Help buying a princess diamond

[Hinkleymustang]

Hi guys, I am new here but I have been looking for a diamond for an engagement ring for months now. My girl is set on a princess despite the drawbacks to them. I just found pricescope and have become less confident as a consumer. There is a whole lot more to know about diamonds then the fours cs. Anyway can someone give me some advice on picking a princess diamond, I can’t seem to get all this table % and depth stuff straight. How should I go about choosing a princess cut stone? I have selected two stones from BN and have just begun to search around PS any help would be great. Also what do you guys think of these two stones from BN? Carat weight: 0.56, Cut: Signature Princess, Color: I, Clarity: IF. Depth %: 68.5%, Table %: 71%, Symmetry: Very good, Polish: Excellent, Girdle: Medium to slightly thick, Culet: None, Fluorescence: None, Measurements: 4.71x4.66x3.19 mm, Crown height: 8.8%, Length/width ratio: 1.01, Price: $1,750.00
Carat weight: 0.53, Cut: Signature Princess, Color: H, Clarity: IF, Depth %: 66.2%, Table %: 69%, Symmetry: Very good, Polish: Excellent, Girdle: Slightly thick, Culet: None, Fluorescence: None, Measurements: 4.72x4.55x3.01 mm, Crown height: 8.6%, Length/width ratio:1.04, Price: $1,950.00
Can anyone suggest any other comparable diamonds?
Thanks
Carat weight: 0.53, Cut: Signature Princess, Color: H, Clarity: IF, Depth %: 66.2%, Table %: 69%, Symmetry: Very good, Polish: Excellent, Girdle: Slightly thick, Culet: None, Fluorescence: None, Measurements: 4.72x4.55x3.01 mm, Crown height: 8.6%, Length/width ratio:1.04, Price: $1,950.00
http://www.bluenile.com/diamonds_details.asp?shortnamelink=1&pid=LD00240013
Can anyone suggest any other comparable diamonds?
Thanks

 

[alexah]

I went on Whiteflash & here's some "comparables", per your request.

The ones you have listed have a table bigger than depth (generally speaking, a no-no) & crown heights under 9 (look for stones around or over 10).

If you ask WF for the PS discount & pay in *cash*, the will give you 5% off the cost of the stone so all these stones are under $2K & have promising numbers.

Stone #1

Stone #2

Stone #3

And, finally

, Stone #4

 

[moremoremore]

NICE stones Alexah!!!

Why the heck would you EVER buy an I IF or H IF????

You are overspending where it's not necessary. There is nothing wrong with an H or I....but that is an odd combo...you can go up in size and or color (which, unlike clarity, for the most part) is visible or just keep the $....Alexah has posted some nice stones and nice Vs1s....it will look THE SAME as an IF to your eye!

 

[Hinkleymustang]

Ok what do you think of this one?
Price: $1,713.00
Report: GIA
Shape: Princess
Carat: 0.62
Color: H
Clarity: VVS2
Depth: 74.6
Table: 70
Girdle: TN-
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Faint
Measurements: 4.68-4.60X3.43
Length/Width: 1.02
Also as far as the setting goes how do platinum and white gold compare? I was told to stay away from platinum. I am looking for an antique looking setting with milgrain edges, something like this.

 

[alexah]

That stone has potential....
I happen to prefer tables in the 60's tho...
Can I ask why you're looking at IF/VVS1/VVS2s? VS1/VS2s are a much better bang for the buck & it's rare to find a VS2 that has a visible inclusion without magnification.

If you really want to go w a higher clarity, THIS stone may be worth checking out - it's a VVS2 & quite a bit larger (assuming you're interested in getting the biggest size H/I for your budget?).

 

[alexah]

As far as staying away from platinum, I don't know why anyone would tell you that...?!

To save money (and because I prefer the lightness of gold to the heft of platinum), the way I did it was to have the head made in platinum & the band itself in white gold. The diamond'll be more secure if the prongs are platinum.

 

[researcher]

Alexah is giving you great advice, but I have an AMAZING princess with a table in the low 70's and actually prefer them that way because your ring will have more brilliance (white light). However, as long as you have a table 3-5% smaller than the depth (preferred) in the high 60's to low 70's and a depth below 75% you're doing well!

 

[Hinkleymustang]

I am looking for a vv1 or IF because I guess I did not know any better

, but I would like the diamond not to have too many inclusions. What I would like to do is by a ring with side stones like the one above and a wedding band with diamonds as well so that the center stone and the bands total out at 1 carat or above. I am a college student so I cant afford to by a full carat at the moment but I can afford to do this, plus I think it is kinda sweet because she is a college students as well and would never expect me to get her anything this nice, for her any ring would be fine. So what do you think of the setting above it cost $1,100 and is just what I am looking for and it has a matching band. I am open to any suggestions have you seen anything else comparable?

 

[Hinkleymustang]

The new contender for the center stone is this.
Carat weight: 0.60
Cut: Very Good
Color: H
Clarity: VVS2
Depth %: 70.6%
Table %: 68%
Symmetry: Very good
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 4.73x4.63x3.27 mm
Length/width ratio: 1.02
I got a Sarin report on it and it said that crown angle is 40.2, and the crown height is 12.1% with a length of .56. I could not upload the document but I will convert it and post all of the info later today. The price is: $1,642.00 and it seems to be a good diamond. What do you think? Thanks for the help everyone.

 

[Hinkleymustang]

is the Sarin, let me know what you guys think.
Princess Weight: 0.609 ct UNUSUAL 2
Width 4.63 Length: 4.73 L/W: 1.02 G Sarin
Table Depth 3.26 10.4 % U2
Table: 3.18 68.7% G
Crown Ang. 40.2 G
Crown Height 0.56 12.1% VG
Girdle 1.7% Thin VG
Pavil Depth 2.61 56.4% U2

 

[researcher]

Now THAT'S a great diamond! I just want to make sure you understand that you will not be able to notice the inclusions in a 100% eye clean SI1 stone unless it's under magnification. With my stone there were 3 inclusions (none of which are visible to the naked eye) and my stone is an SI1. The reason we say you can go down in clarity is you can get a stone almost double the size if you drop in clarity, and size is MUCH more visible. Just something to consider! But, that last stone you posted has serious potential!

 

[Hinkleymustang]

Ok, so it would be better for me to look for an SI1 that is eye clean, how will I know if it is while buying off the net? I think I will talk your great advice and look around some more but that last stone seems tempting to me, check this out.
This came from http://www.gemappraisers.com

Cut Grading Report for Princess Cut Stones
Cut: Princess
Weight: 0.6 carats
Table % 68 Grade: 1A
Crown Height % 12.1 Grade: 1A
Girdle Thickness Medium to Medium Grade: 1A
Total Depth % 70.6 Grade: 1A
Polish / Symmetry Excellent Grade: 1A * Not a primary determining factor.

Final Grade: 1A

 

[researcher]

If you find the right vendor, they can tell you if the stone has visible inclusions. I worked with the fabulous Denise from White Flash, and she would call the manufacturers to see where the inclusions were located, and whether they were visible from any angle. I just know that, for myself, I would never pay for anything higher than VS1 in clarity. As such, I would put out the extra cash for color or size, both factors that are visible.

If clarity is really important to you though (some people just like knowing their diamond has a higher clarity even though it's not visible) you don't need to look into stones with lower clarity. The stone you found is a good price so I'd definitely look into getting ideal scope images!

 

[yowahking]

You will be well served to stay with VS rather than vvs or FL in your size. Go with color and cutting. Crown height for me is not below 10%, depth not above 75%, table not above 70%. Problem with princess is that it has so many variations in cutting styles. Plat is not stronger, it lasts longer, but scratches and bends easier. Setters like it because you break less diamonds (princess corners) when setting it. If you get a plat mounting, and have to change heads, only a laser can do it or the side diamonds will burn. Many jewelers use white gold solder with a plat head and ring, that is no good. If you get a white gold setting, ask if it is nickle free as some have reactions to the nickel, bummer to get a rash from your ring. If her ring size is smaller than 7, you may find that setting to be a little thick on the sides, a slight variation with flatter sides will be more comfortable.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 8/19/2004 4:04:07 PM Hinkleymustang wrote:

Ok, so it would be better for me to look for an SI1 that is eye clean, how will I know if it is while buying off the net?

----------------

It is possible to convey in pictres more than th eye can see

The key to this - as far as I know - is magnificaion and lighting conditions. darkfield illumination will likely get more inclusions visible in a magnified picture (and you can get way over the 10X used for clarity grading) than normal (overhead) lighting.

So yes, you can have allot of precise info on a diamond bought online. It does take a bit of immaginationNice Ice to relate gemological info and optics to the "look" of the diamond, but most of the tools used to present diamonds realistically online are purpose built to match what people see...

Here are some versions of such presentation. You might find the diamonds interesting too, I hope

#1. All about magnification! Presentation at Nice Ice

#2. Just about all types of diamond visual presentation on one page at GoodOldGold

#3. Ideal Scope picture for the Expert Selection pieces at WF

#4. face-up magnified picture with normal lighting for the Signature Series at DCD

#5. and again, just about everythig abou one princess diamond at Superbcert


At Blue Nile the GCAL reports are quite informative, but those only apply for their Signature Series, as you know. There is always a premium for having stones pre-selected by the seller... and then, one can hardly know enough about a diamond comming off a list with only the Cs in place

It's just a matter of hunting down the deal between the two, I would think

.

 

[valeria101]

It does seem that for the price range, letting clarity down does not achieve much in terms of size: most pieces would still be just about 5mm square or a bit less, give or take a little from VS to SI. Alo, girdle thickness would have more impact on size in this weight range than total depth - so I would just look at size (milimeters) rather than narrow the search below 70% depth. It would be greta to find a 65% deep piece with a medium girdle and somewhat above 5mm ... but I just could not.

Below is one piece that caught my eye while making the links above.

 

[Hinkleymustang]

Thank you guys so much for all of you help, I really appreciate it. Ana, I really like the diamond that you picked out and provided information above on, but is $1,900.00 a little high for a .61 diamond. I know color improved but that seems somewhat high when we took a step back in clarity. Also, how does the table of 58 factor in? Will that make it appear long and deep? I am taking you advice and looking for a VS1 or SI1 but it seems like I can not beat the price of the one listed above from /www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]lace>Blue Nile/www.pricescope.com/idealbb/images/smilies/3.gif[/img]lace>. I found a few others that are a bit cheaper but I am not sure if they are cut a well. I am getting some info from white flash I will post it when it gets here.

 

[researcher]

The diamond AnA sent you is nice, but I prefer a bigger table (I like them in the high 60's/low 70's). However, this diamond scored a triple VH on the Bscope which means it's an AMAZING performer (just like my baby)! While the numbers lead you in the right direction, only the images and tests of brilliance, fire, and scintillation will tell you how the diamond performs. The one she sent is worth the extra money not only because of the higher color but because it's going to be a real beauty!

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 8/20/2004 1:39:28 PM Hinkleymustang wrote:





I know color improved but that seems somewhat high when we took a step back in clarity. Also, how does the table of 58 factor in? Will that make it appear long and deep?


----------------

Actually, there is one thing that gives this diamond a premium - the cut, and one that makes for a discount - the fluorescence. There is a goog jump from G to F (remember that "colorless" name for D/F color range?) so... I was quite proud to find this one

And this after scoring almost every source of princess cuts sold with some test of brilliance I know of.

Of course this is not about my coices... just trying to explain why the piece seemed right.

How the stone looks like? Well... that is a 10X picture. It is unlikely that you will see as much detail looking at the stone itself so this is it!

I am not sure I understand what you mean by "long" (this is a square stone) and "deep" ?

 

[Hinkleymustang]

Sorry, by long I ment deep, will 58 table make it seem deep? I talked to barry on the phone and I may get this one, but he is going to check another one next week for me and send me the info. I will post it when I get it. The only draw back is I dont care for any of his rings. I am looking for something like the ring I posted above or, something like this one. What do you guys think of it?