Hello everyone,
I wanted to take a minute to share my update on the issues I posted about in early Dec (topic was What to do). To make a long story short, my fiance and I made an impulse buy at Zales for my engagement ring and I was questioning the quality of the ring and all that(It''s their signature collection... 1.04 round H SI2 )... so here''s my update.
After wearing the ring for a couple more months I still love it and I get quite a few compliments on it. The funny thing is that several people have commented on the "clarity" of it. Given that these are not jewelry experts I have to take their comments with a grain of salt but since I was most afraid of the clarity of my ring it''s still nice to hear. More importantly (and why I''m sharing this update) is that I recently had the ring appraised (to make sure everything is in line for the insurance I got on it) and the results matched those on the "certification" document that Zales gave me (and to fill in the details it didn''t have). The appraiser was fantastic and took the time to answer all my questions. I told him about the concerns I''d had about the ring and he assured me that he would consider the stone to be eye clean. To be honest I''ve never really been able to see anything in it (even with the 20x loupe I bought) so it was great to be able to look at it under the microscope thing and actually see the inclusions. There definitely are some but no carbon or anything like that and there really is no way to see them with the naked eye. None of them were in the center of the ring and the cut hides all of them. He also confirmed that the stone is considered an "Excellent" cut (using the GIA measurement standards). When I posted before there was a question about whether or not the stone had flouresance to it and I can now answer that it does not.
The one criticism he had was that the platinum setting we put it in (we switched it from the 18 k gold setting it came in to a platinum trellis setting.. guess it could also be called an x prong setting) had not been finished well. He finished it out as much as he could while I was there (I loved the way it looked before and it looks even better now). He also said that in his opinion the $6,000 that was paid for it (which includes the platinum setting) was not unreasonable.
I''ve learned a lot through this whole process and the next time we go diamond shopping I''ll be better prepared (I''m thinking I want some earrings next).
Thanks again to everyone to helped me out back in Dec.
I wanted to take a minute to share my update on the issues I posted about in early Dec (topic was What to do). To make a long story short, my fiance and I made an impulse buy at Zales for my engagement ring and I was questioning the quality of the ring and all that(It''s their signature collection... 1.04 round H SI2 )... so here''s my update.
After wearing the ring for a couple more months I still love it and I get quite a few compliments on it. The funny thing is that several people have commented on the "clarity" of it. Given that these are not jewelry experts I have to take their comments with a grain of salt but since I was most afraid of the clarity of my ring it''s still nice to hear. More importantly (and why I''m sharing this update) is that I recently had the ring appraised (to make sure everything is in line for the insurance I got on it) and the results matched those on the "certification" document that Zales gave me (and to fill in the details it didn''t have). The appraiser was fantastic and took the time to answer all my questions. I told him about the concerns I''d had about the ring and he assured me that he would consider the stone to be eye clean. To be honest I''ve never really been able to see anything in it (even with the 20x loupe I bought) so it was great to be able to look at it under the microscope thing and actually see the inclusions. There definitely are some but no carbon or anything like that and there really is no way to see them with the naked eye. None of them were in the center of the ring and the cut hides all of them. He also confirmed that the stone is considered an "Excellent" cut (using the GIA measurement standards). When I posted before there was a question about whether or not the stone had flouresance to it and I can now answer that it does not.
The one criticism he had was that the platinum setting we put it in (we switched it from the 18 k gold setting it came in to a platinum trellis setting.. guess it could also be called an x prong setting) had not been finished well. He finished it out as much as he could while I was there (I loved the way it looked before and it looks even better now). He also said that in his opinion the $6,000 that was paid for it (which includes the platinum setting) was not unreasonable.
I''ve learned a lot through this whole process and the next time we go diamond shopping I''ll be better prepared (I''m thinking I want some earrings next).
Thanks again to everyone to helped me out back in Dec.
300x240.png)