Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Opinion on Diamond

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
R

rdoemail

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
18
Hi guys, I am slowly learning the in''s and out of searching for the perfect diamond for my gf and I. LOL, I am finding the more I read and research the site, I am becoming more engrossed in this hobby! Can you guys give me your opinion on the two diamonds below? I ran it through the HCA calc and the bottom was was much higher. Will there be a significant difference in the way it looks? Does the signature diamond warrant the 2k increase? Will the faint fluorescence affect the look of the signature diamond versus the ideal? Thanks.


http://www.bluenile.com/round-diamond-1-carat-signature-ideal-cut-f-color-vs1-clarity_LD01472917

1.10
F
VS1
Signature Ideal
Flouorescence Faint
HCA .6




http://www.bluenile.com/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-f-color-vs2-clarity_LD01560227
1.14
F
VS2
Ideal Cut
Flouorescence None
HCA 2.8
 
Hi rdoe

Due to the proportions of these I would really like to see an Idealscope image for each but BN do not offer these, both have proportion combos which need an Idealscope image in order to see how effectively they will perform and without I would be reluctant to purchase either. The first might have what is called obstruction due to the angle combo and slightly shallow pavilion angle, this is where a diamond can darken when viewed closely.

Faint fluorescence isn't an issue, you probably will never know it is there.
 
Thanks Lorelei, I appreciate the advice. I'm so bummed that BN does not have idealscope on these. You'd think they would considering they want to sell more diamonds. I've spent so much time looking at these online diamonds it's getting frustrating. I am understanding what the saying "It's harder to find a mind clean stone than a eye clean stone." LOL.
 
Date: 10/31/2009 8:19:24 PM
Author: rdoemail
Thanks Lorelei, I appreciate the advice. I''m so bummed that BN does not have idealscope on these. You''d think they would considering they want to sell more diamonds. I''ve spent so much time looking at these online diamonds it''s getting frustrating. I am understanding what the saying ''It''s harder to find a mind clean stone than a eye clean stone.'' LOL.
Click to expand...
You are welcome! I know, IS would be so useful in cases like these but if you want to buy from BN I think you can find some diamonds with '' safer'' numbers - although there are no guarantees and images are always preferable.
 
Hi Lorelei, I am going to take your expert advice and go for a dealer that has idealscope pics :). Can you tell me which of the three diamonds below that you prefer? If you have time can you check out the inclusions and idealscope? Thanks so much for your help. I ran these all through the HCA and they looks promising. Is the lower number better? Thanks.

HCA=1.4
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2199913.htm

HCA=.7
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2212171.htm

HCA=1.1
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2199914.htm
 
Date: 11/2/2009 11:42:31 PM
Author: rdoemail
Hi Lorelei, I am going to take your expert advice and go for a dealer that has idealscope pics :). Can you tell me which of the three diamonds below that you prefer? If you have time can you check out the inclusions and idealscope? Thanks so much for your help. I ran these all through the HCA and they looks promising. Is the lower number better? Thanks.

HCA=1.4
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2199913.htm
HCA=.7
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2212171.htm
HCA=1.1
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2199914.htm
Click to expand...
 
All looks good to me, so depends on your budget or throw a dice or something. :p
 
Date: 11/2/2009 11:42:31 PM
Author: rdoemail
Hi Lorelei, I am going to take your expert advice and go for a dealer that has idealscope pics :). Can you tell me which of the three diamonds below that you prefer? If you have time can you check out the inclusions and idealscope? Thanks so much for your help. I ran these all through the HCA and they looks promising. Is the lower number better? Thanks.

HCA=1.4
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2199913.htm

HCA=.7
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2212171.htm

HCA=1.1
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2199914.htm
Click to expand...
You are so kind, but I am not an expert, just a consumer but thank you so much for the compliment!

HCA, a lower number isn't better than a higher one, all scores below 2 are considered worthy of further evaluation and with diamond of this calibre with images, the HCA isn't needed anyway.

These all look great, if you are having trouble deciding, ask for Bob at WF to look at each one and discuss them with you, that could help you decide.

Thanks for the links SC!
 
Thanks Lorelei and SC for the advice. I will give them a call today. I appreciate all the information and time you spent helping me. Cheers!
 
Date: 11/3/2009 11:13:18 AM
Author: rdoemail
Thanks Lorelei and SC for the advice. I will give them a call today. I appreciate all the information and time you spent helping me. Cheers!
Click to expand...
Its my pleasure rdoe!!
35.gif
 
If WF says the stone is eye-clean, there is no need to worry about the inclusions you see in the images.
 
Date: 11/3/2009 12:30:31 PM
Author: rdoemail
Hi guys, I spoke to Tracy at Whiteflash. She was really helpful. Talk about good service. I was taking a look at the idealscope for the 1.175 and noticed some spots in the hearts. Are these the inclusions? Should I be worried? Thanks.

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=2212171&file_name=5
Click to expand...
Those are probably just an inclusion/s reflecting around the diamond as seen in the hearts, just check with Tracy that the diamond is eyeclean to YOUR standards, and make sure the stone is clean from all angles if that is what you are looking for.
 
Thanks again guys! Tracy said it was eye-clean. I worried because I did not see it in the other hearts pics. I was wondering why the rest of the diamonds looked so clean. Man, diamond paranoia is the worst!
 
Date: 11/3/2009 12:46:38 PM
Author: rdoemail
Thanks again guys! Tracy said it was eye-clean. I worried because I did not see it in the other hearts pics. I was wondering why the rest of the diamonds looked so clean. Man, diamond paranoia is the worst!
Click to expand...
LOL! Don''t worry, better to ask these questions BEFORE the purchase rather than afterwards, that way you can enjoy your new diamond to the fullest without nagging doubts!
 
Thanks Lorelei. Man I keep looking at these two diamonds. How come the smaller one's images look so much sharper. Looking at the idealscope and hearts, the 1.126 looks better. The hearts and arrows look a lot cleaner and straighter. Tracy said she chose the 1.175 because the 1.126 has additional clouds not shown on the cert. Is the plots just being too picky? I am a computer geek so I have this problem.

1.175 carat
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2212171.htm

1.126 carat
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/Whiteflash-ACA-cut-diamond-2199914.htm


I think I am going to ask Tracy to check out the 1.126 to see if it is eye-clean. When I spoke to her she gave me the assumption that she chose the 1.175 of the three because it did not have the additional clouds on the cert. Decisions Decisions!
 
Date: 11/4/2009 1:35:13 AM
Author: rdoemail
Thanks Lorelei. Man I keep looking at these two diamonds. How come the smaller one's images look so much sharper. Looking at the idealscope and hearts, the 1.126 looks better. The hearts and arrows look a lot cleaner and straighter.
Click to expand...

At a casual glance (which is all I believe is necessary) I see no remarkable differences in sharpness or cleanliness.

I think I am going to ask Tracy to check out the 1.126 to see if it is eye-clean. When I spoke to her she gave me the assumption that she chose the 1.175 of the three because it did not have the additional clouds on the cert. Decisions Decisions!
Click to expand...
33.gif
 
yap, no discernible difference, probably just a image set up problem you noticed. No, clouds not shown is not a problem especially at VS level.
 
Date: 11/4/2009 2:00:18 AM
Author: JulieN

Date: 11/4/2009 1:35:13 AM
Author: rdoemail
Thanks Lorelei. Man I keep looking at these two diamonds. How come the smaller one''s images look so much sharper. Looking at the idealscope and hearts, the 1.126 looks better. The hearts and arrows look a lot cleaner and straighter.
Click to expand...

At a casual glance (which is all I believe is necessary) I see no remarkable differences in sharpness or cleanliness.


I think I am going to ask Tracy to check out the 1.126 to see if it is eye-clean.When I spoke to her she gave me the assumption that she chose the 1.175 of the three because it did not have the additional clouds on the cert. Decisions Decisions!
Click to expand...
33.gif
Click to expand...
Of course I can''t see the diamond and Tracy has, just wondering like Julie if the clouds in this case make much difference but you could ask her to expound on this. The images for both look great.
 
H guys, I made the decision to go for the 1.126. I am basing my preference strictly on the images shown at whiteflash. For some reason, after looking at the idealscope images, the 1.126 look sharper to me. Also I like the fact that the hearts image is clean (no inclusions are on the image). I had a question about the pics on whiteflash's website concerning hearts. Is the picture of the hearts what we would see through a hearts viewer? Can anyone tell me which one's idealscope spec would be brighter? Tracy said both are eye clean but the inclusions on the 1.175 are bigger. Thanks.
 
They will be almost identical visually, like identical twins except one slightly heavier.
 
Date: 11/5/2009 1:38:19 AM
Author: rdoemail
H guys, I made the decision to go for the 1.126. I am basing my preference strictly on the images shown at whiteflash. For some reason, after looking at the idealscope images, the 1.126 look sharper to me. Also I like the fact that the hearts image is clean (no inclusions are on the image). I had a question about the pics on whiteflash''s website concerning hearts. Is the picture of the hearts what we would see through a hearts viewer? Can anyone tell me which one''s idealscope spec would be brighter? Tracy said both are eye clean but the inclusions on the 1.175 are bigger. Thanks.
Click to expand...
That sounds fine rdoe, also when you get to this level its splitting hairs between images, both are superb diamonds and you can''t pick a wrong one!
 
Thanks guys, my only question between the two is that if I look through the hearts and arrows viewer that comes with the diamond, will it look like the pics on their site? IE will I see the inclusions on the bigger one, or are the pics magnified or photoshopped? Thanks.
 
Date: 11/5/2009 12:11:37 PM
Author: rdoemail
Thanks guys, my only question between the two is that if I look through the hearts and arrows viewer that comes with the diamond, will it look like the pics on their site? IE will I see the inclusions on the bigger one, or are the pics magnified or photoshopped? Thanks.
Click to expand...
The h&a viewer isn''t quite the same as an Idealscope, plus the pics are greatly magnified. WF do not photoshop or alter their images.
 
Thanks Lorelei, do you think they magnify all the pics with the same magnification. I was looking at some VS2's and some have more imperfections showing up in the hearts pictures than the one that I have. I understand how the imperfections could be in the dark areas, but in general shouldn't the clearer pics mean less large imperfections showing up? Unless the color of the imperfection is the issue. Thanks.

What's throwing me off is the difference between these two pics. The spot in the heart and the lines near the edges look bad. I know it really depends on eye clean but which would be preferred if all are eye clean equally? Thanks.

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=2212171&file_name=5


http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=2199914&file_name=5
 
I''ve been lurking for a while but decided that this would be a good time to register since I''m now in the market, and I''m looking at stones very similar to yours so this thread is definitely helpful in what to look for.

As said above, the diamonds are pretty much identical. The HCA on both are great, and it all really just comes down to personal preference. I personally would go for the 1.175 since it''s a tad larger (0.2mm bigger), and once set, I''m sure you won''t be able to see the inclusions. Keep in mind that in person, these two will look like twins, one of them being just a bit bigger/heavier.

Can you let us know which one you ultimately went with? (I noticed that they''re both either reserved or sold, so I''m sure one of them is coming to you soon!) They both look phenomenal, so you didn''t go wrong either way.
 
Date: 11/5/2009 12:48:14 PM
Author: rdoemail
Thanks Lorelei, do you think they magnify all the pics with the same magnification. I was looking at some VS2's and some have more imperfections showing up in the hearts pictures than the one that I have. I understand how the imperfections could be in the dark areas, but in general shouldn't the clearer pics mean less large imperfections showing up? Unless the color of the imperfection is the issue. Thanks.

What's throwing me off is the difference between these two pics. The spot in the heart and the lines near the edges look bad. I know it really depends on eye clean but which would be preferred if all are eye clean equally? Thanks.

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=2212171&file_name=5


http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/certificate.aspx?idno=2199914&file_name=5
Click to expand...
I believe the photos are X40 mag, not sure with the other images. As for the inclusion visibility it depends, an inclusion can reflect around the diamond and show as multiples in the images. Both images are excellent, check carefully with WF as to which meet your standards concerning 'eyecleanliness'.

t60 welcome! Just a quick tip for you, with diamonds of this calibre that have images provided the use of the HCA is very limited, it is used for rejection not selection and images always trump the HCA results.
 
Hi Lorelei! Thanks for the advice as always! I confirmed with whiteflash that both stones are eyeclean! You are right as both stones look identical. Tracy kept on telling me that but my picky mind kept wanting her to pick one! Unfortunately the smaller one was sold already. There was another admirer who was not lagger like me! T60, I actually ended up buying another one from whiteflash that I felt more comfortable with. I am picky lol. I think you should call Tracy immediately and have her hold the 1.175 for you. She said it is eyeclean. I am really excited about this purchase and I am a guy lol. It's not even for me! lol. I was so hesitant at first to drop this kind of money on something that is just worn and looked at, but after going through this experience I appreciate the beauty of it much more! After 3 weeks on stress searching for a ring my journey is complete! Well, still gotta propose and plan the wedding lol.
 
Date: 11/6/2009 10:34:26 PM
Author: rdoemail
Hi Lorelei! Thanks for the advice as always! I confirmed with whiteflash that both stones are eyeclean! You are right as both stones look identical. Tracy kept on telling me that but my picky mind kept wanting her to pick one! Unfortunately the smaller one was sold already. There was another admirer who was not lagger like me! T60, I actually ended up buying another one from whiteflash that I felt more comfortable with. I am picky lol. I think you should call Tracy immediately and have her hold the 1.175 for you. She said it is eyeclean. I am really excited about this purchase and I am a guy lol. It''s not even for me! lol. I was so hesitant at first to drop this kind of money on something that is just worn and looked at, but after going through this experience I appreciate the beauty of it much more! After 3 weeks on stress searching for a ring my journey is complete! Well, still gotta propose and plan the wedding lol.
Click to expand...
Congrats and so glad it has been a positive experience for you!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top