Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Pls help me find the perfect stone!!!

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Date: 4/27/2009 4:28:26 PM
Author: QueenMum

Date: 4/27/2009 4:26:24 PM
Author: Lorelei
Did you see those 20k earrings vanish within hours a few weeks ago Stephan? Gone just like that, the original poster didn''t have a chance at them!
Click to expand...
I didn''t see that one, but I''ve seen it happen on smaller diamonds 2-3 times.
Too bad!
Click to expand...
It was, you would think diamonds that expensive wouldn''t go that fast but they did! Well matched big 60 60''s, I bet they made kicken studs!
 
Jordan,

I would add two things (perhaps some people will disagree):

~ Lorelei is right by advising you to buy fast before the lurkers and the diamond looks gorgeous, but do you realize that because of 0.03ct you will pay more for the 2.02ct? If you are not in a hurry you could save some $$$ with something smaller.
~ This may sound sacrilegious: ask Whiteflash if the VS2 is eye clean. Someone with very sharp eyes may begin to detect something in such a big diamond.

If you are OK spending the extra money for going over 2ct and if the stone is eye clean, it will be a WINNER!
 
Lorelei,
I mean the symbol before the number.
I browsed Jonathan''s website and I found some diamonds with the same symbol in the inscription and those diamonds look awesome.
 
Well, I reserved it!

I think I have to step out for awhile now to calm down before searching for a ring, but what I''m thinking is Whiteflash''s own four-prong Tiffany-style one:

http://www.whiteflash.com/Engagement-Rings/Styles/Solitaire/4-Prong-tiffany-style-Diamond-Solitaire_994.htm.

I''ve read--somewhere on this site, maybe--that going with four prongs rather than six may increase the incidence of chipping. But one jeweler I spoke to insisted that chipping usually occurs under the prongs, themselves. Any thoughts?

One last question about the ring. Does it matter that I haven''t seen a "hearts" photo of the pavilion?

-Jordan-
 
Date: 4/27/2009 4:42:13 PM
Author: Lorelei
Do you mean by the inscription # Stephan? That is an Isee2 symbol.
Click to expand...
That''s it! Lorelei, you are the best!
36.gif
 
Date: 4/27/2009 4:51:33 PM
Author: QueenMum

Date: 4/27/2009 4:42:13 PM
Author: Lorelei
Do you mean by the inscription # Stephan? That is an Isee2 symbol.
Click to expand...
That''s it! Lorelei, you are the best!
36.gif
Click to expand...
* blush* thanks!!
12.gif
 
If Whiteflash sets your diamond that has a medium girdle, they won''t chip the stone, be confident. They do some stunning work.
Unless your wife is a Shaolin monk that split stones in two with her left hand, the diamond will be safe too.
 
Date: 4/27/2009 4:51:30 PM
Author: ideal a perfect hand...
Well, I reserved it!

I think I have to step out for awhile now to calm down before searching for a ring, but what I'm thinking is Whiteflash's own four-prong Tiffany-style one:

http://www.whiteflash.com/Engagement-Rings/Styles/Solitaire/4-Prong-tiffany-style-Diamond-Solitaire_994.htm.

I've read--somewhere on this site, maybe--that going with four prongs rather than six may increase the incidence of chipping. But one jeweler I spoke to insisted that chipping usually occurs under the prongs, themselves. Any thoughts?

One last question about the ring. Does it matter that I haven't seen a 'hearts' photo of the pavilion?

-Jordan-
Click to expand...
Great stuff! That will keep the diamond safe while you sleep on it Jordan!

I will just take a look at the setting...

http://www.whiteflash.com/Engagement-Rings/Styles/Solitaire/4-Prong-tiffany-style-Diamond-Solitaire_994.htm.


As to the hearts image, this diamond isn't being sold as a h&a diamond so it is up to you, WF might be able to supply a hearts image on request but it wouldn't have made the grade to be an ACA brand or it would be sold as such - however it is an excellently cut diamond and it wouldn't worry me at all.

Prongs are a matter of preference, some prefer 6 as they feel they are more secure and make the diamond look rounder, others prefer 4 as they feel these showcase the diamond better. That is a classic setting you have chosen, will look gorgeous!
 
It has excellent face up optical symmetry, since it is discounted for not being h&a I wouldn''t worry about the heart images.
 
I sometimes play the game to find out why an expert selection diamonds doesn''t become ACA.
I really hope this one is eye clean.
If it is, no hearts are needed, you won''t set the diamond upside down in the ring.
My guess is that the hearts will look good on this one.
 
Date: 4/27/2009 3:23:29 PM
Author: QueenMum
I have a headache and I''m probably a little hard today but:


~ Whiteflash

Not the nicest ASET/IdealScope pictures I''ve seen for ACA. Really not!

Would Brian call this one ACA?


~ GoodOldGold

Both diamonds have pavilion angles higher than 41 degrees, I don''t like that.


~ James Allen

Why do you hide the dates on your certificates?

I don''t trust sellers who have secrets.


Sorry for this negative post, but I think it is constructive to let the vendors know what we need.

7.gif
Click to expand...


Hi Stephan,

If I may ask. Neither diamond has light leakage that shows up in a critical reflector examination and are GIA Ex/Ex/Ex combined with precise optical symmetry and AGS Ideal Light Performance. They constitute a rarity that falls into a less than 1% category of rounds on the market? What exactly is it about these diamonds you don''t like having never seen either?
 
Hi Jonathan,
Don''t be angry, it isn''t against you.
If you read the whole thread, I even linked one of your diamonds that I think is gorgeous.
As for the diamonds Jordan choosed:
~ HCA is not excellent
~ Some poor light return can be seen in the table (what you used to call ''ring of the death'' years ago
Also see the link I''ve posted where Brian wrote what he thinks about >41 degrees pavilion.
There is also a GIA patent where you can read that >41 degrees pavilion is not good for DCLR.
In my little buyer experience, most of the best diamonds I saw had pavilion angles below 41.
And to finish: why should we pay for weight that doesn''t add beauty?
It''s not against you, Jonathan, but against cutters who try to find a compromise between yield and beauty but where yield often wins.
 
I admit I didn''t see the 2 diamonds.
You could have a movie made with the 2 Jordan chose and the one I did.
I will apologize if I can''t see the difference.
By the way, I love your O-IF!
30.gif
 
Stephan, just to follow up on something you suggested earlier, I have put an inquiry in to Whiteflash as to whether the stone is eye-clean. If not, then I''ll take another look at those GOG diamonds, Rhino.
 
Date: 4/27/2009 6:35:41 PM
Author: ideal a perfect hand...
Stephan, just to follow up on something you suggested earlier, I have put an inquiry in to Whiteflash as to whether the stone is eye-clean. If not, then I''ll take another look at those GOG diamonds, Rhino.
Click to expand...
Especially this one:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/5635/
2.gif


Rhino also makes movies on request if you want to compare the 3 diamonds (size, beauty, ...)
 
I just saw the GemEx report of this one, it has higher scores than the 2 others.
30.gif
 
Wow, it looks stunning. Well, I''ll keep my fingers crossed on the WF one, but I won''t forget that there are always more great stones out there to be found. This search has been a real pleasure. Is it bad to find yourself more excited about a diamond than the person who''s going to wear it?
6.gif
 
Date: 4/27/2009 6:56:40 PM
Author: ideal a perfect hand...
Wow, it looks stunning. Well, I''ll keep my fingers crossed on the WF one, but I won''t forget that there are always more great stones out there to be found. This search has been a real pleasure. Is it bad to find yourself more excited about a diamond than the person who''s going to wear it?
6.gif
Click to expand...
Bad? No. She''s probably excited too but she hides it.
31.gif

If the diamond of WF is not clean or if you don''t want to pay for the magic 2ct, this diamond should be a killer.
 
Date: 4/27/2009 6:56:40 PM
Author: ideal a perfect hand...
Wow, it looks stunning. Well, I''ll keep my fingers crossed on the WF one, but I won''t forget that there are always more great stones out there to be found. This search has been a real pleasure. Is it bad to find yourself more excited about a diamond than the person who''s going to wear it?
6.gif
Click to expand...
I think you are asking the wrong crowd here... Why else do you think we are still hanging around here in this forum after we have gotten our stones? :P
 
Date: 4/27/2009 6:17:58 PM
Author: QueenMum
Hi Jonathan,

Don''t be angry, it isn''t against you.

If you read the whole thread, I even linked one of your diamonds that I think is gorgeous.

As for the diamonds Jordan choosed:

~ HCA is not excellent

~ Some poor light return can be seen in the table (what you used to call ''ring of the death'' years ago

Also see the link I''ve posted where Brian wrote what he thinks about >41 degrees pavilion.

There is also a GIA patent where you can read that >41 degrees pavilion is not good for DCLR.

In my little buyer experience, most of the best diamonds I saw had pavilion angles below 41.

And to finish: why should we pay for weight that doesn''t add beauty?

It''s not against you, Jonathan, but against cutters who try to find a compromise between yield and beauty but where yield often wins.
Click to expand...

Hey Stephan,

Not angry whatsoever. My apologies if that tone came across and I do not take your post personally or as a personal attack whatsoever. On the contrary, I think you''re a friendly person. :) Frustrated would probably be a better word as it frustrates me to see people base decisions on misinformation. Just some points to your comments I''d like to share my input on.

1. HCA is a crystal ball prediction based on 17 out of 57 facets. It has its strengths yes but there are many limitations that many consumers are not aware of which I have covered in my article on this technology.
2. Neither of these diamonds suffer from the "ring of death". :) I still use the term from time to time and my definition has never changed. I''m writing from my Mac in which I don''t have graphics on the ring of death on this computer but to clarify ... Rhino''s Ring of Death is the results of steep/deep angles resulting in a blatant ring of leakage that existed under the table in steep/deep combos. In Red Reflectors like accurately taken IdealScope imagery or our DiamXray technology it wouild show up as a white ring which is very easy to see. If I get a chance tomorrow I''ll post one for you to see as an example.
3. in the thread that you linked back from 2007 Brian''s comments (if memory serves me right) were not directed towards my diamond but to =>41.0 pavilion angles in commonly cut diamonds. Every single expert in that thread including Michael Cowing, Sergey, John Pollard who saw the imagery produced by that diamond confirmed the veracity of what I was saying. I happened to go on vacation in the midst while that thread was going on (the month of July) so I didn''t get a chance to respond properly and when I got back the thread was long buried. It was a while since that went on so I''m going on memory. I do remember clearly express my concern to Brian that if Phoenix took his comments to that particular diamond it would result in misleading and false information.
4. Paying for weight? At a 1.91ct? If this were 2.0xct perhaps you''d have a case.
5. That doesn''t add beauty? ... I''ll put either of these alongside any H&A in my inventory with shallower pavilion angles any day of the week. If you could see any difference you''ll get a boobie prize. :)

Also when differences *do* exist in diamonds via a practical observation Stephan I can capture it in our newest technologies that translate what we see in practical observation. Recently we showed a few PS''rs a comparison of 2 picture perfect H&A diamonds and the only primary difference between the 2 in cut were 3 sets of upper half angles and most every observer was able to see the difference.

Sorry for the long post but just wanted to clarify.

Kindest regards,
 
Date: 4/27/2009 6:26:14 PM
Author: QueenMum
I admit I didn''t see the 2 diamonds.

You could have a movie made with the 2 Jordan chose and the one I did.

I will apologize if I can''t see the difference.

By the way, I love your O-IF!
30.gif
Click to expand...


Should he choose to work with us that''ll be his choice or if you have any comparisons you''d like to see ... I am always happy to serve. And yes ... that O IF absolutely ROCKS. :) I''d put that in a ring for myself but am waiting on the new chunky rounds I''m having cut. =P
 
Now I''m thoroughly confused! Can''t I just buy them all?
3.gif
Stephan, you seem to be suggesting that I may be overpaying a bit because the 2.02-ct is just heavier than a "magic number." And Rhino, your diamonds are just incredible...

Is there anything else I should ask WF to relay to me besides inclusion-visibility and a pavilion view before I make my decision? I guess I''ll report back tomorrow and see if anyone else wants to weigh in before I actually make a purchase. Meanwhile, I should spend some time with the girl
1.gif


-Jordan-
 
Date: 4/27/2009 7:51:08 PM
Author: Rhino

Hey Stephan,

Not angry whatsoever. My apologies if that tone came across and I do not take your post personally or as a personal attack whatsoever. On the contrary, I think you''re a friendly person. :) Frustrated would probably be a better word as it frustrates me to see people base decisions on misinformation. Just some points to your comments I''d like to share my input on.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your nice words, Jonathan.


Date: 4/27/2009 7:51:08 PM
Author: Rhino

Also when differences *do* exist in diamonds via a practical observation Stephan I can capture it in our newest technologies that translate what we see in practical observation. Recently we showed a few PS''rs a comparison of 2 picture perfect H&A diamonds and the only primary difference between the 2 in cut were 3 sets of upper half angles and most every observer was able to see the difference.
Click to expand...
Thank you for that too, you are the only seller I know on this forum who does take the time to compare diamonds.
I think I''ve seen all your videos.

Now for the 41+ pavilions, I forgot to add that one of my eyes can''t see, and that''s probably why I''m very pavilion depth sensitive. Karl (strmrdr) also says I prefer shallow diamonds because of my unique eye.
When your two eyes work properly, they will look at the same time and compense eachother.
But I''m not jalous, video recorders and cameras have only one eye too.
2.gif
 
Date: 4/27/2009 7:54:32 PM
Author: Rhino

Should he choose to work with us that''ll be his choice or if you have any comparisons you''d like to see ... I am always happy to serve. And yes ... that O IF absolutely ROCKS. :) I''d put that in a ring for myself but am waiting on the new chunky rounds I''m having cut. =P
Click to expand...
Chunky rounds?
Something like modern OEC?
18.gif

Keep us posted, that sounds exciiting!
 
Date: 4/27/2009 10:01:27 PM
Author: ideal a perfect hand...
Stephan, you seem to be suggesting that I may be overpaying a bit because the 2.02-ct is just heavier than a ''magic number.''
Click to expand...
Don''t misunderstand me: you won''t be overpaying, the price of this diamond is very good.
My only concerns, being a consumer, were:
~ Does the girl need a 2ct or will she be happy with a little smaller because size difference isn''t very big.
~ Is the VS2 eye clean?


Date: 4/27/2009 10:01:27 PM
Author: ideal a perfect hand...
Is there anything else I should ask WF to relay to me besides inclusion-visibility and a pavilion view before I make my decision?
Click to expand...
As I said, I guess pavilion view will be nice and symmetrical.
ASET/IdealScope pictures are great.
If the inclusions and their reflections are not visible by the naked eye, it should be a great diamond.
If I had to ask one more question, it would be ''Why didn''t it become ACA?''.
 
Date: 4/27/2009 6:26:14 PM
Author: QueenMum
I love your O-IF!
30.gif
Click to expand...

I do too! Stephan and I talked about this in another thread.
30.gif
 
Date: 4/28/2009 2:16:44 AM
Author: DiamondFlame
If I''m the buyer, I wouldn''t want to pay for what I cannot see with my naked eye. This 2.16 F/SI2 would have been my choice (if it is eye clean):

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/5303/
Click to expand...
Thats a beauty Dimitri, Jordan wants VS or better though - stunning rock!
 
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