Please help..urgent..bought RB but may return??

[mgh]

so 1444580 i should go with? even with the not best idealscope and measurements?

 

[yssie]

ISs on both are just fine, and both will be bright beautiful stones - we're piddling details here. In fact, I'd bet if you had them side by side and didn't know which was which you couldn't match stone to IS with certainty

I'd go with the one they recommended, personally, but if you're uncomfortable then just go with the other and call it a success!

 

[mgh]

probably just gonna go w/ 1444580...too much stress lol

 

[Laila619]

so 1444580 i should go with? even with the not best idealscope and measurements?

I honestly wouldn't, because it's too small. You're paying for a full one carat but not getting it in mm.

 

[mgh]

i have checked their website a million times over the past two days..no other good stones??

which one would you recommend..

what are the ideal dimensions for a 1.0ct stone? for mm's? on all the stones i check HCA rating first too make sure under 2.0



so out of these, i should go with 1472009..although the gemologist said "Diamond 1472009 (1.02crt G SI1) should face eye clean to the untrained eye, though our gemologist said that if you are examining the diamond very closely and know exactly where to look, it might be possible to locate the feather on the pavilion or its reflection in the upper girdle. It has great light performance and its "G" color is comparable to the other diamonds in your hold"





#2 (awaiting idealscope) -- this idealscope looks the best to me, but didnt get a good rating from gemologist...i'm skeptical if the gemologist even looked at it...as she said it should face eye clean...

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1472009.asp
measurements 6.45 x 6.49x4.02
1.02 ct
table 54.2
depth 62.2
crown 35.2
pav 40.8
lower girdle 78

hca under 2
ligh ret exc
fire exc
scin exc
spread vg

and then diamond #3 (idealscope on first post, 2nd image) --- what about table leakage????and measurements being small...6.36?? and hi depth???

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1444580.asp

measurements 6.36 x 6.41x3.99
1.00 ct
table 56
depth 62.5
crown 35
pav 40.8
lower girdle 75

hca under 2
ligh ret exc
fire exc
scin exc
spread vg

lso the verbage from the rep at JA

Thank you for your patience while waiting for the gemologist inspection results and idealscope images for diamonds 1444580, 1472009, and 1461961. You'll find that I've attached the requested images to this email for your review.



You'll be happy to hear that diamond 1444580 (1crt G SI1) has excellent fire, brilliance, and scintillation and faces the brightest of the group! It faces completely eye clean and its "G" color is perfectly white. This diamond is our gemologist's favorite and will provide you with an excellent value.



Diamond 1472009 (1.02crt G SI1) should face eye clean to the untrained eye, though our gemologist said that if you are examining the diamond very closely and know exactly where to look, it might be possible to locate the feather on the pavilion or its reflection in the upper girdle. It has great light performance and its "G" color is comparable to the other diamonds in your hold. Diamond 1461961 (1.02crt G SI1) has excellent light performance but its feather will be visible to the unaided eye and is not prongable.



As your brightest, cleanest, and least expensive option, I personally recommend diamond 1444580. Please take a moment to review this information and let me know if you have any additional questions. I have extended your hold on these diamonds for an additional 24 hours while you consider your options. After that time we will release them back to our inventory.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

You may need to consider going up to VS2 or looking at another vendor like WF or GOG. Honestly, I would not handle seeing inclusions, but I would definitely not pay for a one carat stone that is not over 6.4mm and preferably close to 6.5. You may as well look for a diamond under a carat if you are going to buy a smaller diameter.

I can't see your prices since the stones are on hold, but go look at H VS2 stones.

 

[mgh]

i agree with the comment about buying a 1ct stone and having it look smaller due to the measurements..i might as well get a smaller diamond..

my current stone i believe ran me 5900 for the diamond w/o setting..(just a plain solitaire)

the stone 1444580 was around 600 more...but after all posts and reviews from users here, i think i'll pass on that one and keep looking..i'm not sure what to do..i like the setting from JA.com, but it seems like their share of diamonds are scarce..atleast for a g/h si1/si2 that is eye clean..even the vs2 section was little...

 

[diamondseeker2006]

It looked like there were a couple of good H VS2's, but I think they were more than the others. James Allen has a lot of stones and some are great and some are not. It is just hard sifting through all of them, and especially when you can't know if they are eye clean without a process of getting an answer. I can't even remember what setting you wanted now, but this whole thing might be easier if you'd called Yekutiel at ID Jewelry and tell him what you're looking for and let him call in a couple of stones for you. he can usually beat JA prices, too.

Remind me what setting you wanted and we can suggest alternatives that IDJ might be able to get.

 

[mgh]

it is the knife edge 2.0mm white gold setting 4 prong..my fiance loves it..i gave her the current ring/and setting when i proposed..she noticed the cloud as i did before i gave it to her..shes stuck on the setting..loves it

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Of course, I remember now. If James Allen will give you more idealscopes, then I would stick with them. If not, I feel fairly sure IDJ can get a setting like that. You could contact them and ask if you could email them a picture and see what they say. But I imagine many ring companies carry one like that.

 

[mgh]

should i not go with this one?

Diamond 1472009 (1.02crt G SI1) should face eye clean to the untrained eye, though our gemologist said that if you are examining the diamond very closely and know exactly where to look, it might be possible to locate the feather on the pavilion or its reflection in the upper girdle. It has great light performance and its "G" color is comparable to the other diamonds in your hold"





#2 (awaiting idealscope) -- this idealscope looks the best to me, but didnt get a good rating from gemologist...i'm skeptical if the gemologist even looked at it...as she said it should face eye clean...

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1472009.asp
measurements 6.45 x 6.49x4.02
1.02 ct
table 54.2
depth 62.2
crown 35.2
pav 40.8
lower girdle 78

hca under 2
ligh ret exc
fire exc
scin exc
spread vg

 

[mgh]

how about this as an option?

Shape: Round
Carat weight: 1.01
Cut: Excellent
Color: G
Clarity: SI2
Certificate: GIA

Depth: 61.0%
Table: 57.0%
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle:
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.45*6.48*3.95

scored very well on hca <2, and the aga/naja charts

 

[0-0-0]

If you were bothered by a SI2 inclusion in your other stone, I suggest sticking with SI1 or better.

I think Diamond 1472009 (1.02crt G SI1) should be a relatively safe choice. The images look really clean.

 

[mgh]

even if the si2 has different inclusions..such as twinning wisps and needles..vs the cloud i have currently?

 

[0-0-0]

It's just really difficult to find an eye clean SI2, especially if you are not sticking to in house stones.

 

[yssie]

even if the si2 has different inclusions..such as twinning wisps and needles..vs the cloud i have currently?

An SI is a Slightly Included stone, and each SI needs to be evaluated - there are no universal rules. The first inclusion listed on the report is the grade-making inclusion (the "most severe" for lack of better way to put it). "Good" wisps can be difficult to see in most types of lights and pose no structural concern, "Bad" wisps can be easy to see or impede brilliance just like clouds.


Good wisps - GOG inclusions gallery http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/Clarity/InclusionGallery/
Bad wisps [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/what-is-this-scariness-in-my-diamond-that-i-thought-i-loved-pic.136987/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/what-is-this-scariness-in-my-diamond-that-i-thought-i-loved-pic.136987/[/URL]
If you do a PS search for "twinning wisps" you'll find lots more
GIA/AGS clarity grading **read both** here and here

 

[mgh]

accordingy to gemologist 1444580 was rated cleanest. it is also $275 cheaper than 1472009.

i know 1472009 has a cleaner idealscope..but gemologist didnt rate it the best..i'm confused.

1472009 - i cant see any red marks on the certificate posted here. maybe a scanning error?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI2-Very%20Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1472009.asp

so between 1444580 - $600 more than current stone and 1472009 - $875 more than current stone..which is the 'better' buy?

my hunch is to just go with the gemologist recommendation as i have expressed my concerns about the current stone cloud and my ability to spot inclusions rather easily..

even if the si2 has different inclusions..such as twinning wisps and needles..vs the cloud i have currently?

An SI is a Slightly Included stone, and each SI needs to be evaluated - there are no universal rules. The first inclusion listed on the report is the grade-making inclusion (the "most severe" for lack of better way to put it). "Good" wisps can be difficult to see in most types of lights and pose no structural concern, "Bad" wisps can be easy to see or impede brilliance just like clouds.


Good wisps - GOG inclusions gallery http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/Clarity/InclusionGallery/
Bad wisps [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/what-is-this-scariness-in-my-diamond-that-i-thought-i-loved-pic.136987/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/what-is-this-scariness-in-my-diamond-that-i-thought-i-loved-pic.136987/[/URL]
If you do a PS search for "twinning wisps" you'll find lots more
GIA/AGS clarity grading **read both** here and here

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I still say that I'd choose none of those.

 

[mgh]

back to the drawing board then..i looked at briangavin, they have a

'blue' color K VS2 stone for my price range...I know the K is way down the color chart, but looking at other pix of the blue series on pricescopeforum, it actually looks white.

 

[yssie]

Yup - must be a poor scan.


mgh, I understand why you're concerned. It's a lot to be spending, again, on something you won't even get to see before coughing up the dough!

That said, you're in a very good position right now: you have several nice stones to choose from, you're working with a respected and trustworthy vendor, and there is an ironclad return policy if you don't like what you get.

Determinations of eyeclean are necessarily subjective - the reps can tell you what they see, but they don't have your eyes or tastes. There is a possibility that an SI1 that is completely clean (by your definition) to your rep's eyes might not be to yours, and vice versa! A VS2 is always the safer option, especially for someone who *knows* they are sensitive to and picky about inclusions. At this point I do think you're worrying too much though - just pick one, have it shipped out, let your eyes make the call one way or another



ETA: just read the update - really can't judge colour from pics, and fluor will not have any effect on body colour unless the environment lighting has a strong long-wave UV component (sunlight, clubs). A K is going to show some body colour on close inspection or in comparison to higher coloured stones unless you are particularly colour-insensitive.