Wanted: thoughts on these 2 princesses

[jotang]

Decision time - tomorrow morning. Both stones are beautiful to my untrained eye

Princess #1
0.95 Ct.
H VS1
AGS-0
Table: 61.1%
Depth: 73.3%
$3.9k

Princess #2
1.04 Ct.
F SI2
AGI Polish-Ex Symmetry-VG
Table: 65%
Depth 75%
$4.2k

I have looked at both stones in person, here are my impressions:

1) Inclusions: I can''t really see any of the VS1 inclusions, even under a loop. For the SI2, it''s eye-clean (again, to my untrained eye). Under the loop, the biggest inclusion is a long but very thin white line through one of the upper facets, stopping short of the table. The long line is close to the corner where the prone would be (but not directly under it) and is only visible under the loop when light hits it in a certain way. There are also a few other small white lines.

2) Brilliance: #1 is a beautiful stone on its own, but #2 faces up slightly whiter when they are sitting next to each other (2 color grades is noticible side by side)

3) Fire and Scintillation: #1 appear to have slightly more fire and scintillation than #2 (probably due to its smaller table)

I picked #1 out of Excel Diamond''s online listing and Barry from Excel picked #2 out for me to compare. I don''t think I can go wrong with either one, but want to find out your thoughts.

Any comments are welcome.

Oh yeah, the setting would be a solitaire star setting.

Thanks!

Jon

 

[JulieN]

can you post the links

 

[jotang]

Excel's site doesn't have much info. Here's the link to the 1.04 Ct. I just noticed the depth is 71% rather than 75%. But I believe it's still within AGS guidelines.

1.04 Ct. F SI2

The 0.95 Ct one has already been taken off line. Barry was very friendly and patient, but it took almost 2 weeks from my initial visit to set up a comparison for the AGS0 stone I picked.

 

[jstarfireb]

I''d probably choose the 0.95, given that it''s an AGS0 and beats the other one in fire and scintillation. The color difference should not bother you since you won''t be seeing it next to a 1ct F every day.

But...does your last post mean the 0.95 is no longer available?

 

[jotang]

The 0.95 Ct. has been reserved for me, maybe that''s why it''s no longer on their website.

I think it does come down to being conservative and picking an AGS0 stone over a non-AGS0 stone that''s slightly bigger and better in color grade but may not be as well cut. I will sleep on this and make my decision tomorrow (I might have to push it off until Monday, GF having trouble measuring ring sizes... oui, don''t ask...).

Any thoughts about settings on top of any thoughts anyone might have about the stones themselves?

I''m picking between these three settings:

#1 Plain Vanilla

#2 Diamond Accent

#3 Dramatic

#1 is simple and elegant. And the side view (click on "View more pictures") shows what a star setting might look like from the side. This is my fall back if the others don''t work out.

I''m worried a little about #2''s accents distracting from the center stone. GF expressed some interest in accents, and I would like to oblige if I like the look. I have seen Excel''s Novo Replica w/ accents in person and thought it a bit distracting. Of course, the Novo Rep has bigger stones and set differently. Can anyone tell me, from their own experience, whether small (0.18 ctw) accents in channel sets would be distracting?

#3 caught my eye very quickly, and I think with the stone set in star setting, the combination would be very facinating and unique. I originally liked some of the tension settings but thought they were a little too modern for GF''s taste. This is a good compromise. My question is, with something like this, what would I do about wedding rings? Would a regular band look out of place next to it?

As always, any thoughts are appreciated.

Jon

 

[Lorelei]

Jon ask if you can compare both in natural lighting, that should give you a better idea as to which is most suited to you.

 

[Ellen]

I would go with the AGS stone, and the 2nd setting.

 

[jotang]

I did compare them in natural light. I made sure I looked at the stones under normal florescent light. #2 (non-AGS0) looked slightly whiter, but only slightly. That''s why I concluded that the non-AGS0 stone must also be very well cut, although I know it''s not quite as good as the AGS0 (symmetry of VG would have disqualified it for AGS0).

 

[jotang]

I''m going in again at 1 to take a look at the stones and decide then. After reading a bit more on PS, I''m a little worried that the SI2''s long inclusion is too close to the surface (may even break surface) and the girdle. So I''m 90% sure I will get the AGS0 stone. But no harm in taking one last look

I also asked about the three settings I listed, but unfortunately, they don''t have them in house

I will keep you all posted.

Thanks again for all your help.

Jon

 

[jstarfireb]

Personally, I'd go with the AGS0 stone in the first (solitaire) setting...so classic! But since your girl wants diamonds in the band, I think the second is probably more appropriate. Small channel-set accents are usually not distracting from the center stone. I'm not a fan of the 3rd setting at all, but if you got it, you could have a band custom made to fit around it.

ETA: Just noticed you wanted a star setting...a last bit of advice would be to get as close to a 1:1 lxw ratio as possible, since an off-square diamond won't look right in a star setting. I probably wouldn't go with a lxw difference of any more than 0.1mm.

 

[jotang]

Thanks for the pointers, jstarfireb.

I have decided to go with the AGS0 stone since, upon another closer examination, the inclusion on the SI2 was a little too close to the surface for my comfort. Despite the lower color and slightly smaller weight, the AGS0 stone is definitely, borrowing another PSer's words, "mind clean". And yes, both stones are perfect squares. This was a first criteria that filtered out a lot of stones during my search.

I also agree that simple and classy is always a good look. The channel set was in there purely for her. But Judah at Excel pointed out that the bar (whatever the technical term is) on the basket may look a little off when the prongs are turned 90 degrees. Rather than risking it not looking in sync with the rest of the ring, I think I'm going to pass on it and get her a channel set for the wedding band instead.

And in the spirit of keeping it simple and elegant, I'm now also looking at the 6 prong knife edge (well, 4 prong for princess). It may end up a choice between going classy or dramatic (they told me they can eliminate the grooves on that ring, which was bothering me). You can never go wrong with classy...

P.S. Just check my email. Barry sent me the Brilliantscope results for the AGS0: VH1 / VH3+ / VH1 for white light, colored light, and scintillation, respectively. As I stated earlier, it definitely out-performed the non-AGS0 stone under colored light.

 

[jotang]

Just want to let all those who helped me know that I have ordered the 0.95 Ct. H VS1 AGS0 princess cut with the star setting on the "dramatic" ring (GF hinted that she wanted something modern and different). Thanks to all the PSers for your pointers and guidance during this entire process. PS rocks!

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 9/9/2008 11:42:41 AM
Author: jotang
Just want to let all those who helped me know that I have ordered the 0.95 Ct. H VS1 AGS0 princess cut with the star setting on the ''dramatic'' ring (GF hinted that she wanted something modern and different). Thanks to all the PSers for your pointers and guidance during this entire process. PS rocks!

Many congrats! We would love to see some pics of the completed ring when you can please

 

[Ellen]

Date: 9/9/2008 11:43:50 AM
Author: Lorelei

Many congrats! We would love to see some pics of the completed ring when you can please

Ditto!

 

[Kelli]

Oh good! Apparently I''m late, but I was going to vote for that one, based on the fire and scintillation. Keep us posted with pictures when you get it!

 

[jotang]

Will definitely post pictures when I get it. Should be within 2 weeks. Thanks again.