Newbie looking for some sage advice/feedback/reassurance

[Snarleyow]

Hi all.

I''ve been lurking and learning for a few weeks now, but just registered today.

My GF and I have been shopping settings and have narrowed it to two (in platinum) from Verragio:
ENG-0125R - http://verragio.com/gallery_detail.php?prod_id=610&col_id=50
ENG-0264 - http://www.goodoldgold.com/setting/VRG-ENG-0264/

I am working with a local B&M on the setting. Naturally they would also like to sell me a diamond. I bought the Idealscope Expert Scope kit from AGA in Philly and looked at some of the B&M''s stones and was not blown away. They are bringing in some G SI1 stones around 1.25 ct for me to look at. I gave them the WF ACA standards as a guide as to what I''m looking for in terms of cut quality.

In the mean time I took a look at WF''s incoming batch of ACA stones and found several that interest me, especially this 1.285 G SI1 ACA:
http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/Diamond_Details.aspx?idno=1466977

I was concerned that no matter how good the on-line images, I wouldn''t be able to make a true apples-to-apples comparison between the WF ACA stone and the B&M''s stones unless I physically brought them together. So I am buying the WF ACA and should have it soon. I figure this peace-of-mind is worth having to eat the shipping charges if I decide to go with one of the B&M''s stones and return the WF ACA. If I stay with the WF ACA stone, at least the B&M knows I gave them a shot and they still sell me the setting. The B&M rep thought it a smart idea, too.

Any thoughts/feedback on the WF ACA G SI1, the settings, or my strategy? As a diamond and engagement ring neophyte I''d appreciate advice and suggestions. Anything I should pay particular attention to as I compare the stones? Any thoughts/advice re: the settings?

Thanks in advance.

Snarleyow

 

[swingirl]

The WF stone will be gorgeous. I have seen an ACA in a G and it was white and quite beautiful. If your B&M is bringing in some AGS ideals, they might be nice, too. But they probably won''t supply you with all the magnified photos WF has. Hopefully you''ll be able to see well enough through a loupe to make your choice. I am curious to find out how the regular AGS ideals stack up to the ACAs.

I could be wrong but i think when you see your ACA you''re not gonna want to let it go!

 

[arjunajane]

Frankly, I would just keep the ACA - you are still buying a reasonably expensive setting from the store , they should be happy with that.
Welcome to PS!

 

[Lorelei]

Compare all your contenders to the ACA away from the store lights if possible, then it could be that your decision could be quite easy!

 

[Mrs W]

That stone is going to be gorgeous and huge......i love that second setting from good old gold

 

[honey22]

ACAs are stunning stones handpicked by Brian. I will bet my own ACA that the B&M store won''t be able to find you a better store, and even if he could, he won''t be able to do a better price.

Once you open that little box from WF, all your doubts will disappear and then you can just concentrate on finding an equally stunning setting for that baby

 

[Ellen]

That's a great stone, and this is a very fair way to purchase. As you said, at least you are giving the B&M a chance.

Do compare in all lighting situations, and I would actually include the jewelers lighting, as that will give you an idea of what each stone will do in spot lighting situations (which is one of the most beautiful views of a well cut diamond).

Let us know how it goes, I'd love to hear the comparison report!

 

[MissGotRocks]

You are certainly on the right track! I am sure the ACA will be gorgeous but being able to compare two stones with your own eyes is definitely the best way to decide. It will be interesting to hear the price comparison as well.

Best of luck to you - you''ve armed yourself with an IdealScope and one very well cut stone - on to the taste test! I''ll be anxious to hear what you think!

 

[Snarleyow]

Thanks for the tip. The lady at the B&M suggested this, too.

 

[Snarleyow]

Thanks. I''m very hopeful it is eye-clean as the WF rep said it is. The inclusions show up pretty clearly in the enlarged 40X image but hopefully won''t be visible to the naked eye.

By the way, maybe it''s just my monitor, but the 40x images actually measures about 12-13 times the actual size of the diamond as measured on the screen, so why is it called 40x? Anyone know?

 

[Snarleyow]

We shopped a long time for the right setting. My GF initially was thinking a solitaire because that''s what almost all her friends have. Then we saw the Scott Kay crown setting and reallly liked it.

Eventually we found Verragio and really loved their designs. It took us quite a while to whittle it down to the final two. A big obstacle was that most Verragio dealers only would have a few of the settings. Several had the 125R which is in the Verragio catalog/brochure and also their web site. The 0264 I saw first on the GOG site and it is not in the Verragio brochure or anywhere on their web site. The B&M we are dealing with was the only dealer that actually had it in house and none of the others could even get it from Verrgio on memo for us to see. Luckily the B&M with the 0264 was able to get the 125R on memo to compare.

Both settings are gorgeous; my GF likes them equally and so I''ll make the final decision. Interestingly, what you don''t see in the separate pics is the the 0264 is a good bit more petite than the 0125R.

The lady at the B&M has been wonderful and had the CZs knocked out and had some real stones ranging from 1.00 to 1.50 cts laid loose in the settings for us to see and for my GF to wear around the store. She even encouraged us to go outside. My GF and I stopped at the entry, though, as that was far enough to see the rings in natural light. The idea of going out on to the sidewalk with a diamond loose in the settings had us seeing visions of a diamond bouncing into a storm drain! "Oh dear, sir, what a shame! Will you be paying cash or credit for the lucky Public Works Department worker''s new diamond!"

With the first setting, ENG-0125R - http://verragio.com/gallery_detail.php?prod_id=610&col_id=50, a 1.00 ct. "leading lady" was proportionally too small when looked at in conjunction with the side diamonds. That setting really needs a center stone in the 1.20+ ct range. This setting has a very distinctive look with the "Js" and "backward-Js" hoisting up the center stone. The setting total diamond ct. weight is 0.65 ct. Total carat weight of the completed ring with the WF ACA I bought would be 1.935 ct.

With the second setting, ENG-0264 - http://www.goodoldgold.com/setting/VRG-ENG-0264/, the more petite design of the two, a 1.00 ct. center stone looked great. My GF decided that the larger stone she preferred with the 0125R would suit her nicely in the 0264, too. Shocking, huh?! My only concern with the bigger "leading lady" in the second setting is "overhanging" the side diamonds. Viewed from above, the side diamonds in the 0264 are closer to the center stone than with the 0125R. Strangely, the more petite 0264 has a greater total ct. weight on the setting, 0.80 ct. Total carat weight of the completed ring with the WF ACA I bought would be 2.085 ct. This setting has the trademark Verragio "V" holding up the center stone. Though more traditional, it appeals to me as my last name starts with a "V".

I''ve babbled enough. I''ll be back at the B&M this Friday to see the best stones they can get and will make my final choices then. 6 days and counting!

Thanks again.

 

[Snarleyow]

Btw, my apologies on not being good on my replies. I assumed incorrectly that each post I replied to would be shown at the top of my reply. I now see that isn''t the case so it''s not obvious who I was replying to with each of my posts. How do I get my replies to contain the blue box with the specific post I''m responding to? Sorry for the rookie mistake.

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 9/27/2008 5:09:48 AM
Author: Lorelei
Compare all your contenders to the ACA away from the store lights if possible, then it could be that your decision could be quite easy!

Lorelei gives good advice, as always.

When I have a client in my office to look at diamonds, one of the things that we do is to look at the diamond in many different lights. We will sit at my desk with only the flourescent lights on, then add the bright overhead lights to simulate the lighting in a jewelry store, then walk into the hall and down the stairs, all the while looking at the diamonds, then I have them stand in a corner with only the faint light coming over their shoulders to illuminate the diamonds. (That alone eliminates nearly all diamonds that are not AGS 0''s, 1''s, 2''s, and occassionally nice 3''s. Very few diamonds will stand the dark corner test.)

Then we walk outside to view the diamond in the sunlight and in the shade of a broad leafed tree. Wow, even a dog looks good in the shade of a broad leafed tree, but no where near as MAGNIFICENT as a really well cut diamond. The way the light is broken into millions of angles by the leaves makes the diamonds rich with dispersion. It is also important to see the diamond in the sunlight so as to determine if any flourescence has a good or bad influence on the appearance of the diamond. In nearly all cases the affect is negligible or positive, with only a few that I have ever seen having a negative change in the sunlight. (I am talking about fewer than ten in my 30 plus years as a jeweler.)

Ask your jeweler to take the "perp walk" with you. It will quickly and definitively separate the wheat from the chaff.

Wink

 

[WinkHPD]

Date: 9/27/2008 2:22:45 PM
Author: Snarleyow
Btw, my apologies on not being good on my replies. I assumed incorrectly that each post I replied to would be shown at the top of my reply. I now see that isn''t the case so it''s not obvious who I was replying to with each of my posts. How do I get my replies to contain the blue box with the specific post I''m responding to? Sorry for the rookie mistake.

Hit the Quote button near the top left of the dialog box when you are typing your reply. Welcome to Wonderland!

Wink

 

[Snarleyow]

Date: 9/27/2008 2:37:08 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 9/27/2008 2:22:45 PM
Author: Snarleyow
Btw, my apologies on not being good on my replies. I assumed incorrectly that each post I replied to would be shown at the top of my reply. I now see that isn''t the case so it''s not obvious who I was replying to with each of my posts. How do I get my replies to contain the blue box with the specific post I''m responding to? Sorry for the rookie mistake.

Hit the Quote button near the top left of the dialog box when you are typing your reply. Welcome to Wonderland!

Wink

OMG, if it was a snake it would have bit me!

Thanks much.