Thanks to many who have responded to all kinds of questions from me over the past month! I consider myself an infinitely more savvy diamond purchaser now. I am leaning toward buying from one of the famous, high-end stores from which I get an employee discount. Here are my considerations:
(1) 1.28 E VS2 RB
XXX, Depth 60.9%, Table 57%, Pav angle 40.7, Crown angle 34.9
6.99 - 7.03 X 4.27mm
Girdle Medium (faceted), Lower half length 80%, Star length 50%
Culet None, No Fluor, Pav Depth 42.8%, Crown Height 15.3%
HCA: 1.2 (TIC) Ex Ex Ex Vg
ACA: Class 1A except crown angle (1B), and 1A overall
(2) 1.34 F VS2 RB, -$500 or so vs. (1)
XXX, Depth 62.5%, Table 57%, Pav angle 41.0, Crown angle 35.2
7.03 - 7.06 X 4.40mm
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick (faceted), Lower half length 80%, Star length 50%
Culet None, No Fluor, Pav Depth 43.4%, Crown Height 15.5%
HCA: 3.1 (TIC) Vg Vg Vg Vg
ACA: Class 1B overall
(3) 1.27 D VS1 from BGD (for now I omit the images, since I have none for (1) and (2) to compare against)
AGS 000, Depth 61.5%, Table 55.8%, Pav angle 40.8, Crown angle 34.7
6.97 - 7.01 X 4.29mm
Girdle Thin to Medium (faceted), Lower half length 78%, Star length 53%
Culet Pointed, Fluor Negligible, Pav Depth 43.0%, Crown Height 15.3%
HCA: 1.4 (TIC) Ex Ex Ex Vg
ACA: Class 1A in all categories
Despite no imagery (nor will any be provided) for (1) and (2), the stats on (1) all seem very safe to me. I worked very hard to find a diamond in the inventory with such exacting cut proportions. I intend to have my final purchase independently appraised, so if anything surprising emerges (e.g. leakage), I have a reasonable return period on any of these. The setting will solitaire platinum for all 3 (though (1) and (2) are already set).
Cut comments:
I''ve seen (1) and (2) in person, but not (3). I recognize that (2) is a bit on the steep/deep side. But as a point of comparison, (1) had a "deeper" look to me, in the sense that it was face up every so slightly darker (not in terms of less light, necessarily, just a sense that I could see deeper into the diamond). Does this make any sense? I know that (2) is probably less desirable than (1), but I included it to try and explain what I was seeing with my eyes and to see if it made any sense. Also, I find that both (1) and (2) look fantastic with my eyes, and I preferred them both over a 1.33 G VS1 with an HCA score of 2.
Pricing comments:
While I think the mark-up for BGD is one of the higher for online vendors (and probably well worth it: not at all a criticism, just an observation on my part), it is still marked-up a tiny bit less than (1) and (2) are. Nevertheless, the cost of (3) is definitely higher than the cost of (1). However, the employee discount makes (1) and (2) quite competitive, and the benefit of the name recognition and service is definitely a consideration.
Color / Clarity comments:
As a side comment, the sales guy I have worked with for (1) and (2) is a trained gemologist whom I trust. He feels that (1) is a solid E and that (2) is a strong F borderline E (as best as he could gauge in the setting). He believes that both are strong VS2 grades and (2) could possibly be considered a VS1 (cloud instead of white crystal, slightly less pronounced). I have seen (1) and (2) under a microscope, and they are absolutely eye clean from any angle, distance with my eyes.
I know I am being a bit cryptic, but I really value any and all feedback. I am finally at the end of the road, and would like to make a purchase in the next few days.
(1) 1.28 E VS2 RB
XXX, Depth 60.9%, Table 57%, Pav angle 40.7, Crown angle 34.9
6.99 - 7.03 X 4.27mm
Girdle Medium (faceted), Lower half length 80%, Star length 50%
Culet None, No Fluor, Pav Depth 42.8%, Crown Height 15.3%
HCA: 1.2 (TIC) Ex Ex Ex Vg
ACA: Class 1A except crown angle (1B), and 1A overall
(2) 1.34 F VS2 RB, -$500 or so vs. (1)
XXX, Depth 62.5%, Table 57%, Pav angle 41.0, Crown angle 35.2
7.03 - 7.06 X 4.40mm
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick (faceted), Lower half length 80%, Star length 50%
Culet None, No Fluor, Pav Depth 43.4%, Crown Height 15.5%
HCA: 3.1 (TIC) Vg Vg Vg Vg
ACA: Class 1B overall
(3) 1.27 D VS1 from BGD (for now I omit the images, since I have none for (1) and (2) to compare against)
AGS 000, Depth 61.5%, Table 55.8%, Pav angle 40.8, Crown angle 34.7
6.97 - 7.01 X 4.29mm
Girdle Thin to Medium (faceted), Lower half length 78%, Star length 53%
Culet Pointed, Fluor Negligible, Pav Depth 43.0%, Crown Height 15.3%
HCA: 1.4 (TIC) Ex Ex Ex Vg
ACA: Class 1A in all categories
Despite no imagery (nor will any be provided) for (1) and (2), the stats on (1) all seem very safe to me. I worked very hard to find a diamond in the inventory with such exacting cut proportions. I intend to have my final purchase independently appraised, so if anything surprising emerges (e.g. leakage), I have a reasonable return period on any of these. The setting will solitaire platinum for all 3 (though (1) and (2) are already set).
Cut comments:
I''ve seen (1) and (2) in person, but not (3). I recognize that (2) is a bit on the steep/deep side. But as a point of comparison, (1) had a "deeper" look to me, in the sense that it was face up every so slightly darker (not in terms of less light, necessarily, just a sense that I could see deeper into the diamond). Does this make any sense? I know that (2) is probably less desirable than (1), but I included it to try and explain what I was seeing with my eyes and to see if it made any sense. Also, I find that both (1) and (2) look fantastic with my eyes, and I preferred them both over a 1.33 G VS1 with an HCA score of 2.
Pricing comments:
While I think the mark-up for BGD is one of the higher for online vendors (and probably well worth it: not at all a criticism, just an observation on my part), it is still marked-up a tiny bit less than (1) and (2) are. Nevertheless, the cost of (3) is definitely higher than the cost of (1). However, the employee discount makes (1) and (2) quite competitive, and the benefit of the name recognition and service is definitely a consideration.
Color / Clarity comments:
As a side comment, the sales guy I have worked with for (1) and (2) is a trained gemologist whom I trust. He feels that (1) is a solid E and that (2) is a strong F borderline E (as best as he could gauge in the setting). He believes that both are strong VS2 grades and (2) could possibly be considered a VS1 (cloud instead of white crystal, slightly less pronounced). I have seen (1) and (2) under a microscope, and they are absolutely eye clean from any angle, distance with my eyes.
I know I am being a bit cryptic, but I really value any and all feedback. I am finally at the end of the road, and would like to make a purchase in the next few days.
300x240.png)