Helping a buddy of mine with online shopping

[SpideyWeb]

Hi people! Sorry had been out for a while but have been checking back here for stories and pics once in a while. One of my buddies is going to pop the question soon and he is now sourcing for a rock (after giving up on the extreme mark-up on Tiffany''s)... I have introduced him to this fantastic site for some self learning and info...

He has done a fair bit of homework and has narrowed down his choice to 3 rocks...
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?find=1&cid=130&item=1155467
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?find=1&cid=130&item=1180905
http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-55609.htm

My opinion for these 3 rocks:
1155467: Not particularly excited about the fluorescence with such white colour (E). Not sure if it will turn out murky. HCA is excellent at 0.7.
1180905: I quite like this rock. HCA excellent at 1.8 but haven''t had a chance to see IS image.
AGS6327901: Looks like a winner. HCA at 0.6. Is the polish of Very Good a call for concern?

Would like to seek your expert views. Thanks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/28/2008 7:13:16 AM
Author:SpideyWeb
Hi people! Sorry had been out for a while but have been checking back here for stories and pics once in a while. One of my buddies is going to pop the question soon and he is now sourcing for a rock (after giving up on the extreme mark-up on Tiffany''s)... I have introduced him to this fantastic site for some self learning and info...

He has done a fair bit of homework and has narrowed down his choice to 3 rocks...
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?find=1&cid=130&item=1155467
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamond.asp?find=1&cid=130&item=1180905
http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-55609.htm

My opinion for these 3 rocks:
1155467: Not particularly excited about the fluorescence with such white colour (E). Not sure if it will turn out murky. HCA is excellent at 0.7.
1180905: I quite like this rock. HCA excellent at 1.8 but haven''t had a chance to see IS image.
AGS6327901: Looks like a winner. HCA at 0.6. Is the polish of Very Good a call for concern?

Would like to seek your expert views. Thanks!

Hi Spidey, how are you? I hope you and your GF are still enjoying your lovely ring!

You have some nice selections there - faint fluorescence in the first diamond shouldn''t be an issue, that looks like a bad pic of the diamond, so I would request more pics and an Idealscope image from James Allen.

The second looks promising also, again request an IS image.

The WF diamond looks nice, the VG polish shouldn''t be of concern unless your friend prefers higher, you shouldn''t be able to see a difference from good and above with the naked untrained eye.

I would get the IS images from JA then go from there.

 

[SpideyWeb]

Lorelei, thanks for the quick reply! Indeed my wife and I are still both loving that beautiful rock! She no longer thinks it is too big to be worn on a daily basis. Haha...

Yeah my buddy had emailed to request for IS images from JA. Just wondering, IS images would not be able to tell if fluorescence is affecting the rock right? Only pics taken (with correct lighting) will be able to tell? I was concerned about it because the magnified image doesn''t look that nice...

The difficulty now comes with zeroing on either the JA rock or the WF rock, if both are from the same store at least my friend could get an expert opinion on which is a better choice... Personally I like the WF rock (not sure why)...

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 7/28/2008 7:27:47 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
Lorelei, thanks for the quick reply! Indeed my wife and I are still both loving that beautiful rock! She no longer thinks it is too big to be worn on a daily basis. Haha...

Yeah my buddy had emailed to request for IS images from JA. Just wondering, IS images would not be able to tell if fluorescence is affecting the rock right? Only pics taken (with correct lighting) will be able to tell? I was concerned about it because the magnified image doesn''t look that nice...

The difficulty now comes with zeroing on either the JA rock or the WF rock, if both are from the same store at least my friend could get an expert opinion on which is a better choice... Personally I like the WF rock (not sure why)...

It is great to '' see'' you again Spidey! I wasn''t sure if you had got married yet, but please accept my congratulations!!!

Ok, so with the rocks, then that is the next move taken care of, with your buddy waiting on the IS from JA. The IS images wouldn''t tell us about fluorescence adversely affecting the diamond, I think it is a bad picture personally of that diamond, faint fluorescence wouldn''t make the diamond look cloudy. What I would do, is to query the pic, and ask for some more to be taken of that diamond and sent - I bet it is fine and just the photography as there should be no reason why it would be a murky stone!

As to the final choice, I guess also it comes down to which vendor also has the setting he likes, also if an upgrade might ever be a consideration, then check out the terms of each vendor to see which you prefer.

 

[Ellen]

Spidey!! Good to see you again.

And congratulations on your marriage!

(glad to hear she doesn't find it too big, imagine that

)


The first looks great on paper, and no, faint flo won't have any affect on it. I have read from the real experts here that it's only at strong to very strong flo that the rare negative affect happens. So it will be just fine. An IS will help with the rest.

The second looks like a potentially good stone, but again, would like to see an IS.

As for the WF stone, it looks good also. VG polish should not be a problem at all.


Just going on paper, I like everything about the first one best, then the second, and last the WF stone. Of course the IS pics could change my mind.

 

[SpideyWeb]

Thanks for all your well wishes! You folks are the nicest! Thanks for the invaluable advice, the IS pics should be available soon... See if I could get hold of them and post them here...

Once again, thanks!

PS: Ellen, any reason why you prefer the first rock over the second?

 

[Ellen]

Date: 7/29/2008 1:46:12 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
Thanks for all your well wishes! You folks are the nicest! Thanks for the invaluable advice, the IS pics should be available soon... See if I could get hold of them and post them here...

Once again, thanks!

PS: Ellen, any reason why you prefer the first rock over the second?

The crown and pavilion angles are a bit safer (on paper), but that''s not to say the second one can''t be pretty! That''s why I said the IS pics could change my mind.

And you''re quite welcome.

 

[SpideyWeb]

Now see if it works in posting pics... Have been trying it for the past hour (sigh)...

Now the IS image for JA 1155467.

 

[SpideyWeb]

This is the IS for JA''s second rock 1180905.

 

[SpideyWeb]

This one is for WF''s rock AGS6327901..

 

[SpideyWeb]

The guy at JS told my friend that the second rock has some light escaping the edges but not much. And the first JA rock does look better on IS (Ellen you were right!

) but you could see the inclusion specks (I have asked my friend to check with JA if the rock is eye clean)...

Now is JA first rock a good choice or would the one wt WF be a better choice?

Sorry for being such a pain because I am trying help my firend through this heavy investment and it was me who suggested for him to look online.

 

[Lorelei]

Spidey, I think either 1 or 3 would be a good choice, also it depends on whether your friend would prefer E or F colour.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 7/31/2008 2:13:43 AM
Author: SpideyWeb
The guy at JS told my friend that the second rock has some light escaping the edges but not much. And the first JA rock does look better on IS (Ellen you were right!

) but you could see the inclusion specks (I have asked my friend to check with JA if the rock is eye clean)...

Now is JA first rock a good choice or would the one wt WF be a better choice?

Sorry for being such a pain because I am trying help my firend through this heavy investment and it was me who suggested for him to look online.

Either would be nice. The price is now gone from the JA stone, and I don''t recall what it was, but I imagine it''s less? Assuming it''s eyeclean (almost assuredly), I would probably go with that one.

And you''re not being a pain!