shape
carat
color
clarity

Help with looking for Princess 2 CT

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

GCheung55

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
4
Hey everyone! I'm new to the forum, but have been reading a lot to learn as much as I can.

I've been looking into diamonds for about a month visiting brick/mortar and e-jewelers. I've visited stores with my girlfriend so I know she wants a 2ct. Hopefully I can get one within my budget of $10,000.

The specs I have been looking for in a diamond are:
About 2 carats
Color: D to H
Clarity: FL to VS2
Polish/Symmetry: Ideal to VG
Florescence: none to slight
Table % slightly larger than depth % (maybe it will appear larger on her finger?)
W/L Ratio 1.00 - 1.09

But the more I look, the more I feel disheartened that I won't be able to find the best diamond within my budget. I may end up having to increase my budget a bit.. So I turn to you awesome passionate people of this forum for some help. Will you assist me in finding that perfect diamond? I really appreciate it.

-Garrick-
 
Table size bigger than depth do not necessary make a stone look larger but usually will result in less brilliant stone. Is that still your criteria rather than just finding a brilliant stone?

And it is impossible to get a 2c for 10k with those color and clarity specs, maybe a rough, sorry.
 
With your budget I would strongly suggest looking at SI clarity and possibly I color. With an eye-clean SI1 or SI2, you won't be able to tell that it's not IF. And in a well cut stone, I color should be barely perceptible if at all. My princess is an I, and the face-up color is imperceptible to me. Alternatively, you could go down in size just a tad, but it sounds like the magic 2ct number is important to her. What is most important to her...size or color? That may help decide what you can loosen up on first.

Here are some options (ask for Idealscope images)...

This stone looks well-cut from the picture, but it's an I and slightly below the 2 carat mark:
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VS2-Premium-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1243863.asp

Another I that could be a contender (faces up large but is slightly off-square):
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VS2-Premium-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1243862.asp

2ct F/SI2, but no photo available. You would have to call JA and ask for a photo and an Idealscope image, then post for us to evaluate; also ask if it's eye-clean to your standards:
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI2-Premium-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1239605.asp

ETA: Looking a little more closely at that 3rd option, I don't like the girdle (VTN-VTK). May still be worth getting pics, but just make sure the "very thin" part isn't a durability issue. And the "very thick" part is hidden carat weight.
 
jstar, I think you got the two I VS2 mixed up. The first stone is the off square.
 
Date: 6/11/2009 8:43:25 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
jstar, I think you got the two I VS2 mixed up. The first stone is the off square.

Oops, you''re right! I had the tabs mixed up on my browser.
 
Great selections ladies!
36.gif
36.gif
36.gif
36.gif
 
Thanks for your suggestions, everyone.

Date: 6/11/2009 8:22:48 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Table size bigger than depth do not necessary make a stone look larger but usually will result in less brilliant stone. Is that still your criteria rather than just finding a brilliant stone?


And it is impossible to get a 2c for 10k with those color and clarity specs, maybe a rough, sorry.

If that''s the case then I''d much rather find a brilliant stone.

Date: 6/11/2009 8:32:28 PM
Author: jstarfireb
With your budget I would strongly suggest looking at SI clarity and possibly I color. With an eye-clean SI1 or SI2, you won''t be able to tell that it''s not IF. And in a well cut stone, I color should be barely perceptible if at all. My princess is an I, and the face-up color is imperceptible to me. Alternatively, you could go down in size just a tad, but it sounds like the magic 2ct number is important to her. What is most important to her...size or color? That may help decide what you can loosen up on first.

I believe size is more important to her since she has mentioned that aspect of a diamond more than the other specs. I''ll check with JA for the photo and idealscope image.

Based on what everyone has said, I guess I''ll have to give in a bit and change my specs up to I and SI1 for my budget. I''ll continue to search and post my findings here so everyone can evaluate.

Thanks again!
 
Date: 6/12/2009 5:10:04 PM
Author: GCheung55
Thanks for your suggestions, everyone.


Date: 6/11/2009 8:22:48 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
Table size bigger than depth do not necessary make a stone look larger but usually will result in less brilliant stone. Is that still your criteria rather than just finding a brilliant stone?


And it is impossible to get a 2c for 10k with those color and clarity specs, maybe a rough, sorry.

If that''s the case then I''d much rather find a brilliant stone. It is actually more complicated than the table being greater than the depth concerning a Princess''s beauty and performance, there are various critical factors that need to be considered. Ideally the table % should be less than the depth to begin with but this is no guarantee in itself of a great looking diamond. Work with trusted vendors who have in house hand selected Princess specially chosen for their beauty and optics, with images provided.

This link explains further.

http://www.highperformancediamonds.com/index.php?page=education-performance


Date: 6/11/2009 8:32:28 PM
Author: jstarfireb
With your budget I would strongly suggest looking at SI clarity and possibly I color. With an eye-clean SI1 or SI2, you won''t be able to tell that it''s not IF. And in a well cut stone, I color should be barely perceptible if at all. My princess is an I, and the face-up color is imperceptible to me. Alternatively, you could go down in size just a tad, but it sounds like the magic 2ct number is important to her. What is most important to her...size or color? That may help decide what you can loosen up on first.

I believe size is more important to her since she has mentioned that aspect of a diamond more than the other specs. I''ll check with JA for the photo and idealscope image.

Based on what everyone has said, I guess I''ll have to give in a bit and change my specs up to I and SI1 for my budget. I''ll continue to search and post my findings here so everyone can evaluate.

Thanks again!
 
Hmmmmm...maybe this one?
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-SI1-Good-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1016869.asp

It''s hard to evaluate princesses just from photos, but that photo actually looks pretty decent to me, so I''m not sure why it got a "good" cut grade from JA rather than premium or ideal. It is also a tad off-square, but this may or may not be visually perceptible. May be worth asking for an IS and more photos.
 
Date: 6/13/2009 11:52:39 AM
Author: jstarfireb
Hmmmmm...maybe this one?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-SI1-Good-Cut-Princess-Diamond-1016869.asp


It's hard to evaluate princesses just from photos, but that photo actually looks pretty decent to me, so I'm not sure why it got a 'good' cut grade from JA rather than premium or ideal. It is also a tad off-square, but this may or may not be visually perceptible. May be worth asking for an IS and more photos.



They sent me the IS image.

1239605.jpg
 
Are you sure that''s the same stone? The shape of the table looks different. Either way, I''d pass...too much leakage.
 
Date: 6/19/2009 3:31:45 PM
Author: jstarfireb
Are you sure that''s the same stone? The shape of the table looks different. Either way, I''d pass...too much leakage.
Definitely not the same stone--inclusions are different.

Looking at the number for the attachment, it may be the IS for the F SI2 you linked above--the IS seems to match the inclusion plot on the GIA cert.
 
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
Top