Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

need help deciding on round diamond

S

seansba

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
13
hello, i was looking to buy a round diamond for an engagement ring, and i've found some diamonds that i'd like to get a second opinion on.
first: 1.28 ct, I, SI1, hearts and arrows (AGS) - $7200
second: 1.33 ct I, VS2, excellent cut (GIA) - $7350
others (don't have actual pictures of these ones, just copies of GIA certificates):
1.21 ct, G, SI1, excellent cut - $7750
1.27 ct, I, VS1, hearts and arrows cut - $7500
1.38 ct, I, VS2, excellent cut - $7600

what do you guys think of these? any feedback would be good.
also, is hearts and arrows better than regular ideal/excellent cut to the naked eye? or is that something that can only be appreciated under loupes?
 
Images? Idealscope, Hearts image?

Grading report?

H&A not necessary better than ideal/ex cut. Case by case.
 
Use the HCA tool to help narrow down the stones. Stones that score 2 or under are worth further investigating.

https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca

We cant tell from the info you provided us whether these are well cut stones or not. There are stones graded ideal/excellent
that also have light leakage so you cant just go by that label. H&A is a symmetry think. You need H&A images to verify
a stone is an H&A.
 
If you are buying in person, go with the diamond that's more appealing to your eyes.

The HCA,H&A,Idealscope,ASET,AGS/GIA reports are meant to increase the chances of getting a bright, brilliant, sparkly diamond when you can't see it in person, like purchasing online.

So if you want people in this forum to judge the quality of the diamonds, you need to at least post the grading reports, and ideally, the Idealscope image.
 
I have attached the grading reports.

1.21 G-SI1, 2.5.Jpg

1.27 I-VS1, 1.6.Jpg

1.38 I-VS2, 3.1.Jpg

I-VS2-Ideal-Cut-1.33-Carat, 0.9.jpg
 
Can you post the GIA report numbers? These images are quite small and not well scan.
 
Are these online or in person?
 
and one more

ci_ags-1.4.jpg

Screen shot 2010-10-17 at 1.21.08 PM.png
 
is there a way to attach the pictures so that they are actual size?
here are the report numbers for the GIA diamonds:
2116209441, 1.21 cts
2116081787, 1.27 cts
2116336113, 1.38 cts
2116208119, 1.33 cts.

and these are all online.
 
and the ags diamond is
104044879001
1.280cts
 
so after running each of the diamonds through the HCA, these are the ones that scored under 2:
1.33ct= 0.9
1.27ct= 1.6
1.28ct= 1.4

the AGS H&A diamond wasn't even the lowest HCA score, but do you guys think that makes a difference? I am going to ask the vendors for idealscope pictures and i will post if i get them. the only one that i have right now is the ags diamond.
 
HCA is a rejection tool not a selection tool.
 
ditto, the 'lowest' HCA score doesn't matter, lower is not necessarily better, you just want to look for something that scores less than 2. if you get other IS images, post them-WF diamond looks good.
 
The WF stone looks good. It is worth asking for ideal scope images of the other possibilities that scores under 2.
 
Ditto PPs - HCA is blunt rejection, once you have ISs/ASETs you don't need to worry about HCA at all - and stones w/ HCA scores over 2 can have picture perfect ISs and beautiful light return.. blunt rejection only.
 
ok thanks guys.
I requested the idealscope for the other diamond (1.33 cts), so i will be getting that one in a few days. Also, what is the "WF" stone?
 
ok, so i just got the idealscope sent to me.
this is of the 1.33 ct stone

ADS-8304id.jpg
 
seansba said:
ok, so i just got the idealscope sent to me.
this is of the 1.33 ct stone
Click to expand...

Looks good too!

WF stone means the stone from whiteflash that you posted the IS image for, above, with the AGS cert. We recognize their photography.
 
when i look at the actual pictures of the 2 diamonds, the WF one looks brighter and better, but is that because of the lighting and the photography? or do you guys think that the actual diamond looks better? here are the two diamonds.
which one do you think i should buy?

Screen shot 2010-10-17 at 1.17.39 PM.png

Screen shot 2010-10-17 at 1.20.54 PM.png
 
I think those both look good. Does one vendor have a setting you like better, or policies that appeal more to you? Also the SI1 is eye-clean, right?
 
seansba said:
when i look at the actual pictures of the 2 diamonds, the WF one looks brighter and better, but is that because of the lighting and the photography? or do you guys think that the actual diamond looks better? here are the two diamonds.
which one do you think i should buy?
Click to expand...

Yap, photography.
 
It is photography. I would let the policies and settings guide you in this case, both looks great and are from good vendors.
 
i am getting the setting from jamesallen.com
after all is said and done, no matter which diamond i choose, i will be spending the same amount of money for the diamond itself (including jamesallen's extra fee for using an outside vendor's diamond).
should I let that "hearts and arrows" label on the WF diamond weigh in on my decision? that seems to be the biggest difference between the two...
 
seansba said:
i am getting the setting from jamesallen.com
after all is said and done, no matter which diamond i choose, i will be spending the same amount of money for the diamond itself (including jamesallen's extra fee for using an outside vendor's diamond).
should I let that "hearts and arrows" label on the WF diamond weigh in on my decision? that seems to be the biggest difference between the two...
Click to expand...

There are differences in upgrade and buyback policies between the vendors, that may matter to you.

I would lean towards doing it all in house then and get the JA stone. You will likely not tell the difference between the two stones. Unless you are knowledgable about diamonds, detecting the subtle differences between an H&A and non H&A is not easy (if they even exist ;)) there is argument about this). Unless you LIKE the IDEA of owning an H&A, there may be little practical value to the label relative to the JA stone, which will still display nice arrows based on the pics.
 
ok, i found another diamond that i might be interested in:
GIA 6127197100

it's a 1.32ct, I, SI2 diamond
i have asked for an idealscope too.

Screen shot 2010-10-24 at 10.07.40 AM.png
 
Looks promising if eye-clean. Ask JA, do not assume.
 
so JA got back to me and said that the diamond is cloudy (due to inclusions), has additional clouds and has surface graining.
are any of you aware of the website truthaboutdiamonds.com? I asked the writer of that site to take a look at this diamond and he said that the inclusions would not be visible to the naked eye, and that this diamond will be just as brilliant as the other diamond from JA.
do you guys think JA is just trying to sell me the more expensive diamond?
also, how would an excellent rated (polish) still have surface graining?
 
The author of truthaboutdiamonds used to post here until he was outed as being from the trade. He receives commissions from recommendation from his site to JA, so I would not call him an independent, with no interest in the sale.

Surface graining can still get Ex polish, different things apparently.

SI2 eye-cleans are there but not all are eye-clean, you will have to go through a few more condidates. You will have to trust someone that can see the stone, I would trust the JA gemologist that someone looking at the loupe image.

You could still buy it and use the 30days return period and see for yourself or hire an independent appraiser to look at it if you still think it is eye-clean and JA is trying to sucker you into buying a more expensive stone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top