Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Taking the Plunge - Is this a Great Stone?

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

omega

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
7
After spending a great deal of time researching diamonds, I''ve come across a stone that I think might be the one to get. It''s one of Blue Nile''s ''Signature Ideal'' stones, and its stats fall within what seems to be the ideal range for princess cut diamonds. Details are as follows:

Certifications: GIA Diamond Dossier & GCAL Certificate of Authenticity
Carat weight: 0.41
Cut: ''Signature Ideal'' Princess Cut
Color: D
Clarity: VVS2
Depth %: 69.7%
Table %: 66%
Symmetry: Excellent
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Slightly thick to thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 4.13 x 4.12 x 2.87 mm
Length/width ratio: 1.00
Inclusion Type: Pinpoint
Location of Inclusion: Unknown, as this isn''t specified on either certificate

The stone itself is listed here: http://www.bluenile.com/princess-diamond-1-carat-or-less-ideal-cut-d-color-vvs2-clarity_LD01418163

With no knowledge of how to interpret the photomicrograph on the GCAL certificate, I''m unsure as to whether to proceed with a purchase. And just to make this whole process extra fun, I''m under some time pressure as the Australian dollar has dropped drastically in recent weeks and is predicted to drop even further after the weekend.

If anybody here can give me some advice, or info on what the photomicrograph is depicting, I''d be extremely grateful.

Thanks in advance,

omega
 
Biggest piece of advice is to change your color and clarity in order to get a bigger stone. small princesses are generally not good performers. if you must have something extremely high color and clarity, it would be better from a performance POV to buy a round.

But if you want to stick with this kind of distribution of the 4 Cs, that's ok, too. I think the picture in the GCAL is a little tilted, but it looks like a nice stone.
 
Personally I don''t love the pictures of it. Could be nice, just not my preferred pattern for a princess. And I ditto what Julie said about the color and clarity, you can get a lot more stone for your $ if you want and you''ll never notice the difference.
 
I would mirror the two previous posts -- and also add that the girdle on the diamond is also hiding some weight. While it is probably a nice diamond, you could do better.

What sort of setting would this be going into? That might also help people give you some advice.
 
Thanks for all your responses and stone suggestions, everybody. I understand that I could chose a larger stone over one with ideal colour, cut or clarity, but my fiancee would like a stone in the 0.4 - 0.6 carat range. She''s tried on several rings and finds diamonds in that range look nicely ''proportional'' on her tiny fingers. If you don''t mind, I have some further questions, as my goal is to further my knowledge so I have a better idea of what attributes are important in a stone.

Is the aparent tilt of the stone in the photomicrograph something I should be suspicious of, or does it merely make it more difficult to interpret? If I''m looking at photos such as these, do the different shades represent different things such as light return, light leakage etc? What should I be looking for?

Would you consider the slightly thick - thick girdle of the stone I mentioned to be disproportionately chunky? Should I be looking at stones with thin or medium girdles?

As for the setting, my other half likes white gold, 4 claw settings. This is not exactly what we have in mind, but it''s similar enough: http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-engagement-ring-setting-platinum_7836?filter_id=1&collection_id=234

Thanks again for your advice.

omega
 
Date: 11/1/2008 8:09:04 AM
Author: omega
Thanks for all your responses and stone suggestions, everybody. I understand that I could chose a larger stone over one with ideal colour, cut or clarity, but my fiancee would like a stone in the 0.4 - 0.6 carat range. She's tried on several rings and finds diamonds in that range look nicely 'proportional' on her tiny fingers. If you don't mind, I have some further questions, as my goal is to further my knowledge so I have a better idea of what attributes are important in a stone.

Is the aparent tilt of the stone in the photomicrograph something I should be suspicious of, or does it merely make it more difficult to interpret? If I'm looking at photos such as these, do the different shades represent different things such as light return, light leakage etc? What should I be looking for? It is really difficult to judge these shapes with such small photos and just numbers I think, really larger detailed photos and ASET images if available are the best way to go - but BN do not offer these unfortunately. They do however have a 30 day return policy. The thing is without good images to help you choose, you can only hope you will like what you get when you open the box....

Would you consider the slightly thick - thick girdle of the stone I mentioned to be disproportionately chunky? Should I be looking at stones with thin or medium girdles? Not necessarily, look at the diamond as a whole - the girdle is only part of it and Princess can hide weight in other areas - not just the girdle. Try however to avoid extremes and if you encounter a diamond which is said to have ex thin or very thin girdle, you need an expert opinion to determine if it is likely to be a problem or not.

As for the setting, my other half likes white gold, 4 claw settings. This is not exactly what we have in mind, but it's similar enough: http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-engagement-ring-setting-platinum_7836?filter_id=1&collection_id=234

Thanks again for your advice.

omega
Click to expand...
 
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