Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was easy?

[RyanRock]

Hello PriceScope community,

First time poster here.I need help finding the perfect diamond (for my wonderful, soon-to-be fiance), and would love to enlist the help of those whose posts I've been reading for the past 3 months.

My future fiance is 26, a nurse, very modest, very shy, a beauty and a sweetheart; BUT, I know she wants to show off some bling!

She is very slim, has small hands, and her finger size is 4.5.

I have 10K to spend on this rock, and my priority order (but willing to hear arguments otherwise) is as follows:
1. Cut
2. Carot
3. Color
4. Clarity

I've been so hung up on the numbers these last few months, I haven't been able to pull the trigger on any of the diamonds I've been looking at. I'm having issues finding the perfect combination of the 4 Cs. Could you guys provide some suggestions?I'd also like to hear your reasoning for why you've chosen those diamonds.

10K to play with. GO!

 

[UberClaire]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

What shape are you looking at?

 

[tampabull]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Assuming you're looking at Round Brilliant since you didn't mention a different shape, here are a few notes from my search (same budget as you, just purchased a diamond 3 days ago).

For starters, I would recommend, as would the rest of this forum, that you only consider GIA or AGS certified stones.

1. Cut: Most would recommend that you consider only GIA Excellent cut, or AGS 0 cut stones. The cut is definitely the most important and will make the biggest difference in the way the stone looks.

1a. Aside from the "Cut Grade" from the certificate, you should look closely at the Depth %, Table %, Crown Angle and Pavilion Angle. These 4 factors can be plugged into the Holloway Cut Advisor or "HCA" for an estimate of the stone's light performance. You can find it under the "Tools" tab at the top right of the forum page. I used the HCA as a point of differentiation, automatically throwing out anything +2 (my preference, others would consider a GIA Ex, or AGS 0 that was slightly over 2 on the HCA, which you could also argue is fine in some cases).

2. Carat There are two factors here that will be important. One is the actual Carat measurement, the other is the actual size in mm. Two different 1 carat stones might "face up" very differently size-wise depending on how deep or shallow they are cut. If you're sticking within the Cut guidelines above, most should be close, but when you're down to the last few options sometimes that extra .1mm might be the quality that sets one stone above the other.

As far as what Carat to choose for your girlfriend, I determined this largely on budget, but also on looks. I just chose a 1.5 for my girlfriend who is a 5.5 size ring, I personally think that would look nice on your girlfriend's size 4.5 as well, and by choosing 1.5 as my size benchmark it allowed me to keep from compromising too much on the other qualities (Don't get caught up trying to go too big and end up with a stone that doesn't perform well. You wouldn't want her running around with a 2ct that dulls in comparison to her friend's 1.5 that was the same price!).

3. Color Most consider the "sweet spot" for value between G and J colors. If you're exceptionally sensitive to color, something above G might be up your alley. People who aren't very color sensitive find that a compromise to J color can allow them to get a diamond that's bigger, clearer, or better cut while staying in their budget. I started looking at H stones only, but ended up with an I that I'm very happy with.

The thing to also consider here, is that the majority of stones that you'll see out and about aren't D-F stones. When you see an H compared to a D, you can see some color, but the odds of that happening while she wears the stone isn't very likely. It's much more common for her and her friends all to have D-F stones and you can't really tell the difference.

Here's a helpful video on color: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcmSj8dOLRI

Another interesting topic is Fluorescence, which you can google for an explanation. Some say that Faint - Medium blue fluorescence helps offset the faint yellow tint of an I+ colored stone (although I don't think this is 100% proven?). I compromised to an I stone with Faint Blue Fluoro, and I think it looks very white.

4. Clarity Like color, there is a "sweet spot" for value in clarity, and most say it's somewhere between VS2-SI2. When you go higher than VS2 you're paying for clarity that you can't see with the naked eye anyway. When you go lower than SI2 you are talking about stones with easily seen inclusions and I would recommend compromising in another area before going that route. In the SI1-SI2 range you want what's called an "eye clean" stone, which means that you can't see the inclusions with the naked eye. This is accomplished by finding a stone with small inclusions (as opposed to large crystals or something), and inclusions that aren't directly under the table of the diamond (the flat part in the center). Inclusions are less-easily seen when they're outside of the table.

I chose an SI1 stone because trying to find an SI2 that was eye clean stressed me out. Rather than fret over the inclusions I decided to just step up top an SI1 (still need to find an eye clean stone, but it's a little easier because the inclusions are smaller and/or less frequent).




Hope that helps, you caught me at a bored moment so I thought I'd try to "pay it forward" and give someone some good info since I received so much from this site. As a frame of reference, I started my search 2.5 weeks ago, and just typed that whole thing without reference material. So hopefully in a few weeks you'll be confident enough to make the purchase!

 

[tampabull]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Oh, and as a recommendation, this was a diamond that I found the day after I bought mine. I put it on hold too just in case the one I bought showed up and didn't look as nice as I expected:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1481197.asp


AGS 000 (meaning "0" cut, symmetry, and polish), "I" was my preference for color, VS2 (and the inclusions are barely visible at all in the zoom photo, I'm sure you couldn't see them in person), and it's a 1.5ct+ with 7.4mm+ dimensions (another one of my criteria).

It scores a 1.6 on the HCA, which is under the "2" benchmark.

It's $1k over your budget, but I found that the $11k price range for a 1.5 gave me more options than the $10k. If I was hard on the $10k budget, I might have stepped down to a 1.3-1.4ct because otherwise I would have compromised on other factors.

 

[Christina...]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

NIce job tampabull! I would only add that if you are considering an AGS0 stone than you won't have to plug the numbers into the HCA as it has already been evaluated for light performance. And that you get an idealscope image for any potential candidate. Some vendors such as BN don't offer these, therefore I would recommend a vendor that does.

 

[tampabull]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

When you see an H compared to a D, you can see some color, but the odds of that happening while she wears the stone isn't very likely. It's much more common for her and her friends all to have G-J stones and you can't really tell the difference.

Just re-read my post and had to make this correction.

Thanks Christina, most of what I know came from helpful PSers like you, I think you were the one who showed me that video!?

 

[RyanRock]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Round brilliant - Looking forward to your reply!

 

[RyanRock]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Thanks!!! What a great, educational post!

Looks like I'm narrowing my search to EX cuts, G-I Color, SI1-SI2 clarity.

I'll also take advantage of the HCA tool.

Thanks again.

 

[RyanRock]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Thanks for the info! Please feel free to post recs if you find them

 

[UberClaire]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

So far, I like this one: http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/H-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1436474.asp
It scores 1.4 on the HCA (less than 2 is what you're looking for), and is an AGS0 - ideal - cut, so it's graded for top light performance. You could go bigger, but the stones on James Allen in your price range in larger sizes have a lot more inclusions. Keep in mind that the picture you see is blown up many, many times larger than the actual stone, so some/all of those inclusions may not be as visible in real life. You can ask a gemologist at James Allen to evaluate the stone for you to let you know how eye-visible the inclusions are.

Have you and your intended fiance talked about size of the stone? I know you mentioned that you think that she'd like some bling, but it might be worth talking about with her (or a sister or a friend). I personally wouldn't want anything over 1 carat, but many women love bigger stones. If she's a nurse, some hospitals have restrictions on the kind of ring you can wear in a hospital setting, so that would be something to consider also.

 

[Christina...]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

When you see an H compared to a D, you can see some color, but the odds of that happening while she wears the stone isn't very likely. It's much more common for her and her friends all to have G-J stones and you can't really tell the difference.

Just re-read my post and had to make this correction.

Thanks Christina, most of what I know came from helpful PSers like you, I think you were the one who showed me that video!?

The color comparison video? Maybe. It's a fantastic illustration. It's just about impossible to make color comparisons based on pics alone, however Jonathon did a fantastic job and the differences were apparent. I didn't know that you purchased your stone already! I can't wait to hear your first impressions and see pics!

RR: I'll take a look for you and see what I can come up with.

 

[Christina...]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

This looks like it will be eye clean, but of course you will have to ask them to evaluate it.

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2681925.htm

This one comes in at budget with the PS discount abd the $75 off first time purchase.

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2782663.htm

if your ok with a J color then this is a beauty!
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2724955.htm

 

[Christina...]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

This one is slightly out of budget but it's over 1.5.
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.558-j-vs2-round-diamond-ags-bl-104059065027

This one is slightly over budget as well, but a very nice stone.
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.362-i-si1-round-diamond-ags-1040407590019

you would need to request images and ask to have Brian evaluate this one, but it has lots of potential and a nice price.

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamonds/diamond-details/1.530-j-si1-round-diamond-gia-36402791

http://goodoldgold.com/diamond.php?d=17203&shape=1&ctMin=1.25&ctMax=1.6&color=127&priceMax=10000&resultsColumns=268435471&singleResult=1

 

[TRIALnERROR]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

My vote goes to this 1.22 IF I (HCA: .9) at $8,850: http://diamonds.ebay.com/ViewItem?did=130730583129&internalSrc=srp

No pics, but 14-day return policy. You can save quite a bit by doing the legwork yourself and I can vouch for the seller as I am a very satisfied customer. I believe some PS vendors may be able to access the stone and get pictures as well, best of both worlds...

http://www.diamonds.ebay.com

 

[tampabull]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

This looks like it will be eye clean, but of course you will have to ask them to evaluate it.

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2681925.htm

Not disagreeing, just curious...isn't that a ton of leakage around the center of that stone?

I assume not because it's AGS0, but what on earth is that ring?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

This looks like it will be eye clean, but of course you will have to ask them to evaluate it.

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2681925.htm

Not disagreeing, just curious...isn't that a ton of leakage around the center of that stone?

I assume not because it's AGS0, but what on earth is that ring?

The stone is graded ideal by AGS on light performance, so the tiny amount of leakage is not deemed enough to affect light performance. You don't have to have a perfect idealscope image to have a great appearing stone.

 

[2023]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Looks like leakage in the idealscope image but it may not be noticeable to the naked eye.

Train error, do you think an IF stone is necessary size probably trumps but interesting find!

On a 4.5 finger a 1.2-4 will look pretty substantial and may help you keep within your budget if you keep under the magic 1.5ct mark.
I prefer stones over H in colour, no higher than F.
Clarity, S12 for me is getting on the lower end, SI1 is a bit better and in a 1.3-1.4 stone you should be fine with that, just ensure its eyeclean.
I've been on other threads disputing the HCA a bit, so just keep in mind GIA and AGS see the stones. I personally would not dismiss stones above two, I would still look at stones up to three, and probably be wary of stones under 1.
Look at AGS0, and GIA ex stones, symmetry and polish also being Excellent.
Some like Fluor, but you can glow under UV light, and in the worst case scenario, fluor can have a waxy hazey appearance in sunlight. Fluor brings down the price of the diamond but i am yet to be convinced by a Fluor stone, too unpredictable, so I would go no Fluor, but many suggest it here. With your budget I'd go no Fluor.

I understand your analysis/paralysis - there are so many variables.

Honestly, a lot of the things we nitpick over probably won't be noticeable to the naked eye. It's like the difference between an Internally flawless diamond and a VS2. I think with cut there is a trend like that as well. A diamond may have a but of leakage, but is that noticeable? Maybe not.

Buying a diamond is a happy time and seriously getting an engaged, is SO SO SO amazing, it's the best feeling in the world!

When my husband proposed, he was down on his knee box open, my first response was to say yes and give him a hug and try and get him to stand!!! Then he said I can't stand, I have to put the ring on you first!!! He knows how much I love jewellery and yet there was this big shiney engagement ring in front of me and I forgot to get him to put it on!!! That's not to say I don't look at it every single day, and LOVE its sparkle, size and colour, but its what it symbolizes too, and telling my parents we were engaged and family members and friends, so amazing. And when it comes to diamonds all my husband thinks of them are that they are small shiney rocks that cost him lots of money but I associate it with all the other stuff...it's the symbolism of the diamond as well that makes it SO special and exciting. Your GF will seriously be so happy words can't explain. At the end if the day your GF is going to be blown away by the research you are doing, and will be shocked you waited months because you were over analyzing stones! Your GF probably would have loved to get engaged five months ago, so she could start planning the wedding!!!

So I just went completely off topic, try not to get too caught up in all the details, though it is hard, you are well well well ahead of the average consumer...so relax with your knowledge

 

[2023]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

After my tangent in my last post... i did look around a bit and I really like the look of the following:

GIA cut excellent (Proportions are crown angle 34, pav angle 40.8, 56 table,43 depth) (just based on those numbers would also meet AGS ideal standards)
Ex sym Ex polish
1.2 carat (on a 4.5 finger will look substantial)
G colour (G colour would be awesome, close to F in the colourless range.)
VS2 clarity (and on the plot even as a VS2 the inclusions were to the edge of the stone not in the table.)
GIA certified.

Price 9715
The GIA number is 2136569711 on Blue Nile

I looked through some of the S1/2s on JA and I didn't like the look of the inclusions, they may be eye clean so others will prob disagree but they looked quite included and didn't make me feel that nice looking at them.

VS2 you do pay a bit more for, but this stones particular plot looked fantastic, with no inclusions in the table and just a few on the edge.

I chose this one because its an excellent cut stone, with great proportions, inclusions are too the edge of the stone along with it being as VS2, its a G colour which is closer to the colourless range. It looks like a really good quality stone to me.

I think the G colour combined with the excellent cut would look very blingy and the inclusion plot looked clean.

 

[TRIALnERROR]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Looks like leakage in the idealscope image but it may not be noticeable to the naked eye.

Train error, do you think an IF stone is necessary size probably trumps but interesting find!

No I definitely don't think IF is necessary, but when compared to SI-1's for $1,000+ more, it deserves mentioning. This was an example to show what's available if you do some digging. All things considered, I would personally take the IF I over the VS2 G. The clouds, pinpoints, and surface graining comments wouldn't sit well with me and the difference of $1,200 is considerable.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Looks like leakage in the idealscope image but it may not be noticeable to the naked eye.

Train error, do you think an IF stone is necessary size probably trumps but interesting find!

No I definitely don't think IF is necessary, but when compared to SI-1's for $1,000+ more, it deserves mentioning. This was an example to show what's available if you do some digging. All things considered, I would personally take the IF I over the VS2 G. The clouds, pinpoints, and surface graining comments wouldn't sit well with me and the difference of $1,200 is considerable.

I disagree. I would much rather have an eyeclean G SI1 than an I IF and I would pay the difference because it would be worth it to me, IF I had the room in the budget. The color difference will be noticeable to the naked eye, even set, while the clarity difference will not be at all to the naked eye. And ask someone who has a VS1 with REALLY hard to find inclusions even at 40x, having 'birthmarks' that help you identify your stone with a simple loupe is actually quite nice when you drop your stone off for cleaning or repair, as a quick way to set your mind at ease. I've had several eyeclean SI stones and they have all been great... if I knew then what I know now I wouldn't have gotten even a VS1 for clarity.

But that said, if it meant saving 1200 bucks and I was on a tight budget-- I'd be looking at H color with fluorescence or I color with fluorescence.

 

[2023]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

If I had the choice of an IF diamond vs a D diamond (both being rare and expensive) I would totally totally take the D!!!

I agree with Gypsy, G SI1, is a great spot for a diamond (if you can ensure its eyeclean). I picked the G VS2, because the plot looked awesome and there are no pictures on BN - and after looking at the images of the SI1/2s on JA I didn't love them....

I really do like the 1.2, ex cut, G, VS2 I posted earlier

Ryan rock here's the diamond number: LD02477053
Im not sure if GIA number I posted earlier would help you find it.

It's a bit more expensive than other GVS2s, 1.2 carats on the site, but I wanted to make sure the cut fell with in parameters that everyone would agree with too, and the inclusion plot was much better than the other diamonds.

 

[TRIALnERROR]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Looks like leakage in the idealscope image but it may not be noticeable to the naked eye.

Train error, do you think an IF stone is necessary size probably trumps but interesting find!

No I definitely don't think IF is necessary, but when compared to SI-1's for $1,000+ more, it deserves mentioning. This was an example to show what's available if you do some digging. All things considered, I would personally take the IF I over the VS2 G. The clouds, pinpoints, and surface graining comments wouldn't sit well with me and the difference of $1,200 is considerable.

I disagree. I would much rather have an eyeclean G SI1 than an I IF and I would pay the difference because it would be worth it to me, IF I had the room in the budget. The color difference will be noticeable to the naked eye, even set, while the clarity difference will not be at all to the naked eye. And ask someone who has a VS1 with REALLY hard to find inclusions even at 40x, having 'birthmarks' that help you identify your stone with a simple loupe is actually quite nice when you drop your stone off for cleaning or repair, as a quick way to set your mind at ease. I've had several eyeclean SI stones and they have all been great... if I knew then what I know now I wouldn't have gotten even a VS1 for clarity.

But that said, if it meant saving 1200 bucks and I was on a tight budget-- I'd be looking at H color with fluorescence or I color with fluorescence.

Personally, I don't think the difference between G-I is noticeable to the naked eye. I looked at dozens of G-I GIA stones at local jewelers and I have to say I could not tell the difference. I really think it depends on how color sensitive you are. G-I is considered near-colorless, any differences will be nominal. IF-SI1 is five clarity grades, which is considerable (in terms of price, not what you can see). I couldn't justify spending $1,000+ to drop 4-5 clarity grades only to gain two color grades and still fall within the near-colorless range. I agree that if you want a stone with 'birthmarks', IF is not the way to go, but the laser inscription serves that purpose for identification. I'm totally with 2023, all things considered, I would take a D over IF!

 

[RyanRock]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Thanks for all the help guys.

What are your opinions of diamonds with SI2 clarity?

Obviously the only way to check this is by eye test, but I'm interested in hearing general debate. I know this forum is geared towards purists, where stone quality trumps size, but my ultimate goal is to maximize all criteria within the 10k limitation.

I've found several value stones that are G-I, SI2, Excellent cut, HCA < 2, and carot 1.4-1.6ish - none of which were recommended to me.

This makes me think that the general community favors clarity grades in the SI1 - VS2 range.

Are some SI2's worse than others? What should I look for? Anyone have any resources for evaluating clarity?

Can clarity impact fire? scintillation? spread? or other "blingy" categories?

What do you think of the diamond below, from a clarity perspective?

 

[Christina...]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

I would be hesitant purchasing a stone from BN, not because they aren't reputable but because they are a drop shipper. Meaning that they don't actually get to see the diamond that they are selling you unless it's among their signature line. If you ask that the stone be evaluated for eye cleanliness then they place a phone call to the dealer holding the stone, whom wants to sell it and ask his opinion. They do not offer magnified images of the stone or idealscope, ASET, sarins, etc. If I were investing my money on a diamond, I would want to at least have an idea of how it may perform and have had it evaluated by a professional gemologist. I also think that the BN stone will have leakage under the table....how much? don't know without additional images of the stone. You would have to order it and return it if you were dissatisfied, and that can get pricey and time consuming and IMO only worth doing if you had one or two stones with ideal light perfomance to compare it too.

 

[Christina...]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

I try not to get hung up on the clarity grade of the stone. I've owned VVS1s and SI2's. My concern is that it be eye clean to MY standards, which are tougher than many vendors. I don't want to see an inclusion face up or through the pavilion within 6 inches. To be safe this would probably mean the VS range. However, I can see as many inclusions in my VVS1 as I can see in my SI2.....none. That isn't typical though, possible but not typical. I've actually seen I1's that would be considered eye clean, and VS2's that wouldn't. So I think that it's very dependent on the stone and the nature of the inclusions, and the person assessing it. We do typically recommend that people stay in the SI1 to VS range, simply because it's a safer bet, but that doesn't mean that it isn't possible to find an eye clean SI2, it just may be tougher. If I were looking to maximize my budget and was considering and SI2 (and I have) I would be looking for inclusions such as twinning wisps, which can be difficult to spot or inclusions that are off to the sides and can be hidden by a prong or are white where the stone is bright or grey on contrast zones. Inclusions can definitely affect the brilliance of the stone....clouds depending on how deep or where they are located can make a stone appear...well cloudy and not transparent, twinning wisps can do the same so they need to be evaluated on a stone by stone basis. The other thing to consider is that as you go lower in clarity some of the inclusions may cause durability risks to the diamond. Feathers that reach the girdle can put the stone at risk of chipping or cracking. So, yes I think that you can find an eye clean SI2 but it may take more time.

BTW, how would you describe eye clean?

 

[RyanRock]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

@Christina,

Very interesting question. I guess I would describe "eye clean" as not being able to see it with the naked eye? Maybe one foot away? Generally, when you ask a vendor to evaluate a diamond's eye cleanliness, what do THEY use for criteria?In fact, what is your criteria?

Would you be so kind as to list the online vendors that carry their own stock? Who's a drop shipper and who isn't? Is there a thread available that list these types of vendors

Also, you mention items like IdealScope, ASET, sarins,....What other evaluation criteria is out there. "ASET" and "sarins" are new to me.

Thanks for all your help! You ROCK (pun intended )

 

[Christina...]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

Your definition and the definition of most vendors is the same. Typically eye clean is referred to the face up position of the stone at half an arms length. I prefer not see inclusions at a distance of 6-8 inches, or through the pavilion, (through the side of diamond). Many people don't mind if inclusions are seen from this angle, but for me I prefer not to. Most of the diamonds purchased through large retail vendors will be SI's to I's, so chances are, if you've shopped at some of these places, Jared, GM Pollack and such then that is the quality that you have seen and much of the public is wearing. I think SI's are a great value and any PS vendor will be happy to assess the stone for you based on your criteria.

Idealscopes are a reflector tool used to show if a particular stone will have areas of leakage that may impact the light performance of a diamond. You've probably seen them posted in other threads. They will show red where the light is being reflected back to the eye and white were light is leaking. You can find more information in the advance tutorials section under the knowledge tab, then click on firescope. GIA averages the proportions of the diamond and then rounds the numbers, sometimes a sarin report can be helpful in showing how tight the variances of a particular stone are. For instance, GIA may list the PA as 40.8, however the stone probably doesn't have a consistent 40.8 angle around the entire stone, for example it could be 40.6 in some areas and 41 in others averaging 40.8. A stone with tight variances will have nice symmetry and reduced risk of unwanted leakage when the stone deviates from averages. Or so I understand it, if I'm wrong someone here will be able to correct me. I was recently looking at a stone that was listed on the report as having a slightly shallower PA than I would have liked, knowing the the numbers were averaged and rounded and because I wanted to see how much deviation there was, I requested a sarin report to help me determine if there would be performance issues with the stone. It's important to know that even sarins aren't not completely accurate and can be off my .1mm or so. But they have their uses.

James Allen, Good Old Gold, White Flash, Brian Gavin Diamonds, I think Engagement RIngs Direct, all have stones either in house, or that can be sent to them for evaluation and images. I forgot to mention though, if you were interested in a particular stone from BN, you could as ID Jewelry to call the stone in for you. They can evaluate the stone and supply you images, they also guarantee that they will beat BNs price. Many PSers that have wanted to stretch their budgets have had great success at IDJ. You may want to contact Yukitiel and tell him your budget and what your parameters are and ask if he can make a suggestion. Let him know that your a PS, that way he will know that you are looking for a bright lively well cut stone, and will base his search on our picky criteria.

 

[2023]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

That's really great advice Chrstina really knd of you to post all that.

Though I'm curious as to why you think the specs I posted would show light leakage? There was a poster disc80 who's just popped up again and his diamond had an idealscope image with virtually the same specs, 34-34.5 pav 41 crown and no light leakage.

As train error pointed out the other image we saw had definite leakage, yet most people think it would be unaided by the naked eye. From the specs disc80 showed, the other diamond had no leakage, so Just curious?

I completely understand that no two diamonds are the same, and making inferences between two diamonds is hard even if the numbers are the same. I completely get how buying online makes BN a harder vendor too, as you can't see images and you have to rely on numbers. That to me is the major benefit of the vendors most commonly mentioned.

 

[TC1987]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

What are your opinions of diamonds with SI2 clarity?

if you look back through Pricescope-ers diamonds bought back in 2003-2005 or 2006 or so, you will read claims of eye-clean SI2. But there has been "grade creep" since then, and cutters and vendors are trying to give stones the best rating possible to get the most money possible So today's SI2 will probably not be eye-clean. But the inclusion(s) may hide well. Personally, if I'm getting a non-eye-clean diamond, I prefer that it have just one visible speck, rather than a haze or a plethora of little inclusions that make it always look like there's dust on it.

PS has the "cheat sheet" of dimensions, and there's what PS refers to as Fiery Ideal Cut and Brilliant Ideal Cut. You can search here and read more about how to interpret the angles, etc. But here's a clip from a post, that I just happened to have saved for reference:

You can use this chart as a cheat sheet in order to help you find a well cut round diamond.


depth - 60 - 62% - although my personal preference is to allow up to 62.4%
table - 54- 57%
crown angle - 34- 35 degrees
pavilion angle - 40.6- 41 degrees
girdle - avoid extremes, look for thin to slightly thick, thin to medium etc
polish and symmetry - very good and above


note - with crown and pavilion angles at the shallower ends ( CA 34- PA 40.6) and steeper ( CA 35- PA 41) check to make sure these angles complement in that particular diamond - eyeballs, Idealscope, trusted vendor input - check as appropriate!

 

[Christina...]

Re: Paralysis by Analysis - Who said buying a diamond was ea

That's really great advice Chrstina really knd of you to post all that.

Though I'm curious as to why you think the specs I posted would show light leakage? There was a poster disc80 who's just popped up again and his diamond had an idealscope image with virtually the same specs, 34-34.5 pav 41 crown and no light leakage.

As train error pointed out the other image we saw had definite leakage, yet most people think it would be unaided by the naked eye. From the specs disc80 showed, the other diamond had no leakage, so Just curious?

I completely understand that no two diamonds are the same, and making inferences between two diamonds is hard even if the numbers are the same. I completely get how buying online makes BN a harder vendor too, as you can't see images and you have to rely on numbers. That to me is the major benefit of the vendors most commonly mentioned.

Without additional photos or images it's difficult to determine if their will be leakage based on the proportions. That's one of the problems I have with BN is the lack of images to confirm the stones likely performance. Typically with stones with steeper PA over 41 and CA above 33.5 you can begin to see leakage under the table. I like a steeper PA combined with a shallower CA. It's impossible to tell if there will be noticeable visual leakage without an idealscope, as I said thats a risk you take with BN. It's possible the stone would be fine, but without additional images, it isn't a risk I would be willing to take.

edit: Because AGS grades for light performance we know that the stone I linked would have little visual impact on the diamond. However GIA does not grade for light performance so it's no possible to say whether or not the stone is impacted. It may sound like I"m hard on GIA but I"m really not, every diamond I"ve owned has been GIA graded, but there is something very simple about a newcomer who doesn't have a lot of diamond buying experience to find an AGS0 diamond and feel confident that it will perform well. I really hope that GIA will begin to assess light performance in the future as well.