Seeking Advice on Round Diamond for Engagement Ring 1.2 - 1.4 ct (first timer over here!)

[cvh]

Hello! My partner and I just got engaged and have started the search for the perfect diamond together. We've learned a lot in the past week (I had never considered fluorescence or table / depth ratios before), especially from experts @lovedogs @Kim N @DejaWiz and @sledge on this forum (just wow....you gals/guys are incredible!) As first-time buyers here, I want to make sure we're making an informed decision and getting the best value for our money.

I've window shopped at Tiffany (love love love the classic solitaire setting w/ the knife edge band), but I don't find the brand name worth paying for. I then searched at Brilliant Earth, liking their ethical sourcing, but found they didn't have any ideal cuts with depth <63%. So I've arrived at Whiteflash as a great place to buy online from.

Between these three diamonds, which one do you think is the "best"? They all look extremely beautiful and brilliant, but I'm leaning towards the 1.364 ct one because of the ideal cut, AGS certification (which I understand has more stringent grading than GIA), and the ideal light / polish / symmetry. Which would you recommend and why? What else should we be thinking about?

Diamond comparison | Compare Diamonds to choose and buy the best one

Whiteflash gives you an excellent opportunity to compare diamonds to make a great deal. With diamond’s parameters provided, you can compare any detail.

www.whiteflash.com

Thanks a lot in advance - I appreciate it!

 

[lovedogs]

They are all ACAs, so you honestly cant go wrong here. I would ask them to take IRL pics on someone's hand and let your eyes decide.

 

[tyty333]

Any reason you're not throwing this one into the mix? Its a little less expensive than the F/VS1 but its a D. At a VS2 there should
be no visible inclusions...ask though if there is anything visible at any range.

Diamond | 1.41 ct D VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 4583260

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.41 carat D color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the Gemological Institute of America (GIA). | 4583260

www.whiteflash.com

I say no to the 1.36 G...the others look better to me.

 

[tyty333]

So, GIA has bought out AGS. If you look under the row of stone pictures you will see two links:
AGS Ideal Report and Diamond Certificate...which is the GIA report. Click on the AGS Ideal Report and you will see
the other stones also have AGS reports as well as GIA reports.

Edit...would you rather stay more in the $16kish range?

 

[sledge]

So, GIA has bought out AGS. If you look under the row of stone pictures you will see two links:
AGS Ideal Report and Diamond Certificate...which is the GIA report. Click on the AGS Ideal Report and you will see
the other stones also have AGS reports as well as GIA reports.

Expanding on this a bit. December 2022 GIA bought out AGS so “true” AGS reports are limited. That said, in the case with ACA’s they are still superbly cut and ideal stones. While the newer stones have GIA lab reports they also have an AGS light performance addendum.

This “addendum” is an optional feature that has to be purchased when the stone is sent to GIA for grading and while theoretically it could be purchased on any stone, it seems to be an unlikely expense a seller would bear unless they believe the stone it’s requested on will be exceptional. As you can see the addendum on the GIA stones still show the best light performance ratings available, triple 0.

Some buyers may appreciate this as GIA has a strong reputation. What I personally dislike is their methodologies in averaging and then rounding. I prefer the AGS reports because their numbers are more precise as they average only and skip the rounding. Despite my preference for that additional precision it’s less meaningful because the idealscope, ASET and hearts images that WF photograph exceed both lab report data and computer generated ASET images.

For picky buyers like myself that want to see all the actual values of each measurement you can request a detailed Sarine report from WF. There is also a summary view that would report more similar to AGS. Usually the summary view is offered (and sometimes linked on the stone webpage) by default.

I said all that to say that because of changes outside WF’s control all 3 stones have the best available lab reports but more importantly actual photographed idealscope, ASET and hearts images that prove they are all true super ideals and spectacular. I will review the stones closer to look for minor nuances but truly any of these 3 choices are safe. WF holds to my theory as an “easy button” solution provider.

 

[momofive]

You're definitely in the right space and you can't go wrong with WF - ACA. Now it's a matter of finding the one that speaks to you. Lots of hand photos IRL and in different lighting conditions is the way to go.

 

[Kim N]

The G looks less crisp in the sparkle video than the other two, and I prefer the proportions of the VVS2.

 

[cvh]

Any reason you're not throwing this one into the mix? Its a little less expensive than the F/VS1 but its a D. At a VS2 there should
be no visible inclusions...ask though if there is anything visible at any range.

Diamond | 1.41 ct D VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 4583260

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.41 carat D color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the Gemological Institute of America (GIA). | 4583260

www.whiteflash.com

I say no to the 1.36 G...the others look better to me.

Thanks for the suggestion here - I appreciate it and will pass on the 1.36 G then.

I didn't see the 4.1 D because I had the "AGS certification" only in my filters. It's definitely pushing the budget, but it's beautiful and I will email to ask if the inclusions are visible. I'm not sure I'd be able to tell a D from a F to be honest, but will head down to a jewelry store today and see if I can.

 

[cvh]

Expanding on this a bit. December 2022 GIA bought out AGS so “true” AGS reports are limited. That said, in the case with ACA’s they are still superbly cut and ideal stones. While the newer stones have GIA lab reports they also have an AGS light performance addendum.

This “addendum” is an optional feature that has to be purchased when the stone is sent to GIA for grading and while theoretically it could be purchased on any stone, it seems to be an unlikely expense a seller would bear unless they believe the stone it’s requested on will be exceptional. As you can see the addendum on the GIA stones still show the best light performance ratings available, triple 0.

Some buyers may appreciate this as GIA has a strong reputation. What I personally dislike is their methodologies in averaging and then rounding. I prefer the AGS reports because their numbers are more precise as they average only and skip the rounding. Despite my preference for that additional precision it’s less meaningful because the idealscope, ASET and hearts images that WF photograph exceed both lab report data and computer generated ASET images.

For picky buyers like myself that want to see all the actual values of each measurement you can request a detailed Sarine report from WF. There is also a summary view that would report more similar to AGS. Usually the summary view is offered (and sometimes linked on the stone webpage) by default.

I said all that to say that because of changes outside WF’s control all 3 stones have the best available lab reports but more importantly actual photographed idealscope, ASET and hearts images that prove they are all true super ideals and spectacular. I will review the stones closer to look for minor nuances but truly any of these 3 choices are safe. WF holds to my theory as an “easy button” solution provider.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. WF really does do it all - glad I found them through this forum. In the "contenders" for the ring, I've swapped out the 1.36 G for a 1.41 D after tyty333 kindly surfaced that one as a great option, too. Would be curious for your thoughts between these 3 if/when you get a chance...

 

[tyty333]

You most likely wont be able to tell the difference between a D and an F unless side-by-side (which isn't real life).

Ask for pictures of the 3 stones you are interested in side-by-side. Sometimes one will jump out at you. These
are all Super Ideals so if they are eye-clean they are really hard to pick apart. Ask the SA to evaluate the 3 stones.
Sometimes they can talk you through them and tell you what they see (they dont always recommend the highest $$$ one
if you are worried about that). Their eyes are attuned to looking at stones and picking out small nuances that we may
not see in the videos. Its really hard to go wrong with an ACA...its just a matter of picking one that suits you the most.

I will look at all 3 and get back to you if I see anything that jumps out at me.

 

[sledge]

Okay circling back to this thread. Sorry for the delay. Definitely agree with @tyty333 and @Kim N about nixing the 1.36 G. I think I've seen and commented on that stone before. I just don't like it. It looks hazy in the sparkle video. A few reasons for that -- it's being flooded with light to produce the sparkles and it's super zoomed. It will likely be amazing IRL to the naked yet. Still, the others don't have that issue and it's essentially the same money so it makes it easy to eliminate and get you closer to a final decision.

My choices would be the 1.32 F/VVS2 or the 1.41 D/VS2. I don't think clarity is an issue with either stone. I'd get the side by side pictures as suggested to see if you could see any nuances in colors. As you probably know, color grades are subjective and have "ranges" so it's possible to have a high, low or medium color. However, the higher the color it's also true there is usually less "range". Still, for most folks it's hard to differentiate 1-2 color grades. From the top they will both look white, you need a comparison of the side/pavilion/body which is how color grades are determined and where we can see color most easily.

If you can't see color differences I like the 1.32 a smidge better. But it's close. My reasoning is simple. The hearts image just seems more crisp. The LGF's are a smidge smaller (although both reported as 75 on GIA report, they can range from 73-77). You can see this in the idealscope image but moreso on the hearts image. The V that forms at the bottom of the hearts is slightly smaller than on the 1.32 indicating the LGF's are numerically lower (arrows are fatter). The table is also smaller at 55. And you get a taller crown height of 15.5. All these are combinations that produce big fire! The one thing I dislike about the 1.32 is there are some smidges of green in the ASET under the table which indicates slightly lesser light return but some also feels that adds to the depth.

Nothing wrong the 1.4 F/VS1 other than it doesn't pop like the other two. My money would be on the 1.32 F or 1.41 D.

 

[cvh]

If you can't see color differences I like the 1.32 a smidge better. But it's close. My reasoning is simple. The hearts image just seems more crisp. The LGF's are a smidge smaller (although both reported as 75 on GIA report, they can range from 73-77). You can see this in the idealscope image but moreso on the hearts ima

A non-commission GIA Diamond Graduate from Whitefish just sent over the below pictures: closest to fingertip is the 1.41ct D, followed by 1.4ct F, and then closest to her palm is the 1.32ct F. @tyty333 - thanks for suggesting to ask for photographs - I wouldn't have thought to do that and the consultant replied quickly and thoughtfully and seems extremely happy to help.

From the side, the 1.32ct does look the warmest, but I think that's because I'm scrutinizing an extremely magnified photograph and comparing it next to two others, which as tyty333 said, is not real life!). The consultant from Whitefish confirmed that all are eye clean with no inclusions visible with the naked eye.

Thanks for the recommendation on the 1.32 F or the 1.41 D, sledge. I like everything you described about the 1.32 F (especially big fire!) but the 1.41 D does look a lot whiter to me and it's a smidge larger. I'm going to sleep on it and hopefully my fiancé (still getting used to that term!) and I will make a decision this weekend .

 

[tyty333]

Tough decision! Hopefully, the light of day will bring you some clarity. Obviously, you cant go wrong with any choice out
of these 3.

 

[momofive]

I don't think you can go wrong with either of these, but I'm going to throw in with Sledge. Mostly because I like the higher crown height as I think you'll get some amazing flashes and a smidge more warmth won't be noticeable when its by itself and the size is also undistinguishable. Good luck!

 

[Kim N]

I love the 1.41 D for the color and extra size.