I had an I diamond appraised today, and was told that it was a K.

[Eva17]

OMG I can''t believe I read all 12 pages.... phew

Harriet good luck with whatever you decide. For that money, you should absolutely, positively, BE IN LOVE

Since the cert is what the price is based upon, then I would want to be sure my money was spent on the specifics I was expected to pay for. Buying a diamond is a trade off, and we all give up something when we find the stone that talks to us.

As metioned in previous threads, diamonds are graded and priced according to minute deteails. And a color grade issue is not minute. GIA and AGS are respected and pricier for a reason, so we expect to get what we are paying for when we choose to go with their certs. If I wanted to buy a diamond with a subjective cert, then I would buy EGL.

Again, good luck!

 

[SKR]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:02:45 PM
Author: Harriet

Date: 12/30/2006 4:59:26 PM
Author: SKR

Date: 12/30/2006 4:50:48 PM
Author: Harriet
I''m curious -- Who would buy the infamous stone at issue (assuming the budget permits it)?

Harriet - i have limited interest in buying the stone in question. Not because there is anything wrong with it but simply because once I can afford it, I will probably want to go slightly bigger.

Are you still mulling it over and have you been speaking to WF ?

Can you find something bigger that''s as well-cut? (I''m not sure my stone should be any larger -- my fingers are a short 5.5 in size, and I have to buy kids'' gloves.)

Yes.

Yes definately you can. WF for example have this one (but the price seems to go up exponentially and I am not sure about the inclusions on this one) -

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-72771.htm#

There are others as well - search by cut if you need to find more.

Regarding you finger size - in my opinion you could probably wear at least a 4.5ct without it looking stupid. Others may disagree but in my opinion the bigger the better.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:18:23 PM
Author: SKR

Date: 12/30/2006 5:02:45 PM

Author: Harriet

Date: 12/30/2006 4:59:26 PM

Author: SKR

Date: 12/30/2006 4:50:48 PM

Author: Harriet

I'm curious -- Who would buy the infamous stone at issue (assuming the budget permits it)?

Harriet - i have limited interest in buying the stone in question. Not because there is anything wrong with it but simply because once I can afford it, I will probably want to go slightly bigger.


Are you still mulling it over and have you been speaking to WF ?

Can you find something bigger that's as well-cut? (I'm not sure my stone should be any larger -- my fingers are a short 5.5 in size, and I have to buy kids' gloves.)


Yes.

Yes definately you can. WF for example have this one (but the price seems to go up exponentially and I am not sure about the inclusions on this one) -


http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-72771.htm#


There are others as well - search by cut if you need to find more.


Regarding you finger size - in my opinion you could probably wear at least a 4.5ct without it looking stupid. Others may disagree but in my opinion the bigger the better.

Hmmmm... I don't know about that. Even I (total size whore that I am with a finger size close to Harriet's) tried on a 5 ct and thought it looked ridiculous. At the very least it looked *not real*. Keep in mind that was a round; I think in fancy shapes you can go bigger.

 

[Harriet]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:18:23 PM
Author: SKR

Date: 12/30/2006 5:02:45 PM
Author: Harriet

Date: 12/30/2006 4:59:26 PM
Author: SKR

Date: 12/30/2006 4:50:48 PM
Author: Harriet
I''m curious -- Who would buy the infamous stone at issue (assuming the budget permits it)?

Harriet - i have limited interest in buying the stone in question. Not because there is anything wrong with it but simply because once I can afford it, I will probably want to go slightly bigger.

Are you still mulling it over and have you been speaking to WF ?

Can you find something bigger that''s as well-cut? (I''m not sure my stone should be any larger -- my fingers are a short 5.5 in size, and I have to buy kids'' gloves.)

Yes.

Yes definately you can. WF for example have this one (but the price seems to go up exponentially and I am not sure about the inclusions on this one) -

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-72771.htm#

There are others as well - search by cut if you need to find more.

Regarding you finger size - in my opinion you could probably wear at least a 4.5ct without it looking stupid. Others may disagree but in my opinion the bigger the better.

My budget''s not that generous. If it were, I''d take this one:
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-72794.htm

 

[SKR]

Dee Jay - I don''t necessarily agree with this but I thought the guideline was 1ct down from your finger size (as a maximum) ?

 

[SKR]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:24:02 PM
Author: Harriet




My budget's not that generous. If it were, I'd take this one:
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-72794.htm

I would have as well. But now I would rather get the 5ct for the same price (as long as it was eye clean).

So Harriet given you are still searching, have you given up on getting the stone in question ?

 

[KtIceRN]

Harriet....if money was not an issue I would totally take your stone!

Just thinking

.....we can trade if you want

... mines a tad bit smaller but it''s got the fluro that Cehrabehra was talking about.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:24:24 PM
Author: SKR
Dee Jay - I don''t necessarily agree with this but I thought the guideline was 1ct down from your finger size (as a maximum) ?

SKR, I''m not sure there really is a "rule." I was just speaking from personal experience; belive me, the 5 ct looked stupid on me! But everything is a personal choice, and probably also has a lot to do with the lifestyle that you live and the circles that you travel in. Maybe Harriet''s last name is Astor and anything less that 3 cts would be considered *diamond dust* in her reality.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Harriet, since you asked, I''ll give you an answer. For my own ring, I chose a 1.6 H VS1(and it is a high H that scores a G on a machine) whereas I could have had a 2 ct. J for the same money. So you see where I am coming from. I set H as my bottom color that I''d consider, but I am open to a good I color. And I think KT''s J stone with flourescence would be very nice as well.

If I for sure wanted a 3 ct. stone, I''d look at the other I VS2 stone and compare it to the one you have now. I''d only consider the stone you are looking at now if the price was adjusted for the color. But I think a 3 ct. J is just one of those things that is a personal preference thing. You can''t do any better than an ACA stone as far as overall beauty, that''s for sure. But it''s worth it to be SURE you love both the cut and the color in a ring that you plan to wear for a lifetime. I did order two other stones before I found the one I kept, but I knew for sure when I found the one I really loved. I had doubts about the others, and my philosophy is, when in doubt, don''t. Have you asked WF if they are expecting any more large stones in the near future?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:24:02 PM
Author: Harriet
My budget''s not that generous. If it were, I''d take this one:
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-72794.htm

Same here, Harriet. I''d rather have a smaller G than a 5 ct. I stone anyday. No one would think a 5 carat stone is real unless you were a celebrity.

 

[SKR]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:50:48 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Have you asked WF if they are expecting any more large stones in the near future?

Thats a really good point. They will know whats being cut at the moment etc.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Dee Jay, what color is your new stone? I forget..is it a G?

Harriet, Dee Jay has a 3 ct. stone and it is beautiful! I am sure she looked at several when she was upgrading.

What did you think of color in larger stones, Dee Jay?

 

[Mara]

exceptional 3c+ stones are far and few between lately it seems... maybe 2-4 a year from PS vendors we see?

i tried on one of the WF 5 carat stones last time we visited and man it was some bling. i posted pictures of it on my hand and finger which is a size 6. what size are you harriet?

i admit, if budget (and lifestyle!) permitted i would hands down get a 5c. i am a size whore after all.

but if i had 48k i would very strongly consider this stone you have harriet. i have a J and i adore it. ideally i'd like an I in a bigger stone, but for the RIGHT STONE aka the right personality and beauty in the stone, i would totally go J or maybe even K. i think that the personality in a stone can also compensate for some color. my J 2.32 is breathtaking, one of the prettiest stones i have seen thus far. it has such a great personality. another exceptional stone for 'personality' in a large stone i have seen is Kristy Darling's. it's not a *technical* ideal to the tune of what we typically sing about on here, but it's a real stunner. and it fit all her requirements. it has a totally different personality than my stone.

funny...we were just in SF about a month ago on union street, at a jewelry store there i cannot recall the name of (near across from betelnut). i think i have their card somewhere. we tried on a 4.5c if i can recall size correctly...G SI2 GIA graded stone. totally eye-clean. exceptional cut... we didn't see numbers but we saw arrows and this thing was singing to us. funniest part? it was something like 55k if i recall correctly. i remember thinking gosh wasn't that 5c WF G SI2 stone $70k? and this is what 15k cheaper??? for just 1/2c less in size. BEAUTIFUL stone, if i had 50k i so would have gotten that stone right then and there. so if you are in SF...i can find the card for you.

 

[SKR]

I honestly could not tell the difference between a G and an I once mounted (unless maybe I really gawp at them side by side). But I am not very color sensitive and I guess it boils down to personal preference.

 

[Harriet]

I'll ask WF if they are expecting anything.

 

[mrssalvo]

Harriet, color is such a personal thing. I personally would probably not go to a J for a 3+ carat stone. My stone is a 1.5 G, SI but I was willing to go down to and H. I would defintely consider an I but just not sure mentially I could do a J. Like some have said, stones that size are few and far between so I would definitely consider it if that was all that was out there and in my budget. I am also not a clarity nut so I''d probably drop the clarity to and eye clean SI stone. I don''t care about things I can''t see. Some people are just more sensitve to color than others and only you can determine how my your eyes (and your fiance''s) see. As, for cut, you don''t get any better than and ACA...

 

[Harriet]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:59:27 PM
Author: Mara
exceptional 3c+ stones are far and few between lately it seems... maybe 2-4 a year from PS vendors we see?

i tried on one of the WF 5 carat stones last time we visited and man it was some bling. i posted pictures of it on my hand and finger which is a size 6. what size are you harriet?

i admit, if budget (and lifestyle!) permitted i would hands down get a 5c. i am a size whore after all.

but if i had 48k i would very strongly consider this stone you have harriet. i have a J and i adore it. ideally i''d like an I in a bigger stone, but for the RIGHT STONE aka the right personality and beauty in the stone, i would totally go J or maybe even K. i think that the personality in a stone can also compensate for some color. my J 2.32 is breathtaking, one of the prettiest stones i have seen thus far. it has such a great personality. another exceptional stone for ''personality'' in a large stone i have seen is Kristy Darling''s. it''s not a *technical* ideal to the tune of what we typically sing about on here, but it''s a real stunner. and it fit all her requirements. it has a totally different personality than my stone.

funny...we were just in SF about a month ago on union street, at a jewelry store there i cannot recall the name of (near across from betelnut). i think i have their card somewhere. we tried on a 4.5c if i can recall size correctly...G SI2 GIA graded stone. totally eye-clean. exceptional cut... we didn''t see numbers but we saw arrows and this thing was singing to us. funniest part? it was something like 55k if i recall correctly. i remember thinking gosh wasn''t that 5c WF G SI2 stone $70k? and this is what 15k cheaper??? for just 1/2c less in size. BEAUTIFUL stone, if i had 50k i so would have gotten that stone right then and there. so if you are in SF...i can find the card for you.

Thanks, but I''m on the other coast.

 

[canuk-gal]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:24:24 PM
Author: SKR
Dee Jay - I don''t necessarily agree with this but I thought the guideline was 1ct down from your finger size (as a maximum) ?

HI:

I''ve never heard these guidelines. Ironically, my radiant is a 5.01 and my ring finger size is a 6.25...

In terms of diamond shape, I recently tried on a 5 carat RB and I thought it looked "too large"; yet my radiant seems to be just the "right size"....

Good luck Harriet with your decisions...I look forward to seeing your final choice of ring.

cheers--Sharon

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I'll try to find the link to Dee Jay's stone pictures for you.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:52:42 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 12/30/2006 5:24:02 PM
Author: Harriet
My budget''s not that generous. If it were, I''d take this one:
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-72794.htm

Same here, Harriet. I''d rather have a smaller G than a 5 ct. I stone anyday. No one would think a 5 carat stone is real unless you were a celebrity.

this is the main way that ds and I differ - I''d rather have the larger stone in warmer colors - bigger stones mean bigger facets and bigger facets mean more/bigger kaleidoscopic results! I''m not much of a fashion nut so the only person I care thinks it looks good on me is me - but I love the stones as eye toys so big facets to me are paramount. Of course there are other cuts that have bigger facets than rounds so I''d probably get one of them.... but I''d love to have at least *one* ideal round - color is irrelevant.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:55:55 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Dee Jay, what color is your new stone? I forget..is it a G?


Harriet, Dee Jay has a 3 ct. stone and it is beautiful! I am sure she looked at several when she was upgrading.


What did you think of color in larger stones, Dee Jay?

My stone is a 3.37 ct H. Up to H, across the board, I couldn''t see any color in well cut stones. When I got to I it depended, stone to stone. And at J I could see color. (Keep in mind I only considered GIA and AGS; EGL is a whole ''nother matter.)

 

[SKR]

Date: 12/30/2006 6:05:32 PM
Author: canuk-gal

Date: 12/30/2006 5:24:24 PM
Author: SKR
Dee Jay - I don''t necessarily agree with this but I thought the guideline was 1ct down from your finger size (as a maximum) ?

HI:

I''ve never heard these guidelines. Ironically, my radiant is a 5.01 and my ring finger size is a 6.25...

In terms of diamond shape, I recently tried on a 5 carat RB and I thought it looked ''too large''; yet my radiant seems to be just the ''right size''....

Good luck Harriet with your decisions...I look forward to seeing your final choice of ring.

cheers--Sharon

I am sure I read it here on PS, but there is a real possibility that I am losing the plot....

 

[Dee*Jay]

Well, OK, now that we''re circling the matter... There was someone who used to post on this board who had jokingly made up some "rules." One of them was that you could go to your finger size minus one for a round and your finger size plus one for a fancy cut. (Hope I''m remembering the "rule" correctly -- senility at 36 is a terriblle thing, LOL.)

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 12/30/2006 6:07:32 PM
Author: Cehrabehra
this is the main way that ds and I differ - I''d rather have the larger stone in warmer colors - bigger stones mean bigger facets and bigger facets mean more/bigger kaleidoscopic results! I''m not much of a fashion nut so the only person I care thinks it looks good on me is me - but I love the stones as eye toys so big facets to me are paramount. Of course there are other cuts that have bigger facets than rounds so I''d probably get one of them.... but I''d love to have at least *one* ideal round - color is irrelevant.

But Cehra, we''d all probably agree that a 5 ct round is a lot different than a 5 ct. cushion or emerald cut. Yes, I might like to have a larger cushion or EC!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 12/30/2006 6:11:08 PM
Author: Dee*Jay
Well, OK, now that we''re circling the matter... There was someone who used to post on this board who had jokingly made up some ''rules.'' One of them was that you could go to your finger size minus one for a round and your finger size plus one for a fancy cut. (Hope I''m remembering the ''rule'' correctly -- senility at 36 is a terriblle thing, LOL.)

Um, yeah, that was one person''s imaginary rule! I''m with Dee Jay in that it matters most the circles one travels in.

 

[Harriet]

Canuk-gal, you will see the pictures.

 

[Harriet]

I'd like to say I have a 5 ct, but it will look absurd on me.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Here are pictures of Dee Jay's stone:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/the-eagle-has-landed.55342/

 

[Harriet]

Date: 12/30/2006 5:34:18 PM
Author: Dee*Jay

Date: 12/30/2006 5:24:24 PM
Author: SKR
Dee Jay - I don''t necessarily agree with this but I thought the guideline was 1ct down from your finger size (as a maximum) ?

SKR, I''m not sure there really is a ''rule.'' I was just speaking from personal experience; belive me, the 5 ct looked stupid on me! But everything is a personal choice, and probably also has a lot to do with the lifestyle that you live and the circles that you travel in. Maybe Harriet''s last name is Astor and anything less that 3 cts would be considered *diamond dust* in her reality.

Ha. I live in NY, but I do work for a living.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 12/30/2006 6:11:51 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 12/30/2006 6:07:32 PM
Author: Cehrabehra
this is the main way that ds and I differ - I''d rather have the larger stone in warmer colors - bigger stones mean bigger facets and bigger facets mean more/bigger kaleidoscopic results! I''m not much of a fashion nut so the only person I care thinks it looks good on me is me - but I love the stones as eye toys so big facets to me are paramount. Of course there are other cuts that have bigger facets than rounds so I''d probably get one of them.... but I''d love to have at least *one* ideal round - color is irrelevant.

But Cehra, we''d all probably agree that a 5 ct round is a lot different than a 5 ct. cushion or emerald cut. Yes, I might like to have a larger cushion or EC!

that''s true - for a round, no matter the budget I''d probably want to be between 1.5-3.5. For a cushion or emerald maybe 5. More than 10/12mm wide and I''d not want to wear it... however I could mount it on a paperweight.... then I''d go up to a 15c round!! BOLT it to my desk lol!