,173
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    by Dancing Fire » Jan 10, 2019
    I'm resetting my wife's 4 prong into a 6 prong Vatche 119. A 6 prong setting will make the stone look more rounded.
     
  16. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,096
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 10, 2019
    Just a few thoughts. The 4 prong loses the taper from the top view. But the diamonds in the basket are a nice touch that adds some eloquence.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    Agree the Felicity is a sexy looking ring. Love the daintiness of it, especially if slapping it on a very tiny finger. Which is another thing to consider. I think US 6 is about average for many women. Small would be 3-5. Larger would be 7+.

    When my fiancee and I was looking at some settings, I was naturally drawn to very thin stuff like this. But in stores, neither of us liked it. Online she was always drawn to the 2.8+ wide stuff which I snubbed my nose at. But again, once in stores she was more right than me but her fingers weren't teeny tiny either. My point is depending on the size of your SO's fingers, different widths may look better/worse IRL vs online.

    Anyhow, in regards to the Felicity, I'm a guy so I can't comment on comfort & durability. However, I've heard other ladies on here complain about it not being comfortable. Might do a search if you seriously consider this setting.

    [​IMG]
     
    Dcrafty1 likes this.
  17. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 10, 2019
    Thanks for that information. I think I will stick with 6 prong
     
  18. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 10, 2019
    My finger size is 6.5 but are extremely long so look more slender than what they are.
     
  19. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 11, 2019
    4186905A-C4B3-46EE-B66B-425FAB74FB7F.jpeg Here’s Brittany’s response to the S1 diamonds I was interested in

    The 1.591ct G SI1 A Cut Above diamond does meet our definition of eye clean, as it has no visible inclusions from the top view at 10 inches with 20/20 vision. However, it may be possible to see an inclusion if you can focus from approximately 5 inches and know what to look for.
    The inclusion does not impact performance, transparency or durability.

    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4054985.htm


    The 1.513ct G SI1 A Cut Above is slightly cleaner to the eye. I would be extremely surprised if you could see an inclusion without magnification.
    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4059354.htm


    What are your thoughts on the SI1 diamonds? Do you feel it would be beneficial to go to VS2, or do these meet your requirements?

    She also sent the crown royal with a 2.1 ct to reference thickness. How to determine from picture, but looks good to me. I’m thinking if too thick I can always send back vs having it thinned and can’t go backward.
     
  20. Dancing Fire
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    29,173
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    by Dancing Fire » Jan 11, 2019
    I'd pick the 1.51ct. IMO, G SI1 is fine "if eye clean/mind clean" , but if you wanna play it safe go with a VS stone.
     
    Dcrafty1 and kipari like this.
  21. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,096
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 11, 2019
    Like DF, I'm also inclined to go 1.51. However, I'd like to see the video. I noticed they don't have one uploaded for that stone. Please request they upload so you (and all of us) can view it.
     
    Dcrafty1 likes this.
  22. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
  23. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,096
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 11, 2019
    If you haven't already done so, call WF back and put both stones on reserve. Dont want someone poaching your sparkle bomb.
     
    Dcrafty1 and lovedogs like this.
  24. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 11, 2019
    Thank You. Video is available and ring p,aced on reserve.
     
  25. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,096
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jan 11, 2019
    Thank you for posting -- And WOW, the 1.513 is a firecracker too!

    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4054985,4059354

    Two really awesome choices. I'd take the 1.513 since it's completely eye clean. Also, small things but I like the fact the L & W dimensions are tighter. Also, looking at the videos side by side, it's pretty clear both stones are freakin' awesome but for me the 1.513 has a little more umph to it.

    Regarding the setting, I really like the Danhov as well. I had one concern, are you okay with the prong orientation? I think it makes the stone look a little more octagonal than round. Could be optical illusion, etc. Maybe WF has some photos of that setting as well, similar to the Royal Crown you posted?

    4186905A-C4B3-46EE-B66B-425FAB74FB7F.jpg

    Danhov-CL117-Classico-Solitaire-Engagement-Ring-in-Platinum_gi_12501_3-47998.jpg

    Inked4186905A-C4B3-46EE-B66B-425FAB74FB7F_LI.jpg

    InkedDanhov-CL117-Classico-Solitaire-Engagement-Ring-in-Platinum_gi_12501_3-47998_LI.jpg
     
    Dcrafty1 likes this.
  26. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 11, 2019
    I noticed the same thing regarding the Danhov. I do not think I’m okay with it. I’ll ask on Monday. Definitely going with the 1.513 diamond.
     
    sledge likes this.
  27. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 13, 2019
    D4BC3671-DE3F-4CBE-9226-3760A5D509AE.jpeg C6661F8A-4197-480E-8125-A002B8BF1CD0.jpeg CB115A5D-7623-4001-B7F5-AB6C9B636ACA.jpeg B11BB2DE-DE8F-48FE-A586-27358734D404.jpeg More questions and took a few pictures just for fun. I’m definitely purchasing the 1.513 G I have reserved with WF. Went to Jarads yesterday to verify my ring size. Will post more about that later.
    Anyway I decided to test my color sensitivity while there. Here’s a 1.5 D S2 Premium cut. Salesperson would only say ideal is their best cut but didn’t go into depth the difference. Why would I see yellow tint in a D. But under the fluorescent light all (D,G,J) looked icy white. I couldn’t see a tint even from an angled view.
     
  28. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,678
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Jan 13, 2019
    Jared does not sell GIA graded stones. So, their D, may be a GIA J. Diamonds also reflect the color of the light and surfaces around them. Under the store lights, everything looks good.
     
    Dcrafty1 likes this.
  29. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 13, 2019
    9C3BA30A-54AF-45B8-BBD2-9B05A6FB14CB.jpeg 98E675EA-930F-4971-80BC-0EAC0F896B02.jpeg 373B9943-6186-4F5B-A130-66C578906E3D.jpeg 80CA9804-5509-4DBE-980B-7070EC8C25FD.jpeg Here’s a G that looks the same brightness as D. He also showed me an J that was ideal cut and again looked very white and sparkly. His point was cut is not always the defined but definitely helps with higher color grades (Ie the g with the worst cut but best clarity was as pretty as the others under THEIR lights)
     
  30. Dcrafty1
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2018
    by Dcrafty1 » Jan 13, 2019
    0188102A-1EBA-4F06-B40C-EC9A811F093C.jpeg C64BDEDB-1205-404C-A959-34056BF00064.jpeg 488CBF9C-9DBE-4D83-B83D-B635D5812915.jpeg The G again with their cathedral setting. I actually like that width of the band. My question they say it’s 4mm in width. Can that be? My Vatche Royal Criwn is listed at 2.8 mm and looks much thicker. I feel whatever this is is the perfect width for my diamond/finger size. Additionally she salesperson said do not go platinum. Get 14k white gold with platinum prongs. Is this true?
     

Share This Page