Mara, Diamonbob, and other experts...please help!!!

[AudiOn19s]

BUT...this stone looke VERY nice...scored a 1.2 on the HCA.

would someone mind looking at the reports furnished for this stone to tell me if they think that this would be an eye clean stone...I'm not sure because of the placement of the inclusiosn

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-499911.htm#

 

[canadiangrrl]

Hi Andy,

Good job on seeing some stones in person last night - it can really help when you're shopping 'blind' on the 'net.

I'd email WF about the 1.13 and find out about the inclusions. I'd say you likely have nothing to worry about, though.

If you're enquiring on stones at DCD, here are two that you might want to check out. The first stone I've listed has medium blue flourescence, which is a good thing - it means it's going to face up much more like a G than an H. The other one I'd suggest checkout out is the 1.09 G SI2 - this stone scores very well on the HCA, has a pretty cool Firescope pic, and a diameter bigger than a typical 1.09 diamond, because of the crown angle. Not all SI2's are created equally, as you've seen - some are not so clean, and some are verrrrry clean.

Keep us posted on your progress!

http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/diamond_detail_sb.cfm?did=6861086

http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/diamond_detail_sb.cfm?did=6838725

 

[AudiOn19s]

Canadian...I actually looked at both of those this morning as well..I'm not getting a whole lot of work done today though!!!

andy

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 11:35:01 AM AudiOn19s wrote:





would someone mind looking at the reports furnished for this stone to tell me if they think that this would be an eye clean stone...I'm not sure because of the placement of the inclusiosn

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-499911.htm#
----------------

Andy, first off, EXCELLENT. Glad to hear you got out and saw some stones. Trust me, that is a bigger learning curve than any other....when you finally take all that you've learned and apply it in person by seeing stones! Awesome job!

It's honestly not meaningful for any of us to view the cert and speculate on the inclusions and whether they are eye-clean. I'd go one better and make a suggestion. Call Brian (the cutter at Whiteflash) and discuss this stone with him. Several customers here have shared how Brian spent an hour on the phone with them telling them all about stones they were considering purchasing.

Brian will tell you straight up if it's eyeclean or not, and if not, perhaps he can suggest an alternate stone in your budget/size range that is.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 11:52:54 AM canadiangrrl wrote:




If you're enquiring on stones at DCD, here are two that you might want to check out----------------

Hi, Canadian......how's the root canal? Hope it's settling down.

You must still be on the pain meds, though, because I also recommended those stones earlier in the thread. They looked really nice......although I don't think I recommended the SI-2.....both that I recommended were SI-1.

Anyway, hope you're feeling better!

 

[Mara]

Audi--definitely call up WF and have them pull the stone to inspect it. Since they have their ACA stones in-house, they will be able to tell you more about on the stone and possibly take other pictures for you.

Good luck..sounds like you are doing all the right things. Seeing real diamonds in the stones do help--though keep in mind that alot of times jewelry stores call stones 'super ideal' or 'ideal' but do not offer supporting information for you to make that decision on your own (e.g. angles or other numbers)--so you must take the terminology with a grain of salt. However, if those well cut stones faced up white in the I color to you--you will be even more happy with a REAL hearts and arrows or superideal stone with the pictures, reports, and images to back up the term.

 

[aljdewey]

Andy: I think that this WF stone is your best bet, but if that stone doesn't pass muster for some reason, let me know.




I found another stone elsewhere - 1.21, I, SI-1 for 5454.....scores a 1.4 on HCA and looks promising, too.

 

[canadiangrrl]

Andy, I know what you mean about not getting much work done.

I'm buried right now, and this place is a terrific 'escape hatch.'

Al, thanks for asking about the tooth, it's 100% better, thankfully.

I didn't see where you recommended the same stones - I guess great minds think alike. Or fools seldom differ. Something like that.

 

[magna2]

My choice would be the Whiteflash diamond however I would not rule out the SI2 diamond from DCD. From the magnified view, the diamond still looks clean enough that you would not notice the inclusions. Also the price of the SI2 makes it worth considering IMO.

 

[aljdewey]

You know, I ran the G, SI-2, and it scored a 1.1 on the HCA, but the cloud on the plot looks HUGE, and it's almost smack-dab in the middle of the table. However, perhaps under normal viewing conditions, it's eyeclean.




Another instance, Andy, where you'd have to call the vendor and get clarification.....or have the diamond shipped to an appraiser near you so you can see it yourself.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 11:52:54 AM canadiangrrl wrote:

Hi Andy,

http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/diamond_detail_sb.cfm?did=6861086

---

I like every thing about this diamond. But, then I am myopic w/ Blue Fluor.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 4:09:56 PM fire&ice wrote:










http://www.dirtcheapdiamonds.com/diamond_detail_sb.cfm?did=6861086

I like every thing about this diamond. But, then I am myopic w/ Blue Fluor.
----------------

F&I: I liked it, too.....in fact, recommended it to Andy very early on in the thread. I thought the Med Blue would enhance the color, too.

P.S. Pic copy/paste: You have to have 2 browsers open....one with your "reply" window, and the other with the "show ring" forum picture.

On the Show Ring browser, put the cursor on the pic, right-click and select "copy".

Then put cursor in the other browser in the reply window where you want to paste the pic....hit "Control" + "V".....pic will paste in.

Try it!

 

[fire&ice]

That would mean I actually know what a browser is.

If it's what I think it is - a window - a will try

 

[aljdewey]

F&I: Your browser is either Internet Explorer, Netscape, et al....whatever you open to get on the net.




Open it twice......so you have two of the same windows open on your toolbar. Then proceed as directed above.

 

[Mara]

or just email me or AL the pix and we'll post

now i am really curious!!

 

[fire&ice]

Mara & Al, I am trying to post a pic of my anniv. band w/ .11 stones in the same pic is my diamond bracelet - those stones are .20-.25. I wanted for those on the 5 stone ring to see the size difference between the melee's & the low setting of my gemlok. It's relavent for size comp. & option for setting.

I posted the pic to the "Bob's Flashes - decorating with melee diamonds" from a jpeg that lives on my other computer. I can attach the photo this weekend or if one of you kind people can do it for this dopey illiterate

I don't think I have a browser. I am on AOL - internet w/ training wheels.

As far as my 3c ring & loose stone, I can post some pics when I return home also. My pics are pretty crappy - but it certainly shows the stone set in plat & the loose stone against a white background.

If all else fail, I will send you jpegs Mara, since I *do* know how to do that.

 

[aljdewey]

Ha......done! Here it is, F&I.




(FYI.....LOVED that....internet w/training wheels! That's a beaut.....my mother needs that! (so she doesn't hurt herself ..LMAO)

 

[guslik]

----------------
On 10/9/2003 5:01:51 PM fire&ice wrote:

If you search the 'show me the ring' forum, you will see several I stones set in platinum. Another trick is to try to get a stone w/ med/blue fluor - helps the stone face up whiter.

As other have stated, a well cut stone will hide body color & flaws. Personally, how 'well cut' is a personal decision.

Good luck. ----------------

Completely agree with F&I about blue fluor.
Since the ring on the pic #2 is my ring , I really think that med blue fluor. plays an important role in "I" color stone.

 

[Mara]

Cool pictures! Is that the 3c stone I see peeking into the picture?

AOL is like using a MAC....a no brainer.

 

[fire&ice]

Thanks Al, that 's the pic. Can you post it over at the 5 stone discussion since that is where it is relavent. I don't think derek knew how big those .20c was going to be.

Mara, I think that is the 3c. I can't remember taking the pic - don't know what else it would be.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 6:12:47 PM fire&ice wrote:





Thanks Al, that 's the pic. Can you post it over at the 5 stone discussion since that is where it is relavent. I don't think derek knew how big those .20c was going to be.----------------

Done.....with my pleasure.

 

[sylvesterii]

double. man i suck.

 

[sylvesterii]

what about this one?
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-499882.htm#

1.5 HCA score.
vs2, so you don't have to worry about eye clean.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 6:23:00 PM sylvesterii wrote:





1.5 HCA score.
vs2, so you don't have to worry about eye clean.
----------------

I have to respond to this comment with an alternate viewpoint. In my opinion, the idea that one has to "worry" about eye-clean below VS2 does a tremendous disservice to folks here. It makes them hesitant to consider SI-1 stones....."oooo, BE CAREFUL, SI-1s aren't always eye-clean". Newsflash....neither are all VS2 stones!

Not all SI-1 stones are created equal.....some are beautiful and the inclusions are many but small. Others are not as beautiful and have only one inclusion but it's big and noticeable. SI-1 stones represent a fantastic opportunity for folks on a budget to maximize on size/color/weight without paying a premium.

It's not rocket science and it's not hard or laborous to check out an SI-1 stone.....simply call the vendor and ASK if it's eye-clean. The vendors on pricescope are extremely forthcoming....especially the ones under discussion in this thread. Alternately, he can see the SI-1 for himself prior to purchase by having the vendor ship to an appraiser near him. With this option, there is positively no reason to shy away from SI-1 stones in my humble opinion.

Andy wants to maximize his carat weight without suffering a huge hit in quality....and an SI-1 stone represents the best value without a discernable difference to the unaided eye. Why sacrifice size (which he does want) to pay a premium for something that his unaided eye won't see (VS2 vs. eye-clean SI-1)?

 

[sylvesterii]

wait. i disagree. isn't the definition of vs2, is that it can ONLY be detected under 10x magnification, otherwise it would have to be brought up??? or am i mistaken in my understanding?

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 7:11:19 PM sylvesterii wrote:

wait. i disagree. isn't the definition of vs2, is that it can ONLY be detected under 10x magnification, otherwise it would have to be brought up??? or am i mistaken in my understanding?----------------

Umm....not necessarily. Size plays an important
role in this. Thing is Syvest. is that clarity is graded under a 10x power. So, what the eye is able to see depends upon the cut, the accutness of one's eye & alot of stuff.

So, yes, & no.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 7:53:02 PM fire&ice wrote:

---------------
isn't the definition of vs2, is that it can ONLY be detected under 10x magnification, otherwise it would have to be brought up??? or am i mistaken in my understanding?----------------

Umm....not necessarily. Size plays an important
role in this----------------

YAY.......EXACTLY! And I think that's how this whole SI-1 "hyper-caution" thing happens.

Someone sees an SI-1 inclusion in a 1.5+ ct stone, and therefore all SI-1 stones are suspect. The reality is that SI-1 is tough to see with the naked eye in smaller stones, especially if the SI-1 grading is based on a bunch of small inclusions instead of one larger one.

If one had to factor shipping charges into the equation, then I could see where VS2 might diminish the probability of having to return/pay more shipping charges. BUT, if one discusses the stone with the vendor first to make sure it's eye-clean, then it will likely be a non-issue and SI-1 should be completely fair game and offers MUCH more stone for the money.

 

[Mikesgirl]

Fire & Ice - love that setting in your pics. Where did the ring come from?

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 10/10/2003 9:28:18 PM Mikesgirl wrote:

Fire & Ice - love that setting in your pics. Where did the ring come from?----------------

Thanks! The top ring is a Gemlok (Jean Vitau). They were popular in my engagement day. I think the setting of the stones was patented at the time. Extremely good quality bands, great design, but very overpriced. I don't know if anyone makes a knock-off.

The second pic is actually a bracelet. The spacer bars are a design aspect for the bracelet part. The diamonds are set w/ two prongs - north & south.

 

[AudiOn19s]

OK...so here's the update for those interested. First off...I can't thank all of you enough for the help that has been provided in this process.

I spoke with Jim Schultz from DCD on Friday for probably near a half hour, he was kind enough to pull the 1.28 carat stone out of the vault and go over it in detail with me. He assured me that the stone was not only eye clean but after looking at the stone with me for a couple of minutes under the 10x scope and describing every imperfection to me he feels that this stone very well could have passed as a VS2 from a different lab. There were no inclusions on the table of the rock and very few others all togehter. I advised that I was looking at a couple of other stones from his competitors that were slightly smaller but scored slightly better on the HCA scale and he didn't bash anyone's product, he gave me honest imput walking me through the different stones and scenerios that would lead me to one or the other (did I want size over the best quality stone that I could buy basically). I was impressed, he didn't push a sale, didn't bash competitors products seemed to be a nice straight up guy.

I also spoke with Barry at SuperbCert about this stone:
http://www.superbcert.com/products/index.cfm?Product_ID=571&Product_Subcategory_ID=3&Product_Category_ID=3&Product_Group_ID=1
Again, Barry was great to deal with, looked at the stone under the scope and advised that it is indeed eye clean but that under 10x magnification this stone has a small white inclusion on the table but is rather clean other than that. This diamond scored slighty better on the HCA than the stone above.

And finally I'm hoping to speak with Bob about his cut above diamond which is smaller yet but the best quality stone of the 3. He was checking to insure that it was eye clean on Friday but I missed his call when he tried to call me back.

One final question that I'll pose. the 1.28 carat stone is Ideal cut and scores 2.1 on the HCA, the 1.21 carat stone is "Super Ideal" cut and scores 1.4 on the HCA, and the 1.13 carat stone is "A cut above" and scores 1.2 on the HCA. I'm assuming that to the naked eye the two larger stones will probably look very nice and the smaller stone will look a touch better...is this correct? with trying to balance my priorities I think that I'll be more than happy with either of the 2 larger stones...the decision will be made today.

Thanks again for all of the help to EVERYONE!!!

Andy