OMC help with clarity concerns

[Cerulean]

Hey friends.

Some of you know I am selling my 2 most precious rings for an upgrade! I am on the hunt for an OMC/OMB, and found some very pretty options. Buuuut almost all of the stones I like are at least SI1-SI2 (one is I1 - gasp) and have some scary plot charts.

I am having a hard time reading whether some would have the risk of chips. I'd strongly prefer a 4 prong setting...

I am also still learning about OMCs, as I've really only trained my eyes to "read" OECs!

All feedback is welcome.

Looking for...

• 2+ carats
• 7.5mm+
• K+ color (ideally I or above)
• Eye clean is not necessary, but structurally sound is and nothing that is too greatly impacting light performance
• >$23k budget

Inspo facet pattern

 

[Cerulean]

Top contenders...thoughts from the OMC whisperers?

1. 2.46 J SI2
7.77 x 7.70 x 5.58 mm
GIA cert HERE

Pictures are horrible - see the video link - might be tied for favorite with #2




2. 2.21 I SI2
7.75 x 7.69 x 5.39 mm
Gia cert HERE

This might be my favorite...maybe most similar to the inspo?




3. 2.03 H SI2
GIA report HERE
7.38 x 7.23 x 5.11 mm

Worried this might be too small and the table looks crooked




4. 2.5 J SI2
GIA report HERE
8.10 x 7.82 x 5.60 mm

Worried there's just general messiness with the facets and inclusions impacting light performance?



5. 2.42 I I1
GIA report HERE
8.30 x 7.60 x 5.27 mm

Really worried about it being an I1....seeing some messiness at the north and south of the "cross"

 

[RetroQT]

Are you looking for an authentic antique OMC? Wasn’t sure if an AVC would be of interest.

 

[Cerulean]

Are you looking for an authentic antique OMC? Wasn’t sure if an AVC would be of interest.

Authentic only. not puritanical - don't mind if there have been some touch-ups at some point

 

[RetroQT]

Authentic only. not puritanical - don't mind if there have been some touch-ups at some point

That video for #1 is

 

[Cerulean]

Oh I forgot this one...she's got personality but is a very different flavor.

This item is unavailable - Etsy

Find the perfect handmade gift, vintage & on-trend clothes, unique jewelry, and more… lots more.

www.etsy.com

1.99 K VS1
7.40 x 7.27 x 5.45

 

[RetroQT]

Oh I forgot this one...she's got personality but is a very different flavor.

This item is unavailable - Etsy

Find the perfect handmade gift, vintage & on-trend clothes, unique jewelry, and more… lots more.

www.etsy.com

1.99 K VS1
7.40 x 7.27 x 5.45

*Drool*

 

[Mjay]

Ring #2 is to die for imo. The shape is incredible, the setting is unique, and there is nothing concerning on the cert. I’d personally choose that one.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

I didn't know!!!! I've been scatter busy and missed it.
If I didn't have two on their way to college and a new car I would most certainly have adopted your sapphire. It is still one of my all time favorites. I'm going to go write the same really quick under it's pre love. It really is something.

I will come back and take a good look at these as soon as I can- don't sweat some of the clarity grades, overall beauty is way more important.
Instant impression:
2 and 5.

 

[Cerulean]

Ring #2 is to die for imo. The shape is incredible, the setting is unique, and there is nothing concerning on the cert. I’d personally choose that one.

I’m getting more pics of that one. It’s so yummy!

Number 1 is too asymmetrical upping further inspection - off the list

Number 4 - I saw videos and the inclusions are really prominent - off the list


It might be sacrilege but I don’t think I’d keep the settings for any of them…

 

[Cerulean]

I have a few others I’m contemplating but am so scared of lurkers!

I’ll just post screen shots..

Diamond 1


Diamond 2

 

[Sibsgirl]

Longtime lurker here likes #5 best.

 

[tyty333]

Diamond 1 of these last 2 you posted (post #11) caught my eye...

OMCs are so varied in shape/faceting patterns its hard to know what you like. I tend to like the look of "bigger" facets throughout
the stone vs bigger facets under the table and much smaller facets outside the table (but that's me...not sure what look you like).

For example, the look of that 1.99 K on post #6 would not interest me.

 

[RetroQT]

Diamond 1

Stats?

 

[junebug17]

I also like diamond 1 in your last post...can we have deets?

 

[maryjane04]

My vote is #3.

There are so many different flavours to omc. From what I know of you and your current oec, I definitely think that a prominent Maltese cross would not be pleasing to you at all. The darkness under the table might end up bothering you. No point getting a bright white stone to have it go dark.

I think that #1 from your last post also might have potential as well.

 

[Cerulean]

Diamond 1 of these last 2 you posted (post #11) caught my eye...

OMCs are so varied in shape/faceting patterns its hard to know what you like. I tend to like the look of "bigger" facets throughout
the stone vs bigger facets under the table and much smaller facets outside the table (but that's me...not sure what look you like).

For example, the look of that 1.99 K on post #6 would not interest me.

They do have totally different flavors!

I like a fair amount of kozibe, a crisp maltese cross pattern but nothing too large, if that makes sense. A very asymmetrical pinwheel would drive me nuts. I don't want something too elongated, or with facets that are really big (like antique cushions)

You are right, the 1.99 K is off the table for me. I'ts lovely but a little too much kozibe and the obstruction under the table would bug me.

Do you mind sharing examples of what you're describing? I think I know what you mean, but I want to make sure!

 

[Cerulean]

Stats?

@junebug17 @RetroQT @tyty333

This one is a bit different because it is SO low color. 2.4 carats, S color, SI2, 8.36 x 7.9

The cut is TDF IMO - id probably put it in YG prongs

I keep thinking about this one, actually. And no 2 from the original list

here are some videos...I've asked for more

Video 1
Video 2

 

[Cerulean]

Updated list w/ top contenders:

2. 2.21 I SI2
7.75 x 7.69 x 5.39 mm
Gia cert HERE

This might be my favorite...maybe most similar to the inspo?

5. 2.42 I I1
GIA report HERE
8.30 x 7.60 x 5.27 mm

Really worried about it being an I1....seeing some messiness at the north and south of the "cross"

6. 2.4 S-T SI2
8.36 x 7.9mm x 5.52
GIA report HERE
Video 1
Video 2

 

[Cerulean]

I am also going to have Lang show me this one in vids, but I think I already know it's too shallow for my liking

Lang Collection 2.02 Carat Old Mine Cut Diamond Engagement Ring - GIA K VS1

The resplendent 2.02 carat original old mine-cut diamond (circa 1915-1920) in this Lang Collection beauty has found a new home atop our vintage-inspired mounting. Hand fabricated in lustrous repurposed platinum, it is designed with striking flame, or foliate, motif shoulders twinkling with tiny...

www.langantiques.com

 

[Cerulean]

My vote is #3.

There are so many different flavours to omc. From what I know of you and your current oec, I definitely think that a prominent Maltese cross would not be pleasing to you at all. The darkness under the table might end up bothering you. No point getting a bright white stone to have it go dark.

I think that #1 from your last post also might have potential as well.

I love no 3 ....almost. the pinwheel is too asymmetrical and it's all I can see.

i think you are right with the cross. i definitely want it THERE, not covering a lot of the stone, like the 1.99 K. too prominent.

what i don't like are OMCs with really flower facets under the table.

getting more deets on number 6...

 

[lulu_ma]

I am also going to have Lang show me this one in vids, but I think I already know it's too shallow for my liking

Lang Collection 2.02 Carat Old Mine Cut Diamond Engagement Ring - GIA K VS1

The resplendent 2.02 carat original old mine-cut diamond (circa 1915-1920) in this Lang Collection beauty has found a new home atop our vintage-inspired mounting. Hand fabricated in lustrous repurposed platinum, it is designed with striking flame, or foliate, motif shoulders twinkling with tiny...

www.langantiques.com

Oh, see if you can post a vid of this one. This one would be considered deep for an OEC. If you like the faceting, you would get the larger face up and it should face up white.

 

[Cerulean]

This chart for the 2.4 S-T looks pretty scary...feathers and cavities?

 

[Cerulean]

Oh, see if you can post a vid of this one. This one would be considered deep for an OEC. If you like the faceting, you would get the larger face up and it should face up white.

I will definitely post vids! I should be getting some today for all of the Lang rings...

 

[RunningwithScissors]

I know you are eager to get a move on this exciting project (I would be too). But what about waiting until the fall and going to a big show like JAWS in NYC to see and try on a lot of different ones at the same time before making a selection? You could also go to the other antique diamond vendors in the NYC area too and really get an old-cut immersion.

 

[Cerulean]

I know you are eager to get a move on this exciting project (I would be too). But what about waiting until the fall and going to a big show like JAWS in NYC to see and try on a lot of different ones at the same time before making a selection? You could also go to the other antique diamond vendors in the NYC area too and really get an old-cut immersion.

Totally hear you. It'll depend on the timing of selling my current rings or if I do trade-ins, if vendors are willing to send a ring I'm interested on memo to a local jeweler, etc...if that makes sense.

If it takes me a while to figure out what to do with my rings I'll be waiting anyways. I'd absolutely LOVE to go to JAWs, but I'm traveling quite heavily in Aug-Oct and don't know if I can squeeze it in. I hope I can.

Considering snagging flights for a day trip to NYC as well.

I'm curious to explore the options that are out there now, but if nothing of them really speaks to me, I'll definitely move on and wait for a bit.

Part of this is also an exercise in training my eyes...of course the more I see IRL, the better. I've looked at OECs and OECs only for so long, I feel like a newborn.

 

[yssie]

Can vendor for #6 take some video with tweezers rather than between fingers? The fingers will be leaving oils on the pavilion, and also totally changing internal refraction at the areas that are touching skin - like, I can’t be sure that this splotch of mush is the stone rather than just the fact that her finger is touching the stone -

 

[Cerulean]

Can vendor for #6 take some video with tweezers rather than between fingers? The fingers will be leaving oils on the pavilion, and also totally changing internal refraction at the areas that are touching skin - like, I can’t be sure that this splotch of mush is the stone rather than just the fact that her finger is touching the stone -

Yeah, really excellent point. I will ask her...

I also want to really see what the tint looks like in more lighting conditions...she's S-T, and I want to make sure she doesn't turn swamp froggy in the wrong light

If I went this route, she'd need YG prongs...

 

[Cerulean]

This chart for the 2.4 S-T looks pretty scary...feathers and cavities?

Do you have any thoughts on the inclusion chart @yssie - they are making me nervous. is this a mandatory bezel situation? or would 6-8 prongs suffice?

i have no idea what is or isn't a precarious inclusion...

 

[yssie]

Do you have any thoughts on the inclusion chart @yssie - they are making me nervous. is this a mandatory bezel situation? or would 6-8 prongs suffice?

i have no idea what is or isn't a precarious inclusion...

I mean - I think most of it is just the natural consequence of being preowned and genuinely preloved. The report is Feb 2022, so it reflects the stone's current condition, which is fantastic, and it's kind of nice that all the clarity markers are nearer the girdle - the under table is totally clean! Of course the plot doesn't list absolutely everything, especially on lower clarity stones, but you can be confident that there's nothing else of any consequence. This stone must have been quitehigh clarity originally, that feather might have been the only inclusion

The inclusion plot - so pretend that what you see in the report is printed out on a piece of paper, and fold that paper down the middle between the two diagrams to superimpose the plots. Here's what that looks like -


And if you rotate the plot you can see all those inclusions in the original photo you posted too -

So I guess what I'm saying is... There are no clarity skeletons that you can't see lurking in this closet - what you see in photos/vidoes is exactly what you get. Which is nice. Not always the case.

I don't think this is a total #NecessitatesBezel situation, but I do see that finding the right number of prongs/tabs to protect those delicate areas will be more of a challenge. But there are definitely non-bezel options! A "too many to count" prong approach - or wide tab prongs, which I know you're partial to - both could mitigate this problem


I hear you on swampy. Nothing worse than a swampy low-coloured stone. Fortunately there are no clouds or graining, that always makes any swampiness infinitely worse! I have a baby OMC that's kind of SwampAfterAGoodRain - it's not too bad, but it's also not *good*. But it has the lovely (to me) light return. I put it in a hair clip to enjoy it without having to look at it But I would definitely plan to send it to a vendor who's experienced with stones that have some wear and tear - someone who could suggest how to set it protectively without creating more damage

YG, or a creamy unplated white if you're not allergic to nickel...


And all of that said - I personally like #2 best