Help! Which diamond to chose?! Depth & Table Issues

[DiamondSEEKER 1452]

Hi all,

Having trouble selecting a diamond. Would you guys pick -

1.73, VS1, Triple Ex, No Flor, Depth 58.80, Table 60 ($19,680) - https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...f-color-vs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-2295702

1.81, VS2, Triple Ex, No Flor, Depth 62, Table 57 ($20,500) - https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...f-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-1829424

The 1.73 stone isn't as deep and is slightly cheaper than the 1.81. Does this mean it would look similar size? Which stone would you go for?

P.S They say not available because I've ordered them in to have a look at but I don't have a lot of time and am considering buying online.

Thank you very much in advance for your help!

 

[Dster]

I wouldn't choose either. You can do much better.

It is suggested you narrow it down to diamonds that score 2.0 or under on the HCA tool. https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca This is a rejection tool. One diamond scores 3.7 the other 2.6.

Once you find one under 2.0 then you will need to investigate further asking for ASET or idealscope images.

Also try to follow these parameters from diamondseeker

table: 54-58

depth: 60-62.3

crown angle: 34-35.0 (up to 35.5 crown angle can sometimes work with a 40.6 pav angle)

pavilion angle: 40.6-40.9 (sometimes 41.0 if the crown angle is close to 34)

 

[bmfang]

Of those two you linked to, the second is better, but like Dster has said, I wouldn't choose either of these. You can do a lot better. Using the parameters he has suggested, you should be able to find something much better.

 

[ac117]

Is there a cultural reason you're going for such high color? Neither of the stones you chose falls within ideal parameters.

This is what I would go for if I were you:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-g-color-vs1-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-2280851
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3646318.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3730021.htm

 

[DiamondSEEKER 1452]

Thanks so much for all your help! It is tricky to find a winner. When I was looking for diamonds with my girlfriend she could notice the yellow in the G colour.

 

[DiamondSEEKER 1452]

I actually thought by choosing a stone with slightly less depth + greater table you would get a stone that would face up bigger. But, do you think in doing so, you'd end up with something that just looks like a piece of glass?

 

[ac117]

Were the stones you looked at GIA or AGS certified? Most mall jewelers carry stones that certified by places like EGL or IGI or an in-house 'appraisal', which we do NOT recommend because they are softer on color and clarity grading. This means that if you were looking at a EGL stone labeled G color, it would likely be H or I by GIA/AGS standards.

There isn't an issue with the table or depth of the stones you chose - it's the pavilion and crown angle combinations that are not complimentary and will likely result in light leakage. Cut is the most important thing in a diamond to make it sparkle and that doesn't only mean table/depth. These are the parameters to stay within ideal territory in a GIA triple excellent cut stone (AGS 000 stones already vet for light performance):
Table: 54-58
Depth: 60-62.3
Crown Angle: 34-35 (sometimes 35.5 with a 40.6 PA)
Pavilion Angle: 40.6-40.9 (sometimes 41 with a 34 CA)

I believe what you mean with the table/depth is your preference for a 60/60 type stone, which generally have a greater spread and favor white light return over colored light return or fire. However, the angles are still an important factor to consider.

 

[whitewave]

It is important to know where your GF looked at diamonds where she could see color in a G and who certified it (we are all going to guess EGL).

It likely wasn't GIA or AGS certified.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Table size is not the same as diameter. Don't go by that. Only look at diameter to compare size. But if you use the parameters above, you won't get a stone that is too deep. Also, she certainly could have been looking at an EGL G or another unreliable lab graded stone. Stick with ideal cut stones first and foremost, then color and clarity.

 

[DiamondSEEKER 1452]

Thanks for all your help!! All your input is very helpful & you all saved me buying a crappy diamond!

Would this stone be better? It is very close to the specifications:

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...f-color-vvs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-968844

Re: colour I think she said the stones she saw were GIA. Is it possible for a GIA stone 'G' colour to show some yellow tones? She said the F showed no yellow at all.

 

[ac117]

Thanks for all your help!! All your input is very helpful & you all saved me buying a crappy diamond!

Would this stone be better? It is very close to the specifications:

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...f-color-vvs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-968844

Re: colour I think she said the stones she saw were GIA. Is it possible for a GIA stone 'G' colour to show some yellow tones? She said the F showed no yellow at all.

That stone looks to have leakage and I wouldn't buy it unless they could provide an ideal scope. If you must have F color, I like these:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-f-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-2280849
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...e-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-2618042
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...f-color-vs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-2575447

Ask if they have ideal scopes on any of them. To your question on color, color is graded face down and is a spectrum. I don't find G to be yellow at all but if you hold it next to a D color you will certainly see a difference. It would be very difficult for an untrained person to see the difference between 2 color grades side by side face up. Once set it's even harder.

 

[DiamondSEEKER 1452]

Thank you very much for helping me! I think I might request the ideal scope for that one! Do you have any issue with faint florescence? It can bring the price down a bit. I dont know if I want to go as far as medium for risk of appearing quite blue in black UV light (not that it happens too often)

 

[DiamondSEEKER 1452]

Sorry for the last link you posted. The other 2 links have inclusions on the face. I thought they might be more visible

 

[ac117]

Not sure which stone you're talking about bc these 3 have negligible and no fluorescence. Faint fluorescence is not an issue at all and wouldn't look blue. Those videos are at 20x magnification....zoom out even halfway and the tiny inclusions disappear. I wouldn't be concerned about the eye cleanliness of either of them. I urge you to consider the 1.73 F VS2 since it's AGS certified and already vetted for light performance.

 

[DiamondSEEKER 1452]

Thanks for your reply! This one is only half a point too high on the crown, would you highly recommend not diverting at all from the specs?

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...f-color-vs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-2580004

 

[Dster]

In my opinion the 1.73 F VS2 that ac117 suggested is a better diamond than the one you just mentioned, it also has a slightly bigger diameter not that you would be able to tell & would save you some $$ for the setting.​

 

[DiamondSEEKER 1452]

Thanks so much, thats super helpful. Does a bigger diameter mean it would look around the same size despite the carat difference?

 

[Dster]

Yes it does.
Plug in the dimensions of any diamonds you are comparing into this and you will visually see any difference http://www.diamdb.com/
You can even adjust the finger length and ring size to see it on the finger. Remember to put in the carat weight and type (round) so you get an accurate idea.