Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

So I think I''ve nailed it down...?

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Tren

Tren

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
26
Hi, I was searching for a stone to be made into a ring for mom, and you steered me away from overpaying for an ok diamond. A huge thank you to skippy, agc, cocosgirl, lorelei, kcoursolle and strmrdr!
While waiting for an IS from James Allen on this stone, I came across one at WF that looks promising, called up and spoke to Tracy to inquire about it, she assured me that it is "completely eye clean".
What do you think?

http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-1181464.htm#
 
Based on the images alone (and the IS/ASET from the WF stone), I definitely prefer the JA diamond. I''m actually surprised the WF stone got "very good" symmetry, because it seems way off to me. I think you should stick with the JA stone!
 
I prefer the Whiteflash stone, to the JA which has inclusions that can be seen at 16X and other inclusions which need to be covered by prongs?
 
that whiteflash stone already says "sold"... so i''m guessing you or someone else already confirmed the purchase? not sure how that works
 
I have put the WF diamond on hold, that''s why it''s showing up as sold. Now I''m officially confused. The WF scores a 0.8 on the HCA, is it not a good indication?
 
It''s an excellent indication, however your eyes will be the best judge. I can tell you that I totally trust the integrity of the opinions of Whiteflash sales associates. They won''t fudge since they don''t want to send a stone out only to have it returned.
 
Thanks! Oh boy, I was going solely based on the HCA. We discussed about just going by the pics of the stone, then setting it before it''s shipped to me. Based on the info, guess this wouldn''t be a smart move?
 
I think the JA diamond is the better cut of the 2.
 
Possibly, but it does have visible inclusions, so on that basis, not so wild about it.
 
Thanks! Bummer, I really liked the dimensions on the WF one.
8.gif
 
Date: 7/28/2008 9:44:56 PM
Author: Tren
Thanks! Bummer, I really liked the dimensions on the WF one.
8.gif
Click to expand...
Tren, if they both score under 2 on the HCA, just get the one that you think you will like best. I don't know about your mom, but I'd be a bit bummed about a diamond with inclusions I could see without a loupe. It might be the finest cut in the world, but I couldn't get past that. You know the WF diamond is eyeclean. If you're still in doubt, maybe have JA send better/more pics to determine how included the diamond is. I know I can easily see them in the 16X pic.
 
Oh purrfectpear, I missed your reply. Should I go back to the drawing board then? Or is it worth taking a look at the WF one? I''m still confused on how the WF stone scored better on the HCA, yet the JA one is better cut.
33.gif

I apologize if I seem to be missing the point.
 
I agree on the visible inclusions, even if mom was ok with it, I think I''d be pretty bothered. I didn''t realize the JA one wasn''t very eye clean!
 
Date: 7/28/2008 9:55:02 PM
Author: Tren
Oh purrfectpear, I missed your reply. Should I go back to the drawing board then? Or is it worth taking a look at the WF one? I'm still confused on how the WF stone scored better on the HCA, yet the JA one is better cut.
33.gif

I apologize if I seem to be missing the point.
Click to expand...
Tren, the HCA is a tool to weed out bad performing stones not a tool to narrow down. Did JA say their stone was eye clean?
 
Hi Skippy!
1.gif
I haven''t heard back from JA yet, am still waiting on the IS image and whether it''s eye clean or not.
 
Date: 7/28/2008 10:15:16 PM
Author: Tren
Hi Skippy!
1.gif
I haven't heard back from JA yet, am still waiting on the IS image and whether it's eye clean or not.
Click to expand...
Hi Tren, I guess I would wait for the IS and find out if it is eye clean before pulling the trigger. Sounds like you are waiting on that info before you decide.
1.gif
 
Yes, I''m still waiting for a reply from JA. The cut search I did earlier lead me to the WF stone, thought it was a good deal based on the HCA. Now that I look at it, the culet does look a bit off center. I wouldn''t even have noticed if it weren''t for jstarfireb pointing it out! Boy, I''ve got lots to learn!
4.gif
 
Date: 7/28/2008 10:38:53 PM
Author: Tren
Yes, I''m still waiting for a reply from JA. The cut search I did earlier lead me to the WF stone, thought it was a good deal based on the HCA. Now that I look at it, the culet does look a bit off center. I wouldn''t even have noticed if it weren''t for jstarfireb pointing it out! Boy, I''ve got lots to learn!
4.gif
Click to expand...
LOL Tren, I owe you either a thanks or an apology then!
3.gif
I''m sure it''s still a sparkly and pretty stone, but the fact that the arrows aren''t completely symmetrical would bother me. The JA stone was more of what arrows should look like in an ideal cut stone.

When it comes to the issue of visible inclusions, you really can''t tell from a magnified photo whether the inclusions will be visible to the naked eye. Definitely ask them to have someone with great vision look it over and see if it''s eye-clean to your standards (at 3 inches? 8 inches?). You might be able to get away with a "less" eye-clean stone (e.g. clean at 8 inches but not 3) because it''s in a pendant, and people don''t usually stick their faces all up in someone''s neck to get a close look like they do with rings!
 
Jstarfireb, I owe YOU a thank you!
2.gif
Just emailed WF to ask if they have other ones to show me, I was told that right now there''re lots of new stones available, hopefully I''ll get some good news from both vendors!
 
Date: 7/28/2008 10:38:53 PM
Author: Tren
Yes, I''m still waiting for a reply from JA. The cut search I did earlier lead me to the WF stone, thought it was a good deal based on the HCA. Now that I look at it, the culet does look a bit off center. I wouldn''t even have noticed if it weren''t for jstarfireb pointing it out! Boy, I''ve got lots to learn!
4.gif
Click to expand...
That still could be a nice diamond, although it doesn''t have perfect symmetry on the images, in reality considering the actual size of the diamond, this may not be an issue. But it depends on you, if you want the tightest cut you can find, then the other may be more suitable.
 
Good morning! Tracy at WF will send me more pictures of the stone, I guess I''ll go from there. I like the spread and the eye cleanness of the WF one, while the cut of the JA stone. How nerve wrecking!
14.gif
 
I was given another option, please see attached file for the GIA report. The price difference is $600, the stone is eye clean. Do you think it''s worth it? Any input?
1.gif
 

Attachments

Hi Tren
1.gif
I do not see the GIA report is there a link you could give us instead? Do you have a pic of the stone too?
 
*bump*
 
Well, that WF stone is marked as sold, are you sure it''s still in the running? They both look good. The WF stone scores as qualifying for both GIA ex and AGS Ideal while the BN stone score for GIA Ex. Can someone at BN verify that it''s eye clean?
 
Hi Lorelei and mercoledi, WF is holding for me the one they already have in house, and is able to get the BN one, too. I was told both will be eye clean.
 
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