HELP! Need advice on G-round brilliant

[Dancing Fire]

just going by the specs...i would pick #2 cuz of the 35'' x 40.6'' combo.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/3/2009 6:17:09 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
just going by the specs...i would pick #2 cuz of the 35'' x 40.6'' combo.

That would be my choice too then if that one wasn''t the one, then call in the other.

 

[mastermitchell]

Decisions, decisions! Thanks for the advice. Will definitely have to mull this over.

 

[stone-cold11]

Yap, prefer #2 too.

 

[mastermitchell]

it seems like everyone prefers option #2. obviously, these are just numbers. is it possible that both will look similar in person or very close to each other when it comes to brilliance, fire, and scintillation? Thanks, everyone!

 

[stone-cold11]

Yap, they are very close, but if you want us to choose that is the answer.

By the way, what are the physical dimensions?

 

[mastermitchell]

what do you mean by physical dimensions?

 

[stone-cold11]

the diameter and depth in mm?

 

[mastermitchell]

the measurements for option #1 are 6.95-6.98 x 4.26mm. I don''t have the GIA for option #2 in front me. But I did want to mention that I am an idiot because I just realized that I put the wrong carat weight down for option #2. it''s a 1.08ct NOT 1.22ct. I must have been looking at another stone that my jeweler told me about. sorry for the confusion. does that change on size sway anyone''s opinions? Thanks, and sorry for the mistake. I''ll post the dimemsions as soon as I have GIA in front me.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/3/2009 9:11:07 PM
Author: mastermitchell
it seems like everyone prefers option #2. obviously, these are just numbers. is it possible that both will look similar in person or very close to each other when it comes to brilliance, fire, and scintillation? Thanks, everyone!

Not possible to really speculate and come up with any accurate answer....The first diamond might look more brilliant than fiery than the second, the second might show more fire and be a little better balanced but no real way to tell for sure without seeing them.

 

[mastermitchell]

The dimensions of option #2 are 6.58-6.61 x 4.05. I just mistook the size for something else. Lorelei, I think you''re right. I feel like both stones have good potential, and it''s just a matter of pushing the trigger on one of them.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/4/2009 11:46:56 AM
Author: mastermitchell
The dimensions of option #2 are 6.58-6.61 x 4.05. I just mistook the size for something else. Lorelei, I think you''re right. I feel like both stones have good potential, and it''s just a matter of pushing the trigger on one of them.

That looks fine thanks! I know its a difficult decision, I don''t see why they couldn''t call both diamonds in if you paid shipping etc so you could compare - the stones are probably with a supplier.

 

[stone-cold11]

Now I see why you are hesitant in going for the 35CA40.6PA stone, because of the size and face up dimension.

If you want size, go for the 33.5CA stone then, optical performance difference is probably negligible between the 2 but size difference will be noticeable.

 

[abefroman]

If you are going for FL, you mise well go with a better color then too, something in the colorless range, D E or F, or A B or C if you can find one.

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 7/4/2009 12:17:50 PM
Author: abefroman
If you are going for FL, you mise well go with a better color then too, something in the colorless range, D E or F, or A B or C if you can find one.

There is no such thing as a A/B/C color stone in the present GIA color system unless you go back to the old color grading system, then C is the absolute worst in that system.

If D is colorless, what is A? Invisible?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/4/2009 12:17:50 PM
Author: abefroman
If you are going for FL, you mise well go with a better color then too, something in the colorless range, D E or F, or A B or C if you can find one.

Abe, there is no higher colour grade than D.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/4/2009 11:51:21 AM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 7/4/2009 11:46:56 AM
Author: mastermitchell
The dimensions of option #2 are 6.58-6.61 x 4.05. I just mistook the size for something else. Lorelei, I think you're right. I feel like both stones have good potential, and it's just a matter of pushing the trigger on one of them.

That looks fine thanks! I know its a difficult decision, I don't see why they couldn't call both diamonds in if you paid shipping etc so you could compare - the stones are probably with a supplier.

Just checking the weight of this diamond is 1.08cts?

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 7/3/2009 10:11:03 PM
Author: mastermitchell
the measurements for option #1 are 6.95-6.98 x 4.26mm. I don''t have the GIA for option #2 in front me. But I did want to mention that I am an idiot because I just realized that I put the wrong carat weight down for option #2. it''s a 1.08ct NOT 1.22ct. I must have been looking at another stone that my jeweler told me about. sorry for the confusion. does that change on size sway anyone''s opinions? Thanks, and sorry for the mistake. I''ll post the dimemsions as soon as I have GIA in front me.

Lorelei, it is a 1.08c apparently.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/4/2009 12:49:20 PM
Author: Stone-cold11

Date: 7/3/2009 10:11:03 PM
Author: mastermitchell
the measurements for option #1 are 6.95-6.98 x 4.26mm. I don''t have the GIA for option #2 in front me. But I did want to mention that I am an idiot because I just realized that I put the wrong carat weight down for option #2. it''s a 1.08ct NOT 1.22ct. I must have been looking at another stone that my jeweler told me about. sorry for the confusion. does that change on size sway anyone''s opinions? Thanks, and sorry for the mistake. I''ll post the dimemsions as soon as I have GIA in front me.

Lorelei, it is a 1.08c apparently.

Yep, just checked, thanks!

 

[whitby_2773]

hi mitchell

not going to add anything about specs as i think you''d probably find that they''re very similar or inseparable when it comes to scintillation etc as has already been said. but on the size - just be aware there''s a discernible difference between 1.08ct and 1.26ct. both are a nice size, but 1.26 is a *very* nice size.

i''m female enough to say - if they''re both gorgeous - i''d go with the larger one

 

[mastermitchell]

Yes, Lorelei. The weight for option #2 is 1.08 carats. Given that there''s a more substantial difference in size, I am leaning towards the first option. Especially, if difference in performance is going to be negligible or very close.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/4/2009 1:01:06 PM
Author: mastermitchell
Yes, Lorelei. The weight for option #2 is 1.08 carats. Given that there''s a more substantial difference in size, I am leaning towards the first option. Especially, if difference in performance is going to be negligible or very close.

Any visual differences between them for performance will probably be very subtle, so if you prefer a larger diamond then go with that one.

 

[abefroman]

Oops, my bad.

Do you think he should go with at least an F in color though if he is going for Flawless?

To me going with a totally flawless, and picking near colorless over colorless, that's like putting spinning rims on a 15 year old Pontiac.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/4/2009 2:36:33 PM
Author: abefroman
Oops, my bad.

Do you think he should go with at least an F in color though if he is going for Flawless?

To me going with a totally flawless, and picking near colorless over colorless, that's like putting spinning rims on a 15 year old Pontiac.

LOL! You are actually not alone in feeling that way, to me no - a G colour is perfectly fine and will still be plenty white - most people wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between reliably graded F and G colour in this size. It is a matter of preference, some prefer colourless and very high clarity as a cultural or purity preference, others just feel it is natural to get both colourless and high clarity as that is what they prefer. For me, I would have no problem with an M colour and flawless clarity!

 

[mastermitchell]

Ouch! Abefroman, spinners on a Pontiac? That''s rough. Lorelei is right. It really is just a preference. I felt right about it the when I got the first ring, and I''m not going to change it for the second. Not much more I can say. To each their own. You know?

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/4/2009 3:55:44 PM
Author: mastermitchell
Ouch! Abefroman, spinners on a Pontiac? That''s rough. Lorelei is right. It really is just a preference. I felt right about it the when I got the first ring, and I''m not going to change it for the second. Not much more I can say. To each their own. You know?

Absolutely - personally I think G IF is a nice combo, the diamond will still be extremely white!

 

[mastermitchell]

After much consideration, I''ve decided to check out the 1.26 ct stone first. Hopefully, that''s a winner. Thanks for everyone''s input and help!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/8/2009 1:24:50 PM
Author: mastermitchell
After much consideration, I''ve decided to check out the 1.26 ct stone first. Hopefully, that''s a winner. Thanks for everyone''s input and help!

You are most welcome - many congrats and keep us posted on how you like it

 

[mastermitchell]

Ok, I have been able to view the 1.26 ct. diamond and had a few questions. The scintillation is amazing on this stone. When held in certain lighting, such as room lighting the diamond almost appears to vibrate. The fire is very intense as well. But sometimes the diamond appears to have a dark appearance and not very bright white in room lighting when viewed face up. The diamond appears pretty white in sunlight, but at certain angles it can take on that dark appearance as well. Is this normal?

 

[stone-cold11]

Yap, normal.

This happens as the stone is directing too much light into your eyes and the iris is closing up to avoid damaging your retina.