Help choosing diamond

[elds88]

Hi, I'm shopping for an engagement ring, I'm pretty much set on what I want regarding the 4C's, and I've done some research on here and believe Whiteflash to be a reputable seller.

My budget is ~$3000, and these are the diamonds I'm considering:

AGS-104100649035
AGS-104099413001
AGS-104103006007
AGS-104098252030
AGS-104094161023

All of them round cut, around .60 ct, VVS1-VVS2, E-F color, and from the ACA collection. Unfortunately I most likely won't be able to see them in person, so I'm just evaluating based on AGS certificates, ASET and Idealscope images. Some of them seem to be better in terms of less inclusions at the center of the diamond, but it's hard for me to know if they would affect light return at all.

I also checked the angles on the HCA and they all appear to be great, but I understand I should not just go for the lower score (or so I've read).

It seems to me any of these would be great, but since it's for an engagement ring, I want it to be the absolute best I can afford.

Haven't really searched on James Allen or Brian Gavin, would I be better off with one of these two?

I'd really appreciate your help, maybe there's something I'm missing. Sorry for the long post!

 

[lovedogs]

Is there a cultural reason for such high color and clarity? You may be able to get something slightly larger if you go with VS2 and G/H color.

 

[elds88]

My girlfriend doesn't really like big diamonds (weird, I know!). She tried a friend's ring and said it was the perfect size, not too small and not too big. I later asked her friend's fiance and he told me it was around .60 ct.

So that's why I'm looking into these options, the best possible clarity and color within my budget. Of course I'd prefer an IF D, just for the sake of knowing I got her the absolute best, but I guess that would be prohibitively expensive, or way to small to be worth it.

Nothing wrong with big diamonds, just my girlfriend's personal preference.

 

[bmfang]

Just checked the BGD inventory for D-F 0.5-0.8ct IF-VVS2 stones and there was nothing in stock.

 

[rockysalamander]

Many diamonds out in the world are 60/60 stones, which are spready for their size. Others have a ton of weight in the belly. I would not limit yourself strictly to .6 carat (weight). I'd consider up to .7 c, personally.

I like these three.
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4059889,4015025,4015026


https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD9744

 

[crbl999]

@rockysalamander posted some great choices from WF. I would eliminate the .628 F as it has too much painting/digging for my personal preference in a super ideal.

I've added one stone to the WF list. Lower clarity but also saves some budget. If it is eye clean from any angle any distance I'm all for going lower in clarity. You can't go wrong with any of these so I would call WF and have them walk you through each of these stones. They will give you an honest assessment of each stones performance.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4015025,4060806,4015026

 

[OoohShiny]

My girlfriend doesn't really like big diamonds (weird, I know!). She tried a friend's ring and said it was the perfect size, not too small and not too big. I later asked her friend's fiance and he told me it was around .60 ct.

So that's why I'm looking into these options, the best possible clarity and color within my budget. Of course I'd prefer an IF D, just for the sake of knowing I got her the absolute best, but I guess that would be prohibitively expensive, or way to small to be worth it.

Nothing wrong with big diamonds, just my girlfriend's personal preference.

Don't forget that diamonds are graded with a 10x loupe - which means a 'D IF' stone can have inclusions that are visible with a 20x loupe...

VVS stones will be eye-clean from all angles and basically all distances unless you are Clarke Kent on his days off, lol, so stick to that or a good VS1 and save some money / get a bigger spread / get a higher colour

 

[sledge]

My girlfriend doesn't really like big diamonds (weird, I know!). She tried a friend's ring and said it was the perfect size, not too small and not too big. I later asked her friend's fiance and he told me it was around .60 ct.

So that's why I'm looking into these options, the best possible clarity and color within my budget. Of course I'd prefer an IF D, just for the sake of knowing I got her the absolute best, but I guess that would be prohibitively expensive, or way to small to be worth it.

Nothing wrong with big diamonds, just my girlfriend's personal preference.

Just a heads up, but there isn't really a "best" color. It depends on the couple. Some prefer icy white. Some like color. Currently icy white diamonds cost more but that doesn't make them "best". Also, if you aren't aware, color is graded and seen with the table down and pavilion up so you look at the side of the diamond and most people struggle to see a difference between D-G.

In particular, G colored stones can offer a better bang for the buck.

With clarity, I personally wouldn't pay for IF unless a deal just dropped in my lap. Keep in mind, clarity is based on 10x magnification. The images we see on the computer are magnified at least 10x or more. Also factor in the stone is smaller. As such there is less surface area and the inclusions are smaller as a result. Honestly to maximize your dollar I'd consider a clean SI1 or VS2 from WF. They vet their stones and can pull them for a gemologist to review, so there isn't really any risk.

You can pocket the cash, or as @rockysalamander noted, increase the size a bit. Depending on the exact proportions of the stone you choose vs the one that your friend has could vary.

Besides, if they haven't told you yet, diamond shrinkage syndrome (DSS) seems to kick in fast.

 

[lovedogs]

Just a heads up, but there isn't really a "best" color. It depends on the couple. Some prefer icy white. Some like color. Currently icy white diamonds cost more but that doesn't make them "best". Also, if you aren't aware, color is graded and seen with the table down and pavilion up so you look at the side of the diamond and most people struggle to see a difference between D-G.

In particular, G colored stones can offer a better bang for the buck.

With clarity, I personally wouldn't pay for IF unless a deal just dropped in my lap. Keep in mind, clarity is based on 10x magnification. The images we see on the computer are magnified at least 10x or more. Also factor in the stone is smaller. As such there is less surface area and the inclusions are smaller as a result. Honestly to maximize your dollar I'd consider a clean SI1 or VS2 from WF. They vet their stones and can pull them for a gemologist to review, so there isn't really any risk.

You can pocket the cash, or as @rockysalamander noted, increase the size a bit. Depending on the exact proportions of the stone you choose vs the one that your friend has could vary.

Besides, if they haven't told you yet, diamond shrinkage syndrome (DSS) seems to kick in fast.

This. OP: it's very sweet that you want to get your girl the "best", but color really doesn't have a "best", especially between D/E/F/G, as most people can't see differences in this range (from face up normal viewing). In terms of clarity, I wouldn't ever pay for differences I couldn't see. VS1/VS2 is more than clear enough 99% of the time, and you can either get a bigger stone or pocket the cash for a nicer wedding band/honeymoon, etc.

 

[kmoro]

This. OP: it's very sweet that you want to get your girl the "best", but color really doesn't have a "best", especially between D/E/F/G, as most people can't see differences in this range (from face up normal viewing). In terms of clarity, I wouldn't ever pay for differences I couldn't see. VS1/VS2 is more than clear enough 99% of the time, and you can either get a bigger stone or pocket the cash for a nicer wedding band/honeymoon, etc.

Some people/cultures want their diamond to symbolize rarity and purity as well - not only visual performance - the mental and emotional aspects.

However, if that’s not part of the OP’s definition of “the best”, I hope he gives serious thought to the advice for visual performance.

 

[bmfang]

Some people/cultures want their diamond to symbolize rarity and purity as well - not only visual performance.

However, if that’s not part of the OP’s definition of “the best”, I hope he gives serious thought to the advice for visual performance.

Yup, fairly common in my culture (Asian) that stone should be as colourless as possible (D ideally) with very high clarity levels (VVS usually, but who says no to an IF/FL?).

Doesn’t really matter about cut quality that much. Colleague of mine at work (also Asian) showed me the GIA report for his now wife’s e-ring as he knew I had an interest in diamonds (bought at CTF in Hong Kong). Asked my opinion. I asked him if he wanted my honest opinion (even if it was a bad one). He said yes. Stone was like a F or G VVS which was very nice (the plot was insanely clean as you’d expect). Unfortunately, was way too deep at over 63%, table however was around 56% with CA-PA being a steep deep combo.

 

[lovedogs]

Some people/cultures want their diamond to symbolize rarity and purity as well - not only visual performance - the mental and emotional aspects.
Op didn't mention any cultural significance when I asked, so I assumed this was not part of his definition.
However, if that’s not part of the OP’s definition of “the best”, I hope he gives serious thought to the advice for visual performance.

 

[Dancing Fire]

BMFang
a friend of mine showed me 3 GIA XXX stones with high color and high clarity that he purchased in HK. all 3 stones was cut too deep.

I don't understand why Chinese people from the US go back to HK to purchase diamonds when they can buy higher quality stones in the US for less $$$.

 

[bmfang]

BMFang
a friend of mine showed me 3 GIA XXX stones with high color and high clarity that he purchased in HK. all 3 stones was cut too deep.

I don't understand why Chinese people from the US go back to HK to purchase diamonds when they can buy higher quality stones in the US for less $$$.

The last trip I made back to China in 2017, I went and looked at stones in Luk Fook, Chow Tai Fook, Lao Xiang Feng, China Gold and a number of other smaller retailers.

At Chow Tai Fook in my wife’s hometown, across the 5 stores in town, I looked at around 100 GIA graded stones (across a range of carat weights, 0.5ct to 3-4cts). There might have been 3-5 stones that I found that fell within PS recommended proportions and looking at them without a loupe, a couple had fairly visible inclusions (black carbon and white crystalline inclusions). All were priced significantly higher than comparable stones on JA and our PS recommended super ideal vendors (then again, diamonds have a massive tax imposed on them as a luxury good).

I actually made an impromptu scope by using a piece of red A4 paper that some stores had lying around. Most of the 100 stones were steep deep. Of the ones that I found to be within PS proportions, there was one that had a near perfect impromptu IS image (for a mounted stone, they had all been set in solitaires which let a lot of light through, Tiffany setting inspired). For some of the others, generally red all over except for a spot or two (either under table or out near girdle) which were white/light pink.

Let’s just say the staff there were a little intrigued at what I was doing with a piece of red coloured paper.

 

[Karl_K]

@rockysalamander posted some great choices from WF. I would eliminate the .628 F as it has too much painting/digging for my personal preference in a super ideal.

Are you sure?
The .628 has very minimal painting/digging.
None of the three has enough to worry about, but one of the others has more.

 

[crbl999]

Are you sure?
The .628 has very minimal painting/digging.
None of the three has enough to worry about, but one of the others has more.

@Karl_K On the ASET there are areas of green between the arrows. Is this due to digging of the pavilion? If so, I agree it is minimal of 1 degree. Which one has more? .6 D around 6:00? I'm learning to read the finer details of the ASET.

 

[sledge]

@Karl_K On the ASET there are areas of green between the arrows. Is this due to digging of the pavilion? If so, I agree it is minimal of 1 degree. Which one has more? .6 D around 6:00? I'm learning to read the finer details of the ASET.

Remember @Karl_K is trade and you may be putting him in a weird spot asking him to comment on the stone of a vendor. I know that's not the intent of either party but just in case you don't get a response.

I've picked apart stones before and when you are choosing from only super ideals I agree you have to be more critical to narrow to a final choice. That said, I don't think painting or digging is horribly bad or they wouldn't qualify as ACA.

That being said, painting and digging is a technical matter I'd like to see further explained. Stuff like how to read the images, how stones with various paint/dig on the crown, pavilion or both look, etc.

I've seen the PS article here but feel more explanation is needed. I need to do some searching to see what exists but this may be a good separate thread.

 

[Karl_K]

@Karl_K On the ASET there are areas of green between the arrows. Is this due to digging of the pavilion? If so, I agree it is minimal of 1 degree. Which one has more? .6 D around 6:00? I'm learning to read the finer details of the ASET.

No, its the combination and they are even around the stone which indicates that the facets themselves are even.
It shows up around the edges and or it closes the leakage dots off between the arrows at the ends of the stars.
Yes .607 either side of 6. Its not enough to close the dots at the which makes it a couple degrees at the very most most, probably closer to 1 than 2. Not an issue.
Depending on the angle combination different amount are needed to close them and tilt can also close them so you have to look at the arrow shafts to account for tilt.
That is all I had better say because im pushing the correcting information rule.

Not discussing any diamond in particular the green triangles on the edge being larger or no longer trianglish is another sign.

 

[crbl999]

No, its the combination and they are even around the stone which indicates that the facets themselves are even.
It shows up around the edges and or it closes the leakage dots off between the arrows at the ends of the stars.
Yes .607 either side of 6. Its not enough to close the dots at the which makes it a couple degrees at the very most most, probably closer to 1 than 2. Not an issue.
Depending on the angle combination different amount of are needed to close them and tilt can also close them so you have to look at the arrow shafts to account for tilt.
That is all I had better say because im pushing the correcting information rule.

Not discussing any diamond in particular the green triangles on the edge being larger or no longer trianglish is another sign.

Thank you @Karl_K! I apologize if I put you in a difficult position asking you direct questions about an image when you're limited in response due to being trade. I enjoy your comments and your willingness to share your knowledge.

 

[Karl_K]

Thank you @Karl_K! I apologize if I put you in a difficult position asking you direct questions about an image when you're limited in response due to being trade. I enjoy your comments and your willingness to share your knowledge.

Your welcome.
Not a problem.
Staying within the rules is my responsibility not yours if an answer will get me in to much hot water I will just say I can't answer.

 

[elds88]

Some people/cultures want their diamond to symbolize rarity and purity as well - not only visual performance - the mental and emotional aspects.

However, if that’s not part of the OP’s definition of “the best”, I hope he gives serious thought to the advice for visual performance.

I was not aware this was a cultural thing, but I do believe in the symbolism of a rare and more "pure" diamond. I consider the clarity important because of the sentimental value an engagement ring holds, I think I would not be considering such a high clarity if it were for a necklace or earrings. A big part of why I'm looking for a super ideal is for its relative "rarity", it's not just about having the shiniest rock.

 

[elds88]

Just a heads up, but there isn't really a "best" color. It depends on the couple. Some prefer icy white. Some like color. Currently icy white diamonds cost more but that doesn't make them "best". Also, if you aren't aware, color is graded and seen with the table down and pavilion up so you look at the side of the diamond and most people struggle to see a difference between D-G.

In particular, G colored stones can offer a better bang for the buck.

With clarity, I personally wouldn't pay for IF unless a deal just dropped in my lap. Keep in mind, clarity is based on 10x magnification. The images we see on the computer are magnified at least 10x or more. Also factor in the stone is smaller. As such there is less surface area and the inclusions are smaller as a result. Honestly to maximize your dollar I'd consider a clean SI1 or VS2 from WF. They vet their stones and can pull them for a gemologist to review, so there isn't really any risk.

You can pocket the cash, or as @rockysalamander noted, increase the size a bit. Depending on the exact proportions of the stone you choose vs the one that your friend has could vary.

Besides, if they haven't told you yet, diamond shrinkage syndrome (DSS) seems to kick in fast.

Makes sense, now I get your point that a D color it's not necessarily the best. I've read that at I-J the yellowish tint becomes more noticeable, and is generally seen as less desirable. Would a G-H be the "lowest" you should go?

I didn't know about the grading being done on 10x magnification, what do you mean by a clean SI2/VS2? I've seen some diamonds graded at this clarity with clouds and feathers, and they seem kind of hazy.

 

[elds88]

Many diamonds out in the world are 60/60 stones, which are spready for their size. Others have a ton of weight in the belly. I would not limit yourself strictly to .6 carat (weight). I'd consider up to .7 c, personally.

I like these three.
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4059889,4015025,4015026


https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD9744

By spready do you mean they appear larger? If so, how do you tell? I'm starting to think I should compromise on color and see if I can get something a little bigger.

I've compared a .60 and .70 ct side by side and I could see the difference in size, but is it really noticeable once in a ring? I mean, of course it would, but I'm thinking it would not be dramatic.

 

[elds88]

Don't forget that diamonds are graded with a 10x loupe - which means a 'D IF' stone can have inclusions that are visible with a 20x loupe...

VVS stones will be eye-clean from all angles and basically all distances unless you are Clarke Kent on his days off, lol, so stick to that or a good VS1 and save some money / get a bigger spread / get a higher colour

Yeah, I'm actually thinking I should go a little bigger. I think I know the answer here, but I'm guessing a VS1 can be as shiny as A VVS1 as long as it is a super ideal and has all the right proportions, right?

 

[elds88]

This. OP: it's very sweet that you want to get your girl the "best", but color really doesn't have a "best", especially between D/E/F/G, as most people can't see differences in this range (from face up normal viewing). In terms of clarity, I wouldn't ever pay for differences I couldn't see. VS1/VS2 is more than clear enough 99% of the time, and you can either get a bigger stone or pocket the cash for a nicer wedding band/honeymoon, etc.

Yeah, I'm starting to lean towards a bigger size. I get that there really isn't such a thing as a best color. I guess I was led to believe the best diamond was the one with the highest grades on the 4C's, so I was trying to strike a balance within my budget.

 

[elds88]

@rockysalamander posted some great choices from WF. I would eliminate the .628 F as it has too much painting/digging for my personal preference in a super ideal.

I've added one stone to the WF list. Lower clarity but also saves some budget. If it is eye clean from any angle any distance I'm all for going lower in clarity. You can't go wrong with any of these so I would call WF and have them walk you through each of these stones. They will give you an honest assessment of each stones performance.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=4015025,4060806,4015026

What do you mean by painting/digging? I'll look if there's an article around here to learn a little more.

 

[sledge]

Makes sense, now I get your point that a D color it's not necessarily the best. I've read that at I-J the yellowish tint becomes more noticeable, and is generally seen as less desirable. Would a G-H be the "lowest" you should go?

I didn't know about the grading being done on 10x magnification, what do you mean by a clean SI2/VS2? I've seen some diamonds graded at this clarity with clouds and feathers, and they seem kind of hazy.

Color is all personal preference. Many here are happy to have I/J color, and some even warmer tones. I tend to favor more white stones in general but find I am a little more lenient with the older OEC cuts, whereas I'm less tolerant on the newer MRB stones.

OEC = Old European Cut
MRB = Modern Round Brilliant (majority of today's market)

Also I've learned that my fiancee has superman vision and can see the slightest of tints. She isn't bothered by it but she does see it.

The stone I selected for her is an H VS2. It's very white and bright but the setting also heavily exposed the pavilion which is where tint is observed. As a result, depending on the angle of the ring I am sometimes enamoured it's so crisp and white and only an H and other times I see a slight tint. For me, the bright and white view is the majority of the time. Others tend to gasp and love the stone too.

So the H currently works; however, knowing her sensitivity I would have probably ponied up for a F+ had I know then what I know now. When we upgrade I plan to go up in color for her but it's a non priority or issue at this point.

What is very true is H seems to be that point where some might notice a little tint. Usually G+ is safer. However, you also have to consider the stone size. A smaller stone has less body just as a larger stone has a larger body so I'd argue in a smaller stone you are likely to be okay with a lower color. And as the size increases (of a significant nature) then perhaps color should also increase if you or your partner is sensitive to tint. FYI, my fiancee's stone is a 0.867ct.

As far as clarity the stone size thing applies here too. To illustrate this let's use a fictitious model. Say that an SI1 stone allows maximum 10% inclusions. If your stone has a total surface area of 25mm2 then theoretically you'd have 2.5mm2 of inclusions. Now if the stone is larger, say 7mm x 7mm then total surface area would be 49mm2 and 10% of that is 4.9mm2.

This isn't how it works but the point is illustrated that a larger stone will theoretically have larger inclusions than a smaller stone. So much for the same reason I believe you can cheat color a little in a smaller stone i believe the same is true with clarity.

What I meant by clean SI1 or VS2 is each clarity grade is a range. Depending on the exact inclusions, location, etc some SI1's are better than others. As you go up the scale the less likely you are to see inclusions. However, a good portion of people can't see inclusions on a good SI1 stone with their naked eye. Very few, think 98%+, can't see inclusions on a VS2 stone with their naked eye. As you climb in clarity, you do it for cultural reasons or to be mind clean because most people can't visually appreciate a stone above VS2 without a scope.

By spready do you mean they appear larger? If so, how do you tell? I'm starting to think I should compromise on color and see if I can get something a little bigger.

I've compared a .60 and .70 ct side by side and I could see the difference in size, but is it really noticeable once in a ring? I mean, of course it would, but I'm thinking it would not be dramatic.

By spread she means the length and width dimensions of the diamond. Depending on the exact proportions (table, depth, crown and pavilion) of the diamond two stones of identical carat weight can have different dimensions. Larger table, shallower crown and shallow depth stones will be larger than a stone with a small table and steep crown.

One such stone that has good spread for its weight is called a 60/60 stone meaning both the table and depth is around 60% which will also mean the crown is shallow.

Remember that those proportions affect personality. Many 60/60 stones have bright white light return but not as fiery as a small table and steep crown proportioned stone.

FYI, carat weight encompasses length, width and depth. To get approximate weight you can use this formula: L x W x D x 0.0061.

My point is that part of carat weight is consumed (hidden) in depth. As such you are better served to compare length and width dimensions as its measurable data we can actually discern.

FYI it takes about 0.20mm or roughly 1/128th of an inch for us to see a size difference between two stones. Then the stones have to be side by side. If viewed independently you probably wouldn't notice. It's definitely not an OMG experience.

Yeah, I'm actually thinking I should go a little bigger. I think I know the answer here, but I'm guessing a VS1 can be as shiny as A VVS1 as long as it is a super ideal and has all the right proportions, right?

Shine has to do with the cut. Clarity can have a negative effect on light performance depending on the size and location of the inclusion. With WF ACA there is a separate vetting process that happens where they analyze the inclusions and clarity of the stone to ensure this problem does not exist.

What do you mean by painting/digging? I'll look if there's an article around here to learn a little more.

It's a final finishing process done by the diamond cutter. Depending on the severity and type (either paint or dig and also rather down on crown, pavilion or both) or can be viewed as good or bad.

Some reasons include allowing a stone to hot a magic weight. For instance if a stone would normally hit 0.99 carats, slight mods can be done to hit 1.00ct+. Although we visually couldn't discern a size difference, the larger 1ct+ stone sells for a higher unit price per carat due to consumer vanity to actually say 1 carat vs 0.99ct.

Other reasons might include digging out, or removing, a problematic inclusion. Or maybe shaving weight to obtain a different girdle thickness.

Many super ideal vendors like WF or similar may also utilize the technique to enhance beauty and brightness of the stone.

So sometimes this can be good or bad. It depends why and also to what severity level. You change geometry of other proportions when this happens and the severity is measured in degrees. Minor variances are generally okay.

This article gets much deeper and has diagrams, etc to better explain:

https://www.pricescope.com/articles/visible_effects_painting_digging_superideal_diamonds

I'd like to stress that super ideal vendors tend to use this process for beauty and in a manner that does not cause negative effects. Their entire business model is about getting the perfect cut. This includes many things like getting the right crown and pavilion angles, making sure a stone is the right depth, etc. These things prevent them from using the same rough to make a bigger and less pretty finished diamond. So it makes no sense for them to blow their investment into cut precision in this final stage of the finishing process.