Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Please give me your opinions between 2 stones.

J

jikjak

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
14
hi there im new to this board and i have been searching for the past few weeks for an engagement ring. ive seen quite a few locally but i seem to have found 2 that i like online. i was hoping that u guys could help me out and give me your opinions on the 2 stones and also to tell me which one u would choose between the two, along with reasons why.

would clarity have an impact on the diamonds brliiliance/sparkle? if 2 diamonds had the same size, cut, and color, but one was a vs2 and the other was an si2, would the better clarity have more sparkle to it?

im also wondering if a hearts and arrows would have more sparkle to it over an ideal cut diamond.

well here are the two stones i am considering, im not sure if the si2 is eye clean though and that is a concern. (if anyone has other suggestions of similar stones please feel free to link.)

1) http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1307906.asp

2) http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1389974.asp

thanks in advance and im looking forward to all of your expert opinions!
 
jikjak|1309640721|2960757 said:
hi there im new to this board and i have been searching for the past few weeks for an engagement ring. ive seen quite a few locally but i seem to have found 2 that i like online. i was hoping that u guys could help me out and give me your opinions on the 2 stones and also to tell me which one u would choose between the two, along with reasons why.

would clarity have an impact on the diamonds brliiliance/sparkle? if 2 diamonds had the same size, cut, and color, but one was a vs2 and the other was an si2, would the better clarity have more sparkle to it?

it is possible that some of the inclusions could negatively impact brilliance (this is something to ask the gemologist). it is also possible that visible inclusions could distract when someone is viewing the diamond.

im also wondering if a hearts and arrows would have more sparkle to it over an ideal cut diamond.

this is debated. there may be crisper scintillation but i don't think there will be any more sparkle.

well here are the two stones i am considering, im not sure if the si2 is eye clean though and that is a concern. (if anyone has other suggestions of similar stones please feel free to link.)

1) http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1307906.asp

2) http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-SI2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1389974.asp

I would personally be wary of a SI2. Plenty of people are happy with SI2 but I am not sure that I would be. Also it seems that from what you have posting you have a rather sizeable budget. I don't think JA will review if SI2 diamonds are eye-clean. You can get it shipped out to you and see it in person if you'd like.

If you post your budget/specs we can suggest similar stones.
thanks in advance and im looking forward to all of your expert opinions!
Click to expand...
 
1. ditto slg - inclusions can affect sparkle and brilliance, depending on what the inclusions are, how dense and pervasive they are, where in the stone they are. JA's gemologist (or an independent appraiser) can tell you more if you are buying blind, of if you have the stone shipped out you can compare it in-person to higher clarity stones at your local jeweller and let your own eyes judge if the inclusions have real-world effects.


2. again, ditto - H&A is the result of precision cutting that yields high optical symmetry (very clear and symmetric patterns of hearts and arrows when you look at the stone through a H&A scope). IMO the benefits of high optical symmetry are clear over low optical symmetry(larger, bolder flashes, more facets contributing positively to the appearance of the stone by turning dark/light, returning flashes of light as you rock the stone), but personally my eyes cannot appreciate very very high optical symmetry that results in picture perfect hearts and arrows patterns over say a near-H&A type...

3. would request hearts photo retake on the JA, otherwise looks nice. Request IS for the F.

4. like slg says SI2 for an Ering in such a large size is - well, a personal decision that not everyone is comfortable with. When I was looking for my own stone (I too was looking at 2.5ct+) I did not see a single SI2 that I found eyeclean to my requirements. I currently own a 2.7ct SI2 that is not eyeclean when loose, however the inclusion is perfectly placed to hide under a prong - these stones are rare and are usually priced higher than other SI2s of the same carat/colour/cut, but given that once the inclusion is covered they look like higher clarity stones they can be good value for money
 
thanks so much for your reply.

could u tell me what the difference is between scintillation and sparkle?
i thought that fire,scintillation,sparkle,glitter and brilliance were pretty much the same thing.

also, if the si2 was eye clean, what would still make u unhappy with it?

is it worth sacrificing some size (ct weight) and color (from F to G) in order to get VS2 and true hearts?

as for the diamond, ideally i would like to be under 30k but i think i can push it to about 35k.
id like to be as close to 2.5 carats as possible but the stone has to be eye clean (no visible inclusions to the naked eye). i dont want to sacrifice any cut though, so it has to be ags ideal or gia excellent. id also like to stick with those two certificates only.

i dont want to see any yellow to it, so preferably id like to stay in the d-g range. for some reason when i physically saw a few H color gia stones and also a set of grading stones, i was able to see some yellow in the H and lower colored diamonds. the sales person said he couldnt though.

wow after reading throught all that, it sure sounds demanding and i do apologize, i really dont mean to be. its just that if i am to spend this much money then i want to make sure i make the right purchase.

cheers!
 
Yssie|1309647454|2960825 said:
1. ditto slg - inclusions can affect sparkle and brilliance, depending on what the inclusions are, how dense and pervasive they are, where in the stone they are. JA's gemologist (or an independent appraiser) can tell you more if you are buying blind, of if you have the stone shipped out you can compare it in-person to higher clarity stones at your local jeweller and let your own eyes judge if the inclusions have real-world effects.


2. again, ditto - H&A is the result of precision cutting that yields high optical symmetry (very clear and symmetric patterns of hearts and arrows when you look at the stone through a H&A scope). IMO the benefits of high optical symmetry are clear over low optical symmetry(larger, bolder flashes, more facets contributing positively to the appearance of the stone by turning dark/light, returning flashes of light as you rock the stone), but personally my eyes cannot appreciate very very high optical symmetry that results in picture perfect hearts and arrows patterns over say a near-H&A type...

would u consider the 2.51ct that i linked to be a near H&A type?

3. would request hearts photo retake on the JA, otherwise looks nice. Request IS for the F.

whats wrong with the hearts photo?
also what do u mean by request IS for the F?

4. like slg says SI2 for an Ering in such a large size is - well, a personal decision that not everyone is comfortable with. When I was looking for my own stone (I too was looking at 2.5ct+) I did not see a single SI2 that I found eyeclean to my requirements. I currently own a 2.7ct SI2 that is not eyeclean when loose, however the inclusion is perfectly placed to hide under a prong - these stones are rare and are usually priced higher than other SI2s of the same carat/colour/cut, but given that once the inclusion is covered they look like higher clarity stones they can be good value for money

wow that must be one nice stone! if only i were lucky enough to find something like that.
what is the color and cut on it?
do u think u would be able to see the difference in size of 2 stones if the diameter is 0.24mm larger on one of them?
Click to expand...


thanks for the reply as well.
cheers!
 
i thought that fire,scintillation,sparkle,glitter and brilliance were pretty much the same thing.
Click to expand...

Everybody might have a different definition - no industry-wide terminology as far as I know. That said I think here on PS anyway it's pretty safe to say that

scintillation - go into a room with diffuse lighting, like office lights, rock the stone back and forth, and you'll see the stone's facets turning from white to black and back again as you create and remove contrast by changing which facets see the light. As in, the way a chessboard or zebra stripes are "brighter" and more appealing to our eyes than a blank sheet of white paper, even though objectively the blank white sheet is returning more light

sparkle - actual flashes of white and coloured light that you see in sunlight, etc.

brilliance - white light return, specifically

fire - coloured light return, specifically

would u consider the 2.51ct that i linked to be a near H&A type?
Click to expand...

No way to know w/o hearts picture taken through a H&A scope, which vendors won't provide on their non H&A-brand stones. Can have a stone w/ nice arrows and imperfect hearts.. it's clearly not a trainwreck in terms of optical symmetry, whether it's a near-H&A, an almost-perfect H&A we can't tell from the photo, even slight tilt when taking the picture will create false asymmetries

whats wrong with the hearts photo?
also what do u mean by request IS for the F?
Click to expand...

yeah, you're right, it's fine. I saw clefting at 2 o'clock but now I see at 7 o'clock as well.
Request idealscope picture (the red and black one) for the F if interested in the stone, JA will provide IS on three stones for free.

what is the color and cut on it?
do u think u would be able to see the difference in size of 2 stones if the diameter is 0.24mm larger on one of them?
Click to expand...

It's a J. Nicely proportioned near-H&A.
Yes, I think you would see that size difference once the stones are set. But given that we're talking about pretty big stones I don't reckon it'd be blatantly, blindingly obvious - visible, but not "wow that stone is SO much bigger"


ETA:
2.4 G SI1 $34k http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1372124.asp (request IS)
2.32 G VS2 $36k http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8142/
 
thanks! i now have a better understanding of the different ways of how the stone shines.
ill check out the links u posted as well.

what is clefting? i was just asking whats wrong with the picture because im not too sure how to read the idealscope and what to look out for. is it considered to be better if its more of a deeper red instead of pink?

also can anyone help me to determine if the ASET picture that is on the certificate a good one?
i see that the green areas are not as uniform as on other ones and im not sure if that is really bad or not.
the arrows seem to be clearly defined in blue and i dont think i see too much light leakage spots.

im not sure how to link the cert but if u click the link below, u can click a link to the cert itself and see the other diagram.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1307906.asp
 
I would vastly rather have the G VS2 over an F SI2. Both are large stones with good color, so I'd rather have the better clarity of the G stone for an engagement ring.
 
diamondseeker2006|1309654443|2960889 said:
I would vastly rather have the G VS2 over an F SI2. Both are large stones with good color, so I'd rather have the better clarity of the G stone for an engagement ring.
Click to expand...

im actually leaning heavily towards the g vs2 as well, if u do not mind, could please elaborate more on your reasons why?
 
1. cleft in heart - Untitled_0.png

2. ASET on report is a simulation, better to use actual IS/ASET photo if you have (which you do for this one) since we don't know about scanning/printing/programming error margin on the simulation. uneven green could be the result of scanning error or could indicate some slight engineering that results in uneven girdle thickness - again, we have actual IS photo that shows that there is nothing to worry about, so don't think any more on that

3. IS pic is fine, nothing to worry about re. colour of the red (whether it's blood red, purplish red) - it's distribution of whatever hue of red vs white in the photo is the issue - nothing of note in this stone
 
ahh i see, i never even noticed that. are clefts a bad thing?

is the actual ASET something i can request from james allen?
thanks for clarifying about the actual IS, its good to know that it is ok.

when u say nothing of note, do u mean nothing negative of note?
would this be considered an excellent IS?
 
jikjak|1309659953|2960935 said:
ahh i see, i never even noticed that. are clefts a bad thing?
not if they're present symmetrically all the way 'round the stone - unless someone is using a specific definition of H&A that prohibits clefts. What "type" of hearts and arrows pattern you get - large clefts, small clefts, no clefts, thick/thin Vs, etc. depends on the proportions of the stone - stones w/ very similar hearts and arrows patterns will necessarily have similar types of facet proportions (crown, pavilion, etc.). Some brands have strict specifications of ranges in which each facet proportion must fit, and so those brands have similar-looking hearts (think WF ACA brand), other vendors like GOG are open to branding stones w/ a variety of proportions so long as they are precision cut such that the high optical symmetry is there, evidenced by radially symmetric hearts and arrows patterns of one "type" or another, don't specifically require one "type" though. Just different business/branding models!

sometimes there are small deviations from perfect radial symmetry in the pic that have nothing to do with the actual stone - difficulty positioning the stone *exactly* perpendicular to the scope to photograph, sometimes you can assume (w/ a good chance of being correct) that this is the cause of the deviations and not the actual stone, if that's the case obviously it's nothing to worry about. I tend to be especially nitpicky about hearts and arrows pics as I think if you're paying extra for a H&A patterns you'd better be getting a H&A, but I know that the teeny tiny deviations I nitpick over make no real-world difference!

is the actual ASET something i can request from james allen? not for rounds, but don't need it for rounds, IS is sufficient
thanks for clarifying about the actual IS, its good to know that it is ok.

when u say nothing of note, do u mean nothing negative of note? yes nothing negative, IS pic looks nice
would this be considered an excellent IS?
Click to expand...

Edit*double
 
Yssie|1309660693|2960942 said:
jikjak|1309659953|2960935 said:
ahh i see, i never even noticed that. are clefts a bad thing?
not if they're present symmetrically all the way 'round the stone - unless someone is using a specific definition of H&A that prohibits clefts. What "type" of hearts and arrows pattern you get - large clefts, small clefts, no clefts, thick/thin Vs, etc. depends on the proportions of the stone - stones w/ very similar hearts and arrows patterns will necessarily have similar types of facet proportions (crown, pavilion, etc.). Some brands have strict specifications of ranges in which each facet proportion must fit, and so those brands have similar-looking hearts (think WF ACA brand), other vendors like GOG are open to branding stones w/ a variety of proportions so long as they are precision cut such that the high optical symmetry is there, evidenced by radially symmetric hearts and arrows patterns of one "type" or another, don't specifically require one "type" though. Just different business/branding models!

sometimes there are small deviations from perfect radial symmetry in the pic that have nothing to do with the actual stone - difficulty positioning the stone *exactly* perpendicular to the scope to photograph, sometimes you can assume (w/ a good chance of being correct) that this is the cause of the deviations and not the actual stone, if that's the case obviously it's nothing to worry about. I tend to be especially nitpicky about hearts pics as I think if you're paying extra for a H&A you'd better be getting H&A, but I know that the teeny tiny deviations I nitpick over make no real-world difference!

is the actual ASET something i can request from james allen? not for rounds, but don't need it for rounds, IS is sufficient
thanks for clarifying about the actual IS, its good to know that it is ok.

when u say nothing of note, do u mean nothing negative of note? yes nothing negative, IS pic looks nice
would this be considered an excellent IS?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

thanks so much for your input, it has really helped me out in the decision making process.
 
im leaning heavily towards this particular stone and i was wondering if you guys could comment and analyze the various stats of the stone.
is the depth and table good?
how bad are the inclusions? (im assuming it should be eye clean)
is there any way to tell how it falls in the G color range? (high g or low g)
how great will it shine?

anyways id love to hear all of your opinions (good and bad) about the different aspects of this particular stone.

1040402210001CER.jpg


B303001PIC.jpg


http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1307906.asp
 
jikjak|1309769350|2961426 said:
im leaning heavily towards this particular stone and i was wondering if you guys could comment and analyze the various stats of the stone.
is the depth and table good?
yes

how bad are the inclusions? (im assuming it should be eye clean)
it is a VS2 so I think you are fine with inclusions.

is there any way to tell how it falls in the G color range? (high g or low g)
not from photos. i think if you send it loose to an independent appraiser you could find this out

how great will it shine?
it looks great! nice idealscope image, AGS0...I think you picked a winner :)

anyways id love to hear all of your opinions (good and bad) about the different aspects of this particular stone.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1307906.asp
Click to expand...
 
thanks it makes me feel much better that this one has several good traits.
its my first time buying a diamond and ive been doing a lot of research the past few weeks and have learned a lot from this forum as well.
i cant wait to see how it looks in real life.

if anyone else has something to add then please do!
 
wow that was some interesting reading!
its always nice to learn something new.
thanks
 
is it a bad thing if the certificate date for this diamond is over a year old? (may 17, 2010)
 
All looks good!

Age of report - depends. It's a pricier stone, so perhaps it really has just been sitting in inventory for a year, in which case nothing to worry about. If it's a trade-in I personally would want an independent appraisal of the loose stone, for independent, unbiased confirmation that the current condition matches the condition described on the report (that poor setting jobs and careless wear haven't marked the stone).

The report is not so old that grading systems have since changed or anything like that, and a pristine stone with a 2009 or 2010 report is not worth less than one w/ a 2011 report simply because of the age of the report, if that is your question.
 
thats good to know. i will definitely have it appraised when i receive it.
i hope it wasnt a trade in!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top