Please Help Narrow Down Options

[IBM]

Hello everyone,

Long time lurker, first time poster. I've trying to nail down a loose diamond for a while now and have come across the following 3 options from Blue Nile. All three options have their own characteristic differences. Price is definitely a concern, but if I have to spend a little more for the more expensive option, so be it.

Which option do you think is the best bang for the buck while providing a beautiful diamond? Please share your views as to why one is better than others.

Option 1:
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD09964094

Option 2:
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD10444708

Option 3:
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD10571503

I am leaning towards option number 2, but would like some opinions of individuals who are far more educated in the topic than I am.

Thank you everyone,
IBM

 

[yssie]

My personal thoughts:

Eliminate option #1 (1.40 F VS2): that central crystal, despite not being the grade-making inclusion, is awfully visible on tilt through normal viewing angles in that video - I’d wager it’ll be noticeable on close inspection in-person.

Option #2 (G VS2) looks much more clean;
I see no reason to pay $2k more if it’s clean to your personal standards. There’s nothing in the information available that makes option #3 a better choice than #2 (besides the obvious jump in clarity).

 

[IBM]

My personal thoughts:

Eliminate option #1 (1.40 F VS2): that central crystal, despite not being the grade-making inclusion, is awfully visible on tilt through normal viewing angles in that video - I’d wager it’ll be noticeable on close inspection in-person.

Option #2 (G VS2) looks much more clean;
I see no reason to pay $2k more if it’s clean to your personal standards. There’s nothing in the information available that makes option #3 a better choice than #2 (besides the obvious jump in clarity).

 

[IBM]

Thank you Yssie. I just ran the Depth, Table, Pavilion, Crown through the HCA calculator...

Option #2: 2.5 (Very Good)
Option #3: 1.5 (Excellent)

Is this a significant difference? I would like to save the 2k, but if the HCA and the one up in clarity make it a better deal?

I know nothing about HCA.

Thanks.

 

[yssie]

HCA is meant to be a binary rejection tool - if you're working through a large group of possibilities you can run the HCA en masse and shortlist stones that score under 2 for further evaluation. Further evaluation means vetting the report and any additional analyses your vendor might provide, inspection of photos/videos, etc. In this context (which is the only context HCA should be used in - emphasizing this because the tool is often misused):

HCA <2 means "shortlist for further evaluation". It does not mean that the stone is a winner.

HCA >2 means "don't shortlist for further evaluation". It does not mean the stone is a doozy. It does not mean the stone isn't just as or more beautiful as one that scores <2. It just means that your odds of finding one of the great ones are lower, so when you don't have time to inspect a whole bunch of stones... you eliminate in crude sets knowing that you're probably chucking some babies out with the bathwater.​

This isn't the case here - you've got as much info as you're going to get from BN and you've got time and opportunity to do a thorough examination, and that examination indicates there's no reason to believe #2 is inferior to #3 in any way relating to quantity or quality of light return. One of the major factors HCA doesn't consider is lower halves - you can think of longer LGF as "HCA score mitigation" if you like:
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/do_pavilion_mains_drive_light_return_modern_round_brilliant

 

[IBM]

Thank you yssie. I appreciate you taking the time to respond.

Do you think the inclusions in Option #2 are critical? I would hope that this diamond is eye clean, but are the inclusions severe/critical, as based on the GIA report?

Being more educated in the topic, would you personally purchase the Option #2 diamond if you were willing to fork out 13k? Or should I continue the search? I've searching for a while and it seems like this one brings the value.

Thanks.

 

[Luce]

Hi IBM,

I agree with yssie that option 1 should be eliminated.
It looks like option 3 has more complimentary crown to pavilion angle than option 2. (34/41 is more complimentary than 35/41.) I think that along with the higher clarity, I would gravitate toward option 3.

 

[IBM]

Thank you Luce.

So the increase is clarity from VS2 to VS1 and the more complimentary angles would be worth 1.5k. That is a pretty hefty increase in money for things which may not even be noticeable.

 

[Luce]

It may not be that noticeable, what would be ideal would be to look at at these side by side in different lighting to see the differences.

 

[yssie]

Thank you yssie. I appreciate you taking the time to respond.

Do you think the inclusions in Option #2 are critical? I would hope that this diamond is eye clean, but are the inclusions severe/critical, as based on the GIA report?

Being more educated in the topic, would you personally purchase the Option #2 diamond if you were willing to fork out 13k? Or should I continue the search? I've searching for a while and it seems like this one brings the value.

Thanks.

First decide what your requirements for “eye clean” are. Do you want to see absolutely nothing from 6” face-up? Is 12” viewing sufficient? Do you care what you see from the side (setting-dependent)? Then ask BN if the stone meets your personal criteria.

Having the stone shipped out loose to view is certainly ideal, but we know that’s not always feasible. Your priorities seem to be first achieving minimum thresholds for colour (G) and clarity (eyeclean), and then maximizing size with what’s left (please correct me if any of those assumptions are incorrect). You have been searching for some time, and are therefore knowingly not targeting precision-cut stones, choosing instead to put budget toward other parameters.

There’s nothing wrong with your priorities. Highlighting that. No, I wouldn’t buy this stone, because my priorities are different, but I wouldn’t have a problem recommending it to someone in my Real World who shares your priorities

I took a quick look on BN and some other sites. Not too much out there in a narrow cost band, really! Here is a strong contender:
https://www.jamesallen.com/mobile/l...rat-g-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-4455423
The AGS DQD is a prestigious report and the CG ASET image is promising. JA will provide IS images on some of their stones - you could ask if that service is available for this one. It is $1k more than the wire price of your BN selection... If you drop colour or size there are of course more possibilities at a lower price point.

 

[Athena10X]

If you’re willing to go down in color, I think the following may be viable options within the $12K-$14k budget. Because these diamonds are super-ideal they should face up white and will certainly sparkle per their light performance. There are many threads and videos that explain/show how much “whiter” super-ideals are when compared to other cut grades for the same color grade. In fact, my CBI G looks like a D/E facing up (especially after comparing to GIA excellent graded Gs irl). I also searched on Whiteflash, Brian Gavin, Victor Canera, Good Old Gold, as well as Blue Nile. I’m sure the experts will chime in and recommend a few others. Never hurts to have a few excellent options to choose from.

https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD10056

https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD10130

https://www.jamesallen.com/mobile/l...color-vs1-clarity-true-hearts-cut-sku-4453577

https://www.jamesallen.com/mobile/l...color-vs1-clarity-true-hearts-cut-sku-4613477