Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Please Help... Is this SI 2 a smart buy?

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

sslkrissi

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
238
Hello,
I an truly a novice when it comes to diamonds. So, I am eliciting the help of all of you. I have always thought that there are certain levels of color and clarity that I would never go lower than. However, after reading many posts on here regarding that issue, I find myself looking at stones that I would have never even thought twice about before. For example, this one from WF: http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-821291.htm#

Any opinions? It doesn''t appear to be extremely included to me. I am not sure whether it is eye clean or not. I have already put in an email to WF to inquire whether it is or not. That will definately be the main determining factor. BUT, aside from that, are there any other problems that you notice right off the bat? WHat about the IS image? How about the proportions. I ran the proportions through the HCA and it scored a 1.9. Is that good?

Last question, I swear.... Do you think that this will be one of those "dark" stones that I keep on reading about. I do see arrows in the picture, but it isn''t technically a H&A, so I am not sure what that does to the stone''s light performance.

Oops, forgot one.... A couple of days ago I was discussing this GOG stone with some of you: http://www.goodoldgold.com/1_64ct_h_si1_h&a.htm. Which of these 2 stones is better and why? I am looking for the one that will have the most sparkle.

Thanks so much!!!
 
If it is eye clean, that looks like a pretty sweet deal.
 
I dont like the angles on the WF stone and the IS image shows it.


The gog diamond is in another class.
Its a super-ideal h&a diamond and the price reflects that.
Id take the gog diamond anyday there is no contest between those two.
 
Easy choice...Good Old Gold !

Blod
35.gif
 
Looking at what the inclusions are, I wonder if the SI2 is not the ''cleaner'' stone this time (a few small inclusions versus one - at least visible in the pictures).

The grades make it a no-brainer for me too.

Between E and H, E would need to be a dog of a cut to be left aside. This isn''t even worse, IMO.

But.. it is your choice.


IMO, the ''dark'' ACA were too small versus the expectations, not less than perfectly proportioned. But that... we''d never know unless the buyer gets to see more of the same and tell the story.
 
Date: 1/5/2006 1:08:04 AM
Author:sslkrissi

.. it isn''t technically a H&A, so I am not sure what that does to the stone''s light performance.
Click to expand...

H&A is about precise pattern, not precisely optimized light performance: i.e. some H&A may not have it tops (GOG had a page about this - nicely explained).

On the other hand, you can get top brilliance without that pattern or any pattern. There is some artificial difficulty with that since cut grading takes pattern into account allot - in fact, there aren''t too many options to ''grade'' light return independently of patterning. Probably a matter of tradition - what do I know...
34.gif


My 2c
 
Date: 1/5/2006 1:25:39 AM
Author: strmrdr
I dont like the angles on the WF stone and the IS image shows it.


The gog diamond is in another class.
Its a super-ideal h&a diamond and the price reflects that.
Id take the gog diamond anyday there is no contest between those two.
Click to expand...
Strmrdr,
What don''t you like about the angles? I thought that it still falls into the "ideal" category. and what is it about the IS image that isn''t good? too much white?
What kind of effect will these angles have on the stone''s ability to sparkle.

If the GOG stone is out of my price range, which according to BF it definately is, then would you say to go with this WF stone or keep looking?

Thanks so much. This is all helping me understand diamonds better. Funny, I used to think they were so simple. Just the 4 C''s. Who knew there was so much more to it than that!
 
Oops, forgot to ask.... when I look at the stone, I can definately see a pretty nice arrow pattern. Does that automatically mean that it would have a heart pattern too? Maybe this is a H&A stone, that didn''t make the ACA brand for some other reason. Or are yuo saying that it just isn''t a h&A?

Thanks
 
sslkrissi,
the wf stone is very very nice and a great bargain. to get eye clean, 1.5cts and 'e' color for 10k is a great opportunity. you could always have it sent to you loose if you really wanted to check out the heart pattern, but i don't see it being necessary. the arrows show great symmetry. i think you found a winner!
36.gif
 
I think so too. Now I just have to convince BF of that!!!
 
just have it shipped. seeing it is all the convincing you''ll need.
2.gif
 
Looks like a winner to me. Did you ask WF if it''s eye clean?? Good luck with your BF!!!
9.gif
 
I emailed them last night, so I should get a response sometime soon.
 
if I had a choice I''d go for the Good old Gold. Something about that WF stone with the arrows I find distracting. They seem very thick and wide. Plus they seem very close together. I can''t help but think that would be a stone with a prominent black arrow effect (dark under the table) with head shadow but I could be wrong. I just don''t like the size of the arrows. Look at some others to compare and you''ll see what I mean. Storm could chime in. I know that I would go for thinner arrows but maybe that''s just a personal preference. It seems as if anything from WF seems to be a winner so I could be wrong.
 
Date: 1/5/2006 7:05:39 PM
Author: diamondsrock
if I had a choice I''d go for the Good old Gold. Something about that WF stone with the arrows I find distracting. They seem very thick and wide. Plus they seem very close together. I can''t help but think that would be a stone with a prominent black arrow effect (dark under the table) with head shadow but I could be wrong. I just don''t like the size of the arrows. Look at some others to compare and you''ll see what I mean. Storm could chime in. I know that I would go for thinner arrows but maybe that''s just a personal preference. It seems as if anything from WF seems to be a winner so I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
I have never seen a H&A stone in person, but I have seen pictures on PS that have the dark arrow thing going on. From my understanding of it, all H&A stones will have that appearance in certain lighting conditions no matter what and that is considered a good thing. I am not quite sure if the darkness of them will bother me or not. I think that I want a diamond with less darkness b/c I just want lots of sparkle. In fact, the only reason I started looking at H&A stones was b/c I am under the impression that these stones have more sparkle, brilliance, fire, etc than regular rounds. Maybe I am misinformed. Having thinner arrows does sound appealing to me, but I must admit that I have never seen any thinner than the ones on the WF stone. They all pretty much look the same to me. Do you have an exmaple of one with thinner arrows or do you know what angles, proportion, etc give the stone the thinner angles?

Thanks
 
the dark arrows you see in pictures are almost never ever ever never never ever seen that way in person. it is a unique lighting condition conducive to showing the arrows. all diamonds have facets that show dark in certain circumstances, it just happens that in h&a stones these facets are perfectly symmetrical and show up as ''arrows''. in normal conditions all you see is sparkle and if you happen to catch a glimpse of an ''arrow'' you will see it as more of a silvery white.

the stone you are looking at from wf will not look dark. you will just see sparkle
2.gif
 
Hi guys n girls.

There seems to be confusion about ‘darkness’ in diamonds lately. There are 3 things that need to be separated when considering darkness... (1) LGF and Pavilion Main relations. (2) Head Shadow or Obscuration and (3) Angle Combos.

(1) LGF and Pavilion Main relations

You will indeed see different arrow thicknesses in well-patterned diamonds (in not-so-well they can just be a chaotic jumbalaya). The thickness of the arrows comes from the fact that the lower girdle facets in the WF diamond are just under 80%, designed for larger pavilion main facets.

Note that the relative blackness of arrows in different photos can also be influenced by lighting intensity and the focal depth of the camera when taking the photo.

Here are different arrow ''thicknesses'' due to LGF lengths of 75%, 80% and 85%.


lgf758085g.jpg
 
(2) Head Shadow or Obscuration

Now that you see how the thickness of the arrows are determined... When are they ''dark?'' The answer for most diamonds is almost never.

In diamond photos when you see dark arrows it is caused by ''obscuration.'' The dark areas are the pavilion mains, where light would normally enter and exit from directly above. The camera is blocking that direct light, so those areas go dark in the static and centered view. The same thing happens when a diamond is held very still with the viewer''s head is directly over it. When not obscured, which is most of the time when worn dynamically, those arrows are not so obvious.

The difference in a diamond, unobscured to obscured, is a measure of that diamond''s contrast. Remember that diamonds are dynamic. With good contrast you will see a sharp on/off quality to the scintillation as the diamond moves, as well as other benefits. A nice, precise pattern of arrows with contrast is evidence of good cutting and symmetry. Good H&A diamonds are not the only ones that have this effect - many well-cut diamonds show it.

Here are cosine squared images of the same diamond. They are identical images, except that a 30 degree cone of obscuration, equivalent to an observer’s head, is present in the one on the right.

080Obscure30ObscureHA2g.jpg
 
3 words..
steep deep leaks

35 = steep
40.9 = deep when combined with 35
leaks speaks for itself in the IS.

steepdeepleaks.jpg
 
(3) Angle Combos

At certain 'shallow/shallow' combos the presence of a viewer's head influences a diamond more notably.

Once you fall below a 40.6 PA it's a good idea to see if the diamond you are considering is a candidate for more darkness than suits your taste. Depending on the exact diamond, its patterning and particular combinations it could be adversely influenced by head shadow. These are diamonds that are encouraged by many for pendants or earrings, since head shadow does not come into play when the diamond is worn on chest or ears.

There are different opinions about how much you can determine from angles alone at the border.

This darkness debate concerns diamonds with shallow/shallow combinations that are nowhere near the ones being discussed in this thread.

1.gif
 
Hey John,
Thanks for the info. Now what I really want to find out is this stone eye clean?? If so I think it''s a real beauty!!!
30.gif
 
I''m having a really hard time understanding this head shadow concept. Wouldn''t it stand to reason that a diamond with the thicker arrows would have more darkness under the table when head shadow is present? Simply because the area affected by head shadow is larger (larger arrow width)? Are you saying due to the higher pavillion angle this dark arrow effect will not be noticable but if the pavillion angle was lower it would?
 
Date: 1/5/2006 7:58:38 PM
Author: kaleigh
Hey John,
Thanks for the info. Now what I really want to find out is this stone eye clean?? If so I think it''s a real beauty!!!
30.gif
Click to expand...
Thank you m''lady Kaleigh.

Yes, it is eye-clean by our definition (here). Our experience is that PScopers often focus on finding an SI bargain (for good fiscal reason) and this meets the criteria.

I like to mention that someone wanting a diamond to pass every distance, eyesight and study test offered should probably focus on VS goods to be certain it meets the strictest ''eye-clean'' interpretations, but PScopers often succeed in finding that ''SI in the rough.''
2.gif
 
Date: 1/5/2006 8:02:47 PM
Author: diamondsrock
I'm having a really hard time understanding this head shadow concept. Wouldn't it stand to reason that a diamond with the thicker arrows would have more darkness under the table when head shadow is present? Simply because the area affected by head shadow is larger (larger arrow width)? Are you saying due to the higher pavillion angle this dark arrow effect will not be noticable but if the pavillion angle was lower it would?
Click to expand...

Hi DR.

You understand correctly - but a big-picture perspective may help. Remember that diamonds are dynamic, moving, scintillating objects. That is how they are viewed, and that is easy to forget on PS with all these static images. Ultimately, a static image describes only one frame in the 'motion picture' of diamond performance.

Through a normal range of motion you will see on/off return from all involved facets. This means that, depending on where you freeze the motion, something will always be obscured: It may not always be the arrows (mains). Think of this: When a diamond is held still to be photographed so that arrows are dark, it doesn’t move. Now, if you tilt it slightly, the arrows suddenly go light and the areas in-between (the LGFs) go dark… and so on …as you rotate it through degrees of tilt. It's not just about the arrows. Contrast brilliance relies on balance between the pavilion mains and lower girdles through a total range of motion, not just in one static crown-down view.

And THAT is only descriptive of a situation with head shadow from directly ABOVE (like photos on PS).

In real life the contrast quality varies according to lighting intensity, environment, where the illumination source or sources are relative to where obscuration sources are (if any), etc, etc, etc. Think of the sun going down over the ocean, the ring on your hand (or your beloved’s), standing on a pier side by side. If the ring is stretched towards the sun there is no obscuration and the fire and brilliance are alive, sizzling all over the face of the diamond. There is less contrast, but more life and brightness. Now, you turn and walk back down the pier. Your heads are close together. With the ring stretched toward the shore your heads are between the sun and the diamond. Now as you move your hand left and right those spectral colors and bright reflections become more distinctly on/off and intense, broken by shards of brilliance as sun breaks in-between your lovey heads and it's less obscured. Unless your hand is twisted and held still to see the crown view face up you will not see pavilion main arrow obscuration as we see it in photos on PS.

Now as you go into the restaurant the overhead chandelier lighting, candles on the table and wall sconces present even more opportunities to appreciate the qualities of your diamond. Obscuration may or may not be present depending on the locations of the various lighting sources, you, the waiter, the bottle of champagne, and your S.O. Of course, if you’re sitting between the flaming cherry dessert and the diamond you’ll have obscuration, but if you stretch your hand towards those cherries you may not.
1.gif
 
John,
I have read the link that you posted which defines WF''s eye-clean definition. Before I would make a purchase like this, I would want to find out more. For example, is it eye clean from the sides? Can I have someone look at the stone and give me feedback? Is it possible to have other pictures of the stone emailed to me (perhaps a photo that is not as magnified so I can get a better idea of what it will look like)?

Also, what is your take on the IS image? Do you see a lot of light leakage?

Strmrdr, You sais that the stone has a steep deep combo. When I enter the numbers into the HCA, it comes up as being withing the ideal range? Isn''t that supposed to rule out stones with poor angle combinations or light return, or is it possible to have a stone which is in the ideal range, but is too steep/deep?

Thanks, just trying to understand all this info.
 
Date: 1/5/2006 5:26:01 AM
Author: valeria101

Looking at what the inclusions are, I wonder if the SI2 is not the ''cleaner'' stone this time (a few small inclusions versus one - at least visible in the pictures).

The grades make it a no-brainer for me too.

Between E and H, E would need to be a dog of a cut to be left aside. This isn''t even worse, IMO.

But.. it is your choice.


IMO, the ''dark'' ACA were too small versus the expectations, not less than perfectly proportioned. But that... we''d never know unless the buyer gets to see more of the same and tell the story.
Click to expand...
Valeria,
are you saying that you would choose the WF over the GOG?
 
thank you for that explanation! I do know what you are talking about as I look at my diamond under many different lighting conditions and notice how it changes. It''s really a fascinating subject. I have certain favorite lighting conditions and others that are not as favorable.
I guess what would be helpful and informative is an explanation as to how pavillion and crown angles interact in regards to the head shadow and overall brightness of the diamond. Somewhere back in a thread Storm posted a picture of a 34.3 stone with 40.6 and then the same stone with 40.9 and it appeared much brighter with the 40.9. Does this also tie into the fiery ideal cut versus the brilliant ideal cut topics? Would the higher pavillion angle make it more brilliant but less fiery? Also, does the lower pavillion angle lead to a more fiery stone with less brightness?
emcrook.gif

What would be cool and maybe is somewhere on this board is a chart with the angles and pictures of diamonds with those angles.
 
Date: 1/5/2006 9:50:08 PM
Author: diamondsrock
thank you for that explanation! I do know what you are talking about as I look at my diamond under many different lighting conditions and notice how it changes. It''s really a fascinating subject. I have certain favorite lighting conditions and others that are not as favorable.
I guess what would be helpful and informative is an explanation as to how pavillion and crown angles interact in regards to the head shadow and overall brightness of the diamond. Somewhere back in a thread Storm posted a picture of a 34.3 stone with 40.6 and then the same stone with 40.9 and it appeared much brighter with the 40.9. Does this also tie into the fiery ideal cut versus the brilliant ideal cut topics? Would the higher pavillion angle make it more brilliant but less fiery? Also, does the lower pavillion angle lead to a more fiery stone with less brightness?
emcrook.gif

What would be cool and maybe is somewhere on this board is a chart with the angles and pictures of diamonds with those angles.
Click to expand...
You have hit my main questions right on the head! That is the exact information that I want to know, but for some reason I just couldn''t get it out. Anyone who can answer these questions is a hero in my book!!!

Diamondsrock,
the diamond that had the 34.3 and the 40.9 appeared much brighter? That combo is pretty close to the WF stone we have been talking about.

Strmrdr, what was different about the stone that was discussed in the older thread referred to by diamondsrock, that this WF stone is lacking?
 
Date: 1/5/2006 9:45:59 PM
Author: sslkrissi
John,
I have read the link that you posted which defines WF''s eye-clean definition. Before I would make a purchase like this, I would want to find out more. For example, is it eye clean from the sides? Can I have someone look at the stone and give me feedback? Is it possible to have other pictures of the stone emailed to me (perhaps a photo that is not as magnified so I can get a better idea of what it will look like)?

Also, what is your take on the IS image? Do you see a lot of light leakage?

Strmrdr, You sais that the stone has a steep deep combo. When I enter the numbers into the HCA, it comes up as being withing the ideal range? Isn''t that supposed to rule out stones with poor angle combinations or light return, or is it possible to have a stone which is in the ideal range, but is too steep/deep?

Thanks, just trying to understand all this info.
Click to expand...
sslkrissi - I don''t know about the side view. Diamonds are clarity graded face-up so even VS and above may have an inclusion visible from the side where there is more transparency. If you are nearsighted (or very young
1.gif
) there is also the possibility you may pick something up where someone with 20/20 vision may not. If someone is incredibly sensitive I often encourage staying with VS and above. The IS shows slight leakage under the table but nothing adverse. As the HCA indicates, it''s a candidate worthy of consideration. The virtue of this diamond is that it''s a good performing, eye-clean colorless E with nice optical symmetry at the 1.5 ct mark for $10k. It would be our pleasure to have someone view this diamond for you ''live'' so you can ask questions and get input. Perhaps you could email your sales rep tonight and set up a time for a phone discussion with an expert tomorrow.
 
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