Torn between these two diamonds! Images available.

[tenbinko]

I've refined my search and narrowed down my selection to these two final choices. I've found what seems to be perfect optical brilliance in the first diamond, and excellent optical brilliance in the second, but the only problem is that both diamonds are very small, about 0.3 ct. in size, but the first one has a difference of 4 mm between its length and width, while the difference is only 1 mm in the second one.

I've seen so many 1-ct. diamonds with a difference of 2mm to 3 mm in length and width that the 4-mm difference above seems alarming to me, though the optics look perfect... and the other thing is that the first diamond's certificate dates back to the fall in 2011, leading to me wonder if there's possibly anything wrong with the stone.

Which one would you choose??

 

[bunnycat]

Do you have specs for the stones anywhere? I don't think BN's photo set up is all that good, so I think it might be hard to say from those pictures.


If it were me, and I was on a budget, I'd call IDJewelry and see what they could do.

 

[stone-cold11]

Probable a mistake in the report. Post the reports here.

 

[tenbinko]

Thanks, you guys, for your replies!

I've got the links for the diamonds here... you'll see all the specs and such.

http://www.bluenile.com/round-diamond-1-carat-or-less-signature-ideal-cut-e-color-vvs1-clarity_LD02679274

http://www.bluenile.com/round-diamond-1-carat-or-less-signature-ideal-cut-e-color-vvs2-clarity_LD02275858


But what might be wrong with the reports?

I'm wanting to buy one of these diamonds... any clarification would be appreciated.

 

[mdot]

I think (s)he was referring to the 4mm difference being wrong on the GIA report.

However, I don't see the difference you are talking about?

One is: 4.42 x 4.43 x 2.67 mm
Other: 4.67 x 4.71 x 2.83 mm

What 4mm difference are you talking about?

 

[04diamond<3]

I think the .37 is better. It's a $50 difference and you'd see the difference in size. It'd be a very small difference, but still noticeable. I like the cut a hair better on that one...

 

[bunnycat]

I think (s)he was referring to the 4mm difference being wrong on the GIA report.

However, I don't see the difference you are talking about?

One is: 4.42 x 4.43 x 2.67 mm
Other: 4.67 x 4.71 x 2.83 mm

What 4mm difference are you talking about?

I think a "." got forgotten....

I'd agree with 04diamond, of the 2 I'd go with the bigger one. You could also look at some "F" stones. At this size, I'm sure an F will be super icy if that is the look you are going for, but you may have your reasons for the super white, super clean even though you don't really need VVS1. Only you can decide that.

 

[tenbinko]

Sorry, yeah, that's what I meant... 0.04 mm and 0.01 mm, not 4 mm or 1 mm... how careless of me... but yeah, you guys think a 0.04-mm difference is OK when it comes to diamonds that size, eh?

I know that an E color wouldn't be necessary in terms of the physical appearance of the diamond, but according to my research, D-E diamonds are very, very rare... rarer than F diamonds, which are rarer than lower colors, etc.

Do you guys think the rarity is worth it?

 

[MissGotRocks]

No, I don't. The clarity is high as is the color - would you rather have a larger stone?

 

[justginger]

Sorry, yeah, that's what I meant... 0.04 mm and 0.01 mm, not 4 mm or 1 mm... how careless of me... but yeah, you guys think a 0.04-mm difference is OK when it comes to diamonds that size, eh?

I know that an E color wouldn't be necessary in terms of the physical appearance of the diamond, but according to my research, D-E diamonds are very, very rare... rarer than F diamonds, which are rarer than lower colors, etc.

Do you guys think the rarity is worth it?

This is very subjective, everyone has different personal preferences. I like larger stones, with the color around H/I (much lower in antique cut stones, around Mish with them), and eye clean only (which usually translates to SI1, can be SI2 sometimes). I like to purchase based on what I can SEE. I can't see much color in H/I (unless placed directly next to a D), nor can I see the inclusions in an SI1. But dropping both down to that level from E/VVS means you either save a HEAP of money, or you get a significantly larger stone.

My opinion only, there are plenty of others who prefer higher colors and clarity.

 

[bunnycat]

Sorry, yeah, that's what I meant... 0.04 mm and 0.01 mm, not 4 mm or 1 mm... how careless of me... but yeah, you guys think a 0.04-mm difference is OK when it comes to diamonds that size, eh?

I know that an E color wouldn't be necessary in terms of the physical appearance of the diamond, but according to my research, D-E diamonds are very, very rare... rarer than F diamonds, which are rarer than lower colors, etc.

Do you guys think the rarity is worth it?

For me, not really. The stone in my avatar is an H SI1. It took a GG and a microscope for her to show me the inclusion. I am color sensitive in modern stones but have an M OEC also. I have some earrings that are I/J.

It's up to you and I'm assuming this stone is for an engagement ring, but if it were me, I'd prefer a larger stone
that is eye clean and well cut to smaller and flawless. I'm sure you've read enough
by now to know that all this grading is done under 10x so even a stone
graded IF could still have flaws under higher magnification so why pay such a markup on
the illusion of flawless? That is just my personal feeling.

For the budget you look like you've got you might be able to push it around
.5c and .5mm increase in diameter would correspond to a nice surface area increase too.

Maybe there's some pictures on here somewhere showing color comparisons of set near colorless stones. I think it
would be informative.

A compromise?

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1527137.asp

 

[JulieN]

It is not particularly rare... There are a great many .3 E diamonds out there.

 

[tenbinko]

Thanks so much... I know that I should pick the 0.37-carat stone, but the smaller has the perfect set of specs... it's so hard to beat those ideal angles and percentages... ... that's why it's so hard to decide. Thanks for the time you put into your responses.