Help Choosing Diamond

[shadowbuggy]

Hey guys,

I'm closing in on purchasing a Verragio 7074R (link is https://www.verragio.com/Verragio-Engagement-Rings/Insignia-Engagement-Rings/INSIGNIA-7074R) at 20% off from Solomon Brothers in Atlanta, GA.

I spoke with the owner who is willing to sell me the following diamond with a $300 discount:

1.02, G, SI1, no fluor., 3.0 HCA, 6.44 mm, $5796 ($5496 with discount)


I want to make sure I'm getting the best price, so I've done a boatload of research and narrowed it down to 6 other diamonds from this store (which has very competitive prices, as I'm sure most of this community knows). I want a diamond that is eye clean and gives me the best bang for my buck. I've also included the HCA ratings for each diamond and also the measurement of the table (the bigger the diamond looks, the better). I've looked at diamonds with none-faint fluorescence. I don't believe faint fluorescence will bother me all that much. And yes, I understand that I would need to see the diamonds in person, but I'm including images of all of the diamonds' GIA certs to see which ones should be weeded out based on inclusions (if you can make that determination from the cert alone...). Or should I just stick with the diamond that the owner and I looked at? Thanks in advance for the help!

Edit: let's refer to the first diamond listed (discount from owner) as Option 1, and so on until Option 7...

1.01, F, SI1, faint fluor., 1.3 HCA, 6.60 mm, $5590


1.09, G, SI1, no fluor., 1.9 HCA, 6.59 mm, $5671


1.03, G, SI1, no fluor., 1.4 HCA, 6.63 mm, $5660


1.04, G, SI1, no fluor., 1.7 HCA, 6.58 mm, $5715


1.01, F, SI1, faint fluor., 1.4 HCA, 6.52 mm, $5837


1.01, G, SI1, faint fluor., 1.3 HCA, 6.60 mm, $5154

 

[tyty333]

No on the first one. The pavilion angle is too high.

Without pictures and idealscope/aset images, number 5 (1.03) would be my first pick. Complimentary angles, table is a little big. Can you try to get pictures/images and post? I'm assuming they are all eye clean?

 

[shadowbuggy]

The only diamond I've seen in person is Option 1, which was eye clean (it's a hearts & arrows diamond). I don't have pictures/images of the other diamonds - might be able to get them tomorrow. I just wanted to call the owner and tell him to prepare a couple of other diamonds from that list I provided, that way I can take a look at more than just one diamond and make my choice from that point.

With regards to Option 5, how much do those twinning wisps concern you? From what I've heard, they aren't very visible to the naked eye, but I haven't seen enough in person to really say that with confidence.

 

[tyty333]

The only diamond I've seen in person is Option 1, which was eye clean (it's a hearts & arrows diamond). I don't have pictures/images of the other diamonds - might be able to get them tomorrow. I just wanted to call the owner and tell him to prepare a couple of other diamonds from that list I provided, that way I can take a look at more than just one diamond and make my choice from that point.

With regards to Option 5, how much do those twinning wisps concern you? From what I've heard, they aren't very visible to the naked eye, but I haven't seen enough in person to really say that with confidence.

Twinning wisps are one of the best kind of inclusions because they are usually not visible at all. I would be sure to tell them that
you want any stone they bring in to be eye-clean.

See if they will take the stones outside for you so you can look at them in different lighting. Almost all stones look good in
jewelers lighting but you want one that will look good in a variety of different lightings.

Edit...I think I typed in the wrong carat size in my above post. I should have said 1.04 not 1.03. Anyway, it's the 5th one.

Also, first you want a stone with complimentary angles, then H&A after that. If the angles are not complimentary then H&A
doesnt count for much IMO. Did you see an H&A image or did you look at it through an H&A viewer? Who said it was H&A?

 

[shadowbuggy]

I looked at it through an H&A viewer, appeared to be legit. The owner has it listed as H&A. Is the pavilion angle the only thing that throws this diamond off for you? How badly does this affect the diamond?

As for the other options, are they so bad that you wouldn't even suggest looking at them? This helps me narrow down my options, but I'm just curious.

Update: Option 5 is apparently not available. The owner said another client is looking at it.

 

[tyty333]

I looked at it through an H&A viewer, appeared to be legit. The owner has it listed as H&A. Is the pavilion angle the only thing that throws this diamond off for you? How badly does this affect the diamond?
Yes, badly...it results in leakage. Changes in the pavilion angle affect a stone more than changes in the crown angle. So unless you
can get an idealscope or aset image that shows this stone is decent, I would pass on it.

As for the other options, are they so bad that you wouldn't even suggest looking at them? This helps me narrow down my options, but I'm just curious.

No,but I would probably want an idealscope image with these stones. Number 6 might be an ok option.

 

[shadowbuggy]

Hate to be a pain here, but I found two other diamonds (since Option #5 is not available) I would like some input on:

Option #8: 1.00 ct, F, SI1, no fluor., 1.5 HCA, 6.46 mm, $5883


Option #9: 1.01 ct, G, SI1, faint fluor., 1.5 HCA, 6.56 mm, $5921


What are your thoughts on these two?

 

[tyty333]

Option 8 should be a nice stone. Option 9...get an idealscope image.

 

[fair75]

To me, the only diamond that is worth considering will be option 8. The numbers look good but I will still strongly recommend getting an idealscope/ASET scope image to verify the light performance. The numbers on the GIA reports are averaged and rounded, so a scope image will help determine how well the diamond performs. If I were to pick a diamond I would personally buy, it has to have numbers falling in the following ranges and a scope image. The following ranges are what I prefer:

Table: 53 - 58% (54 - 57% preferred)
Depth: 60 - 61.9%
Crown angle: 34 to 35 degrees
Pavilion angle: 40.6 - 40.8 degrees
Lower girdle length: 75 - 80% (75 to 77% would have bold fire while 80% is optimized for pin-fire)
Star length: 45 - 50%
girdle thickness: 3 - 3.5% (If all the other numbers are great, I wouldn't disregard 4% thickness right away. But just know that 4% girdle thickness would slightly reduce the spread of the diamond)

One thing I would like to point out is that many branded super ideal diamonds will have upper girdles slightly painted to improve light returns. In my experiences, many triple excellent GIA diamonds have classic girdles, meaning the upper girdles are not painted. Diamonds with slightly painted girdles will have better light returns, but their scintillation is usually not as sharp as the ones with classic girdle. Class girdles will have some light leakage, but slight leakage can improve the contrast of diamonds. Of course, too much light leakage won't be good. That's why you should get idealscope/ASET scope images to see the light performance. However, most people wouldn't be able to tell the differences if both types of diamonds are placed next to each other, assuming the cut qualities for both are the same or extremely close. I would say you can't go wrong with either type and often it's personal preference.

To show you what I mean by diamonds with classic girdles, I attached an ASET scope image of a diamond I have. This diamond has great numbers on the GIA report and in person, it sparkles like crazy. As a matter of fact, I brought this diamond to some local jewelers and many have said they thought it was E or F color without looking from the side. A well-cut diamond will have the benefit of looking whiter than the actual graded color.

G SI2

Table: 57%
Depth: 61.1%
Crown angle: 34
Pavilion angle: 40.8
lower girdle length: 75%
Star length: 45%
Girdle thickness: 3.5%


There are some slight light leakage under the table, but human eyes won't be able to notice that. The white areas around the edge of the diamond indicate that this diamond has classic girdle. This actually produce good contrast and allows the diamond to have sharper scintillation. But I want to mention again that the differences between diamonds with classic and slightly painted girdles are usually only detectable to the experts. Even to people who can detect the differences, it would most likely come down to what flavor they prefer.

 

[fair75]

I just want to say that the ASET scope image I posted in my first reply was taken using my phone and a handheld ASET scope. Therefore, the image won't be as good as the ones taken with professional equipment. I did my best.

 

[shadowbuggy]

Based on the responses, I'll go after Option 8. Hopefully, the owner has it in stock tomorrow and I'll be able to see it in person. The one thing I really don't know much about is an ASET/Idealscope. How do I get my hands on one of these? Also, what exactly am I looking for? A newbie's guide to either would be extremely helpful...

 

[fair75]

There are many sites on line that have information on idealscope/ASET scope images and how to interpret them. However, some can get quite technical. For round diamonds, an idealscope image is good enough. For fancy-shaped diamonds, ASET scope images are better because they provide more information on light returns.

Here are some links explaining idealscope and ASET scope images and/or how to read them.

https://www.pricescope.com/journal/what-aset-reveals-ideal-scope-does-not
http://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/idealscope-overview-and-examples.htm
http://highperformancediamonds.com/education/performance-tutorial/
**edited by moderator to remove affiliate links per our policies**


Contact the vendor and ask for an idealscope and/or ASET scope image. You can post the image on here and people could help you out.

 

[Diamond_Hawk]

Is the pavilion angle the only thing that throws this diamond off for you? How badly does this affect the diamond?

Hello shadowbuggy,

The important thing to understand is that all of the angles work together. A pavilion angle that is outside a 'recommended range' means the light entering from the top hits the pavilion in a different place than it would in an 'Ideal" diamond. Because the light hits the pavilion in a different place, this makes the pavilion angle nearly irrelevant as the light return can NO LONGER be the most efficient possible. The same is true of pavilion angle and depth of a diamond (among other factors). All angles have to work in tandem with one another.

 

[shadowbuggy]

Thanks for the input, guys. I ended up pulling the trigger on Option 8. Saw it in person and can't begin to describe how beautiful it is (not to mention the fact I talked the owner into yet another discount).