Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Help! I am about to pull the trigger on WF!

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
R

robtali

Rough_Rock
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
35
Please help, I am really nervous. I think I have settled on the diamond below, but don''t want to second guess. I think I can get something about 10 to 15 points bigger for the same $$, but none of the other websites give the sarin reports to verify the cut... it''s an expert selection....
Do you think I should get something slightly bigger, or pull the trigger on this one??? I don''t wanna screw this up!!!

http://www.whiteflash.com/round/Round-cut-diamond-442494.htm#
 
It''s up to you if you want to get this one or hold off for another one to come along... this one looks pretty nice though. Have you called to see if it is totally eye clean?
 
I called, but they took my # and said they will call back. Do you think an extra 15 point would make a noticeable difference?
 
That stone looks a little deep to me, which means that it probably will look smaller for its carat weight. I would probably pass, but hopefully someone with more experience will chime in...
 
Is it the pavillion angle that you look at for the depth, i.e. greater angle would equal more length on the pavillion which eats up some of the weight? If not, can you tell me how I would know?
Thanks!
 
i think that stone looks nice, but...this one is bigger!!
3.gif
 
After doing a quick search with the Search By Cut I do not see any options that are 10 points bigger under 2k.
What other stones are you looking at?
What is your price range?
What color range?
Clarity range?
Does the budget include the setting?
 
The link didn''t work belle.
2.gif
 
I have been looking at h through j, vs2 through si1, and up to about $2k for just the stone. I don''t know much, I just want a stone that looks nice, no inclusions to the naked eye, looks good in white gold, and other than that, as big as possible! Round....
 
I was referring to the total depth...63.4%...

But it really does depend on what your targets are, like Matatora asked...

Belle, I can''t get that link to work, can anyone else?
 
What should my "target depth" be?

For the link, when it brings up the new browser window, go to the address bar and delete the extra "http//", then it will work....
 
.733 G SI2 1-EX
ex-ex-ex-vg 0 60.5% 56.3% 34.9° 40.7° thn-med f pt ex ex neg 5.84-5.87x3.55 AGS $1999

that''s the info from the cut quality search. sweeeeeeeet!
18.gif
 
I have to say I don't really love this stone...

The 63% depth really does not do it for me as well with the small table, maybe it will be a very fiery stone but you are surely losing diameter in that depth and also that slightly thick to thick girdle is not my cup of tea either.

It will definitely be better looking than something with the same specs at the maul, look at those arrows (couldn't view the IS for some reason)...but for $2k you could do better IMO...a .72ct stone with a smaller depth would be more like a 5.9mm diameter so this one is losing some serious points for visuals in my opinion.

I know WF had a sweet looking .94c K SI1 that was in ES for around $2500 PS price...I have to say if I was spending $2k on a stone for an e-ring, I would drop to a K (if you were already looking down to J then I would go to K because I don't think it will visually be a huge difference in color but it would in size!!), and get that stone. I love that stone!!
 
I personally wouldn''t want total depth to be over 62% or so, for the exact reasons Mara just stated.
 
Bob from WF called back, we discussed a few stones, and there is a hold on the one below for me. I am planning on completing the transaction on Monday. Please tell me if I should ask to switch this with one of the ones you listed, al.... In looking at the zooms and ISs, it seems the one he found for me is going to be the most eye-clean, but please let me know if I am missing something. Thanks again for everyone''s help!
BTW, Zales in my area is having an on-site setting show on the 21st, where I can find a setting, and they will set the stone while I wait, same day. Any thoughts on that would help, too! And, of course, I will post pics when complete. Then I will have to come back after Feb 26th (when I will pop the ?) and post pics of it on the hand that I love.......
 
so...can we see the stone you have on hold?
20.gif
 
That''s great!! Can''t wait to see it.
1.gif
 

Date: 1/6/2006 3:39:51 PM
Author: robtali

Please tell me if I should ask to switch this with one of the ones you listed, al.... In looking at the zooms and ISs, it seems the one he found for me is going to be the most eye-clean, but please let me know if I am missing something. Thanks again for everyone''s help!
Click to expand...
Rob, it''s hard to use zooms and IS images to determine whether or not a stone will be eyeclean. If anything, those types of photos often make a diamond look WORSE than it would in person!

When I visited Whiteflash, we saw zooms for a diamond that looked positively HORRIBLE on the computer monitor. When we saw the actually diamond, we couldn''t believe it was the same diamond! In person, the diamond looked incredibly clean. Relying on the "zoomed" pics in that instance would have been terribly misleading.

Your best bet is to ask them to compare all 3 stones and tell you which they think is the best pick.....because they can see them. If the J or the F are eyeclean, I''d certainly choose one of them over the H. That H is just too deep for my liking.
 
er i don''t see a link for the stone on hold? Rob can you clarify?
 
Sorry about that, didn''t realize I forgot the link! Thanks, Al, that does make sense. If you have time, check out this one and see if you think it would be comparable to the ones you listed.
BTW, in talking with Bob from WF, he did say this was the most eye-clean of the bunch, he just referred me to the IS and zoom to show me where the inclusions were. The ones on this stone were pretty far to one side, based on the AGS report, and I think it was listed as a cloud? Maybe you can verify that for me as well.....

Thank you all!

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_Details.aspx?itemcode=AGS-6544305
 
Also, the website listed it as J, but the ags report said it was I!!! Ssshhhhh!!!
 
i think that stone looks like a great deal! but.. apparently the experts think otherwise.. Listen to them.. not me:)
 
A definite good deal! And an "I", eh? I''m pretty partial to "I"s myself.
9.gif
Congratulations, Rob!
 
I really like the I/J stone that you put on hold!! Much better IMO than the iffy H SI stone. Good luck with everything!
 
Thank you all so much for your feedback. It''s nice to know that there is a place like this where people with very little knowledge about diamonds (like me ;) ) have a place to come to tap the minds of the experts! It''s wonderful that you all take the time to help those who need it, and I will feel much better about my purchase knowing that I learned so much here!
 
Congrats! I definitely like that stone better! What kind of setting were you thinking about?
 
Not absolutely sure yet, but I have considered the ones in the pics below. She is fairly conservative, traditional, definitely wants white gold. I want the 3/4 c to look as big as possible, too.... Thought about a solitare because we have talked in the past about a wrap with our birthstones on the sides (amethyst and aquamarine), but don''t know yet. I''m thinking fairly simple, and then if she wants more we will go shopping later. I just need something nice for the presentation at the end of Feb!!!!

robtalisetting.jpg
 
And this one...

robtali2.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top