What would a girlfriend want?

[dbanner8732]

Here's the deal. Let's just say these 2 diamonds are the same with these exceptions.......

Diamond 1: 1.12 carat, H color



Diamond 2: 1.22 carat, I color

(diamond 2 is $300 more)


Which would a girl want? Can you tell the difference in a tenth of a carat ?

 

[pandabee]

*maybe* you could if they were places side to side. On its own in a ring? Most likely not. The real difference will be what the diameter measurements are. Additionally, which of the two performs better? A slightly smaller but better cut and light return will look Niger and better than a slightly larger, poorly cut stone.

 

[chrono]

A girlfriend will pick the sparkliest one. Side by side, they are going to look the same colour wise and size wise, unless you stare at it really hard for a very long time.

 

[pandabee]

Oops darn autocorrect! That was bigger, not Niger in my precious post.

 

[AprilBaby]

I'm gonna say she would pick the bigger.

 

[dbanner8732]

The 1.12 carat does perform slightly better. When I spoke to the gemnologist, she prodded me in the direction of the 1.22 carat. Don't know if she wanted my extra $300 or what. She led me away from a 1.19 that was more expensive so I actually trust her.

Here's the measurements.


1.12 = 6.72mm x 6.69mm x 4.10mm

1.22 = 6.87mm x 6.81mm x 4.26mm

Both are SI1 clarity... Like I said the 1.22 is an I color where the 1.12 is an H.

Both table and depth percentages are similar and they are both Ideal cut.

Both eye clean

 

[04diamond<3]

If they're the same, I would suggest the bigger one. Especially if you're not a person that's going to want to upgrade her ring. And because it's only a $300 difference, for something a bit bigger and better color...

 

[dbanner8732]

No.. not as good color.

The bigger one is an I

The 1.12 is an H.

Ok experts, the bigger one has a depth percentage of 62.3. table 58. Is that a little deep?

The smaller one has excellent table and depth percentages. depth 61.1 table 59.0

 

[chrono]

As you've seen yourself, although they are 0.1 ct apart in carat weight, the size difference is only 0.10 mm (the size of a pin dot). Both have very similar table and depth percentages which wouldn't sway me either way.

 

[04diamond<3]

No.. not as good color.

The bigger one is an I

The 1.12 is an H.

Ok experts, the bigger one has a depth percentage of 62.3. table 58. Is that a little deep?

The smaller one has excellent table and depth percentages. depth 61.1 table 59.0

ah, read that wrong. The bigger one seems to have a smaller table, so if you're going to base it on that, maybe the smaller one. up to you, but they're very close...

 

[dbanner8732]

so chrono, you're saying save my 300 bucks and go with the 1.12? Or is this basically a coin flip.

 

[dbanner8732]

04 diamond... you seem not to understand that an I color is one grade worse than an H color.

As I said the 1.12 is and H

The 1.22 is an I.

300 bucks for a tenth of a carat.... AND dropping a color grade (noticeable probably not at least to me)

 

[04diamond<3]

since they're both so close, i guess it'd come down to if one of them had fluorescence. If they do, it's going to appear a bit whiter.

 

[chrono]

Flip your coin. I'd probably go with the 1.12 H - save $300, looks the same size and one colour grade higher.

 

[dbanner8732]

Neither has any fluoro. And I thought that if it did have it, then it would look more blue, not whiter.
04diamond are you playing opposite day with me lol?

I think that I'll save my 300 bucks chrono. I think overall the 1.12 is better and the only reason I'd do it is to say it was near a 1 1/4 carat and that's it. Toughy though, I know how the women are about this stuff whether they want to admit it or not! Mine wouldn't care, but I know deep down 95 percent of women are about that carat size.

 

[TC1987]

What lab graded them? If EGL, their color grades can be overinflated by 1-2 grades and then they might actually be J/K color. Diamonds with large tables and the "60/60" and older cut diamonds often get sent to EGL because AGS and GIA grade them more harshly.

If they are EGL stones, at least you'd have to do a price comp between them and GIA or AGS graded J/K to make sure you are not overpaying. Or have the vendor run them in a colorimeter or something.

If they are either AGS or GIA, I'd probably say pick the lager I color one, all other things being equal. If the I color has blue fluorescence, so much the better. You could calculate the square mm area of each stone and compare that to see what % faceup size difference there is between the two. Rounds are 3.14 x diameter x diameter / 4

 

[dbanner8732]

GIA graded. No fluoro in either of them.

So the first 2 measurement #'s are the diameters right? Just side to side... then the other side to side?

I assume the 3.14 is based on pi because we're dealing with a circle.

If I did my calculations correctly (if those are the right diameters) then I have these scores:

35.29 for the 1.12

36.72 for the 1.22

Big difference? I have no clue. These numbers mean nothing to me because I don't know what to base it on.

 

[04diamond<3]

Neither has any fluoro. And I thought that if it did have it, then it would look more blue, not whiter.
04diamond are you playing opposite day with me lol?

I think that I'll save my 300 bucks chrono. I think overall the 1.12 is better and the only reason I'd do it is to say it was near a 1 1/4 carat and that's it. Toughy though, I know how the women are about this stuff whether they want to admit it or not! Mine wouldn't care, but I know deep down 95 percent of women are about that carat size.

The stone would look whiter. Under UV light yes, it will be blue and glow instead of not glow. But example, if you had a K color diamond with strong blue fluorescence then it would help the diamond look more like a J or whiter.

 

[dbanner8732]

I see 04diamond. That does make sense. I'm not really into the fluoro thing so I've just tried to stay away from those stones.

 

[TC1987]

I calculated that the 1.22 is 4.05% larger than the 1.12 (double check that b/c I am using the Windows 8 computer and it's always a fight with it, lol.) So, they are pretty close. It's kind of a tossup between those two. But if other stones enter the mix, it's one more method you can use to try to visualize them.

 

[dbanner8732]

Thats not what I got... Its 3.14 x 6.87 x 675 divided by 4 right.. (I know the 6.87 numbers or whatever arent exact but it's the first 2 numbers in the mm measurements right.. Thats diameter... diameter... and depth?


So I tool 3.14 x 1st # x 2nd # divided by 4 and got a 1.5 % difference in the 2. Check my post above.

 

[jstarfireb]

We're missing some info on the cut. Do you have access to the crown and pavilion angles (or percentages if angles are unavailable)? I understand they both say ideal cut, but GIA doesn't issue a grade of "ideal," so it must have been issued by the vendor, and by what criteria...we don't know! GIA's cut grading parameters allow a few stones to slip through the cracks, so not every GIA Excellent cut stone is up to PS standards for cut quality. So it would help to know the angles. If one were clearly better cut than the other, I would buy that one regardless of the differences in size and color. If the cut is equally good, I would choose the smaller H because it doesn't take a huge amount of color sensitivity to detect a bit of color from the pavilion of an I. They would probably look similar face-up, though.

 

[chrono]

http://www.ritani.com/diamonds/round-diamond-1-12-H-color-GIA-certified/D-G1QSV5?search_key=D-G1QSV5
http://www.ritani.com/diamonds/round-diamond-1-22-I-color-GIA-certified/D-G1099X?search_key=D-G1099x

Both score around 3.5 on the HCA. I know the OP can find much nicer cut RBs (I've suggested one not too long ago in a different thread) but he keeps coming back to these 2.

 

[dbanner8732]

Chrono you only go by the HCA scale lol. You have married that thing. It is a 3.5 "very good" I'm not trying to buy something with F color and VS clarity here. The table and depth percentages are excellent. The cut is Ideal. The color is in "my" range. I know the pavilion and crown angles of both. These are $6,000 diamonds they can't be crap lol. I know that the angles are off by like one half of a degree from making them score a 1.7 on the HCA.. Not worried about the HCA.

I asked a question. Consider these stones equally. The carat weight is different by one tenth. The color of the larger stone is one grade lower (an I). Now hypothetically let's pretend that these are decent stones, which I believe they are. No chance my girlfriend will tell the difference in one that scores a 1.9 on the HCA from one that scores 3.5... No chance. All I wanted to know is which one they would choose... A tenth of a carat bigger stone with a grade lower color? Or a tenth of a carat smaller stone with one grade higher color.

This technicallity (by myself included) is driving me insane. She probabaly can't tell the difference between an I1 J color and a VS2 G color. I seriously doubt she could unless she stared them down beside each other. Just wondering what a lady would prefer.. Or if you all thought go for the (slightly) better color graded stone because the carat weight would be a negligible difference.

So with that said, I appreciate all of your opinions, but we are making a vote turn into a dissection. I know that the pavilion and crown angles aren't wild numbers. I've already got them. Very slightly off from perfection really, which makes it score in the very good range.. Which in my opinion (unless they have lied to me) is still "very good" lol. I'm not as hung up on this HCA score stuff as everybody else. It's an Ideal cut, with table and depth percentages in the excellent range. Can't be horrible. And if it is I'll send it back haha

 

[chrono]

Dbanner,
My reply was in response to JStarfireb, to give her some background info, since you have not provided any cut information. Ideally, an IS or ASET is the best tool to verify which stone is the sparkliest but short of that, the HCA is the only remaining elimination too. I've seen both really great and some not so great GIA Ideal cuts. Table and depth tells you very little in terms of how the diamond is going to perform. Yes, there are plenty of $6000 diamonds that are crap. These aren't but for $6K, I would still opt for something better cut. I respect that your priorities are different and cut is not at the top of your list.

How do you know your GF cannot tell the difference between a 1.9 HCA stone and a 3.5 HCA stone. Have you seen 2 such examples side by side to declare so definitely?

 

[John P]

It may be interesting to know that, based on the measurements provided, AGSL...the lab which branded the term "Ideal" in the diamond mainstream...would give the first diamond AGS3 in performance and the second stone AGS4 in performance. It's the seller's right to label anything they want-to "ideal" (or "humdinger" or "cream puff"). But in the interest of providing context the numbers don't conform to uniformly acknowledged standards for ideal performance.

It also may be interesting to point out how dramatic the differences are between color/clarity versus cut standards: Even trained gemologists have difficulty separating DEF color outside a lab, and find it impossible to divide Flawless, VVS1, VVS2 and VS clarity grades without the aid of magnification. But millions of diamonds in the Round Brilliant cut-category all get classified as "Excellent" even though characteristic differences in basic make are visible to any observer. More importantly, and relevant to your question, quality differences in overall light-return exist among diamonds of the same cut-grade. Those differences can be notably visible to the naked eye, whereas this is not the case when you get to the top color or clarity grades.

DBanner, it's up to you to decide what level of cut quality is important. In your defense, not everyone seeks the pinnacle of cutting which results in critical angles which provide best light return - just as not everyone is married to colorless or eye-clean diamonds.

To your main question: If the appearance of both is similar to you my gut says go for the bigger diamond - unless the smaller one is indeed speaking to you more - in which case I submit that it may be cutting particulars that are indeed making themselves heard.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Equal to AGS 3 and 4 for cut? That is far more meaningful than the HCA if you want to disregard the HCA. I would buy an AGS 1 if graded that way because polish was excellent rather than ideal, but I would not go to 3 or 4. Cut is important and I'd want better cut stones, personally.

But since you didn't really want input on cut quality, I will tell you that I prefer H color over I color and would choose a smaller stone if I had to. But the majority here would probably go for the larger stone.

 

[two_little_birds]

http://www.ritani.com/diamonds/round-diamond-1-12-H-color-GIA-certified/D-G1QSV5?search_key=D-G1QSV5
http://www.ritani.com/diamonds/round-diamond-1-22-I-color-GIA-certified/D-G1099X?search_key=D-G1099x

Both score around 3.5 on the HCA. I know the OP can find much nicer cut RBs (I've suggested one not too long ago in a different thread) but he keeps coming back to these 2.

I don't really like either, but if I had to pick one I'd pick the 1.12. I'm not an expert, or a pro, so I'm just going by the visuals.

 

[mogster]

Can you see them in person and then decide? http://www.ritani.com/story/see-in-person

 

[dbanner8732]

Everyone brings up very good points. Thank you for the response!

John, I appreciate your understanding that I (and my girlfriend) are not diamond experts whatsoever, and that our quality standards may not be as high as some others. From the pure measurements, the only thing that I saw that made these 2 diamonds score lower on the hca test was the pavilion or crown angle was basically .4 degrees away from making them score in the 0-2 range. They were around 35 and 41 degrees instead of 34.5 and 41. I realize this can have an affect on the light return.

Chrono, you make very good points about the level of assistance that the hca can provide to people like me. One hurdle is that I'd really like to purchase the stone and setting at the same place so that #1 they can set it and I don't have to fool with worrying about a local jeweler messing it up and #2 it's just convenient. From the measurements, it seems to me that nothing is cut poorly. Yes I'm sure you are right about it would be better to have the crown and pavilion angles more complimentary, but I don't believe they are cut poorly. Perfect-no. Poorly-no. It's GIA graded and I know that all of these grading reports are very subjective, but I don't think we could tell much difference at all. The reason I know this is because we have gone to a local jeweler and looked at a few and we could not describe the differences. I'm sure some people could though.

2birds.. What is it that makes you dislike both of them? I know that you can see the inclusions under the 20x magnification, but these are better clarity graded than the GIA stones we looked at together in person. We looked at si2's in person. I could not see them unless I bought the ring because I do not live near a store to see these rings after being set. Not really a problem because I would have time to return them if they don't meet my standards, which again I'm sure are much higher than some peoples' and much lower than others.

Again, I appreciate all of the input. Im treating this as a learning experience as well as an informed purchasing experience, and I thank you all for your opinions!