L color Pre. Cut

[MINE!!]

Carat weight:
1.07 

     Cut:
Premium 

     Color:
L 

     Clarity:
SI3 

     Depth%:
63.8% 

     Table%:
57% 

     Symmetry:
Good 

     Polish:
Good 

     Girdle:
Slightly Thick to Very Thick 

     Culet:
None 

     Fluorescence:
Faint  


Would this be a horrible diamond in a ritani like setting? How much would you pay for this diamond?

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 3/11/2005 11:52:28 PM
Author:MINE!!
Carat weight:
1.07

Cut:
Premium

Color:
L

Clarity:
SI3

Depth%:
63.8%

Table%:
57%

Symmetry:
Good

Polish:
Good

Girdle:
Slightly Thick to Very Thick

Culet:
None

Fluorescence:
Faint


Would this be a horrible diamond in a ritani like setting? How much would you pay for this diamond?

Horrible? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
It goes without saying that this certain is not the "cat's meow" - but if you've seen it and like it, well then proceed carefully, get it checked out, to make sure it isn't really "horrible".

How much would I pay? Depends on if your buying on the net, or in a store, and what level of quality does that person sell?

You can check stone on the price search engine here for internet comparable prices.

Who graded the stone? Does it have a lab report, or is the grading done by the seller?

This stone was probably cut to retain maximum weight from the rough material. I would certainly not think this is a "premium cut" particularly with the very thick girdle and the total depth ( could be deep stone ).

L color refers to the intensity of color in it.. can be yellow, brownish, greyish etc. You need to find out if this stone is "brackish" which can cause it to look dull, based on the amount and type of inclusions that it has.



Rockdoc

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Not nice in White setting.
The cert may be questionable and premium cut means it is a worry.
Spread is not great because of thick girdle.
SI3 is usually = to a nice I1

 

[valeria101]

Date: 3/12/2005 12

9:27 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
.
The cert may be questionable and premium cut means it is a worry.

Perhaps this needs translation

... there is no standard behind this word: it is just the seller's label and more often than not this means nothing.

What would I pay for this: nothing. Really. SI3 definitely needs to be seen - it could be downright opaque with inclusions or quite acceptable. There's no way to know which is true before seeing the thing.

L will most likely show a bit of color. This being EGL graded is probably quite a bit more tintend than the GIA's L. It would be great in yellow gold (say, a version of the Ritani with a yellow gold bezel). If this was cleaner (SI1-say) and ideal cut than the color would not need as many excuses.

From this point onwards, I would drop weight under one carat (this stone doesn't have the diameter of one carat stones anyway - no loss there) to avoind the price premium at that mark. Keep color K-L if needs be, look for something a bit cleaner and with decent proportions. "Decent proportions" would at least mean a decent HCA score based on the numbers on the EGL report.

Can you obtain a copy of the EGL cert for a reality check ?


Now, I don't know if you have seen this piece: it could indeed have nice proportions (aside the evident thick girdle that makes it look small) and be the luckiest clean SI3. There's no way to know by those numbers.

As for price...at least around here (you can check prices for comparable goods in the database here) the going price for this appears to be about $1600. I would expect L/SI3 to be sold without a lab report & at a lower price most of the time.

 

[Dancing Fire]

MINE
very thick girdle

this stone and i have the same problem,we''re both carrying too weight in the mid-section

63.8% is too depth

this one better be real cheap.

 

[MINE!!]

Basically, I am greedy. We can only afford a 4200 engagement ring.... I want the most for my money and most 1 carat look very small. I love the Ritani look alikes. I a not so picky that I think it is ness. that I get a d color and a VS1 clarity. I did not even want a round till I saw the pave round setting. Sorry, I am just so frustrated....

The settings I have found are usually around 2000 to 2200.. that leave very little for a diamond...

it is just not fair

YES, I realize that I am being whinny

 

[valeria101]

Date: 3/12/2005 9:47:44 AM
Author: MINE!!
The settings I have found are usually around 2000 to 2200..

Do you like this setting ?

The space between diamond andn "frame" adds allot of light to it, I think, and there is a version with the center stone set in prongs.

If you want the largest diamond for the money, I would rather look at cushions and ovals - rounds are allot more expensive per carat.

Just a random idea, of course

(the ring comes from here: LINK)

 

[Maxine]

Would you consder getting the biggest, best cut stone you can afford....put it into a basic setting, and then get another setting down the road when you can afford it??? Some jewelers will take back the basic setting at a later date......

 

[treysar]

MINE, why don''t you get a solitaire setting for youre engagement and then for your wedding gift, get a new setting? This will allow you guys some extra time to save for the setting, and lets you put all of your money in to the stone!

That''s what we did, and I am really greatful for it - it allowed me to take my time choosing a setting, to be sure of what I really wanted,a nd to be able to AFFORD what I really wanted!

 

[valeria101]

... btw. the prong and bezel versions mentioned above.

 

[MINE!!]

OH yes... I love it... I just love the pave around the diamond.. even if the diamond is smaller.. it looks bigger that way... I know very little about Fay Cullen.. but I did look at the site for a while. This ring is out of my price range

I am not sure if I can just buy this setting either. Hmmm

 

[MINE!!]

MINE, why don''t you get a solitaire setting for youre engagement and then for your wedding gift, get a new setting? This will allow you guys some extra time to save for the setting, and lets you put all of your money in to the stone!

That''s what we did, and I am really greatful for it - it allowed me to take my time choosing a setting, to be sure of what I really wanted,a nd to be able to AFFORD what I really wanted!
**************************************************************************************************************************************

Yeh, I know... I guess it is just because we are going to have to pay for a wedding and pay for a down payment on a house and take care of the kids and everything too... Sometimes I feel like this is my only chance... and unless I squirrel away the money and pay for it myself in 10years... the possibility of getting it.... is very very very small...

Once again... forgive me for being pouty

 

[Jennifer5973]

I don''t think this is your "only chance."

But it may feel like it is--I know.

I got engaged with a very modest diamond and 8 years later, got a great upgrade. We have different priorities at different points in our lives. Right now, getting married, buying a house and starting off on sound financial footing are yours.

What I would do is get the nicest stone possible for your $4,000+ (which could be quite stunning) in a simple setting and choose a vendor with an upgrade policy. Then, when the time is right get a bigger one and/or a new setting. When a diamond is well cut, it sparkles unlike anything you''ll ever see--a one carat stone will be like a sunburst on you hand and people WILL notice. For $4,000 I think you could do very well, espeially if you go for a J, Si1-2...

 

[phoenixgirl]

There's also this 1.01 K SI1 uncertified from GOG for about $3k. It scores VH, VH, H/VH on the brilliancescope.

Since you're going for size, I would look for a stone under 1 carat with a large spread (depth under 60%) or push the color and clarity as you have done with the L stone. If it comes with an AGS or EGL cert, you can plug the numbers into the cut advisor for an idea if the particular combination of angles in that stone might still perform above average.

By the way, I found the L stone you mentioned on the uniondiamondirect website. Using angles, it scored a 5.4 on the HCA, good, fair, fair, good. Doesn't sound that exciting (note that the diameter is only 6.45-6.49 -- the size of a normal 1 carat).

This 0.96 J SI2 EGL stone has the same spread as the stone you listed.

 

[valeria101]

Well... this doesn''t look half bad, and the stone is way smaller than a 1 carat round.

 

[Diamondsbybree]

antiqueengagementrings.com has some really beautiful settings, not to expensive.
Try faycullen.com

 

[blueroses]

I know DCD also sells ritani-esque (pave halo around stone) settings:

http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/engagement-search_results.cfm?cat_cd=meno

You mentioned FayCullen as well....they seem to have a LOT of this style these days too. Good luck!

 

[Mara]

that DCD setting is very affordable...

for your budget and love of size, I would definitely go with the pave halo and get something like a 1c stone...a few people have stones like this, I want to say that chellebelle''s is around 1c or maybe slightly bigger and her ring looks huge on her hand thanks to the pave halo and the setting!

your budget is nothing to sneeze at..make the most of it without compromising on CUT in my opinion. even a K I1 if it is well-cut would look better than a L SI3 from EGL with a deep depth and a fat girdle!

to clarify, do you have 4200 for the DIAMOND or is it 7k for everything including setting? what are the numbers, it will help people when they are looking for you.

 

[MINE!!]

Thanks everybody!!

You are so awesome and encouraging!

I will back to some research..,

I will keep everyone updated!\

 

[phoenixgirl]

I read 7K in an earlier post and wondered if that was her budget, but I think she said that they have brought the budget down to $4200.