I hope I've learned and narrowed to two choices

[Punn]

Hello,

I can't begin to explain how much more informed and comfortable I am by reading this forum (this community is awesome!). I started off by looking for size (and this isn't a bad thing!) but it made no sense in my budget. I was looking for a 1.5 (mental) F (wanted colourless), SI2 (didn't want to pay more for clarity) and a triple excellent diamond certified by GIA or AGS. I was doing it all wrong!

I've realized the following (and this isn't the norm but it's what I think and I hope someone reading this also can take somthing away from all the reading I've done):
1. Better colour and clarity don't always mean a shinier diamond!
2. Prioritizing carat size to save in other areas may lead to a dull, cloudy, poor quality diamond (even if it's triple X)
3. Round numbers sometimes have a premium price (1.2,1.3, 1.4, etc.)
4. H is the tipping point for colour meaning you can't really tell the difference between colorless and nearly-colorless, and with some fluoresence, you can actually get to a place where it looks more icy than the grade (research this more)!
5. Eye-clean diamonds are key! However, VS2 will give you most bang for your buck.
6. Cut, cut, cut and cut


So here are two options that I am weighing in on and I am torn between the two because they are both beautiful:

Option 1:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...color-vs2-clarity-true-hearts-cut-sku-5331142
SHAPE: Round
CARAT WEIGHT: 1.27
COLOR: I
CLARITY: VS2
CUT: True HeartsTM Ideal
POLISH: Ideal
SYMMETRY: Ideal
FLUORESCENCE: Negligible
L/W/D (MM): 6.97*7.02*4.30
L/W RATIO: 1.01
DEPTH %: 61.6
GIRDLE: Thin - Medium
TABLE %: 53.5
CULET: Pointed
CERTIFICATE: AGS
CROWN ∠: 34.3
CROWN %: 15.9
PAVILION ∠: 40.6
PAVILION %: 42.9
Price: $8097
HCA: 0.8
Light Return: Excellent
Fire: Excellent
Scintillation: Excellent
Spread: Very Good

Option 2:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...h-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-6418634
SHAPE: Round
CARAT WEIGHT: 1.29
COLOR: H
CLARITY: VS2
CUT: Excellent
POLISH: Excellent
SYMMETRY: Excellent
FLUORESCENCE: Medium
L/W/D (MM): 6.95*6.90*4.34
L/W RATIO: 1.01
DEPTH %: 62.7
GIRDLE: Medium - Slightly Thick
TABLE %: 56
CULET: None
CERTIFICATE: GIA
CROWN ∠: 36.5
CROWN %: 16.5
PAVILION ∠: 40.6
PAVILION %: 43
Price: $7949
HCA: 2.4
Light Return: Very Good
Fire: Very Good
Scintillation: Very Good
Spread: Very Good

Please weigh in and let me know what you think!!!

 

[lydial]

if you are attached to either of these stones you should call the vendor and put them on hold - people lurk and snatch things when you aren't looking!

I think #1 looks better but I am not one of the experts who hang around here. Curious how they will chime in with the extra tiny table %?

 

[OcnGypZ]

#1 - no contest

 

[Punn]

I thought #2 looked better I have number #1 on hold

#1 - no contest

 

[kmoro]

I thought #2 looked better I have number #1 on hold

#1 is excellent .... #2 I would not even consider ....

 

[Dreamer_D]

I honestly think for most people, under normal viewing conditions, those diamonds would look identical. But for me, I like the look of number 1 better. Nicer patterning to my eyes with those fat arrows, nice small table, better looking optics under the table in particular.

 

[Punn]

I’m torn because option 2 is a better colour bigger size but performs only at a 2.4 on HCA...although agreed at eye level they’ll probably look the same...thinking from a investment perspective...

 

[Dancing Fire]

I'll take #1!. A 53.5% table with a high crown. Not many MRB are cut with such a small table.... i'm a sucker for small tables with a high crown.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I’m torn because option 2 is a better colour bigger size but performs only at a 2.4 on HCA...although agreed at eye level they’ll probably look the same...thinking from a investment perspective...

At this point, IMO, it is about the psychological aspects mostly. Both are nicely cut, though as a "cut nut" I think the I/VS is better for the reasons I said and Dancing Fire said. But if you will feel better about an H color and a little more size, I don't personally think you are making a bad compromise there. As I said, would bet good money you and most others could not tell these apart -- in cut or color! -- in person! So it comes down to what you like and value. Buying a diamond is partly about the objective properties, but largely about the subjective psychological qualities!

ETA: there is no real "investment" perspective here though. You retain your upgrade policy either way with the company. But if you went to sell on your own, you take a mega hit -- at least 50% -- and there is not much you can do about that. This is not really an "investment". Best not to think of it that way.

 

[ringo865]

I’m torn because option 2 is a better colour bigger size but performs only at a 2.4 on HCA...although agreed at eye level they’ll probably look the same...thinking from a investment perspective...

#2 is “bigger” only in weight. Look at the dimensions. #1 is larger. Also, stones scoring over 2 on HCA go in the “reject” pile. So, as the others before me did, I’d pick #1 AGS ideal with the tiny table and fat arrows

 

[Dreamer_D]

At this point, IMO, it is about the psychological aspects mostly. Both are nicely cut, though as a "cut nut" I think the I/VS is better for the reasons I said and Dancing Fire said. But if you will feel better about an H color and a little more size, I don't personally think you are making a bad compromise there. As I said, would bet good money you and most others could not tell these apart -- in cut or color! -- in person! So it comes down to what you like and value. Buying a diamond is partly about the objective properties, but largely about the subjective psychological qualities!

ETA: there is no real "investment" perspective here though. You retain your upgrade policy either way with the company. But if you went to sell on your own, you take a mega hit -- at least 50% -- and there is not much you can do about that. This is not really an "investment". Best not to think of it that way.

OH! AND 2 is not bigger. It weighs some miniscule amount more, but is actually faces up smaller (smaller spread) so its not bigger.

 

[lovedogs]

Wouldn't consider #2. #1 is amazing!

 

[kmoro]

I’m torn because option 2 is a better colour bigger size but performs only at a 2.4 on HCA...although agreed at eye level they’ll probably look the same...thinking from a investment perspective...

If you held those diamonds side by side, there’s a good chance that you would be able to see the subtle difference - one will just be more lively. Maybe by itself you’ll think the 2.4 on HCA is super sparkly ... but you’ll know that it could be more sparkly ... muahahahah! I plant the dirt in the mind, lol.

But really, a 2.4 score on HCA is stil pretty good ... it’s just hard to back from perfection after being on PS for awhile. Still, I would not consider it - the other one is much better - and it’s the diameter that’s more important than weight.

To chime in on the investment comment like @dreamer_dachsie - diamonds are not a good investment. Except for trade-ins or if inflation goes crazy, you’ll never be able to sell a diamond for what you paid for it (retail). If you want to retain value, buy a preloved at the discount to begin with, then maybe you would be able to sell it for same one day. (Even if diamonds were good investments, there would be no advantage in getting the higher color and weight - the difference is so small that if it were to increase in value at a higher rate than the lower colour diamond (a generous assumption), you’d still hardly be celebrating your decision).

 

[Ss52]

Number 1 is extraordinary! I hope the reason “not available” is on the site is because you have it reserved or purchased.

Honestly, don’t know why it isn’t a VS1. The feather on the plot is VERY difficult to see. Did you find it?

 

[Gussie]

#1

 

[Punn]

Thanks everyone for the feedback and yes I am buying it I currently have it on hold!

I’m going in for a Pave setting because I love the detailing in the crown:
https://www.jamesallen.com/mobile/e...pave-crown-diamond-engagement-ring-item-53057

I’m hoping I don’t have any issues with the contrast of colours with the small diamonds!

 

[tyty333]

#1

 

[Dreamer_D]

Thanks everyone for the feedback and yes I am buying it I currently have it on hold!

I’m going in for a Pave setting because I love the detailing in the crown:
https://www.jamesallen.com/mobile/e...pave-crown-diamond-engagement-ring-item-53057

I’m hoping I don’t have any issues with the contrast of colours with the small diamonds!

Just remember that small diamonds handle light differently than big ones, so that smaller stones always look “whiter” than large (except maybe w. D color, but even then you have different optics to contend with). Also remember that if you go looking for the color you will probably find it That’s part of the psychology of diamonds I was talking about earlier. Unless you come from a culture or social group that has a lot of very strong and vocal opinions about diamonds, no one else will see or be looking for tint! So I’d suggest you don’t go looking too hard for it either lol

 

[sledge]

Because of cut quality....#1 would also be my choice.

The small 53.5 table will produce lots of fire, as the table shrinks the upper facet girdles increase, which is where rainbow light (fire) is produced. Consequently, smaller tables = more fire, at least when all other factors are the same. Also, the 34.3/40.6 is much more complimentary. Honestly, I think that is probably one of the best arrows images I've seen from JA. Very deep red.

As for the size, you are looking at this wrong. Theoretical carat weight is a factor of length (L) x width (W) x depth (D) x 0.0061 for a round diamond. The L, W and D dimensions change slightly because of the table size and relationship of the varying crown & pavilion angles.

Option 1 = 1.27 actual carats = 6.97 * 7.02 * 4.30 <--- stone has < carat weight but > dimensions
Option 2 = 1.29 actual carats = 6.95 * 6.90 * 4.34 <--- stone has > carat weight but < dimensions

Rule 101 of buying....ignore carat weight and look at dimensions. Here the difference is mathematical only because physically the variance is so tiny our eyes can never appreciate the difference. But mathematically the smaller 1.27 carat stone measures larger because it has better proportions. The larger 1.29 carat stone has a steep crown and is cut too deep, therefore, the weight is hidden in the depth (4.30 vs 4.34) so even though it weighs more, it sizes up slightly smaller.

As a point of reference....

• 6.97 - 6.95 = 0.002mm difference, or about 1/1,280th inch (5x smaller than 1/256th inch)
• 6.90 - 7.02 = 0.12mm difference, or about 1/256th inch
• Most humans can start to detect a difference visually around 0.20mm, or 1/128th inch

As far as color goes, here is a side by side comparison. This is just one angle. But I was trying to capture a pavilion view as color/tint is primarily seen in the body (pavilion) of the diamond. Putting a stone in a setting that covers more of the pavilion alleviates some of the possibility of seeing body tint. Also, more precise cut stones have the luxury of facing up whiter. That said, it's not exactly realistic to think everyone will always see the stone from a perfect face up view.

Each person has their own tolerance to color. I bought my fiancee a BGD H VS2 stone. It has an ever so slight tint (to me). However, my fiancee sees color more easily than me and can easily see the tint in an H. Despite her being sensitive to color, she is also tolerant meaning she doesn't see the tint as a negative but rather just sees the tint.

Color is NOT a one size fits all -- H works for some, and others it doesn't. Just like J/K works for some but others it doesn't. Many Americans consider G to be a sweet spot of sorts as being colorless without paying for the premium of D-F stones. It really does depend on the wearer and the person giving the stone as to what color is "right" for them.

 

[sledge]

As far as someone pointing out the clarity on option 1, I have highlighted the feathers.

 

[Dreamer_D]

As far as someone pointing out the clarity on option 1, I have highlighted the feathers.

This diamond was cut by a very skilled person. Cutting the rough so the feathers fall under the meets between two facets like that makes them virtually invisible in my experience (my diamond is cut like this too and I cannot even find the inclusions with my loupe!)