shape
carat
color
clarity

HELP me pick my $10,000 diamond!

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by ClemsonPurdue, Jul 30, 2018.

  1. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 30, 2018
    I started this process so sure I was buying a diamond at Shane Co. and have since become a believer in there being significant cost savings and much more selection by purchasing online. Now that I've convinced myself to buy online, done my homework and research, and spent hours looking at diamonds online, I've narrowed my search. I have a $10,000 budget and want as big surface area as possible that is eye-clean and has an amazing cut. Which of these is the best value? Any other suggestions?

    GIA, Excellent, 1.55 carat (7.50 x 7.43), color G, SI2 - $9,740
    https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...g-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-5383789

    GIA, Excellent, 1.71 carat (7.78 x 7.73), color H, SI2 - $9,730
    https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...h-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-5243261

    IGI, Excellent, 1.58 carat (7.43 x 7.49), color H, VS2 - $9,890
    https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...h-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-5414040

    GIA, Excellent, 1.60 carat (7.51 x 7.48), color H, SI2 - $9,712
    https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab
     
    


    


  2. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 30, 2018
    Or maybe I consider Whiteflash and go slightly smaller? Too many things to consider and tons of choices!!!
     
  3. ringo865
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,177
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    by ringo865 » Jul 30, 2018
    Whiteflash has a great upgrade policy so you could incrementally increase size and still have consistently awesome cut quality.
     
  4. ZestfullyBling
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,662
    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    


    


  5. ZestfullyBling
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,662
    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
  6. farrahlyn
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,170
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2015
    by farrahlyn » Jul 31, 2018
    my comments:

    1.55 - just don't like the proportions on this, the large table and low crown... eh
    1.71 - this is a 60/60 type stone and the angles *should* work pretty well but it falls flat for me in the picture. i also wouldn't buy an SI2 with the comment of "additional clouds not shown"
    1.58 - Pass, this is an IGI graded stone and you could be looking at a stone that would be graded 1-3 colors lower with GIA or AGS.
    1.60 - this would be my pick of the bunch if i had to choose although the clarity bugs me and wouldn't buy it for myself.

    a few other options:

    first and foremost, i would absolutely inquire about this WF ACA: (1.637 I SI2) it is a super ideal stone, cut very precisely and look at the SIZE!!! It says to inquire as to whether or not is is eye clean. I'd ask for a video for this and the J i've listed below it. The color in the J may not bug you. (worth it to add that WF has a great upgrade option if that ever comes up, you just have to purchase $1 over the amount of the original stone)
    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-260694.htm (1.637 I SI2)
    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3997098.htm (1.535 J VS2)

    other options:

    1.58 H SI1
    https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab would want to make sure the Strong Blue fluoro isn't causing any issues as well as follow up on the clouds comment

    1.51 I VS1
    https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab again, just make sure the fluoro isn't causing any haziness

    1.50 G SI1
    https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab again check that the fluoro isn't causing a negative effect.

    1.42 I VVS2
    https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab :love:

    1.54 I VS1
    https://www.adiamor.com/Diamonds/1.54-ct-I-VS1-Affinity-Cut-Round-Diamond/D41982452 :love:

    1.51 H VS2
    https://www.adiamor.com/Diamonds/1.51-ct-H-VS2-Affinity-Cut-Round-Diamond/D41907868

    1.41 H VS2
    https://www.b2cjewels.com/dd/11621198/Round-diamond-H-color-VS2-clarity
     
    lovedogs likes this.
  7. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,166
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jul 31, 2018
    Agree with @farrahlyn. The first 3 are blah for me. The last one I like the angles a lot but also concerned about the clarity. It may be worth a call to BN and have them verify the severity of the inclusions and at what distance it becomes "eye clean".

    While no industry standard definition for eye clean currently exists, many vendors utilize a definition similar to this:

    No inclusions visible looking at the top of the diamond from 10" away with 20/20 vision.​

    Obviously, you can adjust those parameters up or down, depending on your own sensitivity. I am rather particular and adjusted my version of eye clean to: No inclusions visible from 6" away looking at the top or sides with 20/20 vision.


    Love the 1.637! While I would prefer the clarity to be a little better, the fact you are looking at SI2's from virtual inventory tells me your vision isn't super sensitive or you're just not aware that SI2's can have visible inclusions to the naked eye.

    Nice thing about these WF stones:
    • Both are ACA super ideal, meaning it has AGS certified ideal cut, polish and symmetry
    • Proven performers as evidenced by ASET & Idealscope images
    • Near perfect symmetry as evidenced by H&A images
    • Super ideals are known for facing up bigger & whiter because of their superb cut
    • Complete transparency with all data needed to make a decision
    • Superb customer satisfication
    • Excellent return policy and trade-in policy
    • ACA stones are in-house and vetted, and not part of a "virtual inventory"
    • WF employs knowledgeable gemologist that can pull the stones and analyze while speaking to you to confirm and alleviate any issues you may have regarding color, clarity, cut, etc. They can take pictures, send additional videos, etc. Basically they bend over backwards to ensure you get the "warm fuzzies" when buying.
    The above in mind, if I was going to gamble on an I SI2, then WF is where I'd choose to gamble. You have the most data and access to those gemologists to really assess and understand what you are getting into. You will be hard pressed to find that same level of service with other "value vendors".

    FYI, I know you are trying to maximize your size. I was unclear if you are trying to do this through a large table, or through actual length (L) and width (W) dimensions. Choosing by LxW dimensions can be much smarter than carat weight as some of the weight is lost in the depth (D) portion. Below is a formula to calculate carat weight for round diamonds:

    L x W x D x 0.061 = carat weight

    Additionally I might note it takes about 0.20mm of difference for a normal human eye to see any visible difference in size. So you can't probably tell the difference between a 7.00 x 7.00mm stone against a 7.10 x 7.10mm stone but you will likely see a small difference at 7.20 x 7.20mm.

    FYI, 0.20mm is equal to about 1/128th of an inch! This is tiny. My point is that when compared SIDE BY SIDE, you can see a difference; however, IMO, it is not a MEMORABLE enough difference that you would walk away and go "wow, that 7.20mm stone is so much larger than the 7.00mm one". Most likely, unless compared side by side, you wouldn't even know they weren't the same.

    That said, when you start narrowing this list down further, there is a website www.diamdb.com that you can visit and enter ACTUAL dimensions of each stone you are looking at. You can also define the width of the e-ring band and the finger ring size to get a visual of how the stone will look with YOUR specific criteria. Nice thing is you can enter two at once so you can compare side by side how they are different.

    Here are some size comparisons of the WF 1.535 (7.42 x 7.46mm) and WF 1.637 (7.54 x 7.56mm) stones. There is only about 0.12mm difference.

    Capture.PNG

    Here is a size comparison of the BN 1.42 I VVS2 (7.18 x 7.20mm) and the larger 1.637 (7.54 x 7.56mm) WF stone. Now we are seeing about 0.36mm difference and it's becoming a little more visible to the naked eye, although IMO it's still not a MEMORABLE jaw dropping experience.

    Capture2.PNG


    Good size, and the angles look pretty good for the table sizes. However, the first is near a 60/60 diamond and the second one is a 60/60 diamond.

    It is important you realize these are 60/60 style diamonds! While many people love them, there are also many that do not. They tend to show more white light than fire/sparkle. It really is a preference thing. Here is a more in-depth article about them.

    https://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/60-60-diamonds-1503.htm

    Also, here is a recent thread about someone that bought one similar to the 59/60 like the first B2C stone linked:

    https://www.pricescope.com/communit...am-i-getting-stressed-out-for-nothing.242489/
     
  8. farrahlyn
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,170
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2015
    by farrahlyn » Jul 31, 2018
    @sledge great post above. And you bring up a great point about clarity and inclusions. So i thought i'd explain to the OP why i'm ok with the WF SI2 stone but not ok with the BN SI2 stone.

    This is the clarity plot for the BN 1.60 H SI2 stone. notice that in addition to the twinning wisps plotted, under comments it mentions ADDITIONAL twinning wisps, clouds, pinpoints and graining not shown on the plot. already i'm not crazy about twinning wisps on the table and here there are 4 plotted that go across the table. plus the mention of additional, i would be concerned that everything that is going on there on the table would imede light performance and make the appear stone dull.
    BN 1.60 H SI2.JPG

    Now, this is the clarity plot for the WF 1.637 I SI2 stone. Yes, there are some inclusions on the table but they appear to be white and not dark inclusions. TBH it would probably be eye clean enough for me, although for some, it will not. There are also no other comments on clarity noted. Already viewing the photo and video, the stone appears clearer and more crisp than the BN one.
    WF 1.637  I SI2.JPG

    Now, would those differences in clarity be a vast difference? Possibly. The BN stone may be one that you need to see in person to determine whether or not the clarity issues are inhibiting light return in any drastic way. If you are interested in pursuing the 1.60ct H SI2 stone, i'd suggest giving IDJewelry a call to see if they can get this stone in and take a look at it for you. BN is going to more than likely give you a canned answer on the clarity.
     
    bmfang and sledge like this.
  9. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 31, 2018
    So here is the setting I've decided on. I love that it is a little different than the typical cathedral and pave bands. It is also flattering on my bigger fingers. It is a substantial piece, 1.62 carat in the setting and lots of white gold. Very thick band. In the store I've found that a 1.3 carat is just too small and looks out of proportion to the setting. I was hoping to find at least 7.5 x 7.5 mm. With all the side stones, I also found that the GIA color H seemed to "match" the best. Those were just my takeaways from staring at a few diamonds in the setting in the store.

    IMG_3879.jpg

    As far as proportions, I'm really not familiar with how to look at a diagram and tell what the light reflection will be like. My only objective has been to maximize surface area, but I don't want to hinder performance by going out of proportion. @sledge - I have been looking a lot at the surface area diameter, and your explanation was VERY helpful!

    I called Whiteflash, and they are going to get back with me on some options. I'm concerned it will be stretching it on budget to even get a 1.45 carat, and I'm concerned I won't be happy on size. (Again, because of how it will look in the setting.) They did say they've had that 1.637 in stock for awhile which led them to believe that it is probably not eye clean.

    Ideally, I'd like 1.6 carat (around 7.5 mm), GIA excellent cut, color H, eye clean SI1.

    In looking at the above suggestions, I'm concerned the B2CJewels are not eye clean, though they do offer size. :love: The HPDiamonds are too small for what I am looking for. @ZestfullyBling

    I do really like this one from @farrahlyn:
    1.58 H SI1 - Exact specs that I am looking for.
    https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-de...AMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails&action=newTab

    Questions:
    - Do you think I should try to stick to H given what I've stated about my setting? Is there any concern with my setting not matching my diamond? I don't want to go to crazy with the cut of my center stone to make my side diamonds look cloudy.
    - Should I stick with this setting even though it is $5,200 and Shane Co. will charge additional $500 to set diamond? Anything similar online or should I try do something custom with same sort of look?
    - I really wanted eyeclean SI because I feel like it maximizes my budget.
     
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2018
  10. HDer
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    591
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2017
    by HDer » Jul 31, 2018
    The setting not matching your diamond shouldn't be a big concern. Once set 1 or 2 color grades are very hard to tell apart even for professionals. And melee will always return more white light and less fire than the main diamond.
     
    msop04, gm89uk and ClemsonPurdue like this.
    


    


  11. farrahlyn
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,170
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2015
    by farrahlyn » Jul 31, 2018
    THe Setting.... are you super set on it? i mean, there are settings well within that price range that are much, MUCH better made that will also provide the finger coverage you want. what is your ring size? and what about this setting besides the finger coverage is so appealing?
     
    LLJsmom and lovedogs like this.
  12. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 31, 2018
    No, I'm not set on it. I just went to four jewelry stores and it was the only setting I found that I loved. I couldn't find anything similar to it when I looked online which bummed me out. I like the round with the baguettes alternating. It really makes the rounds pop when they are separated by the baguettes. I like how the small diamonds are angled slightly so that you see the sparkle in the profile view (kind of like your ring picture). I like it being one piece and symmetrical (prefer this to wedding band). I like that it is thick all around and in the back. I like the cathedral and channel setting. The biggest thing is that by it splitting on either side of the center stone, it seemed to frame the diamond and lengthen my finger. Sometimes I feel like the center stone gets lost in a big setting when it blends in making it look like just a sparkly band from a distance. This one seemed to frame the diamond. I liked that it was 1.62 carat weight with larger diamonds.

    What I don't like is that it's $5,200+tax, and I have to pay another $500 to have the diamond set. It really cuts into my $15,000 budget. Ignore my fingernails which desperately need done... I wear a size 7.5 to 8 ring.

    @farrahlyn - You're a lifesaver cause I feel more confused than ever on what to buy and where! lol!

    IMG_3891.jpg IMG_3887.jpg IMG_3885.jpg
     
  13. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 31, 2018
    Another curveball is that I really like the oval shape. More surface area. But is round the "safer" more traditional approach. I'm also nervous to try to find a great oval since cut isn't a criteria. Also, I wouldn't know where to even start on the setting. I should mention... No halos!
     
  14. farrahlyn
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,170
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2015
    by farrahlyn » Jul 31, 2018
    i like your photos of it so much more than the stock photo but i still think the price is way too much and it could be better executed. I'm SO SORRY if i confused you! :doh:

    Ok, so your intent is NOT to wear a wedding band. (are you positive? Have you tried on settings WITH different size bands? I love a thicker wedding band with a pave or solitaire setting)
    You like a thick band but NOT a lot of thickness under the stone itself.
    You like the alternating shapes
    You like the tilted, smaller pave which makes a pretty profile view.

    Would you consider a custom setting? @sledge just went through this, his fiance had found a setting at Jared that she loved and he took photos to David Klass for inspiration. the finished product is STUNNING. see here for his journey: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/dk-bgd-custom-setting-the-home-stretch.240843/

    BUT, you'd want to be darn sure this was THE SETTING before going custom. Can you go try on some more just to get a feel for what you really, really want? As far as an oval.. if you want an oval, the more experienced folks here can definitely help you find a nice one. Precision cut ovals right here:
    https://august-vintage-inc.myshopify.com/collections/opulence

    Anyway, suss out what you REALLY want and we can go from there!
     
    bmfang, lovedogs and sledge like this.
  15. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 31, 2018
    I would absolutely consider custom. If I could something similar that is custom for the same price or even a little cheaper, I would be thrilled.

    I really like the one piece because of it's uniqueness. I considered a pave ring with matching wedding band, but feel like I see that on so many people. Everything you said is spot on. I like the thick band, the alternating shapes, and the tilted pave. I also like how the diamonds go from larger to smaller on the side. And I like how you see a lot of white gold to offset the three rows of diamond in the channel setting. I also like how the setting curves around the diamond. Basically I like everything about it, and would be ready to proceed forward with having something custom made that is similar. By better executed, what would you change about it? My top goals are something substantial, flashy, and unique I suppose.

    Who is David Klass? Would I need to pick my diamond first, and then have that company design the setting? I was just nervous to use someone like Blue Nile or James Allen for the setting, but maybe they would do ok?

    Probably better to stick with round for this setting for sure. I like an oval in a halo, but I'm not sure how else to have it done and look good. @farrahlyn
     
    


    


  16. farrahlyn
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,170
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2015
    by farrahlyn » Jul 31, 2018
    I'm not into matchy matchy either. i wish i could find the picture but one of my favorite settings hwere is a very simple, 2mm solitaire paired with a really thick wedding band, it is a bold statement and it is just beautiful.

    Definitely do not go to JA or BN for something custom. David Klass would be where i'd start. His email is [email protected], websited: https://www.davidklassjewelry.com/ Get a quote and then we can see about how much we have to play with for the stone. You can purchase your stone and have it sent directly to DK to have it set. check out some of his work here:
    https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/show-us-your-david-klass-bling.196654/page-20
    and be sure to look up his Instagram page!

    @rockysalamander is incredible with CAD's, too as are several other regulars here.
     
    Matthews1127 likes this.
  17. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 31, 2018
    I just emailed David Klass, so we'll see what he says. :twirl:
     
    Matthews1127 and lovedogs like this.
  18. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,166
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Jul 31, 2018
    If you're open to custom settings, then definitely check out DK as @farrahlyn suggested. Picking a diamond for my girl was easy. The setting just about made me pull my hair out, along with several people here including @farrahlyn and @rockysalamander, lol.

    For me, custom was absolutely the right choice. I couldn't be happier with the DK and BGD combo. DK came in under the Jared's price. I got better quality and highly refined piece that was custom modified to fit this particular diamond perfectly.

    Also, while many may consider it a small detail, I originally wanted platinum for my girl. That was a hefty upcharge with almost everyone. With DK, it was only a $200 premium. However, my girl wanted the "shiny" of WG and as I talked more with DK I learned his white gold (WG) is actually a WG/palladium alloy that isn't the typical cheap yellow gold (YG) with rhodium plating that you have to keep re-plating and re-plating. This WG/palladium alloy is truly white and never needs re-plated. Plus that is the metal choice he recommended for structural reasons of this particular ring design.

    Keep in mind, I'm a guy and had never even dreamed about doing this. The PS community here really kicked in and helped me review CAD's, made suggestions of things to change/modify, etc. In the beginning I wasn't sure exactly why they kept saying things looked clunky, etc. As we went through the design process I saw things transform and began to understand. The final product was inspired by the original but definitely transformed in a way that exceeded my own expectations. I was truly amazed at how all those little things had made so much difference in the elegance and pure sexiness of it all. Not to mention just knowing (and now seeing) the quality difference, I couldn't imagine it any other way.

    The downside is, if my girl ever wants to upgrade I'm probably stuck doing custom as I know what's possible and how well it can be executed.

    I'd encourage you to read my journey that @farrahlyn linked to earlier. If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask and I will help you the best I can.

    FYI, I didn't spend anywhere close to $5k on mine. ;)2

    And now for some bling....








     
  19. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 31, 2018
    Wow! That is incredibly beautiful. I love the combination of the pave with the channel. That’s unique. I feel like I see the same ring over and over in stores, which is why I was drawn to the one I was because of it being different. Yours also has that special/different look to it. I do like the idea of the ring being custom created for the diamond. Maybe the one I picked is too chunky? It’s just very difficult to know what I want and where to start. Maybe I should go to Jared and Kay just to hone in on the style I want. Did you pick out the diamond first and then move on to the setting? @sledge

    Any suggestions on similar settings to what I picked that maybe would be better? @farrahlyn
     
    Matthews1127, sledge and lovedogs like this.
  20. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Jul 31, 2018
    @rockysalamander In reading through your advice to Sledge on the design of his custom setting, you had so many great ideas! What’s your thoughts on the Shane Co setting? Picture and info a couple posts above.
     
    sledge likes this.
  21. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
  22. LLJsmom
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    8,837
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    by LLJsmom » Jul 31, 2018
    Ok I think ifnyou are going with Whiteflash you have the diamond squared away. But please, please take lots of time with the setting. The first one you posted shows features you like. BUT, what you don’t know is whether you will like that ON YOUR HAND in the long run. Here are the issues I see, which you may not notice until you have worn the ring for a while.

    1. Given the size of your stone, there is a likelihood that your diamond may disappear in your setting. Do you want a wall of bling across your finger look or do you want to be able to definitively see the round outline of your center stone more accentuated?
    2. You mentioned the side view. The head you picked is a standard peg head. The transition from band to ring is rather abrupt and there is a big disconnect between the band and the head. Do you want a design that has more flow from the band to the center stone? The claws and the prongs are bulky and square. Is that the look you want? It’s totally ok if it is but just pointing out that there are other options if you prefer.

    These are all things you should consider when designing your ring. Spend lots of time looking at various styles. Check out the following vendors’ IG accounts.

    David Klass
    Victor Canera (since you are considering a $5k setting, look at his channel set with graduated stones)
    Steven Kirsch website. Don’t think he posts much on IG.

    https://www.victorcanera.com/rings/engagement/the-sophia-french-cut-solitaire-with-cac

    These side stones are French cuts and the sparkle differently from an MRB. See how the sides sweep up to meet the head? And the claws are sharp and delicate and do not take away from the center stone?
    A0B840C8-4AEB-4E98-AD2B-56CF65E1E738.png B69925DE-C73A-47C6-82E4-59E7A4DCD1F0.png
     
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2018
  23. Kaycee2018
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    292
    Joined:
    May 14, 2018
    by Kaycee2018 » Aug 1, 2018
    I let the experts chime in on the proportions, but my recent upgrade was purchased from Adiamor (diamond and simple setting, which they slightly modified per my request) and the transaction was smooth and I am very pleased with the ring. Their upgrade policy is not as generous as some others, but is still decent. I would have no hesitation in purchasing from them again or recommending them. GL!
     
  24. rockysalamander
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,721
    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    by rockysalamander » Aug 1, 2018
    For me, the setting you posted looks very chunky and less unique. I think I can see your direction, but I would personally prefer the french cut suggested by @LLJsmom mom. If you still like the combo of rounds and baguettes, I still prefer the profile and shape of the VC setting. Another option for a wearable ring would be to fish-prong the rounds. Its a bit prettier on the side. The ring you like reads as very clean, contemporary and almost masculine. Is that your style? If not, what is?

    But, if you want more size/spread, even with your budget, what about a three stone ring? I have a size 10.5 ring and find that adding spread with side-stones is the key to wearable and finger coverage.

    If you like unique, have a look a Maevona. https://www.instagram.com/maevona/?hl=en
    https://www.instagram.com/p/BikkBQhA37T/?hl=en&taken-by=maevona
    https://www.instagram.com/p/Bg1KI_bhqMs/?hl=en&taken-by=maevona {love this one!}
    https://www.instagram.com/p/BeVb96LgvVz/?hl=en&taken-by=maevona
    https://www.instagram.com/p/Bd_CSTZhf69/?hl=en&taken-by=maevona {maybe stacking to get a unique look that allows you to be more fluid in your style}
    https://www.instagram.com/p/BZUYkntgXWd/?hl=en&taken-by=maevona

    These gives some options that have different styles. I'm not suggesting these exact ring, though they are all lovely, but trying to help you find what you like both overall and elements.
    https://www.jewelsbygrace.com/1-18ctw-art-deco-princess-halo-ring
    https://www.jewelsbygrace.com/4-40ct-est-vintage-tourmaline-dinner-ring

    Have a look at these and the others above and start thinking about your style and lifestyle.
     
    Matthews1127 likes this.
  25. appl3
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    by appl3 » Aug 1, 2018
    I have inquired about the whiteflash 1.62 I si2. They said it’s eye clean. However you can see inclusion in the scope images. Exact words from WF:

    I pulled the 1.62ct and the inclusions are light in color and they diamond is 100% eyeclean from 10" from the top view! From 6" as well as from the side view you might be able to find the inclusion if you have excellent vision and know just where to look (as well as excellent lighting).

     
  26. farrahlyn
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,170
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2015
    by farrahlyn » Aug 1, 2018
    Given the price and incredible cut, i'd jump on the WF 1.637 I SI2. At least put it on hold and think about it for a few days. if it's not "mind clean" enough for you and the clarity continues to bug you then pass on it.

    I was going to suggest Maevona as well. I don't think you should knock wearing a band until you've tried some on. Check out the Maevona IG page, you'll see how VERY unique their sets are and how the bands they've paired with them just make for an incredibly unique set.

    this has baugettes and rounds but may not necessarily be your style:
    http://www.maevona.com/ring-detail.html?rid=980
    this is one of my favorite sets: http://www.maevona.com/ring-detail.html?rid=2928
    a few othere that are different: http://www.maevona.com/ring-detail.html?rid=1649
    oval halo! http://www.maevona.com/ring-detail.html?rid=1050
    http://www.maevona.com/ring-detail.html?rid=161
    check and see if there is a retailer nearby that you can try on: http://www.maevona.com/store-location.html

    Additionally, try some local jewelers for settings. Gabriel & Co has some really beautiful settings. have you considered a split shank?
    https://www.gabrielny.com/engagement-ring/ER13888R4W44JJ
    https://www.gabrielny.com/engagement-ring/ER11810R4W83JJ/amavida
    https://www.gabrielny.com/engagement-ring/ER12153R4W83JJ/amavida
    may be a long shot: https://www.gabrielny.com/engagement-ring/ER12343R6T84JJ
    this one too: https://www.gabrielny.com/engagement-ring/ER12356R6W84JJ


    I'm kinda feeling like maybe you should purchase your stone online and find a local jeweler that will help you find a setting. NOT Kays or Jareds, okay? find a LOCAL mom and pop place. they should be able to get settings from designers like Gabriel & Co, Vatche, Stuller, etc etc
     
    HDer likes this.
  27. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    3,166
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Aug 1, 2018
    Thank you! While I am very happy with the outcome, the journey was tough on me mainly because me and my girl have very different ideas and styles when it comes to rings. She definitley did not want a traditional solitaire setting and it was important the wedding band look integral to the ring, and that the e-ring didn't look naked as a standalone. Oddly enough wearing a wedding band only has never been her concern. But I think that's because she relates the ring to us and if we are married then so are her bands and she doesn't want to wear either solo after we say, I do.

    A lot of the stuff she liked I threw up a little bit in my mouth when I saw. In fairness, she never saw a ring she loved and felt was the one until we found the inspiration piece.

    All this said, I knew I needed help with the setting and my journey started by looking for that. Here was my first thread:

    https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/need-some-help-w-setting.240400/

    While my search for a setting started it, the topic and search for a diamond kind of happened simultaneously. Eventually I started two more threads before getting to that last one that @farrahlyn already posted.

    https://www.pricescope.com/communit...ope-need-input-on-this-diamond-please.240443/

    https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/picking-the-setting-take-2.240587/

    I might add my girl isn't large but has big fingers. Well for a girl. Her hands are tiny compared to mine, lol. Her ring size is a 7.75. What I find funny is many ladies here have size 5 to 6 fingers and talk about needing so much diamond coverage. My girl was pretty insistent her fingers were small enough she didn't need anymore than 0.5 carat. I originally wanted 2 carats for her. You know where I settled and she thinks it's a smidge big but okay with it, lol.

    Below are some handshots of her ring. Although her ring has more size than traditional you can get an idea how to break things up to better compliment one another and not look "bulky".




    Angles look pretty good. See chart below. With GIA rounding and averaging the blue box shows where cut quality COULD fall. ASET or IS images would confirm.

    You will have to contact Adiamor to confirm if eye clean. Inclusions look small but are on table. Also it says additional clouds are not shown. It concerns me and sometimes getting reviews and images are a PITA with virtual inventory.

    With the WF stone being eye clean and available you need to hurry and place on hold. I would prefer that stone.

    20180801_092734.jpg
     
  28. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Aug 1, 2018
    I got this response yesterday on the WF 1.63 stone, so I had eliminated it. I also had spoken with someone on the phone that advised against it. Otherwise, I'd be all over it because it would be an excellent value and perfect size for what I'm looking for.

    This diamond isn’t eye clean and has a fairly easy to pick up on inclusion in the center of the table. Now everyone will vary on what their own personal comfort level with eye clean so that would come down to your thoughts on it. I don’t currently see any diamonds in house that cross that 7.5mm range while keeping in your $10k budget on the diamond. If we drop the color and increase the price a little then we have these two beautiful choices: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=3872119,3997098
     
  29. ClemsonPurdue
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    68
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    by ClemsonPurdue » Aug 1, 2018
    You all are SO helpful, and I really appreciate the help in trying to determine exactly what setting style fits me best. I definitely think I lean more towards contemporary/modern and clean look. I do not want anything halo, vintage, or floral. I want something that gives that WOW look WITHOUT distracting from or dwarfing the center stone. I want the center stone to sit up and be complemented by the setting. I do not want a "band of bling" from a distance where the 1.5 carat center is lost (certainly a concern for the one I picked). I want something that looks good on my hand. I find that dainty bands make my fingers look fat, but too thick of bands make my fingers look short. I certainly do not want something harsh, blunt, or masculine. In looking at the jewelry I typically wear, I gravitate more towards "statement" pieces, and I'd like my ring to be that too. Sigh... if only I had an unlimited budget...

    While the Maevona certainly offer that uniqueness, they have a little too much floral, vintage, celtic look for me. The split shank may be a good option to get some finger coverage, a unique look, frame the center stone well, and still be "pretty".

    I think you all might like some of the contemporary styles of Mark Schneider. A lot of these have a swirl look similar to @sledge ring. Check out these rings: https://www.markschneiderdesign.com/engagement-rings/view-all-engagement-rings#contemporary

    I like some of these by DiamondBoi. Check out the classic/modern collection: http://www.diamondboi.com/classic-engagement-rings?lightbox=i2cch

    These two are okay, but I don't love them like I do some of the rings on the above two links...
    https://www.bloomingbeautyring.com/...ternating-round-and-baguette-diamonds-bbr304/
    https://www.gabrielny.com/engagement-ring/ER12153R4W83JJ/amavida

    I like the idea of going to more local stores and seeing what I can find that I like. My current plan is to find something online or in store that I like, then have it made custom with modifications.

    My goal is still total budget of $15,000. Round or oval around 1.5 to 1.7 carats.

    @rockysalamander @farrahlyn
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
  30. farrahlyn
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,170
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2015
    by farrahlyn » Aug 1, 2018
    Ok, so i kinda had an idea. i'm not as good as Rocky at explain so bear with me. When i saw this setting with the x prongs it occured to me that this is a good way to get that pinched look and the pretty profile that your original ring you posted had because of the gap/space under the stone. that peg head on that setting totally detracts from it.
    DB Xprongs pave.JPG


    So i thought this setting was nice and semi close to the original one you liked and easier to draw on for these purposes. ignore the princess shape. the red is the prong changes, creating the X prong. I'm not even sure if this is possible, i did draw it slightly pinched approacing the stone. The purple lines, you could thin out that channel as it approaches the stone to create that pinched look at the stone. Again, i DON'T know if this is completely possible, just throwing it out there. Does this make sense? THoughts?

    DB Channel.JPG
     
    LetLoveRule, bmfang and Matthews1127 like this.

Share This Page