Help Please - Imminent Proposal

[BrentM1]

Medium blue fluor, highly unlikely. Strong, more likely but still quite unlikely. Very strong, even more likely, but unlikely. There used to be a premium for these stones a very very long time ago until the market fell out back in the late 70s/early 80s (according to my research).

The GIA study as referenced above by @OoohShiny (while a little old now) is still highly relevant.

A really good example of strong blue fluor in a D stone is here (with the exception of that honker of a black crystal under the table!!).
https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/...1.093-d-vs2-round-diamond-ags-bl-104067973013

Right now in the market I can tell you that diamonds with a strong blue fluorescence are discounted alot because the majority of dealers don't want to buy them and put them in their inventory

 

[bmfang]

Right now in the market I can tell you that diamonds with a strong blue fluorescence are discounted alot because the majority of dealers don't want to buy them and put them in their inventory

Yup. I totally agree with what you are saying above. Probably because they don’t want to be bothered to deal with the very slight chance of having to deal with such a problem if a customer returns it (and then they have to try and offload it again to another vendor).

The general view of most of the jewellery sales force I have spoken to when window shopping is that fluorescence is bad. I push them to explain why and the answer I get back is something along the lines of “it affects the purity of the diamond”. No mention at all of how it affects transparency (ie milkiness and haze). I then balk at their response on the inside, especially when I can see that the stones for sale at said shop have visible inclusions. Affects purity my @$$.

On the other hand, for savvy consumers who don’t mind fluorescence (I’m one of them) it’s a very very good way of getting a stone.

 

[BrentM1]

Yup. I totally agree with what you are saying above. Probably because they don’t want to be bothered to deal with the very slight chance of having to deal with such a problem if a customer returns it (and then they have to try and offload it again to another vendor).

The general view of most of the jewellery sales force I have spoken to when window shopping is that fluorescence is bad. I push them to explain why and the answer I get back is something along the lines of “it affects the purity of the diamond”. No mention at all of how it affects transparency (ie milkiness and haze). I then balk at their response on the inside, especially when I can see that the stones for sale at said shop have visible inclusions. Affects purity my @$$.

On the other hand, for savvy consumers who don’t mind fluorescence (I’m one of them) it’s a very very good way of getting a stone.

I agree completely and in my experience over the years in 90% of the cases fluorescence has no negative affect on the diamond and if you don't mind it stated on the certificate you can usually get the diamond a little cheaper. You are right the public has a bad taste in their mouth about fluorescence and that is why it is tougher for wholesalers to sell them

 

[msop04]

@msop04: "Excuse me, can I take this diamond for a test drive?"

Employee: "So you mean try it on?"

@msop04: "No... I mean literally get in my car and drive around with it."

 

[RunningwithScissors]

For me, even a super ideal G looks very tinted, but I know I'm in the minority. I do have to point out though that it is false to say that a G and a D look the same when mounted. True, some people can't see the color difference, and others don't care. But I know many people who can see it loud and clear (I am in a line of work where we deal with with nuances of color all day long, so many of my friends also have extreme visual/color acuity.) That doesn't mean a G or warmer isn't beautiful, of course it is, especially if you have a super ideal. (Lydia's diamond is drop-dead gorgeous.)

And for me, I wouldn't consider a diamond that wasn't a super ideal from one of the preferred vendors like WF or CBI/HPD, etc. IMO it is so worth it to trade down a bit in size to go with a true, super ideal. Fire and brilliance are super important and so is a good trade in/buy back policy. And that is exactly what I just recently did with a diamond I purchased from CBI.

I'm posting this video of my new baby, to show the kind of brilliance and fire you get from a super ideal (of any color):

 

[headlight]

The larger the stone, the more apparent the color will be. The photo of the diamond posted by a participant here show a great deal of body color which is perfectly fine... but not for someone who is in the market for D color... in which case G wouldn’t be the color for this buyer, and even more wrong in a 3 carat. A buyer looking for a 3 ct., D color, VS1 is not interested in something in a lower grade “to save money”.
I really take issue with this constant suggestion on every thread where someone is buying a diamond and is looking for a specific color and participants try to talk them into getting a lower color saying it won’t be detectable. I disagree on that, but WHAT IRKS ME EVEN MORE IS IF SOME GUY COMES ON HERE AND WANTS TO BUY HIS BELOVED A CERTAIN COLOR, WHO ARE WE TO TALK HIM OUT OF IT? That would make me furious if my guy was talked into buying a lower color by a complete stranger over the internet. I’m totally baffled by this. I know I will be received by responses of “cut, cut, cut” of which I totally get. I’m not saying sacrifice cut. I’m saying don’t tell these people to go down in color because they won’t see it. If they won’t see it then there would be no need for color grades. If a buyer isn’t happy with the size they will get for their budget based on all this, then it’s their decision where to compromise, but to tell them they won’t notice a difference is being irresponsible. Also, I don’t know why the buyer gives his desired 4Cs and is met with “... you could get a bigger diamond if...”. Maybe they don’t want a bigger diamond. I know it’s shocking to most of us here, but there’s a whole big world out there of people that don’t care about big.
And if the recipient wanted a specific color grade, or nothing lower than a specific grade, I don’t care how good the cut is, she’s not going to be happy. Her guy telling her that he went down on color to get a better cut means nothing to her... she was already expecting a “performer” in her mind anyhow. So all she sees is that he fell short of getting her what she wanted. So many here who have a “warmer color” in a super ideal selected the stone themselves (often as an upgrade) so you made that decision, it wasn’t made for you. If a guy wants to buy his girl a D color, the rarest of rare, why on earth would anyone talk him out of it, whether it’s this buyer for a 3 ct. or any other guy, even if buying a half carat.
With the colorless stones, especially in the case of D and E, it isn’t just less color (or, in this case, lack of color)... there is an optical aesthetic as if the diamond is “lit from within”, especially under certain lighting conditions. So when it is recommended here to go down in color and go up to super ideal, the super ideal suggestion is awesome, but you eliminate a positive visual element. So give and take, but just know what you’re giving and what you’re taking. And when you talk someone out of buying a colorless diamond because they won’t see the difference, you have taken that away from them
Regarding the fluorescence, there is a light box the stone can be placed in to determine if it will be of issue. However, I find it interesting that the GIA research in this topic is taken as gospel yet the GIA research on cut grade is completely rejected. Whether the study is accurate or not, I do believe with regard to that it “shouldn’t be an issue” the study gave the caveat of “in most diamonds”... well, I wouldn’t want to be the one who got stuck with one of the stones that didn’t make it into the “most” category. Historically, it is fact that perception in the trade has varied, which should give rise to the fact that perception will continue to change in which case you just better hope you aren’t trying to unload your diamond on a day that falls during a period where anything beyond Faint for colorless is the trend. Also, I think that someone who has made a career of brokering diamonds (taking this participant on their word) would know a thing or 2 about how this affects the sale of stones in the marketplace no matter the research.
While I think this forum brings much value, I think there is an element of that phrase “learned it on the internet” and the joke about “if it’s on the internet it must be true”, also “a little knowledge is a bad thing”. I think sometimes here there is some over-reaching. I also think sometimes there is the splitting of hairs with regard to what will translate in real life viewing. I understand that it is with the best of intentions this rigidity... I’m not saying throw the baby out with the bath water, I’m just saying that a slight variance is not going to make a difference when you get that diamond set and “living its life”.
I’m also confused with regard to the HCA scores... “reject anything under 2”... how about “reject anything less than Excellent for the top 3 categories” (& for spread if that is important to the buyer). Who cares what the next diagnostic steps are if the stone doesn’t score Excellent for all the performance categories. Isn’t that the whole point of this... performance... and top performers at that? Is it just about an HCA 2 and under, irregardless of how that calculation came to be?
I don’t understand why the rigidity on the numbers if they don’t yield all Excellents for the light performance categories on the HCA to begin with... yet you’ll reject a stone that does get top HCA performance scores but upon further investigation one spec may be off by mere fractions of a percent?
When I was buying my 2 ct. E, of which there aren’t a lot out there and most of them had Strong Fl, and I’ve seen other buyers mention they ran into the same issue. I would imagine even more difficult in a 3ct. When I was searching, of the 2 ct. E’s that were online, I noticed some with amazing prices (relatively speaking)... upon further investigation, they had Strong Fl (or noticeable dark inclusions through the table).

 

[TreeScientist]

The larger the stone, the more apparent the color will be. The photo of the diamond posted by a participant here show a great deal of body color which is perfectly fine... but not for someone who is in the market for D color... in which case G wouldn’t be the color for this buyer, and even more wrong in a 3 carat. A buyer looking for a 3 ct., D color, VS1 is not interested in something in a lower grade “to save money”.
I really take issue with this constant suggestion on every thread where someone is buying a diamond and is looking for a specific color and participants try to talk them into getting a lower color saying it won’t be detectable. I disagree on that, but WHAT IRKS ME EVEN MORE IS IF SOME GUY COMES ON HERE AND WANTS TO BUY HIS BELOVED A CERTAIN COLOR, WHO ARE WE TO TALK HIM OUT OF IT? That would make me furious if my guy was talked into buying a lower color by a complete stranger over the internet. I’m totally baffled by this. I know I will be received by responses of “cut, cut, cut” of which I totally get. I’m not saying sacrifice cut. I’m saying don’t tell these people to go down in color because they won’t see it. If they won’t see it then there would be no need for color grades. If a buyer isn’t happy with the size they will get for their budget based on all this, then it’s their decision where to compromise, but to tell them they won’t notice a difference is being irresponsible. Also, I don’t know why the buyer gives his desired 4Cs and is met with “... you could get a bigger diamond if...”. Maybe they don’t want a bigger diamond. I know it’s shocking to most of us here, but there’s a whole big world out there of people that don’t care about big.
And if the recipient wanted a specific color grade, or nothing lower than a specific grade, I don’t care how good the cut is, she’s not going to be happy. Her guy telling her that he went down on color to get a better cut means nothing to her... she was already expecting a “performer” in her mind anyhow. So all she sees is that he fell short of getting her what she wanted. So many here who have a “warmer color” in a super ideal selected the stone themselves (often as an upgrade) so you made that decision, it wasn’t made for you. If a guy wants to buy his girl a D color, the rarest of rare, why on earth would anyone talk him out of it, whether it’s this buyer for a 3 ct. or any other guy, even if buying a half carat.
With the colorless stones, especially in the case of D and E, it isn’t just less color (or, in this case, lack of color)... there is an optical aesthetic as if the diamond is “lit from within”, especially under certain lighting conditions. So when it is recommended here to go down in color and go up to super ideal, the super ideal suggestion is awesome, but you eliminate a positive visual element. So give and take, but just know what you’re giving and what you’re taking. And when you talk someone out of buying a colorless diamond because they won’t see the difference, you have taken that away from them
Regarding the fluorescence, there is a light box the stone can be placed in to determine if it will be of issue. However, I find it interesting that the GIA research in this topic is taken as gospel yet the GIA research on cut grade is completely rejected. Whether the study is accurate or not, I do believe with regard to that it “shouldn’t be an issue” the study gave the caveat of “in most diamonds”... well, I wouldn’t want to be the one who got stuck with one of the stones that didn’t make it into the “most” category. Historically, it is fact that perception in the trade has varied, which should give rise to the fact that perception will continue to change in which case you just better hope you aren’t trying to unload your diamond on a day that falls during a period where anything beyond Faint for colorless is the trend. Also, I think that someone who has made a career of brokering diamonds (taking this participant on their word) would know a thing or 2 about how this affects the sale of stones in the marketplace no matter the research.
While I think this forum brings much value, I think there is an element of that phrase “learned it on the internet” and the joke about “if it’s on the internet it must be true”, also “a little knowledge is a bad thing”. I think sometimes here there is some over-reaching. I also think sometimes there is the splitting of hairs with regard to what will translate in real life viewing. I understand that it is with the best of intentions this rigidity... I’m not saying throw the baby out with the bath water, I’m just saying that a slight variance is not going to make a difference when you get that diamond set and “living its life”.
I’m also confused with regard to the HCA scores... “reject anything under 2”... how about “reject anything less than Excellent for the top 3 categories” (& for spread if that is important to the buyer). Who cares what the next diagnostic steps are if the stone doesn’t score Excellent for all the performance categories. Isn’t that the whole point of this... performance... and top performers at that? Is it just about an HCA 2 and under, irregardless of how that calculation came to be?
I don’t understand why the rigidity on the numbers if they don’t yield all Excellents for the light performance categories on the HCA to begin with... yet you’ll reject a stone that does get top HCA performance scores but upon further investigation one spec may be off by mere fractions of a percent?
When I was buying my 2 ct. E, of which there aren’t a lot out there and most of them had Strong Fl, and I’ve seen other buyers mention they ran into the same issue. I would imagine even more difficult in a 3ct. When I was searching, of the 2 ct. E’s that were online, I noticed some with amazing prices (relatively speaking)... upon further investigation, they had Strong Fl (or noticeable dark inclusions through the table).

#Preach. Someone sticky this.

Another thing worth mentioning about forums is the hive mentality . Once a few vocal participants begin touting things like "high colors are a waste of money" and "no-one can tell the difference face-up between a D and a G," then it suddenly becomes gospel, whether it's actually true or not.

When I first began posting on here, if you weren't buying a SuperIdeal I/SI1 in the largest size that you could possibly afford, then you were wasting your money and might as well burn it in a trash heap. I'm glad to see a few other members now recognizing the benefits of high-colored diamonds. For a while I felt like the only one on here who could appreciate the difference.

 

[Ss52]

#Preach. Someone sticky this.

Another thing worth mentioning about forums is the hive mentality . Once a few vocal participants begin touting things like "high colors are a waste of money" and "no-one can tell the difference face-up between a D and a G," then it suddenly becomes gospel, whether it's actually true or not.

When I first began posting on here, if you weren't buying a SuperIdeal I/SI1 in the largest size that you could possibly afford, then you were wasting your money and might as well burn it in a trash heap. I'm glad to see a few other members now recognizing the benefits of high-colored diamonds. For a while I felt like the only one on here who could appreciate the difference.

AMEN!! to headlight and TreeScientist.

 

[bmfang]

#Preach. Someone sticky this.

Another thing worth mentioning about forums is the hive mentality . Once a few vocal participants begin touting things like "high colors are a waste of money" and "no-one can tell the difference face-up between a D and a G," then it suddenly becomes gospel, whether it's actually true or not.

When I first began posting on here, if you weren't buying a SuperIdeal I/SI1 in the largest size that you could possibly afford, then you were wasting your money and might as well burn it in a trash heap. I'm glad to see a few other members now recognizing the benefits of high-colored diamonds. For a while I felt like the only one on here who could appreciate the difference.

Hence for me in my responses to OP, he wanted to buy a D, lets just comment on the particular stone in question. If he wants to buy a D with fluor, even better value for money in my books. OP is breaking the conventional “rules” then (as evidenced by Brent who made the comment about fluor in D coloured stones).

Where I will be picky about it on cut. And OP’s original selection was not that bad in the first place. Do I think that they can do better? Yes, but if they ultimately want to buy this stone and be happy with it, then by all means do so and I’ll be happy for them about it.

Re: research by GIA on fluor vs GIA on cut, GIA has been utterly surpassed by AGS on cut. And that’s based on research that AGS have done on light performance of stones. For fluor, the reason why I take GIA on their word is because to my knowledge, there isn’t any other major study done by another lab on impact of fluorescence on viewing by professionals and consumers out there (happy to be proven wrong in this respect). What the “market” makes of fluor is different from what the GIA study revealed.

 

[headlight]

bmfang, I definitely appreciate your comments and duly noted. Thank you!

 

[msop04]

The larger the stone, the more apparent the color will be. The photo of the diamond posted by a participant here show a great deal of body color which is perfectly fine... but not for someone who is in the market for D color... in which case G wouldn’t be the color for this buyer, and even more wrong in a 3 carat. A buyer looking for a 3 ct., D color, VS1 is not interested in something in a lower grade “to save money”.
I really take issue with this constant suggestion on every thread where someone is buying a diamond and is looking for a specific color and participants try to talk them into getting a lower color saying it won’t be detectable. I disagree on that, but WHAT IRKS ME EVEN MORE IS IF SOME GUY COMES ON HERE AND WANTS TO BUY HIS BELOVED A CERTAIN COLOR, WHO ARE WE TO TALK HIM OUT OF IT? That would make me furious if my guy was talked into buying a lower color by a complete stranger over the internet. I’m totally baffled by this. I know I will be received by responses of “cut, cut, cut” of which I totally get. I’m not saying sacrifice cut. I’m saying don’t tell these people to go down in color because they won’t see it. If they won’t see it then there would be no need for color grades. If a buyer isn’t happy with the size they will get for their budget based on all this, then it’s their decision where to compromise, but to tell them they won’t notice a difference is being irresponsible. Also, I don’t know why the buyer gives his desired 4Cs and is met with “... you could get a bigger diamond if...”. Maybe they don’t want a bigger diamond. I know it’s shocking to most of us here, but there’s a whole big world out there of people that don’t care about big.
And if the recipient wanted a specific color grade, or nothing lower than a specific grade, I don’t care how good the cut is, she’s not going to be happy. Her guy telling her that he went down on color to get a better cut means nothing to her... she was already expecting a “performer” in her mind anyhow. So all she sees is that he fell short of getting her what she wanted. So many here who have a “warmer color” in a super ideal selected the stone themselves (often as an upgrade) so you made that decision, it wasn’t made for you. If a guy wants to buy his girl a D color, the rarest of rare, why on earth would anyone talk him out of it, whether it’s this buyer for a 3 ct. or any other guy, even if buying a half carat.
With the colorless stones, especially in the case of D and E, it isn’t just less color (or, in this case, lack of color)... there is an optical aesthetic as if the diamond is “lit from within”, especially under certain lighting conditions. So when it is recommended here to go down in color and go up to super ideal, the super ideal suggestion is awesome, but you eliminate a positive visual element. So give and take, but just know what you’re giving and what you’re taking. And when you talk someone out of buying a colorless diamond because they won’t see the difference, you have taken that away from them
Regarding the fluorescence, there is a light box the stone can be placed in to determine if it will be of issue. However, I find it interesting that the GIA research in this topic is taken as gospel yet the GIA research on cut grade is completely rejected. Whether the study is accurate or not, I do believe with regard to that it “shouldn’t be an issue” the study gave the caveat of “in most diamonds”... well, I wouldn’t want to be the one who got stuck with one of the stones that didn’t make it into the “most” category. Historically, it is fact that perception in the trade has varied, which should give rise to the fact that perception will continue to change in which case you just better hope you aren’t trying to unload your diamond on a day that falls during a period where anything beyond Faint for colorless is the trend. Also, I think that someone who has made a career of brokering diamonds (taking this participant on their word) would know a thing or 2 about how this affects the sale of stones in the marketplace no matter the research.
While I think this forum brings much value, I think there is an element of that phrase “learned it on the internet” and the joke about “if it’s on the internet it must be true”, also “a little knowledge is a bad thing”. I think sometimes here there is some over-reaching. I also think sometimes there is the splitting of hairs with regard to what will translate in real life viewing. I understand that it is with the best of intentions this rigidity... I’m not saying throw the baby out with the bath water, I’m just saying that a slight variance is not going to make a difference when you get that diamond set and “living its life”.
I’m also confused with regard to the HCA scores... “reject anything under 2”... how about “reject anything less than Excellent for the top 3 categories” (& for spread if that is important to the buyer). Who cares what the next diagnostic steps are if the stone doesn’t score Excellent for all the performance categories. Isn’t that the whole point of this... performance... and top performers at that? Is it just about an HCA 2 and under, irregardless of how that calculation came to be?
I don’t understand why the rigidity on the numbers if they don’t yield all Excellents for the light performance categories on the HCA to begin with... yet you’ll reject a stone that does get top HCA performance scores but upon further investigation one spec may be off by mere fractions of a percent?
When I was buying my 2 ct. E, of which there aren’t a lot out there and most of them had Strong Fl, and I’ve seen other buyers mention they ran into the same issue. I would imagine even more difficult in a 3ct. When I was searching, of the 2 ct. E’s that were online, I noticed some with amazing prices (relatively speaking)... upon further investigation, they had Strong Fl (or noticeable dark inclusions through the table).

...and on the flip side, the majority of people just want a white, sparkly diamond. And most ppl see a G and think it “must be a D because it’s so white”.

I happen to know a LOT of women whose husbands bought them a D/E color diamond (6 to be exact), albeit but a much smaller stone than they desired or were expecting...

“...but it’s a DEEEEE, honey!” Regardless of it being super white, they were disappointed by the size their husbands sacrificed by going super colorless. Each one has said many times that, although they can appreciate that their husbands thought they were doing great by buying D/VS, they would’ve been happier with a larger G/H. Why? Because they, as is the case with many women, would rather have a larger “white enough” diamond than a small super white diamond. All of them feel like their husband wasted money by going with a smaller D/E, as opposed to a larger G/H.

Every. Single. One. All six.

Now... if the intended has looked and compared GIA colors and still wants a D, then please, try to get her that D. But many women (and men) have never compared GIA graded stones IRL to see if they can see tint in specific colors OR if any perceived tint even bothers them.

This is why we advise others to take the time to personally compare diamond colors so they won’t have to take another’s opinions as gospel. They need to experience what their eyes can actually see and what their tolerances really are before digging deep into their pockets and springing for a D/IF blindly.

Why? Because PS is here to help educate consumers so that they make the best, most responsible, and INFORMED decision when making such an expensive and emotional purchase.

That’s all.

 

[headlight]

msop04: What you said about taking the time to personally see & compare is definitely the best way to go! I'm surprised that the group you spoke of were disappointed with what they received and wish they had different parameters. So a similar disappointment like I mentioned, just the other way around! Well, as my husband always says, "I'm not a mind-reader" lol! So much pressure and cost and one shot to get it right (unless, of course, you have a good trade-up policy!!!). Thanks for the perspective.

 

[lovedogs]

...and on the flip side, the majority of people just want a white, sparkly diamond. And most ppl see a G and think it “must be a D because it’s so white”.

I happen to know a LOT of women whose husbands bought them a D/E color diamond (6 to be exact), albeit but a much smaller stone than they desired or were expecting...

“...but it’s a DEEEEE, honey!” Regardless of it being super white, they were disappointed by the size their husbands sacrificed by going super colorless. Each one has said many times that, although they can appreciate that their husbands thought they were doing great by buying D/VS, they would’ve been happier with a larger G/H. Why? Because they, as is the case with many women, would rather have a larger “white enough” diamond than a small super white diamond. All of them feel like their husband wasted money by going with a smaller D/E, as opposed to a larger G/H.

Every. Single. One. All six.

Now... if the intended has looked and compared GIA colors and still wants a D, then please, try to get her that D. But many women (and men) have never compared GIA graded stones IRL to see if they can see tint in specific colors OR if any perceived tint even bothers them.

This is why we advise others to take the time to personally compare diamond colors so they won’t have to take another’s opinions as gospel. They need to experience what their eyes can actually see and what their tolerances really are before digging deep into their pockets and springing for a D/IF blindly.

Why? Because PS is here to help educate consumers so that they make the best, most responsible, and INFORMED decision when making such an expensive and emotional purchase.

That’s all.

This underlined and bolded part is EXACTLY why I ask the new posters that say they want a D/VVS stone if they are sure that their intended wants/requires those things. Because many many people can't see the difference between a D/E/F/G, especially not between a D/E/F, and an eye-clean SI1 is often a great value. Everyone has a budget, and it's critical to balance the budget with the desires/expectations of the couple themselves. It isn't as though I think everyone who gets a D-F stone is wrong, because many of them know their (or their intended's) color sensitivity, and knows that the preference is for a super white stone. But when people don't make informed choices then they are almost always overpaying or de-valuing cut, which is a problem.

 

[LLJsmom]

I have family members who reacted exactly like @msop04 described, young women who can’t tell and don’t care that much about clarity grade on a piece of paper, or color. They judge by their eyes and the most obvious things that jumped out at them was size and sparkle. Sometimes color if there is a huge difference. I have tried explaining about cut and ASETs and showing inclusion plots and most of them started having that glazed look in their eyes and I could see the mental blast doors shutting like in Star Wars. Thus a lot of the advice given here is highly practical. Not everyone prefers big and sparkly but in my experience most do.

 

[lydial]

Anyone notice this is one of those threads where the OP disappears and the PS’ers have Lots and Lots to say? Maybe we scared the OP away.

 

[bmfang]

Anyone notice this is one of those threads where the OP disappears and the PS’ers have Lots and Lots to say? Maybe we scared the OP away.

That or they’ve just gone and bought a stone

 

[LLJsmom]

That or they’ve just gone and bought a stone

 

[msop04]

That or they’ve just gone and bought a stone

What’s that saying? ...you can lead a horse to water...

 

[motownmama]

I thought the same thing!
“Knock knock OP - are you there?!”

 

[ALRAAA]

Thank you everybody for your informative comments.

I never left. I am merely watching and learning.

The medium fluo ring was thoroughly inspected in a multitude of environments. One can only see the localized fluorescence under black light, so I don't care very much for it.

It is true the stone whose video I posted is D colored, but I am also open to an F - and as long as it's eye clean, clarity isn't a big deal either.

The appraiser helping me make my decision is a wonderful gentleman. I understand that he's sort of a superstar in the diamond industry.

His stance is that I might find a better cut diamond, but the difference in real world performance, not a lab environment, does not always justify the increase in price. He believes this is such a case.

Interestingly, he also did not seem particularly fond of the perfection in hearts and arrows or aca standards. He pointed that they're starting to lack personality and look all the same - cookie cutter.

Regardless, he's encouraged me to see one for myself before making my final decision.

 

[ALRAAA]

"His stance is that I might find a better cut diamond, but the difference in real world performance, not a lab environment, does not always justify the increase in price. He believes this is such a case."

I'd love to open this up for debate.

 

[bmfang]

"His stance is that I might find a better cut diamond, but the difference in real world performance, not a lab environment, does not always justify the increase in price. He believes this is such a case."

I'd love to open this up for debate.

There is truth in what he says. But it comes down to what prices are showing up for equivalent stones with the same colour clarity and carat combinations. Given that GIA XXX is a very very wide range compared with AGS 000, if prices were similar on two stones, one with AGS 000 light performance vs a GIA XXX that has poorer light performance, then I’d rather the AGS 000 one anyway.

If you are talking a couple of grand however, then I’d be tempted to go the other way around assuming that the GIA XXX stone performs decently in most lighting conditions.

Having said that, after seeing the super ideals my wife now has vs a regular GIA XXX she also has, my eyes prefer the super ideal in a variety of real life lighting conditions. But that’s me. Not you.

 

[headlight]

That or they’ve just gone and bought a stone

That seems more likely!!!

 

[ALRAAA]

That seems more likely!!!

You're wrong. I am still here

 

[ALRAAA]

There is truth in what he says. But it comes down to what prices are showing up for equivalent stones with the same colour clarity and carat combinations. Given that GIA XXX is a very very wide range compared with AGS 000, if prices were similar on two stones, one with AGS 000 light performance vs a GIA XXX that has poorer light performance, then I’d rather the AGS 000 one anyway.

According to the specifications, the 3 carat stone is AGS ideal and GIA XXX. Although when I inspected it under the ideal scope I could see a clear ring inside just around the table.

For comparison's sake, i could get an ACA from white flash. here is how the math would work out. I'd need to drop about half a carat, drop to F, and essentially add 10% to the price.
Not sure if the performance will be worth it.

 

[AV_]

... but the difference in real world performance ...

I find pleasure in putting things OTT - in some respect or other, within common sense & good reason (yet!)

 

[ALRAAA]

I find pleasure in putting things OTT - in some respect or other, within common sense & good reason (yet!)

please elaborate.

 

[AV_]

Cut so precise to make crisp calidoscope like patterns visible in precious stones is... crazy (story of approximations: www) & a high sport of impossible precission against futile odds (or so I feel)... of attention paid to crystals and to how they are seen, enough to write a book of poems some day.

 

[ALRAAA]

Cut so precise to make crisp calidoscope like patterns visible in precious stones is... crazy (story of approximations: www) & a high sport of impossible precission against futile odds (or so I feel)... of attention paid to crystals and to how they are seen, enough to write a book of poems some day.

Interesting you should write that.
The expert said there will never be a perfect cut; it's like art - always evolving...best to stop chasing the mirage. Yet, here I am - presenting a diamond ring this week.

 

[AV_]

There are higher standards of precission in diamond cutting beyond jewelry (eg. diamond screens).


Then, the sense occassion of the engagement really must overwhelm just about anything about this diamond... These things are interesting as a pursuit, if you will, but not NOW!