Looking for second opinions on some diamonds for an engagement ring

[kvanever]

I''ve been reading the forums, doing my homework, and everyone seemed so helpful, I thought I might ask for some help for myself.

I''m in the market for an engagement ring. Some things I''m certain of. It''s going to be round cut, platinum, in a solitaire setting. My target budget for the diamond and setting is somewhere between $2500 and $3000. I have been browsing diamonds, and I''ve chosen three that are in my price range. I''ve looked at the pictures, and plugged the info into the HCA and these all rated well there. I''ve requested an idealscope image of each, but it''s only been a couple of hours, so I''ll post them when I get them, hopefully tomorrow.

Anyway, here are the three links. Any helpful advice would be appreciated.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1198869.asp

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1197400.asp

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1197159.asp

I browsed through Whiteflash and Blue Nile as well, but I felt that similar diamonds on Whiteflash were outside of my budget, and Blue Nile did not offer enough information about their diamonds to make me feel comfortable with any decision. Any recommendations or assessments of vendors would be helpful as well.

Thank you.

 

[strmrdr]

First one the crown is a little shallow but it works.

Second the pavilion is steeper than optimal.

The third I don''t care for the lgf% with that angle combo but it did get AGS0 so the averages may not represent the diamond.

 

[stone-cold11]

Personal preference will be the AGS0 stone.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/3/2008 11:41:59 PM
Author: strmrdr
First one the crown is a little shallow but it works.

Second the pavilion is steeper than optimal.

The third I don't care for the lgf% with that angle combo but it did get AGS0 so the averages may not represent the diamond.

Ditto. First and third would be the ones I would be most interested in.

 

[kvanever]

I tried to download Diam Calc after looking up what lgf% meant, but it''s not shareware. Now, lgf% affects brilliance versus fire, correct? As in a high lgf% makes this brighter, and a low makes it fierier? Perhaps that''s on oversimplification, but that was the understanding I got. Without that software, I''m not able to ascertain the lgf% of the third stone. Would you please explain to me what exactly it means in terms of the third diamond? Is this diamond liable to be dark?

 

[Lorelei]

These pages might be useful reading for you.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/low-lgf-need-advice-on-this-stone.65508/

http://www.goodoldgold.com/Articles/MinorFacets/

An explanation from one of the experts John Pollard and the thread. https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/sorry-stupid-question-what-is-lgf.61176/ See the thread for images to go with the explanation below.

Commonly referred to here as Lower Girdles and LGFs

They are called "Lower Halves" by GIA.

Remember that good crown/pavilion angles and top light return should be prerequisites. Once you have a diamond with great light return the lower halves ‘fine-tune’ the character of that diamond’s performance:

Shorter lower halves mean wider pavilion mains (what you see in diamond photos with obstruction as ‘arrows’). Longer lower halves mean narrower pavilion mains. As it relates to scintillation, broad flashes become more visible as lower half % gets shorter. Needlelike flashes become more visible as they get longer. Shorter lower halves can be conducive to performance in indirect/soft lighting conditions and longer lower halves conducive to direct/bright lighting conditions. Diamonds in the middle range have a balance of qualities.

The major labs generally include rounds with 70-85% lower halves as candidates for the top grade. GIA rounds to the nearest 5% on their reports. AGS does not round.

You can 'guesstimate' lower half % by viewing still diamond photos with obstruction (where the arrows are dark), like we commonly see on PS. The simulations below are near-Tolkowsky configurations. See how the 'arrows' get fatter with short lower halves - and skinner with longer.

 

[Scot]

I always say you gotta go see the stone in person. Your personal preference will not necessarily match anyone else''s. Make sure you know the return policy or just visit a local jeweler with the online prices printed out. More and more often physical jewelers can match or beat the internet price and nothing can replace seeing the actual stone.

 

[kvanever]

Thanks Lorelei. From what you sent me and what Karl posted, I think I will have to wait until I see the idealscope image from the vendor before I can know what effect the lgf% in this case will have on this particular stone.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/4/2008 11:25:41 AM
Author: kvanever
Thanks Lorelei. From what you sent me and what Karl posted, I think I will have to wait until I see the idealscope image from the vendor before I can know what effect the lgf% in this case will have on this particular stone.

Most welcome! And that was Storm saying that the LGF''s in this case aren''t his preference which is fine, it is still a very finely cut diamond and may be a great choice for you, the IS will tell us more.

 

[kvanever]

Thanks again for all your help everyone. I got in touch with someone at Whiteflash who''s been quite helpful, and she recommended this stone.

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-471537.htm#

I think it is very obviously a superior stone, but I am not an experienced eye, so again, I''d appreciate other opinions.

 

[stone-cold11]

Looks good.

You should have it reserve in case someone buys it while your are seeking advice.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 12/4/2008 6:22:14 PM
Author: kvanever
Thanks again for all your help everyone. I got in touch with someone at Whiteflash who''s been quite helpful, and she recommended this stone.

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-471537.htm#

I think it is very obviously a superior stone, but I am not an experienced eye, so again, I''d appreciate other opinions.

It is a beautifully cut diamond, check with WF it is eyeclean to your standards.

 

[kvanever]

Hey everyone. Thanks for all your advice. I went with the WF ACA cut. Just ordered it this evening. One of their reps looked at it for me and assured me it was eye-clean, so I went for it. Again, thanks for all the advice, both here and everywhere on the site.

I will be sure to let you know if the ring works.

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 12/5/2008 10:38:29 PM
Author: kvanever
Hey everyone. Thanks for all your advice. I went with the WF ACA cut. Just ordered it this evening. One of their reps looked at it for me and assured me it was eye-clean, so I went for it. Again, thanks for all the advice, both here and everywhere on the site.


I will be sure to let you know if the ring works.

Congrats! It will be an absolutely stunning stone for sure!

 

[Lorelei]

CONGRATS!!!!