Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

HELP on an upcoming buying decision; "Ideal" marketing vs. Beauty/Brilliance, and online shoppping

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

bigDbuyer

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
6
Well, as most people here, I have spent some serious time educating myself on the 4C''s and beyond, and am at the point where I am ready to make a buying decision - and this one in particular is on-line.

I (and from future fiancee''s input) am a tad more concerned on the Cut/Clarity, but am still trying to find the "Ideal" as far as brilliance and beauty is concerned ("sparkle"), although not necessarily the "Ideal" cut as far as today''s marketing is concerned.

SOOOooo, I have been searching for E/VS1 in 2.0x and above, while trying to get as much "Brilliance", although not necessarily "Ideal" cut - not necessarily looking for VG/EX/ID Symmetry and Polish, and trying to keep Flourescence to none or faint. My budget is up to $25K if I find an exceptional deal, but was hoping to stay in the 23''s (up from my initial budget of $20k, realizing I wanted to move up to E from F for the fiancee and couldn''t get that for under $22K).

Okay, so I find this newly cut diamond from my broker:

Laboratory: GIA
May 11, 2004
Carat Weight: 2.01
Color: E
Clarity: VVS2
Shape: Round

Depth: 61.8%
Table: 61%
Polish: GD
Symmetry: GD

Culet: None
Girdle: Medium to Thick, Faceted
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 7.97x8.15x4.98


I am pretty excited about the E/VVS2 combo since it''s so rare, and it''s just outside "Ideal" cut, so it''s a pretty good deal, although over my $25K.

I realize that most people would consider this a "Premium" cut, and some even Ideal, BUT, now my concern is with the Depth/Table being 61-ish, is this going to take away from the "Beauty/Brilliance" ?!?!

Since I can''t view the stone, I am a little apprehensive, although I trust the jeweler/broker I am working with since he dealt with friends of mine (I have also seen his prices as compared to the on-line lists I compiled from friends, friends of friends, and from this site, and he is consistently $500 or more off the the lowest price that the same or similar stones are listed, so I know I am getting a good deal).

He did say that this was considered "Ideal" before the new "marketing blitz" since the Table/Depth are so similar and under 63%. I have read conflicting reports on the 60/60 "myth", some say it''s just that as far as brilliance is concerned, while others say 58-62.5% depth and 55-62% Table, if crown and pavilion angles are properly adjusted, will rival any "Ideal cut" diamond out there as far as brilliance is concerned.


SOOO, long story short story, am I getting a little too picky? after all the research I''ve done, I am not necessarily sure I want to spend the extra $$ on the VVS2, while I "think" I am giving up some cut dimensions, and "settling" for symmetry/polish of G (as opposed to VG/EX). I am pretty sure my fiancee'' will be MORE than happy to know she''s getting a VVS1, but maybe I am feeling I might want to go for more "paper" ideal as far as cut and at least VG in polish/symmetry and stay in the E/VS1 or maybe search for an F/VVS1?

What is your guy''s and gal''s takes?!?! Is 61-ish a bit too high % to produce "Ideal" Brilliance? or is the 60/60 (61/61 in this case) still "in effect" although not "Ideal" by current marketing ? Am I succombing to my own "paper" ideals now that decision time has come, although I realize that most of this at this point is so negligible to the naked eye, it''s only in my head?

Any and all input will be greatly appreciated!!!

Thanks in Advance,
"Almost There" bigDbuyer
 
Ok just quick thing.

You said that you can't see the thing...

Uhmmm if you are going to spend that much, they can take lots of pictures for you. Ask them to e-mail you, please.

Sorry for butting in..
21.gif
 
Yes, thanks for the input.

I was going to ask for pictures, but I don't know what "type" of pictures to ask for, that would help "true" gemologists give me opinions, beyond the "naked eye" beauty/brilliance I would get from normal prints.

Do you, or anybody else, have any input on what types of "Scopes" I should ask for??

Thanks

----------------
On 6/4/2004 4:20:40 PM laney wrote:

Ok just quick thing.

You said that you can't see the thing...

Uhmmm if you are going to spend that much, they can take lots of pictures for you. Ask them to e-mail you, please.

Sorry for butting in..
21.gif
----------------
Click to expand...
 
This is hard to answer if you're willing to sacrifice cut quality to get higher color and clarity--both factors that contribute less to the visual beauty of a stone than cut does. I know a lot of old-fashioned jewelers like to think of the new cut standards as nothing more than a marketing fad, but there's quite a bit of science behind them.

Read the tutorials here and on www.goodoldgold.com and you'll get a better sense of the issues around cut.

Also, for a taste of what you can get for less money, here are two stones from Good Old Gold.

An ideal 2.08, G, VS2 for around $22K: http://www.goodoldgold.com/2_08ct_g_vs2_h%26a.htm

And, if you're willing to go down in clarity, an ideal 2.24 for well under that $20k mark.
http://www.goodoldgold.com/2_24ct_e_si2__h%26a.htm

Also, if you do a search here on the Pricescope homepage you'll see a lot more diamonds that are not only better cut than the one you're looking at, but cheaper as well.
 
Ask for an Idealscope and a Sarin or OGI. The Sarin or OGI will give you further angle dimensions that you can enter into the HCA cut advisor on this site. This will give you a rating on the performance of the stone.The Sarin or OGS will also give you an AGS rating of the cut quality. The Idealscope will show light leakage and other cutting defects or assets.
You might also want to call some of the very reputable dealers on this site such as Whiteflash, GoodOldGold, Niceice, etc.
I bought my stone from Whiteflash. It was not one that they had in inventory or on multiple listing. Lesley did a search and found it for me.
This was an anniversary present and not an engagement ring. Although it was a gift, my husband had nothing to do with picking it out. I am sure he would have gone in the direction you are going as to color and clarity but I settled for an SI2(completely eye clean from all angles], I color, new Ideal cut because I wanted a stone over 4 carats. My original engagement ring was 3 carats and there was no point in getting a new ring in the same size even if the quality were superior.

Most of the vendors are at a convention in Las Vegas this week and are probably not as available for calls although they may be returning messages. Emailing might be a good idea. They also may find access to the knd of stone you are looking for while they are there.
It may be that you have found the perfect stone at a great price but until you have more information about it you will not know how it performs and whether it is a good deal.

A stone that is very well proportioned looks like better color because it is so dazzling.

You can see my ring in Show me the Ring. I live in Manhattan and spent many hours in the Diamond District before I decided to spend that much money on line. My husband thought I was crazy but now he is convinced that we got a great ring at a great price. Most of the vendors on here are honorable. Many such as Whiteflash do not drop ship but actually see the stone. I then had it sent to an independent appraiser who confirmed the GIA and Sarin and said it was a beautiful stone. He then sent it back to Whiteflash for setting (I picked their new, hand made, knife edge Tiffany which was custom mande for my stone].
I did not have to pay anything until the stone was set and ready to be shipped by overnight FedEX and there is a money back guarantee and a small loss on the setting because it was custom made.
I hope this has been of help and I wish you the best of luck.
 
I understand you're wanting to stay in the colorless range for a stone this size. Some eyes see the difference, most can't. (I see the difference between e and g, but only when next to each other). No one can see the difference between 99% of the vvs and the vs stones without magnification. I'm not one for trying to talk people down in quality except when it is the emotional zone of things you can't see.

As Hest says, cut will make more of a difference in how the stone looks than color and clarity combined in these ranges. And it is science, not marketing.

I would be willing to bet that this stone would look bigger and whiter than the one you are considering. It is actually bigger than the one you are considering in diameter. (btw...I am assuming yours is a round stone. If so, it is most likely going to look out-of-round with a diameter variance that large. Experts say anything over .1mm is going to be out-of-round.) With the DCD stone you are still eye-clean and colorless.

Hest also found you some good options at GOG. The selection seems to be a little slim in this range right now. More might show up after the JCK show this week. You could also ask a vendor to go looking for a stone that fits your requirements. They all buy from the same set of manufactures, and most will take on special requests.

I personally would tighten your cut criteria, and consider loosening (slightly) your color and clarity criteria. I think you will find more beautiful stones in your price range.
 
Big D,
don't try to save money by going with a less than ideal cut, which is the most important C of them all. you will never regret it. one of these days you will run into a real sparkler, and you will wonder why your stone doesn't sparkle like that. personally the best combo i like is H VS2. with a ags or gia cert.
 
Well BigD,

I am sorry, but I feel the need to be very clear and straightforward in my reply.

I see that you realize that you are giving up cut for the other C's, but it seems that you have no idea how much you are giving up. This stone is not a 'premium'-cut or near-to-ideal, like you say. It is not even "excellent" or "very good". Its cut is much lower than that.

Take a look at the diameter, ranging from 7.97 to 8.15 mm. This means that on one side, the diameter is that of an ideal-cut 1.83 Ct, and on the other side that of an ideal-cut 1.95 Ct.

With the depth being OK, this means that there is a lot of hidden weight in the thick girdle.

Also, with such a diameter deviation, there is no way for a cutter to produce something close to a symmetrical stone, and the sparkle that you are looking for, is going in all possible unpredictable directions, and with certainty, a lot of it will never reach your eyes.

On the other hand, you get what you are paying for. If it is just slightly over 25K, this is a fair deal for this stone, in a sense that the market probably pays this much for such a +2Ct. If, in future, however, you decide to increase the light-performance of this stone, without sacrificing a lot of diameter, you will probably end up with a 1.60 Ct super-ideal diamond, value around 19K. And this is the true value of this stone, if you combine the value of rarity and beauty.

Frankly, it is your choice. Do you want to join the lemmings, whose omnipresence make that weight is still the primary cost-indicator of a diamond? But if you do, take that plunge knowing what you are deciding. This stone is not close to ideal, excellent, very good or anything. The only thing this diamond is close to is close to 2 Cts.

Sorry if I sound harsh. I just get angry when I see such mis-representations.

Live long,
 
----------------
On 6/5/2004 4:20:18 AM Paul-Antwerp wrote:

Also, with such a diameter deviation, there is no way for a cutter to produce something close to a symmetrical stone, and the sparkle that you are looking for, is going in all possible unpredictable directions, and with certainty, a lot of it will never reach your eyes.
----------------
Click to expand...
I don't know that I believe this. The diameter deviation on this diamond is almost as great (for its size) but it seems to be reasonably symmetrical.
 
----------------
On 6/4/2004 6:55:56 PM lop wrote:

I understand you're wanting to stay in the colorless range for a stone this size. Some eyes see the difference, most can't. (I see the difference between e and g, but only when next to each other). No one can see the difference between 99% of the vvs and the vs stones without magnification. I'm not one for trying to talk people down in quality except when it is the emotional zone of things you can't see.

As Hest says, cut will make more of a difference in how the stone looks than color and clarity combined in these ranges. And it is science, not marketing.

I would be willing to bet that this stone would look bigger and whiter than the one you are considering. It is actually bigger than the one you are considering in diameter. (btw...I am assuming yours is a round stone. If so, it is most likely going to look out-of-round with a diameter variance that large. Experts say anything over .1mm is going to be out-of-round.) With the DCD stone you are still eye-clean and colorless.

Hest also found you some good options at GOG. The selection seems to be a little slim in this range right now. More might show up after the JCK show this week. You could also ask a vendor to go looking for a stone that fits your requirements. They all buy from the same set of manufactures, and most will take on special requests.

I personally would tighten your cut criteria, and consider loosening (slightly) your color and clarity criteria. I think you will find more beautiful stones in your price range. ----------------
Click to expand...


Thanks for the input; I realize I could get more cut for the money with less color clarity, but in my particular case, she/we are more "emotionally" involved with the color/clarity. I was looking at the F/VS2 ranges, but have decided I wanted to move into the E/VS1 range to get something a little more rare and go from there.

Funny you should link to a diamond on DCD; if you run a search on 2.0 to 2.1, D to E, IF to VS1, then on the "Premium Cuts" tab, the stone I am looking at is #9, or item 2524878. I am getting it quoted to me from the guy who actually has it in hand at $1K less...

SOoo, again, I am at somewhat of a loss since some people would call it "Premium", while others on this same board would call it "Below Average" and that it would only produce a 1.6 ct Ideal if re-cut.

Thanks,
 
----------------
On 6/5/2004 4:20:18 AM Paul-Antwerp wrote:

Well BigD,

I am sorry, but I feel the need to be very clear and straightforward in my reply.

I see that you realize that you are giving up cut for the other C's, but it seems that you have no idea how much you are giving up. This stone is not a 'premium'-cut or near-to-ideal, like you say. It is not even 'excellent' or 'very good'. Its cut is much lower than that.

Take a look at the diameter, ranging from 7.97 to 8.15 mm. This means that on one side, the diameter is that of an ideal-cut 1.83 Ct, and on the other side that of an ideal-cut 1.95 Ct.

With the depth being OK, this means that there is a lot of hidden weight in the thick girdle.

Also, with such a diameter deviation, there is no way for a cutter to produce something close to a symmetrical stone, and the sparkle that you are looking for, is going in all possible unpredictable directions, and with certainty, a lot of it will never reach your eyes.

On the other hand, you get what you are paying for. If it is just slightly over 25K, this is a fair deal for this stone, in a sense that the market probably pays this much for such a +2Ct. If, in future, however, you decide to increase the light-performance of this stone, without sacrificing a lot of diameter, you will probably end up with a 1.60 Ct super-ideal diamond, value around 19K. And this is the true value of this stone, if you combine the value of rarity and beauty.

Frankly, it is your choice. Do you want to join the lemmings, whose omnipresence make that weight is still the primary cost-indicator of a diamond? But if you do, take that plunge knowing what you are deciding. This stone is not close to ideal, excellent, very good or anything. The only thing this diamond is close to is close to 2 Cts.

Sorry if I sound harsh. I just get angry when I see such mis-representations.

Live long,----------------
Click to expand...


Thanks for the input; I guess this is where I get confused in that some people would say this stone is bad, while others list it as a Premium cut, while others say it is a former Ideal.

I am willing to go "just outside" today's Ideal to get a bit of a deal on a stone that is still brilliant and "Sparkly", but opinions vary so much on what is acceptable it is hard to get a consensus. I guess this is what frustrates the average - and the above average - person out there trying to educate and inform themselves.

Thanks,
 
My opinion, for what it's worth.




Your eyes cannot tell a E VS1 from a F VS2. You will be able to tell a bad cut. E VS1 is not as rare as you think... you can buy this color/clarity combo from most "maul" stores. But a good cut, THAT is a rarity and very hard to find.... at least harder to find than a D VVS2.


or go for the better cut in a slightly smaller diamond if you need the E VS1 combo. It will appear larger anyway.
 
It sounds to me that the expert selection catagory at whiteflash.com if there is something there in your size/clarity/color combo would be perfect for you.

They usualy are awesome dimaonds that just miss the super-ideal aca label on one or 2 points.
A lot of times I dought if there would be much difference in actual appearance.
For example the cut may be perfect as far as the angles go but the polish comes back as vg therefore it cant be an aca.
No one can tell the difference between vg and ideal polish with just their bare eyes and the price is lower.

edit to add > nothing in your size range right now but you might want to call them and see what they have thats not on the site.
 
----------------
On 6/5/2004 9:41:41 AM Superidealist wrote:

----------------
On 6/5/2004 4:20:18 AM Paul-Antwerp wrote:

Also, with such a diameter deviation, there is no way for a cutter to produce something close to a symmetrical stone, and the sparkle that you are looking for, is going in all possible unpredictable directions, and with certainty, a lot of it will never reach your eyes.
----------------
Click to expand...
I don't know that I believe this. The diameter deviation on this diamond is almost as great (for its size) but it seems to be reasonably symmetrical.
----------------
Click to expand...


Well, Mister Riley,

Very interesting example that you gave. Something is wrong with that stone, probably an error on the GIA-report. There, it says, 5.64 - 5.76 as diameter.

Now check the OGI Megascope measurement: 5.65 - 5.68

I think that someone in GIA made a typing mistake here.

Live long,
 
----------------
On 6/5/2004 1:04:26 PM strmrdr wrote:

Very interesting example that you gave. Something is wrong with that stone, probably an error on the GIA-report. There, it says, 5.64 - 5.76 as diameter.

Now check the OGI Megascope measurement: 5.65 - 5.68

I think that someone in GIA made a typing mistake here.
----------------
Click to expand...
You're absolutely right. Must be one in a million.
wacko.gif
 
Spooky
6.gif
 
BigD,

I know how frustrating and confusing this process can be.

This is where actually seeing this diamond you are considering along side a true ideal cut would be extremely helpful. Then you could make an informed decision based on what YOU see, not what is on paper, not what the jeweler is telling you.

You stated that you cannot see the stone, why? I remember past threads where some of the internet vendors have sent two diamonds to an independant gemologist for the potential buyer to view. Is this jeweler too far from you to be able to see the stone and compare? If so, perhaps he could send it to a professional near you for viewing. I cannot imagine making a purchase of this amount with out seeing the stone with my own eyes.

If he won't send the diamond under the above circumstances, will he offer a money back option so you can have the stone evaluated and compare it with others?

I think if you could see the stone and compare yourself, you would see what everyone else is talking about regarding cut being extremely important!
 
----------------
On 6/6/2004 3:56:46 AM Paul-Antwerp wrote:

----------------
On 6/5/2004 9:41:41 AM Superidealist wrote:

----------------
On 6/5/2004 4:20:18 AM Paul-Antwerp wrote:

Also, with such a diameter deviation, there is no way for a cutter to produce something close to a symmetrical stone, and the sparkle that you are looking for, is going in all possible unpredictable directions, and with certainty, a lot of it will never reach your eyes.
----------------
Click to expand...
I don't know that I believe this. The diameter deviation on this diamond is almost as great (for its size) but it seems to be reasonably symmetrical.
----------------
Click to expand...


Well, Mister Riley,

Very interesting example that you gave. Something is wrong with that stone, probably an error on the GIA-report. There, it says, 5.64 - 5.76 as diameter.

Now check the OGI Megascope measurement: 5.65 - 5.68

I think that someone in GIA made a typing mistake here.

Live long,----------------
Click to expand...


paul,
take a look of this one:
GIA report-
Measurements 9.68-9.71 x 5.90 mm

Sarin from the vendor-
9.69-9.72 mm x 5.90

OGI from the vendor- (look at this big variation)
9.75-9.68 mm x 5.91

Sarin from the appraiser-
9.69 x 9.66 x 5.91

OGI from the appraiser-
9.73-9.70 x 5.90

Now which report would you believe ?
 
With 4 out of 5 reports saying basically the same, I think that this particular vendor should re-calibrate his OGI-machine.

The two examples of Superbcerts are different. The GIA-deviation is much bigger, and not in line with the other details of the stone. To me, it is logical that this is a GIA-typo.

This happens more often, and if I were Barry, I would demand them to rectify it.

But this is taking us too far away from the original subject.

Live long,
 
----------------
Earlier, I wrote:

Must be one in a million.
----------------
Click to expand...
Make that two.
 
Thought I'd give you all an updated.

After some More exhaustive research, and discussion among the "informed", I have found more "ways" to determine cut/beauty/brilliance, not the least of which being the Halloway cut analyzer.

I've also determined that I could/should live with an F or G color versus E, esp. if I can get better clarity and a much better cut.

Here is a stone I am considering these days:

http://www.superbcert.com/Information/off_site_diamond_search.cfm/Action/View_Diamond/P/616/N/1;1

much better having all the pictures to look at - also looked on Good Old Gold - but I think I like the idea of VS1/VVS2 for clarity if I can get it.

My only concern here is the flourescence, but I don't think it is too much of an issue. What do you all think?

Much Thanks to everyone for their replies and input, it aided me, if not so directly, to re-examining my "specs" and requirements and priorities.

-BigDbuyer
 
After I advised you not to take your original stone, I owe it to you to comment on this one.

Well, I would not worry about the medium fluorescence. It might have a small effect on the value of the stone on the market, but you will not observe any negative visual effect.

Other than that, the stone will be a beauty.

Live long,
 
----------------
On 6/9/2004 11:38:51 AM Paul-Antwerp wrote:

After I advised you not to take your original stone, I owe it to you to comment on this one.

Well, I would not worry about the medium fluorescence. It might have a small effect on the value of the stone on the market, but you will not observe any negative visual effect.

Other than that, the stone will be a beauty.

Live long,----------------
Click to expand...


Thanks Paul,

Given that, I have come across another stone with similar specs:

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-618643.htm

and actually, it was listed with a wrong price, and since I was the one to let them in on it, they are honoring the price I saw it listed at.

realizing I am giving up (not much) from VVS2 to VS1, only can see it on the GIA report, but I'm getting .1 more carats. It just misses being "a cut above" H&A, but it sure looks good in the ideal scope, and once it's set, I'll never be able to see the hearts again.

For what it's worth, the superbcert scored a 1.2 on the Halloway, and this stone scores a 1.4, so VERY close. They both are AGS 0 and such, so I guess the question comes down to:

G/VVS1 2.02

or

G/VS1 2.11 for about 2 Grand less...


At this point, I'm seriously considering getting them both shipped to me and doing a side by side comparison.

Sooo... what would you do?
 
2K is a signifcant cost savings. Personally, I'd go for that. It sounds like you won't really notice that it's not "perfect."
 
Without seeing them, I'd go for the G/VS, no question. I don't believe in paying for something that it takes magnification to see. and the .2 in the HCA scores is beyond it's accuracy level, so don't try to read the tea leaves there.

On the other hand, I think having 2 stones side by side to choose from is a good thing. The experts here keep saying to pick the one that looks better to you, and let your eyes be the judge, etc. That is hard to do with a single stone because at this caliber, they all look beautiful. The question then becomes which, if either, looks more beautiful to you. Either way, you can't go wrong...
 
Hi BigD-

I don't think you can go wrong between these two choices. Personally, I'd pick the first one, simply because I'm a sucker for blue fluorescence, and I prefer smaller stones to begin with. The nice thing with blue fluor. in a G color is that it can make it look whiter in sunlight. But it sounds like you want a larger stone, and at 2K less, that's certainly a great deal. Congrats on finding great contenders!
1.gif
 
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