Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

The Saga Continues: The Final Three

M

maxs.memo

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
133
So, after deciding to adjust my parameters to increase the size of the diamond from 1 ct to 1.2 ct by decreasing from G color to I/J color (and prob actually increasing my budget by 500 or so), I have narrowed it down to the following three diamonds at JA:

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-i-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-249577

-- HCA=1.2**, GIAXXX, FAINTFL

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-208593

-- HCA=1.6**, GIAXXX

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-156586

-- HCA=2.5, GIAXXX

The third option was retained because it is JA's hearts & arrows so I was willing to be a little more lenient on the HCA rating. Thoughts?

Thanks for your comments and consideration. Idealscopes to follow...
 
I'll wait for the idealscopes. The clouds on the J stand out to me but then again, the videos are really magnified and they probably (?) can't be seen by the naked eye. Did they tell you if the J is eye clean? H&As are very pretty though...! Tough choice!
 
Yeah these three are pretty tightly matched. Will probably come down to what the gemologist thinks. Anyone else have any suggestions?
 
This list represents all the diamonds I considered seriously. The "eye clean" statements were just my best guess.

1. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.19-carat-i-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-232977 (eye clean, HCA = 2.7, GIAXXX)

2. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.30-carat-j-color-vs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-156499 ( eye clean, HCA = 3.5, GIAXXX)

3. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.22-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-72908 (likely eye clean, HCA =2.5, AGSOOO)

4. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-188102 (eye clean, HCA = 1.7**), GIAXXX)

5. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.14-carat-j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-100141 (likely eye clean, HCA = 1.7**, AGS000)

6. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-208593 (, eye clean, HCA=1.6**, GIAXXX)

7. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-i-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-213706 (, eye clean, HCA=2.8, GIAXXX)

8. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-156586 (eye clean, HCA=2.5, GIAXXX)

9. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-i-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-239316 (eye clean, HCA=2.2**, AGS000)

10. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-j-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-228433 (EYE CLEAN, HCA=2.6, GIAXXX, MED FLUOR**)

11. http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.20-carat-i-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-249577 (eye clean(?), HCA=1.2**, GIAXXX, FAINTFL)
 
Choosing diamonds can be a very daunting task.
From all the diamonds you have shown me thus far the only ones I like are:

sku# 188102 and 72908

1) 1.22 carat I color SI1 clarity (AGS lab graded):
- There is more blue obscurities in the diamond based on the ASET image on the AGS lab report but I am assuming
that is mainly due to the optical symmetry or craftmanship of the diamond.
- I don't see much green reflected light return so that is good and adds a bit of contrast.
- There are lots of red as seen on the image thereby a grade of AGS ideal 0 for light performance.
- All inclusions are white in color and they look fairly unnoticeable even under 40x magnification so it
will be eye clean when observing the diamond with the naked eye from 5 inches or so away.
- Optical symmetry seems fairly decent as well.

All in all, a guaranteed great performer.

2) 1.20 Carat J-SI1 (GIA lab graded):
- All inclusions seem white and will definitely be eye clean with naked eye.
- The proportions of the diamond seem to be in the range of AGS ideal cut based on the AGS proportion chart,
even though we are only in essence using the average of 17 facets out of 57 to arrive at this result without taking into
account the rest of the minor facets, 40 of them. If AGS were to grade this diamond, all facets characteristics would be considered.
- Optical symmetry seems fairly decent based on the top view.

Either way out of all your diamonds, this would be my second choice. I believe this diamond would perform very well.
 
I'm not sure how you arrive at those being the only two to consider. They all have great HCA scores that I've chosen and will all three be eye clean without magnification. I do like the optical symmetry of the AGS stone you outlined, and I am considering replacing with that. I guess this is subjective, but those diamonds are of course very similar to all the others i've listed. IRL no layperson would be able to tell them apart.
 
You are right in that choosing a diamond is very much a subjective thing, so I suppose it is good to choose
the one you think is considered in your viewpoint to be good.

Afterall, us buyers don't have the instruments, tools and knowledge that a gemologist is equipped with to make the most accurate
choice. But then each diamond is unique in its brilliance, dispersion/fire and optical symmetry so choosing a diamond based on these factors will also be personal preference.

I just happened to like those two out of all your choices based on my way of thinking.
 
Also you should consider whiteflash as your choice of vendor as well since they have loads of info to
show you like images based on ASET, idealscope, actual top view of diamond, sarin reports, as well as the standard GIA and AGS
certifications. The diamonds are a bit expensive, but if you are willing to go down one color level then you are sure to find a great performer. James Allen though is also a great vendor and that is where I will purchase my diamond.
 
No problem. Its my pleasure to give you my opinion.
I must say though that i do love the look of the 72908.
Especially due to the craftmanship of the diamond, the optical symmetry of the diamond gives it the nice
protruding arrows pattern (due to usually head obstuction). It would be nice to see the Idealscope image of it as well, although I would
personally prefer ASET images. But JA only does ASET images for fancy cuts.

I wish my chosen diamond did not have that little feather under the table...it is a tad bit of an eyesore, although it is eye clean
by naked eye ;)
 
Well, I hate to be a downer, but I don't like any of them. The I color one that is supposedly hearts and arrows would never meet the qualifications of the H&A stones of vendors such as WF, GOG, and BG. I don't like it's idealscope image. That one appears to be a low I and appears more tinted than the first I color one. The first I color one has it's inclusions right in the center, and I would not like seeing that when I check my stone with a 10x loupe. And it's depth is over my absolute limit of 62.3 (but not by much). It's color is better than the other two, though. The J stone also does not have an idealscope image that would equal the other vendors, either. It has good like return, but it just doesn't have the optical symmetry that a H&A stone should have. We mainly tell you that because you could be paying a premium for a H&A stone when it really is not up to those standards. Those would fall into premium at GOG or ES at WF more than likely. And that level is okay if the diamonds are priced the same as their non-H&A diamonds.

Here's what you want your ideascope (or diamxray) to look like:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/NewCutGrading/OpticalSymmetry/
 
I will be getting them mid-week along w a gemologist inspection to assess eye clarity.

I do feel like that may be the one I go with... Although for 1k cheaper the true hearts may be a better buy.
 
diamondseeker2006|1377957678|3512850 said:
Well, I hate to be a downer, but I don't like any of them. The I color one that is supposedly hearts and arrows would never meet the qualifications of the H&A stones of vendors such as WF, GOG, and BG. I don't like it's idealscope image. That one appears to be a low I and appears more tinted than the first I color one. The first I color one has it's inclusions right in the center, and I would not like seeing that when I check my stone with a 10x loupe. And it's depth is over my absolute limit of 62.3 (but not by much). It's color is better than the other two, though. The J stone also does not have an idealscope image that would equal the other vendors, either. It has good like return, but it just doesn't have the optical symmetry that a H&A (eg solasfera for gog) stone should have. We mainly tell you that because you could be paying a premium for a H&A stone when it really is not up to those standards. Those would fall into premium at GOG or ES at WF more than likely. And that level is okay if the diamonds are priced the same as their non-H&A diamonds.

Here's what you want your ideascope (or diamxray) to look like:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/NewCutGrading/OpticalSymmetry/
Click to expand...

i see your point. but what is considered to be perfect and superior optical symmetry may not be always appealing to others.
http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/NewCutGrading/GIAExAGSIdeal/
I noticed that diamonds that are sold at whiteflash, GOG, or Briangavins include the regular virtual slections as well as the H&A that are exclusive to that vendor. There is no denying that the standards of craftmanship may be higher for those exclusive items but you are paying a premium for that craftmanship or according to their standards of optical symmetry.

For me personally, the standards by which AGS grades their diamonds as is reflected on their use of the ASET images is more important since a balanced distribution of direct, reflected, and obscured light characteristics of the diamond is what will in essence give the diamond the optimal brilliance, fire/dispersion, and dynamic/static scintillations. The so-called perfect optical symmetry is taking it one step further to refine the aesthetics of the diamond. Some individuals may not be so focused on the aesthetics, and therefore some may choose a GIA triple excellent over an AGS 000 ideal with the briangavin standard H&A optical symmetry with the naked eye, just to the 'dance' of scintillations unique to each diamond.
 
I'm not paying a premium for the true hearts diamond.
It is the cheapest of the three, FYI.
 
I actually like the other two better.

In fact, I think I like the AGS0 the best. Does it day that the cert number is inscribed? For some reason the part is blank for me...
 
Why does it reflect so much blue?? Is that a certain characteristic or am I crazy?
 
So, what happened to the results of the last 3 stones you sent in for review?
 
Ditched 'em. JA only does one so I had to make a decision. Sorry to have wasted your time!! :blackeye:

Reduced color requirements in favor of larger size.
 
delight|1377995437|3513072 said:
So, what happened to the results of the last 3 stones you sent in for review?
Click to expand...

What do you think of these three? As I've indicated, leaning towards the AGS000 stone that was pointed-out to me. Has many twinning wisps, but I don't think they'll effect the stone visually.
 
Bump. Appreciate your input. Idealscopes will be here by Wed or Thurs.
 
Question:

The HCA score of the AGS000 stone is >2.0. Do I ignore this because of the great ASET image on the AGS report or is this indicative of poor cut quality in some way? Thanks!!
 
It's my understanding that if it scores a 0 for light performance at AGS that an idealscope is not even really necessary as it's already been proven to be a great performer. (someone please feel free to correct me if I'm in error)

There's a thread going on right now about whether or not HCA > 2 can still be great stones - might be worth checking out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top