Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Help! Finding an Oval for my proposal

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
Hello all! I stumbled across this website while sifting through an ocean of questionable info, and I wish I had found you all sooner. Looking through these threads has been so helpful and y'all really have an amazing community here. I was going to try to get through this process on my own, but despite hours of learning and research, I decided I should probably suck it up and ask some true enthusiasts for help.

Basically, what I know is:
1) She wants a huge OVAL diamond. The ideal setting would be simple, thin and low profile (no halo, not cathedral, probably <2mm), and I was considering a micropave to dress it up a bit without getting too involved.
2) I have a modest budget of about $6000. Looking around online and at the local jewelers, a nice pave setting would run about $1500, so I'm hoping to keep the cost of the center stone around $4500, though I'd go up to $5000 if I found something truly remarkable.

Most of the online sites I've seen have some version of a simple thin pave setting, but I've been having a hard time finding a great center stone. I've actually been using a site called rarecarat that searches several vendors for diamonds, and I found a few ovals with good stats, but there was almost always something that would give me pause, like a VTK-XTK girdle or strong blue fluorescence. With a little more digging, I found that it's a lot more difficult to evaluate a good oval online than round, since there isn't a standardized cut or ratio. Not many of the sites I've found have pictures of the actual stone, which really limits the number of places I can look.

Cut: I understand this is the most important for light performance, but have heard varying things re: the reliability of GIA cut ratings for oval diamonds. I'd probably want something VG to X.
Carat: Right around 1.0-1.1 carat seems to be about the best my budget can sustain, though I'm hoping for more. I'd settle for something in the 0.9 range if everything else was perfect, but probably wouldn't go any lower than that.
Color: I've heard ovals show color more easily than round, so I'm trying to stay around H, though this is probably the least important of the things I'm looking at.
Clarity: She owns loupes (training to be surgeon), so I'm trying to do VS1 or better.
Bowtie: minimal, but a little bowtie doesn't bother me, as long as it isn't visible from far away
Ratio: 1.3-1.6, I don't care that much about the aesthetics of a rounder vs longer oval, as long as it has the best possible light performance.
Similarly, I've heard Table ought to be between 53-63 and Depth 57-62, but I'll end up getting whatever seems to sparkle the best.

Basically, the only sites on rarecarat that reliably offer pictures are James Allen, Brian Gavin, WhiteFlash and Brilliance. And most of the diamonds with the best ratings are on sites like B2C Jewels, or Blue Nile, that only have sample images. I know GOG is a local fave here, but they only have one diamond that fits my criteria:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond-search/1.01-Oval--GIA-H-VS1-diamond-stock-OV22868-cert-5213644354

Even when looking at the pictures, the only thing I can really tell is whether there are inclusions, so it's hard for me to discern a lot of the finer points of finding a quality stone. Despite my best efforts and research, I just can't get to the point where I feel comfortable picking one and I was hoping to get something done in the next few days so can propose before the New Year.

Am I going about this the right way? Any information or suggestions that could help me out would be greatly appreciated.
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
Call GOG and ask for an ASET image on that stone. See if they can do a rotating video of it for you.

I prefer to look at James Allen because they do have rotating videos of their stones. For fancy cut stones like ovals, pears and
marquise I think the video gives you the most information. Pictures/asets are usually only 1 straight on view that doesnt really
tell you how the stone reacts as it moves.

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.00-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-sku-2136531
EDIT...another
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-f-color-vs2-clarity-sku-2213207


Settings...these are thin...can you do platinum?
https://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/platinum-petite-pave-engagement-ring-flush-fit-item-56280
I'd rather see you put it into a BGD setting.
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/pave-and-side-stones/fishtail-pave-with-straight-head-18k-white-gold-5354w18
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/pave-and-side-stones/legera-pave-platinum-5861p
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
You want to look for well-defined (not blurry or muddy looking) facets through the center of the stone. You want them to extend
as far as possible to the rounded ends of an oval. I have circle the areas of good light return in green. As a stone moves, look for
the area of well-defined facets to move down towards the end of the stone.

straight_on_oval_with_lines.png

angled_oval_with_lines.png
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
Thanks so much for the suggestions! I'll start requesting some of these images, and I feel like I'm my judgment is starting to inprove just by looking at some of your suggestions vs some of the stones I had been considering earlier.

And special thanks to tyty333 for showing me what to look for in the videos. Very helpful!
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
I love that JA setting, and that's almost definitely what I'll get if I end up buying through JA. Any particular reason for platinum over white gold? I know it's more durable, but was wondering if there was another reason.
I love all the diamonds and settings at BG, but they're a little out of my price range and I don't know how I would go about getting them to set a diamond bought from somewhere else.

Thanks again for the advice, keep it coming! I'll be looking through stones all morning, so any other thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
I'm glad the pictures helped...

These settings are soooo thin (1.6 - 1.8mm) along with being rittled with holes to put the pave in. There is just not much metal
there to hold everything together. Platinum is suppose to be more durable because when it gets scratched the metal is just moved
to another part of the ring (displaced) ...when you scratch white gold you lose the metal. I'm not sure how much it matters in
such thin rings. I prefer people stick with 2mm+ but unfortunately it doesnt always give the look a person is after.
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
tyty333|1478882324|4097024 said:
I'm glad the pictures helped...

These settings are soooo thin (1.6 - 1.8mm) along with being rittled with holes to put the pave in. There is just not much metal
there to hold everything together. Platinum is suppose to be more durable because when it gets scratched the metal is just moved
to another part of the ring (displaced) ...when you scratch white gold you lose the metal. I'm not sure how much it matters in
such thin rings. I prefer people stick with 2mm+ but unfortunately it doesnt always give the look a person is after.
Thanks so much for the explanation! I will have to think hard about the cost difference.
My frontrunner so far is this one you suggested:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vvs1-clarity-sku-2206561

I also found this one, which I like:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-1047705

What do you think of it in comparison to the first?
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
RayorJ|1478883384|4097034 said:
tyty333|1478882324|4097024 said:
I'm glad the pictures helped...

These settings are soooo thin (1.6 - 1.8mm) along with being rittled with holes to put the pave in. There is just not much metal
there to hold everything together. Platinum is suppose to be more durable because when it gets scratched the metal is just moved
to another part of the ring (displaced) ...when you scratch white gold you lose the metal. I'm not sure how much it matters in
such thin rings. I prefer people stick with 2mm+ but unfortunately it doesnt always give the look a person is after.
Thanks so much for the explanation! I will have to think hard about the cost difference.
My frontrunner so far is this one you suggested: I dont think I posted this one
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vvs1-clarity-sku-2206561

I also found this one, which I like:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-1047705
I did post this one above.
What do you think of it in comparison to the first?
The H/VVS1 is nice but I think I like these two better...they have better light return to me in the middle (wider area of facets returning
light). Both the H/VVS1 and H/VS2 have some facets at the rounded end that will return light nicely where as the H/VS1 does not
have these facets but does have a very wide area in the center that are returning light nicely.

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.00-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-sku-2136531
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-1047705

Edit...the F is very nice too but it is somewhat smaller than the other 3. My choice (but it's not my choice!) would be between the
2 above. Did you try requesting aset images for them? I put more faith in the videos then 1 static aset image but it is just one more
piece of the puzzel. Also, those 2 above have a pretty different look so you need to decide which look you like in an oval...or if
you like them equally.
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
This wont really help much because those last 2 stones are close in size but here is what they would look like on a size 6 finger with
a 1.8mm wide setting.
The H/vs2 on the left and the H/Vs1 on the right.

oval_comparison.png
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
tyty333|1478892620|4097110 said:
RayorJ|1478883384|4097034 said:
tyty333|1478882324|4097024 said:
I'm glad the pictures helped...

These settings are soooo thin (1.6 - 1.8mm) along with being rittled with holes to put the pave in. There is just not much metal
there to hold everything together. Platinum is suppose to be more durable because when it gets scratched the metal is just moved
to another part of the ring (displaced) ...when you scratch white gold you lose the metal. I'm not sure how much it matters in
such thin rings. I prefer people stick with 2mm+ but unfortunately it doesnt always give the look a person is after.
Thanks so much for the explanation! I will have to think hard about the cost difference.
My frontrunner so far is this one you suggested: I dont think I posted this one
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vvs1-clarity-sku-2206561

I also found this one, which I like:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-1047705
I did post this one above.
What do you think of it in comparison to the first?
The H/VVS1 is nice but I think I like these two better...they have better light return to me in the middle (wider area of facets returning
light). Both the H/VVS1 and H/VS2 have some facets at the rounded end that will return light nicely where as the H/VS1 does not
have these facets but does have a very wide area in the center that are returning light nicely.

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.00-carat-h-color-vs2-clarity-sku-2136531
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-1047705

Edit...the F is very nice too but it is somewhat smaller than the other 3. My choice (but it's not my choice!) would be between the
2 above. Did you try requesting aset images for them? I put more faith in the videos then 1 static aset image but it is just one more
piece of the puzzel. Also, those 2 above have a pretty different look so you need to decide which look you like in an oval...or if
you like them equally.

Whoops, you're right! I switched the previous links. I've requested an ASET on 1047705, but they won't be able to get it for 2-3 days. And you're right, I can't tell too much of a difference between the on-finger diagrams, but that's a pretty sweet tool! Is it available online?
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
Thanks again for the comments. I can see what you're saying with the 1.01 H VVS1, as the table/main facet does seem smaller than most. I chatted with one of their reps and they said that the table and depth of the diamond were very well suited to light performance nonetheless, so that's part of the reason why I considered it (I don't have an excellent understanding of table and depth, so I trusted the rep on that one).

I will probably end up going with:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-1047705
but may wait for the ASET image to come back to make sure I'm not missing anything.

The rep I talked to said I can add two other diamonds (only the ones in their NY office) to the ASET request , so I think I may take a closer look at the following two, just to compare:

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/0.95-carat-f-color-vs2-clarity-sku-2219242
which seems to sparkle quite nicely, despite having a very thick girdle, which can make it show a little smaller than its carat weight. I've heard that when the girdle gets too thick, it can start to disrupt the light return, but I'm not really seeing that here. Is there something I'm missing?

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2071756
This one seems very nice, except that when it's rotating in the video, I feel like the area of light return doesn't quite move down towards the rounded edges as well as the first one. Is this what manifests as the bowtie effect?

I notice the same phenomenon in these two:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.04-carat-g-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-2133957
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-d-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2074898


I really appreciate all of your explanations. I know you've probably already looked at most of these and thought they weren't up to snuff, but it's really helpful to hear how you see each diamond.
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
RayorJ|1478903408|4097226 said:
Thanks again for the comments. I can see what you're saying with the 1.01 H VVS1, as the table/main facet does seem smaller than most. I chatted with one of their reps and they said that the table and depth of the diamond were very well suited to light performance nonetheless, so that's part of the reason why I considered it (I don't have an excellent understanding of table and depth, so I trusted the rep on that one).

I will probably end up going with:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-1047705
but may wait for the ASET image to come back to make sure I'm not missing anything.

The rep I talked to said I can add two other diamonds (only the ones in their NY office) to the ASET request , so I think I may take a closer look at the following two, just to compare:

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/0.95-carat-f-color-vs2-clarity-sku-2219242
which seems to sparkle quite nicely, despite having a very thick girdle, which can make it show a little smaller than its carat weight. I've heard that when the girdle gets too thick, it can start to disrupt the light return, but I'm not really seeing that here. Is there something I'm missing?

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2071756
This one seems very nice, except that when it's rotating in the video, I feel like the area of light return doesn't quite move down towards the rounded edges as well as the first one. Is this what manifests as the bowtie effect?
Whoops, this one apparently not in the NYC office, so the rep I talked to suggested this one: jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2209314

I notice the same phenomenon in these two:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.04-carat-g-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-2133957
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-d-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2074898


I really appreciate all of your explanations. I know you've probably already looked at most of these and thought they weren't up to snuff, but it's really helpful to hear how you see each diamond.
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
The aset on this one will probably have black blothes because that's what it looks like when you stop the stone straight on. This is
part of a bow-tie.
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/0.95-carat-f-color-vs2-clarity-sku-2219242

So this stone doesnt have what we usually refer to as a bow-tie but you are correct in that the area of nice light return
does not stretch out towards the rounded ends as well as the other stones you are looking at.
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2071756

These 2 DO have dark bow-ties that you usually want to stay away from.
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.04-carat-g-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-2133957
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-d-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2074898
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
tyty333|1478907603|4097252 said:
The aset on this one will probably have black blothes because that's what it looks like when you stop the stone straight on. This is
part of a bow-tie.
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/0.95-carat-f-color-vs2-clarity-sku-2219242

So this stone doesnt have what we usually refer to as a bow-tie but you are correct in that the area of nice light return
does not stretch out towards the rounded ends as well as the other stones you are looking at.
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-h-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2071756

These 2 DO have dark bow-ties that you usually want to stay away from.
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.04-carat-g-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-2133957
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/oval-cut/1.01-carat-d-color-vs1-clarity-sku-2074898
Hey, thanks again for all your help! Im eagerly awaiting the ASET images but I feel infinitely more confident and hopeful now that Ive gotten some expert guidance. Im spending the weekend with my girl, so im going to go dark the next two days. I'll update when the ASET images come in, and thank you again!
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
Sounds good...must go covert...

You have picked up the concepts of a nice oval pretty
quickly. Remember, asets are only 1 static image straight on. I put more emphasis on the videos and how well the facets light up as the stone turns.

But, post the asets when you get them.
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
tyty333|1479044744|4097776 said:
Sounds good...must go covert...

You have picked up the concepts of a nice oval pretty
quickly. Remember, asets are only 1 static image straight on. I put more emphasis on the videos and how well the facets light up as the stone turns.

But, post the asets when you get them.
2219242aset-2.jpg
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
So im sneaking away to post from the bathroom. It looks like 1047705 has a small bowtie with some obstruction, but pretty good light performance otherwise.

2209314 has more of a bowtie and worse light return overall, so i think 1047705 is still a pretty clear winner.

GOG says they would be able to send me additional imaging on their 2 one carat vs1s, so theyre hoping that JA will extend my hold on the above two one more day so that I can evaluate all 3 and make a decision. If JA says they wont, i may just grab 1047705 tomorrow before noon when the hold expires. Not sure if you think the GOG ones would even be worth waiting for, though I guess its pretty hard to say without seeing a video or additional imaging. The static images look pretty good on both though!
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
I still think 1047705 is still you best shot. Like I said, the aset is only 1 static view but doesnt really tell us what happens as the
stone moves.


2219242 has a nice wide area of good light return but I wouldnt want to see the obstruction going through the center.

With respect to GOG...can they do a video for you? I'm not sure which 2 stones you are looking at...can you link them for me?
A video of them together in one video would be helpful so you could compare them side by side and pick out the best performing
stone...then just have to compare it to the one/ones you are looking at at JA.

Have you compare the size/lengths of the JA stones compared to the GOG?
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
tyty333|1479130087|4098155 said:
I still think 1047705 is still you best shot. Like I said, the aset is only 1 static view but doesnt really tell us what happens as the
stone moves.


2219242 has a nice wide area of good light return but I wouldnt want to see the obstruction going through the center.

With respect to GOG...can they do a video for you? I'm not sure which 2 stones you are looking at...can you link them for me?
A video of them together in one video would be helpful so you could compare them side by side and pick out the best performing
stone...then just have to compare it to the one/ones you are looking at at JA.

Have you compare the size/lengths of the JA stones compared to the GOG?
Yeah, I agree 1047705 still looks the best. I've heard that ovals never do that well in ASET, and there is a lot of variation between ASET setups, but there seems to be a fair bit of light leakage towards the rounded ends compared to other oval ASETs I've seen from browsing around. Am I seeing that right and/or is it enough that I should be somewhat concerned about?

The GOG ones I am looking at are:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond-search/1.01-Oval--GIA-H-VS1-diamond-stock-OV22867-cert-7211083069
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond-search/1.01-Oval--GIA-H-VS1-diamond-stock-OV22868-cert-5213644354

The ratios and stats seem quite comparable. I spoke with David, who said he would try to get video and ASET images to my by tomorrow. JA said they weren't sure if they could extend the hold on 1047705 to Tuesday but that they would ask.

Any thoughts? Thanks, again
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
I think of all the JA ones we had narrowed it down to, i preferred 1047705 to 2136531 because it didnt have any noticeable (to me) inclusions in the table area, albeit the 213 only had a very minor one. As a result, I think i kind of mentally locked on to 1047705. I did request an ASET on 2136531 but was told I could only get ASETs on diamonds in their NY office whereas that particular diamond was in another location (the india office, i think?)

Of all the JA ones I was truly interested in only 1047705 was in the NY office, but I chose a few others from the NY office so I would have some images to compare.

I havent ruled out 2136531, but not sure Im going to be able to get an ASET on it. I dont know if its reasonable to toss out 1047705 on the basis of the ASET image, but if it looks like its not going to be a great performer, I'm ready to go back to the drawing board to look at some others
 

Tiber55

Rough_Rock
Joined
Sep 12, 2016
Messages
15
Just going to share my personal experience.

I spent the last two months with my girlfriend looking for the perfect oval.

She wanted one with 1.45 ratio d-f vs2+ over 1ct, budget for stone was 6.5k.

We selected two stones from JA, both had asets, both were reasonably close to what is listed on the internet as good/ideal oval asets, and both stones were middle of the pack to poor performers in our mind.

We ended up getting a stone from GoG, its wonderful, within our budget (just) and is probably the best oval we have seen in our specs.

From personal experience the ability of GoG to select Ovals is a great resource and I would suggest availing yourself of it.

They can create videos of the ovals they get in in different lighting, and under all angles. Along with any and all imaging you would want done.

This last weekend we brought the stone to the jeweler we decided on to set it and his comment was that he could go through 50 stones, and not find one that performs as well.

We are extremely pleased with the end result even if it used our entire budget to get there.
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
Tiber55|1479155359|4098372 said:
Just going to share my personal experience.

I spent the last two months with my girlfriend looking for the perfect oval.

She wanted one with 1.45 ratio d-f vs2+ over 1ct, budget for stone was 6.5k.

We selected two stones from JA, both had asets, both were reasonably close to what is listed on the internet as good/ideal oval asets, and both stones were middle of the pack to poor performers in our mind.

We ended up getting a stone from GoG, its wonderful, within our budget (just) and is probably the best oval we have seen in our specs.

From personal experience the ability of GoG to select Ovals is a great resource and I would suggest availing yourself of it.

They can create videos of the ovals they get in in different lighting, and under all angles. Along with any and all imaging you would want done.

This last weekend we brought the stone to the jeweler we decided on to set it and his comment was that he could go through 50 stones, and not find one that performs as well.

We are extremely pleased with the end result even if it used our entire budget to get there.
Tiber55;
Thank you for sharing your experience. I have heard great things about GOG, and am excited to see what they can find. Hopefully they can deliver some good news on Tuesday. I was honestly leaning towards JA because of their generous return policy and ease of getting the stone set but, if I can get a much better diamond for a comparable price, I am willing to put in a little bit of extra work. Did you consider having your oval set by GOG and/or was there a particular reason you decided to have your own jeweler set the stone?
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
22,691
RayorJ|1479145897|4098268 said:
I think of all the JA ones we had narrowed it down to, i preferred 1047705 to 2136531 because it didnt have any noticeable (to me) inclusions in the table area, albeit the 213 only had a very minor one. As a result, I think i kind of mentally locked on to 1047705. I did request an ASET on 2136531 but was told I could only get ASETs on diamonds in their NY office whereas that particular diamond was in another location (the india office, i think?) Gosh, I can barely even seen that inclusion
blown up. I dont think it will be visible and I wouldnt have knocked it out of the running for that.


Of all the JA ones I was truly interested in only 1047705 was in the NY office, but I chose a few others from the NY office so I would have some images to compare.

I havent ruled out 2136531, but not sure Im going to be able to get an ASET on it. I dont know if its reasonable to toss out 1047705 on the basis of the ASET image, but if it looks like its not going to be a great performer, I'm ready to go back to the drawing board to look at some others
No, dont toss out 1047705 due to the aset...like I said...1 static view. I prefer the 2136531 because it has some nice facets at
the rounded ends. I guess its personal preference. 1047705 is very sparkly through the center.
 

Tiber55

Rough_Rock
Joined
Sep 12, 2016
Messages
15
The reason why we didn't go with GoG for the setting was because we wanted to have one custom made by David Klass.

I for sure wouldn't hesitate to have the entire ring made by GoG we just felt that having it made locally to us would allow us to have more input and get exactly what we were looking for easier than working with GoG in New York.
 

RayorJ

Rough_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
22
tyty333|1479161936|4098467 said:
RayorJ|1479145897|4098268 said:
I think of all the JA ones we had narrowed it down to, i preferred 1047705 to 2136531 because it didnt have any noticeable (to me) inclusions in the table area, albeit the 213 only had a very minor one. As a result, I think i kind of mentally locked on to 1047705. I did request an ASET on 2136531 but was told I could only get ASETs on diamonds in their NY office whereas that particular diamond was in another location (the india office, i think?) Gosh, I can barely even seen that inclusion
blown up. I dont think it will be visible and I wouldnt have knocked it out of the running for that.


Of all the JA ones I was truly interested in only 1047705 was in the NY office, but I chose a few others from the NY office so I would have some images to compare.

I havent ruled out 2136531, but not sure Im going to be able to get an ASET on it. I dont know if its reasonable to toss out 1047705 on the basis of the ASET image, but if it looks like its not going to be a great performer, I'm ready to go back to the drawing board to look at some others
No, dont toss out 1047705 due to the aset...like I said...1 static view. I prefer the 2136531 because it has some nice facets at
the rounded ends. I guess its personal preference. 1047705 is very sparkly through the center.
tyty333, I think you're right. Back when I started this topic, the only thing I was really able to do was notice inclusions and I think, for that reason, I gave inclusions an inordinate amount of weight in forming my opinions on a stone. Now that I feel like I've learned how to see facet patterns and light return better (thanks to you!), I can definitely appreciate what you're saying about the facets on the rounded ends of 2136531. Also, it seems like the areas of good light return extend out towards the rounded edges just a little bit better than 1047705, which seems to ease the appearance of the bowtie -- but I may just be seeing things that aren't there. It makes sense to me that a wider area of evenly distributed light return is probably better than a narrower area of more intense light return for "everyday shine." The JA service people I talk with keep noting that having a lower table percentage than depth percentage will help boost light performance, which I don't completely understand, but I couldn't help but notice that the table and depth percentages for 2136531 are roughly equal. Would that make a significant difference?

I'll see what GOG sends me tomorrow and, unless there's something that really knocks my socks off, I'll probably end up getting one of the JA ones you've suggested.

Tiber55, thanks again for sharing! I sent GOG a pic of the setting type I'm going for (see attached, but she would prefer white gold/platinum), so hopefully I can have a ring in the works by the end of the week!

_6278.jpeg
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    November’s Jewels Of The Weeks
    November’s Jewels Of The Weeks
    Upgrade to Five-Stone
    Upgrade to Five-Stone
    Elizabeth Taylor's Diamond Heart
    Elizabeth Taylor's Diamond Heart

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.

New posts

Top