shape
carat
color
clarity

Need help with this diamond urgently!

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by 1amaN00b, Feb 5, 2019.

  1. kmoro
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    532
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2018
    by kmoro » Feb 10, 2019 at 5:31 AM
    I thought that I preferred claw prongs - loved them on a setting that I had in October. For the setting I have now, I was going to ask for claw prongs, but then I thought it would be fun to see the prongs as intended by the designer, since they looked quite small ... I don’t regret it. The prongs are very tiny with a rounded end; they are very subtle and I like them as much as the claws. That experience showed me that I actually like all prongs as long as they are tiny and, as someone else mentioned, allow the diamond to be the star of the show.

    One thing though: the longer that I have my current setting, the more that I’m bored with it. I thought that I wanted a solitaire with no other diamonds viewable from the top. However, the prongs are so tiny and unnoticeable that the diamond looks kinda plain sitting there in a perfect circle above a very thin band. No one can say there is anything about the setting that doesn’t make the diamond the star of the show, but I’ve come to realize that the prongs could have had some pizazz. For example, not prongs that blend into the sillouette of the round diamond, but ones that stick out a little along the parameter - like the Tiffany style settings.

    My next setting is sort of a pseudo halo (never thought that I would go for such a style but I fell in love with it), and it just happens to have the claw prongs.

    Not sure if that helps .... I just think that those big blob prongs are out, lol.
     
  2. kal2021
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    550
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    by kal2021 » Feb 10, 2019 at 5:48 AM
    This makes a lot of sense. While I also always loved claw prongs my current setting has the Tiffany like prongs and I love them because they don’t totally blend in.
     
    kmoro likes this.
  3. 1amaN00b
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    kal2021 likes this.
  4. blueMA
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    rockysalamander and 1amaN00b like this.
  5. 1amaN00b
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    rockysalamander likes this.
  6. blueMA
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    by blueMA » Feb 10, 2019 at 11:22 AM
    Are you seriously going to leave us hanging and ask what your decision is??? :confused: :bigsmile:
     
    rockysalamander and 1amaN00b like this.
  7. 1amaN00b
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    by 1amaN00b » Feb 10, 2019 at 11:24 AM
    Lol! I thought I mentioned it earlier in the thread. Platinum contemporary setting (1463 WF) with 6 claw prongs. :lol:
     
  8. blueMA
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    by blueMA » Feb 10, 2019 at 11:33 AM
    I don't like the contemporary's bulky prongs as is but with the claw prongs customization, I think it'll look striking. I can't wait to see the result! :appl:
     
    sledge, kal2021 and 1amaN00b like this.
  9. kal2021
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    550
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
  10. 1amaN00b
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    sledge and kal2021 like this.
  11. kal2021
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    550
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    by kal2021 » Feb 10, 2019 at 2:28 PM
    Thank you! I am actually going to trade the stone in for an H though. The I Color is bothering me! But the setting is perfection and the stone sparkles like crazy!
     
    sledge likes this.
  12. ACA Dia
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2018
    by ACA Dia » Feb 10, 2019 at 3:31 PM
    @1amaN00b Hi, do you mind posting the pictures of 1.6 I stone along with the stone that you decided to go with? I want to see how yellow that I stone looks compared to G. Currently I'm torn between I and H stones and I am interested in that I stone.
     
  13. 1amaN00b
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    lovedogs, blueMA and sledge like this.
  14. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,905
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Feb 10, 2019 at 4:25 PM
    Good choices. :cool2:

    In regards to the price of mens bands, I too feel they are over priced. Bulk of them is plain and round with nothing overly unique. I was looking at some that had a German finish in platinum and was $3k with no diamonds!

    It always goes back to the amount of metal. I have large fingers at 12.5. Most bands I look at are 7.5 to 9mm wide. I prefer thickness in the 2.1+ range.

    That's a considerable more amount of volume than a typical ladies band that is size 7 or less and usually 2.5mm or less in width and most the time 2mm max thickness.

    Now consider platinum is 95% pure, where 14k is 58.3% pure (14k/24k) or that 18k is 75% pure (18k/24k). The remaining is alloyed with other metals rather that be iridium, nickel, palladium, etc. So with platinum you have less "fillers" than 14k or 18k gold.

    The second element you have to consider is the density of each metal type. Ever eat a piece of cake that was light and fluffy? Or one that was more moist and heavy? This is density. The first cake weighs less than the second cake although they occupy the same size, or volume.

    Platinum has a slightly higher density than gold. But when you consider the junk/fillers added to 14k and 18k variants the difference grows as generally speaking those fillers weigh considerably less than gold or platinum.

    In pure form, platinum has a density of 21.4 and gold (24k) of 19.3. Not a huge variance but platinum is still heavier. But as noted earlier, 14k and 18k has fillers so 14k gold by itself has a density of 11.3 (19.3 x 58.3%), whereas 18k gold has a density of about 14.5 (19.3 x 75%). Although considerably less fillers are used, even platinum rings have some so final density of those are around 20.1.

    Using density we can then multiply by cubic centimeters (cm3) to obtain grams. Then you can find market pricing for gold and platinum (normally quoted in ounces so you have to divide by 31.1 to convert to $/gram).

    At this point you have a decent idea of how much gold and platinum value is in the ring. It doesn't account for the fillers, labor or markups associated with everything. Consequently this is commonly called a scrap, or melt, value of the ring.

    But maybe it gives you an idea how weights and sizes matter and relate to final pricing variances between men and women rings. Unfortunatly, having scientific knowledge of the process doesn't necessarily change sticker shock feelings we sometimes associate with a purchase.

    This article has a good explanation as well:

    https://www.callagold.com/education/rule-of-thumb-in-calculating-the-cost-of-gold-jewelry/

    And this explains densities, etc a little further while still keeping it simple:

    http://www.18carat.co.uk/densityofgoldandothermetals.html
     
    1amaN00b and kmoro like this.
  15. sledge
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,905
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Feb 10, 2019 at 4:30 PM
    Face up views of super ideals will look very white. To really compare, you also need a side view of the pavilion which is how diamonds are graded for color as the pavilion is where color is mostly seen.
     
    kmoro and kal2021 like this.
  16. kmoro
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    532
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2018
    by kmoro » Feb 10, 2019 at 7:39 PM
    Sure! :twirl:
    613319C4-593E-49D6-B822-8548238718AC.jpeg
     
    sledge and 1amaN00b like this.
  17. 1amaN00b
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    by 1amaN00b » Feb 11, 2019 at 9:35 AM
    I have a random question about WF. I assume they resell diamonds that customers have sent back for exchange/upgrade. How do customers know if the diamond they are interested is a result of an upgrade?
     
  18. ringo865
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,003
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2014
    by ringo865 » Feb 11, 2019 at 9:37 AM
    Ask the vendor.
     
  19. lovedogs
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    5,480
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    by lovedogs » Feb 11, 2019 at 12:54 PM
    Ask WF. They will be honest and tell you. But I would argue it doesn't matter or affect anything about the quality of the stone, as WF gets them recertified to make sure they are in the same condition as when sold.
     
  20. 1amaN00b
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    by 1amaN00b » Feb 11, 2019 at 1:58 PM
    Yup confirmed with WF!
     
    blueMA, lovedogs and kmoro like this.
  21. 1amaN00b
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    37
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2019
    by 1amaN00b » Feb 11, 2019 at 5:07 PM
    One more thing, I just noticed that the AGS report has a comment that says: Clouds not shown.

    I searched on PS and read a few threads. I think this may be a concern with a SI1 stone but is this something I should be concerned about given this is a VS2 ACA stone?

    Update: I was told that the clouds are so insignificant that they aren't plotted but listed under comments for completeness.
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2019 at 5:41 PM
    kal2021, lovedogs and kmoro like this.
  22. blueMA
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    by blueMA » Feb 11, 2019 at 7:38 PM
    Generally you don't have to worry about transparency issues with ACA stones since they're already vetted. You're right to be very cautions about that clarity note when it comes to most other diamond purchases.
     

Share This Page