Help deciding between 2 center stones

[stratos]

Hey guys and gals, I have been lurking here for since July and I want to say a massive thank you! I have learned so much during my search for a great engagement ring for my girlfriend. I decided to make a first post looking for some honest feedback. I understand that so much of this is subjective. I get it, I really do But I want to quantify some of this so I can make a call.

To give you context, my girlfriend is a nurse, and although she says she'd prefer to wear her ring at work, I know this is not always possible, and my gut says she'll try it for a bit, but ultimately decide to just wear the wedding band. She is very down-to-earth and low maintenance. I think she'd prefer something that is neither too big nor too small, but not so large that it will inhibit her lifestyle or be cumbersome.

So here's the deal. I finally have a setting picked out, and I would like some opinions deciding between 2 stones. For me, the answer to this question comes down to proportion between setting, stone, and finger.

First, here are a few pictures of the setting. Specs: platinum, 2.6mm wide, 6 stones, minimum carat total weight .23 ca, average color H. The top sample image is a 1 ct. The 2 subsequent pictures are with a .75 center.





Now, here is a picture of the 2 stones I am deciding between. For reference, my finger is a 7 and I am reasonably confident that my girlfriend is a 6.5, but her finger is a little shorter than mine.


The top stone is a GIA .73 brilliant cut round, J, VS1, excellent cut/symmetry/polish, faint purple florescence. HCA score of 1.3. Measurements are 5.75-5.78x3.58mm.

The bottom stone is a GIA .81 brilliant cut round, J, VVS2, excellent cut/symmetry/polish, no florescence. HCA score of 1.7. Measurements 5.93-5.97x3.58mm. In person, both sparkle like crazy, but the .73 has a tad more fire, as the table is 55% as opposed to 57% on the larger one. However, the larger stone has a bit more presence.

Would any of you be so kind as to give me your thoughts on which sized stone you like better with the setting on a 6.5 finger? Sorry for the long post!

 

[MarionC]

That's a tough one. Off the top of my head I would say the larger one, yet the 0.73 has more fire and a bit of florescence which is nice.
Also the 0.73 would be easier to wear at work.

Which one looks the most beautiful to you in all lighting situations?

Can she help you decide or is it a surprise?

 

[stratos]

Thanks so much for the response, Jimmianne! The smaller one looks a little better to me in various lighting situations, but there is a part of me that likes the larger stone because it is bigger. I hope that's not too vain to admit. Sometimes, as the guy I like the idea of getting her a bigger rock. I bought the stones from BN, and the local jeweler who looked at them thought both were very well cut, but the larger one showed a bit more of the typical "J" color. He thought the smaller was an H, but both face up very white.

I would love more input from her, but as you stated, she has told me that she wants this aspect to be a surprise. I've been staring at these for a few weeks scratching my head, and sadly I need to send one back soon. Can't I just keep both?

 

[MarionC]

I see your dilemma.
Um-m-m what about price? Is there enough of a difference that it could help with the decision?

I would go for the stone with the best light performance and that sounds like the smaller diamond - although it's not that small! It's a nice size and will probably be large enough when you are not putting it right next to the other one.

If you can look at them through that scope that shows the cut [take them to a local Hearts & Arrows dealer at a mall and say you want to compare these stones to H&As] it might help you decide as well.

 

[CanuckAB]

I think if it were me, I would choose the smaller stone. It sounds like it performs better in more lighting situations. I love small tables and lots of fire. Also, this will be in a setting with 6 other diamonds so you will be getting lots of sparkle & presence. I don't think you need to spend more for another .2 mm in spread and VVS2. It sounds like the faint purple fluorescence is perhaps helping the stone look whiter as well? Anyway, that's my 2 cents. Obviously you need to do what's right for the 2 of you.

Are you able to post some pictures of the smaller stone in sunlight? I've never seen purple fluorescence and would love to see it if there are any effects in UV lighting. I love my strong blue fluorescent stone!

 

[drk14]

This is going to be a completely unhelpful response...

In my completely subjective opinion, the 0.73ct diamond seems like a more "sensible" size given her lifestyle and profession. In addition, again in my subjective opinion, I think that in the last two setting pictures (in which the center is 0.75ct), the center diamond looks more "proportionate" to the side stones, as compared to the first picture (with a 1ct center). Plus it faces up more white, and and has slightly better light performance.

And here comes the monkey wrench.

Since you are sensitive to the carat weight, I don't know if you also consider the 1-carat mark to be a special, magical number, like so many diamond shoppers do. If so, it may make a difference to you that with the side stones, your first diamond would yield a total carat weight of 0.23+0.73 = 0.96 ctw, whereas your second diamond would yield 0.23+0.81 = 1.04 ctw.

On the other hand, you said the side stone weight was 0.23 ctw minimum. So if you do care about that 1-carat thing, then possibly you could negotiate with the setting vendor to make sure you get at least 0.27 ctw in the side diamonds, in which case you could make it to 1.00 ctw with the 0.73ct center as well. Of course, if the 1-carat number has no special significance for you, then more power to you, and disregard the second half of this post!

 

[stratos]

Unhelpful replies are why I come here! Totally kidding. You guys are so unbelievably helpful.

As far as size is concerned, I do like the idea of a 1 carat total weight, but moreover, I just don't want her to feel (even if it's deep in the recesses of her head) that I cheaped out on her. While she's not the kind of gal to walk around comparing her ring to that of others, I know how we are as people sometimes. At times, it just takes one comment from a rude individual to make us feel bad or plant a seed in our head. Am I over thinking? Yes. Have I been for weeks. Also yes.

So let me ask this highly subjective question. Do y'all feel like a .73 is respectable? I am very new to this stuff and it's difficult for me to assign a number on this one.

Price on these is pretty close. The difference was only a couple hundred bucks, which I liked because I stepped up in both size and clarity. I know stepping up to a VVS is not necessary, but because the inclusion in each is a feather, a VVS seemed safer somehow.

 

[CanuckAB]

You won't have durability issues with inclusions on either. As long as you don't have a very thin girdle I think you'll be fine.

 

[stratos]

CanuckAB, that's very good to know. The girdles on both are med-slightly thick. Although, I was bummed to not get any solid information on where the inclusions were. But I guess, if it's too small to see, who the heck cares.

I will try to get some pics of how the smaller of the two fluoresces. I was a bit surprised when the jeweler showed me that under their black light, as I had no idea what color the florescence was. I thought it was kind of cool, and if it helps it appear whiter, I'll take it. I actually had some left over under cabinet lighting that's rated at 6000 Kelvin and it looked super white, although I am not sure I could detect the purple.

 

[CanuckAB]

Thanks! I'd really like to see them!

 

[drk14]

At times, it just takes one comment from a rude individual to make us feel bad or plant a seed in our head. Am I over thinking? Yes. Have I been for weeks. Also yes.

So let me ask this highly subjective question. Do y'all feel like a .73 is respectable? I am very new to this stuff and it's difficult for me to assign a number on this one.

I've certainly got you beat in the overthinking department... my PS thread is 11 pages long and counting, and I haven't even finalized my setting choice yet!

With regards to whether 0.73 ct is "respectable", in my opinion, yes, absolutely. And I'd like to reiterate that anybody who receives a ring similar to the 0.75ct ring you posted in the picture below is not going to wish that center diamond was 0.2 mm wider! It's a beautiful ring:


And with regards to "rude individuals", anybody who would poo-poo a 0.73ct diamond will do the same to a 0.81ct diamond. And anybody who would make such a comment is probably someone who wears 2+ carats of dull, lifeless, frozen-spit, pancake diamond!

Let me ask you something. Do you think that yould you and your gf would consider availing yourselves of BN's upgrade program say 5-10 years in the future (or whenever your financial circumstances allow)? If so, that may take away some of the stress of trying to eke out an extra 0.08ct in the center stone for her ring...

 

[luvdajules]

My choice would be the smaller one that's very bright, the better performer overall, has fluoro, and more fire. No contest. It's a beautiful ring, you picked out and will look spectacular on her hand!