I thought I needed to post since I''ve been lurking here for awhile...

[bensbabe]

Hello everyone! I''ve been lurking here for a few months while getting together some facts, etc, to build my ering.... First, a little about me. My name is Becky, and I''ve known my fiance, Ben, for seven years. We began dating three years ago, and he proposed last New Year''s Eve with a three stone blue topaz ring from a set (earrings, ring, necklace) /idealbb/images/smilies/wacko.gif. My ring is a "temporary solution to a permanent commitment." We both graduate next May /idealbb/images/smilies/appl.gif, and we get married two weeks later on May 28th /idealbb/images/smilies/9.gif, and we don''t have a lot of money /idealbb/images/smilies/8.gif.


Anyway, Ben wants me to find what I want, as long as it''s within his budget. I''ve been researching /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif, and here''s what I''ve found that I want:


Radiant cut diamond; around 1ct; at least H in Color; at least VS2 in Clarity; Excellent to Very Good in cut, polish, and symmetry; a Table around 65.1-69.0%b or 58.9-58%; and a Thin to Medium or Medium to Thick 1% to 3.0% or 1.7% to 5.5% girdle.


My ring will be a solitaire 14k white gold setting with platinum prongs. I am more interested in the sparkle factor than the color, so I will settle for a lower color (to H), but have some flourescence (faint) to balance out the yellowish tint. After I finish Master''s school in 3-4 years, I will be getting an upgrade and an anniversary wrap (trillions on either side of the solitaire). /idealbb/images/smilies/love.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/naughty.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/9.gif


Ok, so here are my questions:


1. What height & type of setting should I get? If I''ll be getting an upgrade, I know I''ll have to adjust for that when the time comes, but I also want to know how to get it set (high/low, etc).


2. I have a total budget of $3500, I have found some settings that I like, so my diamond budget is around $3300-$3400. Is this feasible for what I''m looking for?? /idealbb/images/smilies/confused.gif


3. Can anyone help me with places to look online? I''m not sure who to trust & I need to get this together for Ben to look at soon, too.


Any links, advice, etc, are greatly appreciated!!!! If I''ve left anything out, please let me know!!! /idealbb/images/smilies/wavey.gifThanks in advance for your help!!!




Becky


05.28.05

 

[Lincoln]

Becky - I don't know that you should draw the line at VS clarity. You'll find that this website preaches cut over color and clarity, and you will be able to stretch into the SI1 or SI2 eyeclean stones, bringing your cost down. I have an SI2, which was stated eyeclean by Whiteflash, and I couldn't be happier.

 

[icelady]

Hi Becky,

Welcome to PS! I too am a huge radiant fan, so I like your choice already. I have to say that radiants need to be viewed to be appreciated since there are no standards on fancy cut diamonds. There are branded radiant cuts but you will pay a premium for them. My radiant is not a branded cut and is very very beautiful (if I do say so myself!).

I think you are on the right track regarding flourescence and H color. Again you will have to view the stone to see if the H color will be to your liking. Radiant diamonds tend to reflect color because of the cut.

It is hard to find excellent polish and symmetry in a radiant so you may have to compromise a bit on this point. As for clarity, if you find an SI1 that is eye clean, you cannot go wrong (depending on where the inclusion is). The "sweet spot" for the girdle is thin to medium.

I love that you are so organized in how you are doing things! Good luck to you and I hope this helps!

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 6/8/2004 6:49:06 PM Lincoln wrote:





Becky - I don't know that you should draw the line at VS clarity. You'll find that this website preaches cut over color and clarity, and you will be able to stretch into the SI1 or SI2 eyeclean stones, bringing your cost down. I have an SI2, which was stated eyeclean by Whiteflash, and I couldn't be happier.
----------------

But Lincoln, is your stone a fancy cut? I, too, have an SI2 from Whiteflash that is COMPLETELY eyeclean......but it is an exceptionally cut RB stone.

Fancies like princess, emerald or radiant can potentially show inclusions more, and perhaps this is why the VS2 minimum.

Yes, this website does preach cut, but radiants are not the choice of folks who are cut-crazed. People who pick radiant know they are sacrificing on cut to get the individuality they want in the shaped stone. It's a totally separate animal.

 

[icelady]

----------------
On 6/8/2004 8:14:45 PM aljdewey wrote:

Fancies like princess, emerald or radiant can potentially show inclusions more, and perhaps this is why the VS2 minimum.

Yes, this website does preach cut, but radiants are not the choice of folks who are cut-crazed. People who pick radiant know they are sacrificing on cut to get the individuality they want in the shaped stone. It's a totally separate animal.
----------------

Al,

I really beg to differ with you on this point! Just as with RB, there are good Radiant cuts and bad ones. The sparkle is very different from a RB, but a well cut Radaint is very beautiful AND sparkly. Just in a very different way. I do not feel that I sacrificed on cut just for the shape on my stone! It may not be your preference, but I don't think you could say I sacrificed!

 

[Mara]

While it may not be a sacrifice persay...the best cut stones in terms of LIGHT RETURN are hands-down round brilliants. I don't think anyone can dispute that. But if you are a fancy lover, chances are you know that you are not getting anywhere close to RB light return with that fancy, no matter how well-cut. However...fancy lovers don't necessarily want that RB look, and most fancies have a different sparkle to them over a RB. Radiants are beautiful, but even the best cut ones will leak light. But that sparkle they have, its nothing like a RB...it's more like shattered glass which many find appealing (myself included).




So it IS a separate animal and you can't remotely compare RB's to fancies or vice-versa. Clarity is more important in some fancies..I'm not sure about radiants since I think their multi-facets hide inclusions much as a RB would...but some further research to figure it out makes sense. If you CAN go down to an SI1 with a Radiant it will save you a huge amount of money from VS1.




Good luck!

 

[valeria101]

You may find that those VG-EX polish and symmetry grades really do not mean much for either "sparkle" or shape.... I would look for a stone with great light return, and given that there are no rules to deduce that from numbers and few radiants, the other details (depth, table, whatever...) can be relaxed a bit unless they detract from either brilliance, or have some negative visual impact otherwise. This is more "search strategy": not too many sellers select radiant cuts for light return in the first place

Here are three examples of what kind of description one can expect to find demonstrating the optics of a radiant:

0.53 F-VS2 with Ideal Scope and Sarin data

1.25 F-VS2 put to test by GOG

0.82, G-VS2 wit detailed photos at Niceice

Obviously this is just a small sample - hopefully enough to show how much more is to be said about a diamond than a lab cert does

 

[Lincoln]

oops - I missed that detail. Yes, mine is a RB and I can get away with an SI2. I'm going to stand back from any chat on radiant cuts.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 6/8/2004 11:44:25 PM icelady wrote:




Al,

I really beg to differ with you on this point! Just as with RB, there are good Radiant cuts and bad ones. The sparkle is very different from a RB, but a well cut Radaint is very beautiful AND sparkly. Just in a very different way. I do not feel that I sacrificed on cut just for the shape on my stone! It may not be your preference, but I don't think you could say I sacrificed!

----------------

Icelady, I think you're reading into my post in a way I didn't intend. I'm not suggesting you picked a "less than" stone.....I'm saying, as Mara did, that even the best cut radiants don't provide the same kind of fire/brill/scint that an RB does because of it's shape. I didn't say radiants don't sparkle at all.....I said they don't sparkle *as much* as a RB because of its shape and propensity to leak some light. Most people who select radiants are aware of this, and they are willing to trade off to get the shape that makes them happy.

Nor did I say that you didn't pick a beautiful stone, or that radiants aren't beautiful. In fact, when I first came here, I WANTED a radiant stone. But the most important thing to me about diamonds was the fire/brill/scint, and a radiant just doesn't compare to a RB for those qualities. When I learned that, I had to go with a RB.

My point is that if everyone went for the MOST sparkle/fire, etc., everyone would pick rounds. But they don't. My friend Tracy LOVES marquise stones. Certainly it cannot provide the same light return that RBs have, but she's willing to accept that to get the shape that appeals to her.

What I'm trying to say is: every shape has its pros and cons, and it's up to the wearer to determine what's most important to her. Trying to compare a radiant to a round brilliant or to compare a marquise to a heart isn't relevant....they aren't comparable. It's like trying to compare a banana and a plum. Just because both are fruits doesn't mean they are comparable.

 

[bensbabe]

Wow guys!!! I was watching this post, but you all had at it when I left for class this AM!!!! While I appreciate what everyone has given me (info wise), I do understand a few things that are universal......The BEST diamond for sparkle factor is a RB b/c of the dimensions, refractive ability, and amount of facets....But what icelady was defending was that while this is a universal point, I am more interested in something *not* round with softer edges, and what I needed to look for to accomplish what I want my diamond to be. I think that many things were blown out of proportion & this caused unnecessary strife./idealbb/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif This wasn't a "my ring is better because" thing,/idealbb/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif but it turned into that b/c several things were taken out of context....I know my ring differs in many ways b/c it is a fancy & there are different qualities that I want, but please don't make it sound as though what I picked was an uneducated thing (that's what some are implying with their posts)




***Please understand that the following is what I have an OPINION about--this is not to start any more arguments!!! Please don't take offense b/c of what I say below--or LEAVE NOW & DON'T READ ANY FURTHER!!!!***


/idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif /idealbb/images/smilies/read.gif


To defend myself, I'm not into the round thing---I want to be different than many I know who have either round or princess. I live in a small, southern, redneck town where everything is the same. Round also made my short hand look chubbier & rounder--if that makes sense. Princess was too boxy for me & I wanted something to elongate my hand. I've had marquis cut before & I don't like them much b/c the cath on everything & didn't sparkle like I wanted (also may have been a bad cut, etc...). I originally wanted an emerald b/c of it's sleek lines, but it didn't have the fire I was searching for, and it was out of my price range. Asscher is too expensive also, but I like the look of it, too. Pear just wasn't my style. /idealbb/images/smilies/love.gifRadiant, to me, is more of what I'm looking for--more elongated than the square princess cut, had more facets than the emerald, and therefore, sparkled better./idealbb/images/smilies/love.gif Eventually, I would like to own some of each of the diamonds, so that I can have a little of it all (yeah, I'm greedy...lol)...../idealbb/images/smilies/22.gif/idealbb/images/smilies/22.gif/idealbb/images/smilies/9.gif




Anyway, I hope that everyone who was getting defensive about cut, brilliance, and what's better, etc---I've done my homework on what I want to live with, and I'm happy with my decision. I hope that you all can put the attitude of what's better, etc, on hold b/c I know what *technically* is the best for brilliance, etc....I only specifically asked about the radiant b/c that's my style. We are not in a debate, and you aren't sounding older than little 5 year-olds by saying that what you own is the best. If no one had developed these different styles of diamonds, everyone would have the same thing & no one would be learning much of anything about diamonds!!!! Please don't argue, when all I asked was a simple thing!!! Some took this post & it's answers more literally than others, but I appreciate all the input!!!/idealbb/images/smilies/wavey.gif/idealbb/images/smilies/appl.gif

 

[researcher]

Glad to hear you know what you want The only suggestion I have is to not rule out stones with clarity ratings of SI1--as long as they're completely eye clean. Interestingly, there seems to be a debate above on choosing a clarity level for different stones. What matters most IMO is that they're EYE CLEAN...PERIOD. It may be that rounds hide flaws better than other shapes, but when you find a fancy with an SI rating that is 100% eye clean it's just that--eye clean. In fact, it may be that what would be considered an SI in a fancy is a VS in a round because inclusions show more. I have no idea, but the point I'm trying to make is don't rule them out. I started my search with pretty strict criteria because of things I read on this post, but after viewing stones in person I realized that there are always exceptions. I found VS stones in which I could see the inclusions when looking through the pavilion (which I hate), and SI stones in which I couldn't see a thing no matter which way I turned it. I also saw "G" colored stones that seemed to have more color face up than some "I" colored stones. As a result, I started paying a lot more attention to cut (BTW, I have a princess). As many people in this forum have stated, cut truly determines the beauty of a diamond--regardless of shape. Oh, and my stone is an "I" without fluorescence, and the two appraisers who've seen it say it faces up extremely white Anyway, I don't know if this info helps, but you may not want to limit yourself with color and clarity too much if the cut is absolutely ideal

 

[icelady]

I have to agree with Researcher on the SI versus VS issue. Eye clean is most important and I wouldn't rule out an SI for a well cut radiant.

 

[Mara]

I would venture to say that no one is arguing here and no one sounds like 5 year olds...any misunderstood points seem to be clarified and understood...all is well.

 

[pqcollectibles]

----------------
On 6/9/2004 8:59:23 PM Mara wrote:


I would venture to say that no one is arguing here and no one sounds like 5 year olds...any misunderstood points seem to be clarified and understood...all is well.

----------------

It's this wonderful medium of communication that we have available to us all. We aren't face to face to hear intonations of voices and read body language and facial expressions. What may read like an arguement to some is really just a discussion of ideas.

Don't feel like you have to defend your taste or preference in diamond cut style, Becky. While I have a round, I love asschers, and radiants, and pears, and,...... Why,....... I can't actually say that I've ever seen a nicely cut diamond that I didn't like. Regardless of it's shape!!

While it may be a bit more difficult to find an eye clean SI radiant than an eye clean SI round, it's not totally impossible. If you do chance to find one, it will help to maximize your buying power. Every one of the C's comes at a premium and clarity is no different.

You've got a great buying plan. Probably your best bet to find a diamond more quickly is to work with a Vendor who can source a diamond for you. They know their business. They know the specs to look at on paper. They know the Wholesalers they deal with. The Vendors can talk to the Wholesalers and learn if a diamond is worth the time to call in and take a look at for you. If the Vendors call in a diamond, and it isn't worth your consideration, they will tell you honestly. Call and chat with a few. Review their policies. Find a Vendor you are comfortable working with and let them search for you.

 

[aljdewey]

Don’t argue? Who the heck is arguing? This is a forum for open discussion and an exchange of (sometimes opposing) ideas. That’s what constitutes a forum. Calling it arguing is really overstating. C’mon…..we’re all adults here, aren’t we? Do we really need to “defend” our preferences? Heck, I don’t think so.

No one needed to “defend” your choice – no one was attacking it in the damn first place! Everyone has to choose what is right for them. Just because someone notes the fact that a radiant doesn’t give the same light return as a RB doesn’t mean they are deriding your choice. Why the insecurity? I can’t understand what the sensitivity is here.

I’m sorry, but from where I sit, this didn’t “cause strife” and it didn’t devolve into a “my ring is better than your ring” vibe. If that’s how you’re reading it, put down the drama and let’s get back to talking like adults.

Lastly, I didn’t see a single post that even remotely implied that you (or anyone else who picks a radiant) made an “uneducated” choice. Not my posts, and not anyone else’s posts. Go back and reread them. The gist of the posts is “people need to pick what’s important to them”. PERIOD. Some people won’t compromise and MUST have a D stone. Others want size and sacrifice some color for size. EVERY buying decision is a trade-off of finding the best blend of elements for YOU. Why must you interpret that as being an attack?

You don’t need to defend your choice, nor do you need to explain why rounds don’t turn you on. That’s a totally personal preference, and if you want a radiant, then get one. NO ONE is knocking your choice, for Pete’s sake.

Look, this is a forum for exchange of ideas. It is a FACT that RB stones return more light than any other cut. Just because that fact was noted doesn’t mean it’s bashing *your* choice. It doesn’t mean we think radiants are a poor choice. It's not a personal comment to you at all. It's just one in a sea of factual observations, which is what this forum is about.

 

[researcher]

Let's all try to get back on topic and help bensbabe with her questions. They were as follows:

Ok, so here are my questions:
1. What height & type of setting should I get? If I'll be getting an upgrade, I know I'll have to adjust for that when the time comes, but I also want to know how to get it set (high/low, etc).
2. I have a total budget of $3500, I have found some settings that I like, so my diamond budget is around $3300-$3400. Is this feasible for what I'm looking for??
3. Can anyone help me with places to look online? I'm not sure who to trust & I need to get this together for Ben to look at soon, too.

IMO, the height/type of setting really depends on your lifestyle, taste, finger size (L/W) and whether you plan to wear it with an eternity band or other band. Oh, yeah. You actually talked about getting a wrap with trillions, huh? I would say you just need to talk with a jeweler to decide on a setting that will work best for you. I personally like stones set in baskets and cathedral settings. The best thing about several of these online vendors is they can create a setting for you that fits your budget but is still beautiful (have you seen the setting moremoremore got for her princess?). Keep in mind that your stone will most likely need to be set in a setting that sits a tad higher (which can make a stone appear larger!) so it will not interfere with your wrap. However, remember that there's a difference between a setting that is high and setting a diamond high. I don't know if this is always the case, but at one jeweler I went to I was shown stones with space between the culet and the bottom of the basket, and stones that were in higher settings but had culets that were slightly hidden by the bottom of the basket. What else? As for your budget, it is feasible for you to find a stone in your range, but you may, as was stated before, want to keep your options open in terms of "I" color stones and "SI" clarity. Just a thought As for places to look online, I chose WF (and worked with the wonderful Denise!) because they had the best match of prices and service. Other places I would consider include GOG (Jonathan), and Nice Ice (Robin and Todd). I've heard a lot of great things about Winfield's (Wink) and DBOF (Brad and Jan), but have not had much interaction with either.

I hope this helps to answer your questions! Let me know if you have additional questions or need clarification!