shape
carat
color
clarity

Should i sacrifice quality for carats?

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
hello,

is it worth sacrificing some quality for more carats? it is going in a petit, pave yellow gold band.




Thank you!!
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
57,633
Would I buy an E VVS2 if there were other well cut options? No.

But there are colors of F, G, and H before you get down to I color. I do like VS1 which is extremely clean, so I'd only pay for VVS if it just happens to be the best cut stone with the right color. I'd go for a 1.5 H VS1 or maybe a 1.4 G VS1 before I'd consider these two extremes.

Whoa, I just looked and that I color stone is poorly cut and IGI graded. It is likely J or K in GIA color grading! The E is also not well cut. PLEASE get some advice on cut before you even consider reserving a diamond! Neither of these is a stone people here would recommend!
 
Last edited:

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
57,633
Just to help you get started, GIA Excellent cut is a very wide range. In order to narrow down the best of the Excellent cut stones, you can use these number ranges. Then you can post stones that fall into that range and we can see the videos and help you choose the best ones. But aim more at G-H color unless a colorless stone is important, and then I'd look at F. GIA or AGS graded stones only.

table: 54-58
depth: 60-62.3
crown angle: 34.0-35 (up to 35.5 may be okay with a 40.6 pavilion angle)
pavilion angle: 40.6-40.9
 

distracts

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
5,803
Yeah, you could get something like this 1.5 H VS2 which scores under 2 on the HCA even though it is only a GIA Very Good cut, which to me would personally be a better balance of features.

 

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
Just to help you get started, GIA Excellent cut is a very wide range. In order to narrow down the best of the Excellent cut stones, you can use these number ranges. Then you can post stones that fall into that range and we can see the videos and help you choose the best ones. But aim more at G-H color unless a colorless stone is important, and then I'd look at F. GIA or AGS graded stones only.

table: 54-58
depth: 60-62.3
crown angle: 34.0-35 (up to 35.5 may be okay with a 40.6 pavilion angle)
pavilion angle: 40.6-40.9

Thank you so much for your help! We’ve purchased the E stone already but we do have time to return. It seems we got a little too excited and purchased a little too quickly.
 

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
Yeah, you could get something like this 1.5 H VS2 which scores under 2 on the HCA even though it is only a GIA Very Good cut, which to me would personally be a better balance of features.


Colorless is not the most important, I’d mostly just like it to be sparkly
 

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
Yeah, you could get something like this 1.5 H VS2 which scores under 2 on the HCA even though it is only a GIA Very Good cut, which to me would personally be a better balance of features.


Will “very good” cut still provide the sparkle we were hoping for?

what do you think of this one?

 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,140
Different vendor, but you could easily cancel the JA order.

WF ACA 1.282 G-SI1 @ $9,356 wire

Woah, this baby rocks hard! :love::love::love:

Seriously, check out the sparkle video. ACA's are super ideals and no slouch, but this one is above average IMO.

Clarity is a little lower than you initially wanted, but WF owns these stones and actually vets (inspects) them and has stated the stone is eye clean. It seems reasonable, as the magnified videos make it appear the crystals are clear.

Best part is WF has a killer upgrade program. A very simple policy, simply trade for another stone of equal or higher value. So you can grow your size and color as budget allows. Unlike JA who requires you spend 2x the original amount each time you upgrade.

If you are even remotely considering this, please put it on reserve so someone doesn't buy it from under you!


WF PS 1.26 H-VS2 @ $8,124 wire

A very budget friendly stone. This is a premium select (PS) stone which means it comes with a GIA lab report, instead of AGS. Also, there is very minor area near the girdle around 7 o'clock that creates a less intense light return. You can see this on the ASET by the additional green splotch.

Nothing to worry about. Tons of fire, and considerably more firey than the JA stone. Also, this stone is part of that generous upgrade program, where you can later swap with an ACA, PS or ES brand.
 

distracts

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
5,803
Do not buy a very good cut stone. Even GIA xxx is overly broad. Sledge selected some nice options

The Very Good cut one I chose has a good HCA score. There are nice stones that fall outside of GIA XXX for a variety of reasons and if he wants to maximize size it's worth looking at and requesting if JA can get an idealscope or ASET image for it as well as the GIA report for the exact numbers. Multiple members on here have had GIA very good cut/HCA less than 2 diamonds that have been incredibly nice, though the forum has trended away from that being acceptable lately.
 

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
Different vendor, but you could easily cancel the JA order.

WF ACA 1.282 G-SI1 @ $9,356 wire

Woah, this baby rocks hard! :love::love::love:

Seriously, check out the sparkle video. ACA's are super ideals and no slouch, but this one is above average IMO.

Clarity is a little lower than you initially wanted, but WF owns these stones and actually vets (inspects) them and has stated the stone is eye clean. It seems reasonable, as the magnified videos make it appear the crystals are clear.

Best part is WF has a killer upgrade program. A very simple policy, simply trade for another stone of equal or higher value. So you can grow your size and color as budget allows. Unlike JA who requires you spend 2x the original amount each time you upgrade.

If you are even remotely considering this, please put it on reserve so someone doesn't buy it from under you!


WF PS 1.26 H-VS2 @ $8,124 wire

A very budget friendly stone. This is a premium select (PS) stone which means it comes with a GIA lab report, instead of AGS. Also, there is very minor area near the girdle around 7 o'clock that creates a less intense light return. You can see this on the ASET by the additional green splotch.

Nothing to worry about. Tons of fire, and considerably more firey than the JA stone. Also, this stone is part of that generous upgrade program, where you can later swap with an ACA, PS or ES brand.

These are very nice! Only issue is I really do love the bands picked out from JA and I’m not seeing a similar one on WF. I’m going to have to send setting and current diamond back to JA to return that diamond then send setting to WF to set new diamond?
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,140
The Very Good cut one I chose has a good HCA score. There are nice stones that fall outside of GIA XXX for a variety of reasons and if he wants to maximize size it's worth looking at and requesting if JA can get an idealscope or ASET image for it as well as the GIA report for the exact numbers. Multiple members on here have had GIA very good cut/HCA less than 2 diamonds that have been incredibly nice, though the forum has trended away from that being acceptable lately.

I think @lovedogs gave good advice.

Probably the most important thing I’ve learned with diamonds is that unicorns can exist in this realm. I’ve seen a few really great VG stones; however, IMO, that is very much the exception and not the norm. I think most would agree EX > VG and that most EX aren’t really all that excellent. So playing a numbers game a great VG is much like finding a unicorn.

I wish my wife liked old cuts as I enjoy big chunky facets and probably why I like fat arrows (smaller LGF’s) and small tables so much. Here is an example of a VG that flyingpigs posted awhile back in the “odd stone” thread. For me this is one of the unicorns that I would buy all day long but not recommend to people that don’t share my own tastes or preferences.

BD4C18EC-FF07-4F70-8F54-8FFE0C7C49E6.jpeg
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,140
These are very nice! Only issue is I really do love the bands picked out from JA and I’m not seeing a similar one on WF. I’m going to have to send setting and current diamond back to JA to return that diamond then send setting to WF to set new diamond?

WF has access to thousands and thousands of settings, many which aren’t listed on their website. Also WF can custom make settings in-house as well. I would simply contact a WF rep and advise what you like and explore the options.

My 2 cents is the diamond is the star of the show and if making some adjustments now are required to get the best diamond then that is a worthwhile hassle. However, you may have a difference of opinion.
 

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
WF has access to thousands and thousands of settings, many which aren’t listed on their website. Also WF can custom make settings in-house as well. I would simply contact a WF rep and advise what you like and explore the options.

My 2 cents is the diamond is the star of the show and if making some adjustments now are required to get the best diamond then that is a worthwhile hassle. However, you may have a difference of opinion.

Oh that’s good to know about the settings!

and yes I do agree the diamond is the star so I would much prefer a great quality stone.

the cheaper 1.3 JA I posted above is a no-go then you’d say?
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,140
Oh that’s good to know about the settings!

and yes I do agree the diamond is the star so I would much prefer a great quality stone.

the cheaper 1.3 JA I posted above is a no-go then you’d say?

HCA score below. The proportions can work. A score < 1 is generally best for pendants & earrings. A score of 1-2 is recommended for e-rings. Although you have to realize this is a prediction tool using 17 of the 57 facets. So while it helps eliminate stones, we still have to analyze.

Also we must keep in mind, lab reports show us a single value for crown & pavilion angles. In reality there are 8 actual values for each. In the case of GIA, they average all 8 together and then round to the nearest 0.5 degree for crown and 0.2 degrees for pavilion. AGS does averaging but does not do the wonky rounding.

Now consider the HCA uses those data points of 33 and 41 as static truth to make a prediction. Yet we know there IS variance. We just don’t know how much and where it aligns with one another. An advanced image such as an idealscope (IS) or ASET would help provide a visual reference if the proportions work by identifying any potential leakage. Last I heard JA wasn’t doing IS because of COVID. And ASET is only available on shapes other than round.

The actuals going over 41.2 pavilion is the next concern with a reported 41.

Lastly look at the picture of the JA stone against the the WF stone I recommended. See visual difference?

4BCDAB92-5848-4D50-8967-A86CE2D4785B.jpeg
C9369AE6-80CD-405D-AB33-49F42FA09CA0.jpeg
18ACC463-DA16-4E08-B770-C0ACB0C169F4.jpeg
1621343065762.jpeg
 

musicloveranthony

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
299
the cheaper 1.3 JA I posted above is a no-go then you’d say?

I wouldn't choose that stone. I don't think it's horrible by any means, but it doesn't have great proportions so it won't be as sparkly as I think you'd want. It's a great example of why I don't use the HCA as a tool of selection but rather as confirmation.

It looks like you'd like to stick to J.A. so here are some solid choices from them. They both have good edge to edge brightness and good contrast symmetry. They both have inclusions under the table, though, unfortunately. So I don't love that. Not sure how they look to the eye - I think a sensitive eye would probably see them. They're probably no more or less noticeable than the center-table inclusion in the WF ACA stone.


 
Last edited:

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
Yeah wow, the difference really does show when you put them next to each other like that! My only concern with the WF stone is it’s a little out of my price range
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,140
I almost forgot. On the lab report I noticed that stone also has strong blue fluorescence (SBF).

Fluor can have positive & negative effects. The stronger the level the higher the odds of an issue. Consequently stones with fluor trade at cheaper prices.

Most stones don’t have issues but you need to perform due diligence and ensure it doesn’t have a milky, hazy or oily appearance. Normally this is most evident in indirect sunlight.

To be very clear and direct, it doesn’t mean this stone is an issue. It means you need to do additional verification. Also because of the SBF it should trade for less dollars than a stone with none/faint/negligible levels, even if it doesn’t exhibit negative effects.

 

musicloveranthony

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
299

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,140
They both have inclusions under the table, though, unfortunately. So I don't love that. Not sure how they look to the eye - I think a sensitive eye would probably see them.



Agree table inclusions are less preferable. I haven’t examined each stone yet but generally speaking most VS2’s will be eye clean in this size range. And it would be very unlikely a VS1 wouldn’t be eye clean.
 

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
I wouldn't choose that stone. I don't think it's horrible by any means, but it doesn't have great proportions so it won't be as sparkly as I think you'd want. It's a great example of why I don't use the HCA as a tool of selection but rather as confirmation.

It looks like you'd like to stick to J.A. so here are some solid choices from them. They both have good edge to edge brightness and good contrast symmetry. They both have inclusions under the table, though, unfortunately. So I don't love that. Not sure how they look to the eye - I think a sensitive eye would probably see them. They're probably no more or less noticeable than the center-table inclusion in the WF ACA stone.



Yes JA would definitely be easier. Here are the ones I’m finding with the criteria that was first given to me above






None of them just seem to pop as much as the beauty sledge posted!
 

musicloveranthony

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
299
Yes JA would definitely be easier. Here are the ones I’m finding with the criteria that was first given to me above






None of them just seem to pop as much as the beauty sledge posted!

I'd eliminate the whiteflash based on the inclusions - but I'm picky.

Check out the second two I sent from JA. They're not much smaller than these but cut more optimally.

I'd eliminate all of the options you just sent with the exception of the 1.3 H VS1. If you're considering that one, you should put it on hold now. That's a great stone and someone will buy it. The only think I see with it is some internal graining and with that clarity grade it won't impact the optics.
 
Last edited:

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
I almost forgot. On the lab report I noticed that stone also has strong blue fluorescence (SBF).

Fluor can have positive & negative effects. The stronger the level the higher the odds of an issue. Consequently stones with fluor trade at cheaper prices.

Most stones don’t have issues but you need to perform due diligence and ensure it doesn’t have a milky, hazy or oily appearance. Normally this is most evident in indirect sunlight.

To be very clear and direct, it doesn’t mean this stone is an issue. It means you need to do additional verification. Also because of the SBF it should trade for less dollars than a stone with none/faint/negligible levels, even if it doesn’t exhibit negative effects.


Yes I was wondering that about the strong blue so I’m glad you pointed out! I’ve read all sorts of information about it and I think I’d prefer to stay away from a strong florescence
 

ajacks

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
18
I'd eliminate the whiteflash based on the inclusions - but I'm picky.

Check out the second two I sent from JA. They're not much smaller than these but cut more optimally.

I'd eliminate all of the options you just sent with the exception of the 1.3 H VS1. If you're considering that one, you should put it on hold now. That's a great stone and someone will buy it. The only think I see with it is some internal graining and with that clarity grade it won't impact the optics.

So you think it’s worth dropping a few carat wise for the true hearts cut vs excellent? I was trying to stick closer to a 1.5 so I’m already dropping a little to make sure it’s quality diamond
 

musicloveranthony

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
299
So you think it’s worth dropping a few carat wise for the true hearts cut vs excellent? I was trying to stick closer to a 1.5 so I’m already dropping a little to make sure it’s quality diamond

I'd say yes with the exception of that 1.3 H VS1. THat's truly a really really well cut non-super ideal. It probably also displays hearts and arrows. I'd put that on hold now and ask for more imaging
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Who was Jean Schlumberger?
    Who was Jean Schlumberger?
    The Jewelry of Disney's Cruella
    The Jewelry of Disney's Cruella
    He Said, "Yes!"
    He Said, "Yes!"

Need expert help finding that diamonds?

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top