Which diamond is better?

[daisygrl]

I have lost sleep over these two diamonds (round, natural.) I cannot decide which one is better as neither is a perfect combination of angles, depth...etc. Both are GIA certified as triple X. I would appreciate any help, advice, suggestions.

First stone: 1.52ct round cut, VS1, G, 3X, Table: 56%, Crown: 35, Pavilion: 40.6, Depth: 62.2% and about $13,000 (HCA 0.8 - all excellent)

Second stone: 1.61ct, round cut, VS1, G, 3X, Table: 57%, Crown: 35, Pavilion: 40.8, Depth: 61.8, and about $14,700 (HCA 1.2 - all excellent)

The price on the second one is a bit steep but the depth is ideal.... unlike the first one. The first one, on the other hand, has a bit better cown/pavilion angle ratio, I think.

Thank you!

 

[OoohShiny]

Welcome to the forum

I'm not sure what you mean about 'ideal depth' - are you referring to a preferred %age range that is stated on another site?

Generally on PS the recommendation is for MRBs to be between 60% and 62.4% depth to stay within the 'superideal' range (with complementary crown and pavilion angles, of course) and both of these stones fit within that range.

Both stones also have crown and pavilion angles that complement each other, as the HCA scores show, so I think either stone would be a good choice


What are the dimensions for each? It is usually stated on here that we can perceive a difference in size of 0.2mm but under that it is hard to do so, so if the 1.61 is only a tiny amount bigger in size, I'd be tempted by the 1.52. No point paying a lot more for no visible difference!

Additionally, the crown angle being in the higher end of the PS-recommended range, and the table being not that big at 56%, should mean it produces a lot of coloured fire.

 

[tyty333]

Nothing wrong with the depth on the first stone. Can you get idealscope or aset images for these stones? That would tell us if there
is any leakage occurring.

 

[daisygrl]

Welcome to the forum

I'm not sure what you mean about 'ideal depth' - are you referring to a preferred %age range that is stated on another site?

Generally on PS the recommendation is for MRBs to be between 60% and 62.4% depth to stay within the 'superideal' range (with complementary crown and pavilion angles, of course) and both of these stones fit within that range.

Both stones also have crown and pavilion angles that complement each other, as the HCA scores show, so I think either stone would be a good choice


What are the dimensions for each? It is usually stated on here that we can perceive a difference in size of 0.2mm but under that it is hard to do so, so if the 1.61 is only a tiny amount bigger in size, I'd be tempted by the 1.52. No point paying a lot more for no visible difference!

Additionally, the crown angle being in the higher end of the PS-recommended range, and the table being not that big at 56%, should mean it produces a lot of coloured fire.

Thank you for your response! I have been a long time lurker, reading all comments and insights about measurements, angles, and depths of diamonds... so I guess, based on the opinions I have read here, I came to the conclusion that the "best" depth would be below 62%.

The measurements of the first stone (1.52ct) are: 7.33x7.36x4.57 - it will not optically look bigger, just normal for its size.

The measurements of the second stone (1.61ct) are: 7.49x7.52x4.64 - also appears normal for its size.

In pure honesty, I am also leaning towards 1.52ct only because I am really not convinced that the other one is worth $1,700+ more. Unless, there is a significant difference in a light leakage or darkness from obstruction in the first one.

 

[daisygrl]

Nothing wrong with the depth on the first stone. Can you get idealscope or aset images for these stones? That would tell us if there
is any leakage occurring.

Yes, I was thinking of those as well... how would I go about getting them without paying for aset scope? Each of the diamond is from a different US website (two most reputable ones) and one of them does not provide neither ASET nor ideascope images.

 

[OoohShiny]

Yes, I was thinking of those as well... how would I go about getting them without paying for aset scope? Each of the diamond is from a different US website (two most reputable ones) and one of them does not provide neither ASET nor ideascope images.

You could purchase as ASETscope for yourself - that would mean you could use it on other stones as well in the future

 

[OoohShiny]

Thank you for your response! I have been a long time lurker, reading all comments and insights about measurements, angles, and depths of diamonds... so I guess, based on the opinions I have read here, I came to the conclusion that the "best" depth would be below 62%.

The measurements of the first stone (1.52ct) are: 7.33x7.36x4.57 - it will not optically look bigger, just normal for its size.

The measurements of the second stone (1.61ct) are: 7.49x7.52x4.64 - also appears normal for its size.

In pure honesty, I am also leaning towards 1.52ct only because I am really not convinced that the other one is worth $1,700+ more. Unless, there is a significant difference in a light leakage or darkness from obstruction in the first one.

You may be able to tell a size difference side-by-side with those measurements but alone, on your finger and in motion in day-to-day activities, I very much doubt it!

 

[daisygrl]

You may be able to tell a size difference side-by-side with those measurements but alone, on your finger and in motion in day-to-day activities, I very much doubt it!

Yes, I thought the same.. I was not so concerned about the size as I was about the depth of the first stone of 62.2% - a bit too deep for my liking. Thus, I started looking for other stones and came across the second one - of which measurements I like much better... wish it were the same size as the first one (meaning, cheaper )

 

[OoohShiny]

Yes, I thought the same.. I was not so concerned about the size as I was about the depth of the first stone of 62.2% - a bit too deep for my liking. Thus, I started looking for other stones and came across the second one - of which measurements I like much better... wish it were the same size as the first one (meaning, cheaper )

lol

There's always a compromise somewhere!

 

[TODiamonds]

There's nothing wrong with 62.2% depth and I would encourage you to refrain from assessing diamonds by these overly simplistic rules of thumbs that many seem to gather by lurking these forums otherwise you may pass on gorgeous stones that represent good value.

For example, a diamond may be slightly deeper for any number of reasons. For example if it has a med-slightly thick girdle it will be deeper than a stone with a thin-med girdle yet light performance will not be impacted.

Again nothing wrong with 62.2. The supply of well cut stones below 62 shrinks significantly unless you're willing to pay the premium for a branded super ideal.

Do u have pics or links to the stones? We could offer a more informed opinion if we can actually see what they look like.

 

[ringo865]

Do a search for the GIA number. Sometimes (not in-house) stones are being offered by other (or multiple) vendors who might have scope images on the stone.

 

[daisygrl]

There's nothing wrong with 62.2% depth and I would encourage you to refrain from assessing diamonds by these overly simplistic rules of thumbs that many seem to gather by lurking these forums otherwise you may pass on gorgeous stones that represent good value.

For example, a diamond may be slightly deeper for any number of reasons. For example if it has a med-slightly thick girdle it will be deeper than a stone with a thin-med girdle yet light performance will not be impacted.

Again nothing wrong with 62.2. The supply of well cut stones below 62 shrinks significantly unless you're willing to pay the premium for a branded super ideal.

Do u have pics or links to the stones? We could offer a more informed opinion if we can actually see what they look like.

I agree that one can get carried away by the numbers that might or might not represent the true beauty of the diamond. I have been playing around with diamonds for a while (before GIA even started grading them back in 2006) and have always considered overal ratio of a diamond rather than one number. And I do like the 1.52ct crown/pavilion angles a lot! I would like (need) to save some $$$ and I do still consider the 1.52ct stone. Neither of them is cheap (at least not for me) so I am trying to get the best one without breaking a bank.

Here are the links for both diamonds:
1.52ct: https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD13191433
1.61ct: https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...g-color-vs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-8280760

GIA for the 1.52ct is: 1339775420
GIA for the 1.61ct is: 2336250473

Both show as "not available" as I put the first one on hold and as for the second one I am waiting for Ideal Scope image from the company.

PS: Happy New Year to you, all!

 

[OoohShiny]

I agree that one can get carried away by the numbers that might or might not represent the true beauty of the diamond. I have been playing around with diamonds for a while (before GIA even started grading them back in 2006) and have always considered overal ratio of a diamond rather than one number. And I do like the 1.52ct crown/pavilion angles a lot! I would like (need) to save some $$$ and I do still consider the 1.52ct stone. Neither of them is cheap (at least not for me) so I am trying to get the best one without breaking a bank.

Here are the links for both diamonds:
1.52ct: https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD13191433
1.61ct: https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...g-color-vs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-8280760

GIA for the 1.52ct is: 1339775420
GIA for the 1.61ct is: 2336250473

Both show as "not available" as I put the first one on hold and as for the second one I am waiting for Ideal Scope image from the company.

PS: Happy New Year to you, all!

Well, both look very eye-clean to me!

If you like the angles on the 1.52ct and need to save some money, I don't think you'll go wrong with it

Check the Returns policy and processes so you are aware of any cost implications if you decide it is not for you when you see it in person, and also check you are happy with the upgrade policies (if you think you might use them in the future).

 

[sledge]

You mentioned you've been playing with diamonds for awhile. Do you currently have a stone you wear daily? If so what are the proportions of that stone, and do you like the personality of it? If you have something you like in a smaller size, it would seem logical to replicate it, if possible.

I also prefer a depth of 62 or less. The reason being when the other proportions are taken into account it helps provide control for staying within ideal ranges. Also, it keeps from hiding unnecessary weight in depth so you get full spread capacity for the established carat weight.

That said, I would not reject simply because of 62.2. I feel the difference is minimal and your other proportions are within ideal territory.

Something to keep in mind, is the values shown on a GIA lab report is rounded and averaged. There are 8 actual values of each and you will get readings like 34.7, 35.1, 34.8, etc for the crown if you had a detailed SARIN report to review. You'd have similar things for the pavilion, lower girdle facets, etc.

I mention this because mathematically when you calculate depth of the reported 40.6 pavilion angle, you get:

Tan(40.6) * 50 = 42.855, or 43% rounded

That is almost the 0.20% difference we are talking about. More importantly, it gives me hope the actual pavilion angles stay at 40.5 or above. This is important as you can start to leak light at less than 40.5.

Sometimes you see a 40.6 pavilion reported with 42.5 depth and it would lead me to believe some of the values might be a little lighter.

Of course an ASET or idealscope would help us determine if any leakage is occuring.

I am fine of the 35/40.6 combo as they tend to be very firey when cut right. I particularly like that combo with 75 LGF's as I prefer fatter arrows as opposed to narrower arrows of 80 LGF's. Also, numerically lower LGF's provide slightly more broad rainbow flashes vs smaller pin fire type white return of larger LGF's. The differences are minor and just my preference. Some prefer the other. Most super ideals are 77-78 as that is nearly the perfect balance.

If you aren't aware there can be up to 5% variance between reported and actual LGF's on a GIA report. A reported 75 can vary from 73-77 and a reported 80 can vary from 78-82. Looking at the videos I can see the arrows are slightly fatter on the JA 35/40.8 stone but I would guess the BN 35/40.6 stone is on the lower side (78-79) of the reported 80 LGF.

To me, the faceting of the JA stone seems a little more attractive, and it has strong crisp arrow patterns. I'm not certain if this is a good comparison though as you have two very different video environments. JA has publicly announced they spend a pot load of money on their videos so I am hesitant to dismiss the 35/40.6 solely for this, yet I do think the 35/40.8 video looks a little better.

What concerns me with the 35/40.8 combo is I too frequently see leakage in ASET and idealscope images of that combo. I believe it boils down to actual values and more precision symmetry on the 35/40.8 combos that perform well.

My point being I think the 35/40.8 is also a worthwhile consideration but I'd want an idealscope or ASET to confirm before fully recommending.

At the end of the day, we may be able to debate some of these variations but I do think both stones have the potential to make you very happy. You seem to be more comfortable with the 1.52 stone because of the dollars. I think it's worth a gamble personally. I would buy a $35 ASET and check the loose stone once it arrives, and prepare myself to send back if it wasn't 100% what I expected.

You have a nice budget and I feel relatively confident we can help you find an alternate stone should you need to return and start over.

 

[daisygrl]

You mentioned you've been playing with diamonds for awhile. Do you currently have a stone you wear daily? If so what are the proportions of that stone, and do you like the personality of it? If you have something you like in a smaller size, it would seem logical to replicate it, if possible.

I also prefer a depth of 62 or less. The reason being when the other proportions are taken into account it helps provide control for staying within ideal ranges. Also, it keeps from hiding unnecessary weight in depth so you get full spread capacity for the established carat weight.

That said, I would not reject simply because of 62.2. I feel the difference is minimal and your other proportions are within ideal territory.

Something to keep in mind, is the values shown on a GIA lab report is rounded and averaged. There are 8 actual values of each and you will get readings like 34.7, 35.1, 34.8, etc for the crown if you had a detailed SARIN report to review. You'd have similar things for the pavilion, lower girdle facets, etc.

I mention this because mathematically when you calculate depth of the reported 40.6 pavilion angle, you get:

Tan(40.6) * 50 = 42.855, or 43% rounded

That is almost the 0.20% difference we are talking about. More importantly, it gives me hope the actual pavilion angles stay at 40.5 or above. This is important as you can start to leak light at less than 40.5.

Sometimes you see a 40.6 pavilion reported with 42.5 depth and it would lead me to believe some of the values might be a little lighter.

Of course an ASET or idealscope would help us determine if any leakage is occuring.

I am fine of the 35/40.6 combo as they tend to be very firey when cut right. I particularly like that combo with 75 LGF's as I prefer fatter arrows as opposed to narrower arrows of 80 LGF's. Also, numerically lower LGF's provide slightly more broad rainbow flashes vs smaller pin fire type white return of larger LGF's. The differences are minor and just my preference. Some prefer the other. Most super ideals are 77-78 as that is nearly the perfect balance.

If you aren't aware there can be up to 5% variance between reported and actual LGF's on a GIA report. A reported 75 can vary from 73-77 and a reported 80 can vary from 78-82. Looking at the videos I can see the arrows are slightly fatter on the JA 35/40.8 stone but I would guess the BN 35/40.6 stone is on the lower side (78-79) of the reported 80 LGF.

To me, the faceting of the JA stone seems a little more attractive, and it has strong crisp arrow patterns. I'm not certain if this is a good comparison though as you have two very different video environments. JA has publicly announced they spend a pot load of money on their videos so I am hesitant to dismiss the 35/40.6 solely for this, yet I do think the 35/40.8 video looks a little better.

What concerns me with the 35/40.8 combo is I too frequently see leakage in ASET and idealscope images of that combo. I believe it boils down to actual values and more precision symmetry on the 35/40.8 combos that perform well.

My point being I think the 35/40.8 is also a worthwhile consideration but I'd want an idealscope or ASET to confirm before fully recommending.

At the end of the day, we may be able to debate some of these variations but I do think both stones have the potential to make you very happy. You seem to be more comfortable with the 1.52 stone because of the dollars. I think it's worth a gamble personally. I would buy a $35 ASET and check the loose stone once it arrives, and prepare myself to send back if it wasn't 100% what I expected.

You have a nice budget and I feel relatively confident we can help you find an alternate stone should you need to return and start over.

Thank you very much Sledge, for your thoughtful response. You and I have a very similar thinking when it comes to the measurements of the stones. I am thinking the same you are re: depth as well as LGFs. Now you understand my dilemma.

Unfortunately, BN does not provide Ideal Scope images and I am still waiting for the JA image that I requested 2 days ago... takes about 3-5 days. Once I have it, I am more than happy to share the image with you.

I do have one comparable diamond that, (to me), has perfect proportions! It is 1.10ct, round diamond, VS1, I color (which is why it is not my most popular one as I prefer them whiter.) 34.5/40.8 and 57%/61.6% with LGF of 75. I would not mind getting something like that in 1.50ct range and G color.

Meanwhile, if you have any other suggestions or different diamonds for me to look at (my budget is around $14,000.... a bit flexible if the stone is worth it.)

 

[sledge]

You're very welcome. I do understand your dilemma.

With some of these smaller details being important, are you a candidate for a super ideal? Probably stretching your budget but your beloved 34.5/40.8 combo and all the images to prove they rock hard.

WF ACA 1.525 G VS2 @ $15,428 wire

Diamond | 1.525 ct G VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4187420

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.525 carat G color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4187420

www.whiteflash.com

Freakin' love that small 55.3 table with the 34.5/40.8 combo. 62 depth, 77 LGF and 52 stars. Look at the video....a sparkle bomb showoff.


WF ACA 1.521 G VS2 @ $15,366 wire

Diamond | 1.521 ct G VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4187424

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.521 carat G color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4187424

www.whiteflash.com

Another rock solid performer. Slightly larger 56.0 table with 61.3 depth with 34.5/40.8 combo, 77 LGF's and 52 stars. Because of the slightly larger table & less depth, it's pushing some of the weight out a little so you get a smidge more spread on this one than the other, but nothing you'd ever see with the naked eye.

 

[sledge]

Using the PS search engine with limited criteria (54-57 table, 60-62 depth, excellent symmetry, excellent polish, excellent HCA score, etc) I found a few other stones you may find interesting....

GIA XXX 1.51 G IF @ $13,846

https://diamonddealfinder.com/enquiry.php?id_field=1401371

55 table, 61.4 depth, 34 crown, 40.8 depth, 80 LGF & 50 stars

Love the small 55 table. All ideal proportions. Know a few people that love the 34/40.8 and 34/41 combos when you can find them and the actual pavilion angles don't creep over the 41.2 mark. This stone is very promising.

Within budget....and IF clarity. No video or images for me to examine, but I'm sure Martin can provide upon request.

FYI, Martin @ USA Certed has a good rep here, but he is a no frills sort of experience meaning no upgrade programs, etc if that is important to you. Nice thing is his prices are hard to beat.


GIA XXX 1.61 G VVS2 @ 14,852

https://diamonddealfinder.com/enquiry.php?id_field=1340041

55 table, 61.9 depth, 34.5 crown, 40.8 pavilion, 80 LGF and 50 stars

I love small tables with that 34.5/40.8 combo so I'm really loving this one. I'd like to see a video or image to confirm where the actual LGF's might fall as opposed to the reported 80 value. Would be awesome if it appeared to be an actual 78. Get a little size bump and clarity for just a little more money.


GIA XXX 1.55 G VS2 @ $14,589

Unique Engagement Rings, Diamond Engagement Rings, Wedding Rings, New York Engagement Rings

Unique engagement rings, diamond rings, wedding bands, anniversary rings, Loose Diamond Search and Wedding Rings. The Best Online Jewelry Store in New York Diamond District, NY,NYC,New York,New York Engagement Rings

www.eternitybyyoni.com

56 table, 61.8 depth, 34.5 crown, 40.8 pavilion, 80 LGF and 50 stars

Potential candidate but a few concerns. First, the cert is dated 4/12/2011 so I'd want the vendor to send back to GIA for an updated certification. Look at the clarity plot though...it appears clean for a VS2. Also, the stone has medium blue fluor, which I don't think is a concern but you need to do all the checks to ensure it's not cloudy/milky/hazy. Being a trade-in and having medium fluor, you may be able to negotiate a better deal for yourself on this stone. Lastly, you need to confirm video and images of this stone.

...............................

These next few are from JA and consequently I don't have the lab reports to get all nerdy on you. However, if you are interested in any of them, you can use the chat window and request certs for all 3 stones, or just the one(s) that you like. These are all AGS stones, presumably with 000 certification. And they all are part of JA's True Heart program which means they have very good symmetry. FYI, while these are normally part of JA's better cut stones, they don't have extensive control measures like a true super ideal vendor like WF, HPD, etc will have. So when shopping TH stones, it's important to analyze price in comparison to other available stones to ensure it's a fair deal.

Each one has a hearts image attached along with an idealscope image, so no waiting. Also, great videos. IMO, all this is good as it helps provide reassurance with your purchase.

JA TH 1.56 G VS2 w/ AGS Cert @ $14,270

1.56 Carat round diamond

This True Hearts TM diamond, 1.56 carat G color vs2 clarity has ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from AGS

www.jamesallen.com

JA TH 1.52 F VS2 w/ AGS Cert @ $14,850

1.52 Carat round diamond

This True Hearts TM diamond, 1.52 carat F color vs2 clarity has ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from AGS

www.jamesallen.com

JA TH 1.61 G VS2 w/ AGS Cert @ $15,060

1.61 Carat round diamond

This True Hearts TM diamond, 1.61 carat G color vs2 clarity has ideal proportions and a diamond grading report from AGS

www.jamesallen.com

 

[sledge]

Here's one more I found using RC. Oddly enough, most the stuff I've found has been 80 LGF's today or not met other criteria.

GIA XXX 1.54 G VS2 @ $13,155

Shop Round 1.54-2.04 carat Loose Diamonds at Yadavjewelry.com -

Shop wholesale natural loose diamonds at Yadav Jewelry. As jewelers and diamonds wholesalers since 1983, you can trust Yadav to bring you fine quality, prompt service, and excellent prices.

www.yadavjewelry.com

1.54 Carat G VS2 Round Brilliant Natural Diamond GIA Certified 6203519059 Affinity Cut - D43774936

1.54 carat, Round, G Color, VS2 clarity, GIA Certified Diamond, Affinity Cut Natural Diamond, D43774936

www.adiamor.com

56 table, 61.5 depth, 34.5 crown, 40.8 pavilion, 80 LGF & 50 stars

Proportions are very promising. And as you can see, this stone is available at 2 different vendors with Yadav having the cheaper price. However, you can use this for leverage at Adiamor if you prefer to deal with them.

Obviously, you will want to request images and video.

 

[daisygrl]

Here's one more I found using RC. Oddly enough, most the stuff I've found has been 80 LGF's today or not met other criteria.

GIA XXX 1.54 G VS2 @ $13,155

Shop Round 1.54-2.04 carat Loose Diamonds at Yadavjewelry.com -

Shop wholesale natural loose diamonds at Yadav Jewelry. As jewelers and diamonds wholesalers since 1983, you can trust Yadav to bring you fine quality, prompt service, and excellent prices.

www.yadavjewelry.com

1.54 Carat G VS2 Round Brilliant Natural Diamond GIA Certified 6203519059 Affinity Cut - D43774936

1.54 carat, Round, G Color, VS2 clarity, GIA Certified Diamond, Affinity Cut Natural Diamond, D43774936

www.adiamor.com

56 table, 61.5 depth, 34.5 crown, 40.8 pavilion, 80 LGF & 50 stars

Proportions are very promising. And as you can see, this stone is available at 2 different vendors with Yadav having the cheaper price. However, you can use this for leverage at Adiamor if you prefer to deal with them.

Obviously, you will want to request images and video.

Oh wow! Thank you for the wide selections of the diamonds. They are all beautiful... I did pick one... the one from JA (1.56ct) - their system, however, is down and they were unable to provide me with GIA at the moment...

Unfortunately, most of the other ones are outside my budget.... as I would prefer them to be in lower $14,000 and VS1... the combo of angles does not have to be perfect... I also have 35/40.8 and it is a fire! I also like 35/40.6. Like you, I love smaller table (my most favorite would be 55-56)

I am still waiting anxiously to receive Ideal Scope report for the 1.61ct from JA... that I would love to share with you, guys to see what you think.

 

[daisygrl]

Here's one more I found using RC. Oddly enough, most the stuff I've found has been 80 LGF's today or not met other criteria.

GIA XXX 1.54 G VS2 @ $13,155

Shop Round 1.54-2.04 carat Loose Diamonds at Yadavjewelry.com -

Shop wholesale natural loose diamonds at Yadav Jewelry. As jewelers and diamonds wholesalers since 1983, you can trust Yadav to bring you fine quality, prompt service, and excellent prices.

www.yadavjewelry.com

1.54 Carat G VS2 Round Brilliant Natural Diamond GIA Certified 6203519059 Affinity Cut - D43774936

1.54 carat, Round, G Color, VS2 clarity, GIA Certified Diamond, Affinity Cut Natural Diamond, D43774936

www.adiamor.com

56 table, 61.5 depth, 34.5 crown, 40.8 pavilion, 80 LGF & 50 stars

Proportions are very promising. And as you can see, this stone is available at 2 different vendors with Yadav having the cheaper price. However, you can use this for leverage at Adiamor if you prefer to deal with them.

Obviously, you will want to request images and video.

Also the last one, from Yadav, is gorgeous! I will keep that one in mind as well... since the price is fine... just that VS2...

 

[sledge]

Is the desire for VS1 a cultural or mind clean thing?

Only asking as you may be able to get a little more stone, or save a few bucks if you considered eye clean SI clarity.

Definitely no judgment as I too prefer VS clarity but I know it comes at an additional expense and for me it's a mind clean thing. Plus, if shopping drop shippers a click or two higher clarity gives you a little wiggle room since you can't vet the stone with your own eyes, or if your definition of eye clean is higher than average.

 

[daisygrl]

Is the desire for VS1 a cultural or mind clean thing?

Only asking as you may be able to get a little more stone, or save a few bucks if you considered eye clean SI clarity.

Definitely no judgment as I too prefer VS clarity but I know it comes at an additional expense and for me it's a mind clean thing. Plus, if shopping drop shippers a click or two higher clarity gives you a little wiggle room since you can't vet the stone with your own eyes, or if your definition of eye clean is higher than average.

It is a mind clear thing as well as the fact that the inclusions (let's say in the middle of the table or close to it) might impact the overall "fire" of the diamond (even if eye clean... ) - For instance, I have just found 1.54ct VS1 for $12,400 and, sadly, all the inclusions were heavily situated right in the middle of the table.... While the one I am considering 1.61ct, is $2,000 more but the inclusion are disperse and nearly negligible so it should not impact the light performance in any way...

See, I would not be this picky, if it were not for $15,000... that is, to me, a lot... so I am trying to get the best I can.

 

[lovedogs]

It is a mind clear thing as well as the fact that the inclusions (let's say in the middle of the table or close to it) might impact the overall "fire" of the diamond (even if eye clean... ) - For instance, I have just found 1.54ct VS1 for $12,400 and, sadly, all the inclusions were heavily situated right in the middle of the table.... While the one I am considering 1.61ct, is $2,000 more but the inclusion are disperse and nearly negligible so it should not impact the light performance in any way...

See, I would not be this picky, if it were not for $15,000... that is, to me, a lot... so I am trying to get the best I can.

If it's graded by GIA or AGS, VS1 will be completely eye clean for essentially everyone unless you have superman vision. Don't let the giant image scare you--remember that a 1.5 ct stone is only going to be about 7mm IRL. If you zoom out that far, I almost guarantee you won't be able to see any of the inclusions.

 

[OoohShiny]

If it's graded by GIA or AGS, VS1 will be completely eye clean for essentially everyone unless you have superman vision. Don't let the giant image scare you--remember that a 1.5 ct stone is only going to be about 7mm IRL. If you zoom out that far, I almost guarantee you won't be able to see any of the inclusions.

Although that is also a reflection of the limited resolution of your viewing screen lol

 

[daisygrl]

If it's graded by GIA or AGS, VS1 will be completely eye clean for essentially everyone unless you have superman vision. Don't let the giant image scare you--remember that a 1.5 ct stone is only going to be about 7mm IRL. If you zoom out that far, I almost guarantee you won't be able to see any of the inclusions.

Oh, sure, I know that... I love VS1 because of that! But if the inclusions (invisible to the eye) are heavily near the center of the diamond, it might impact the light performance of it. My ideal scope for the 1.61ct should arrive today or tomorrow... I can't wait to share it with you and hear what you think.

I have cancelled my hold on the BN one... it did not have as superb light performance.

 

[daisygrl]

I would like to update you on my decision since you all were so helpful. I have received Ideal Scope image from JA for the above mentioned diamond and it is spectacular! I have decided to proceed with the purchase of that diamond.
It is a bit more, yes, than the BN diamond but three out of three diamond experts advised me to go with the 1.61ct due to quality and "sparkle." And there was something that bugged me with the BN diamond... and knowing me, it would always bother me. I believe one should be happy with the purchase when paying $$$$$. The ideal scope is my peace of mind.

This is the diamond I will keep forever so I wanted it to be the best. And it is!

Thank you, all, for your help and suggestions. They were all much appreciated. I would love to show you the whole ring once it is done and received as well as contribute further to the forum.

 

[OoohShiny]

I would like to update you on my decision since you all were so helpful. I have received Ideal Scope image from JA for the above mentioned diamond and it is spectacular! I have decided to proceed with the purchase of that diamond.
It is a bit more, yes, than the BN diamond but three out of three diamond experts advised me to go with the 1.61ct due to quality and "sparkle." And there was something that bugged me with the BN diamond... and knowing me, it would always bother me. I believe one should be happy with the purchase when paying $$$$$. The ideal scope is my peace of mind.

This is the diamond I will keep forever so I wanted it to be the best. And it is!

Thank you, all, for your help and suggestions. They were all much appreciated. I would love to show you the whole ring once it is done and received as well as contribute further to the forum.

Excellent news - we will look forward to pictures!

 

[sledge]

So happy to hear you found "the one". Congratulations!! I'm excited for you.

Be sure to come back and post pics once you get it.

Also, if you get bored I'd love to see the IS image of the 1.61 stone JA provided you.

 

[daisygrl]

So happy to hear you found "the one". Congratulations!! I'm excited for you.

Be sure to come back and post pics once you get it.

Also, if you get bored I'd love to see the IS image of the 1.61 stone JA provided you.

So sorry to get back to you so late.... here is the ideal scope for the 1.61ct. Honestly, when I first saw it , I compared it to JA True Heart ideal scope diamonds and this one was so much better (mine is NOT True Heart.) However, I took my time and examined it closer... and while it is not bad, it is not great either. I wonder what you, guys, think.

 

[OoohShiny]

So sorry to get back to you so late.... here is the ideal scope for the 1.61ct. Honestly, when I first saw it , I compared it to JA True Heart ideal scope diamonds and this one was so much better (mine is NOT True Heart.) However, I took my time and examined it closer... and while it is not bad, it is not great either. I wonder what you, guys, think.

Not an expert... but I think that looks alright. The brightness of the central circle sets the brightness at which leakage starts to occur - i.e. brighter than the circle = leakage.

In this case, the lower left area under the table looks a smidge leaky but it is not that different to the central circle.

Is it perfect? No, but for a GIA XXX it is pretty good.


Which stone was it again? Do you have the angles/HCA score?


EDIT: I see you've started another thread and Garry has replied.

Is this Ideal Scope really ideal?

As some of you might know, I have an eye on the stone: 1.61ct, round cut, VS1, G, 3X, Table: 57%, Crown: 35, Pavilion: 40.8, Depth: 61.8, and about $14,700 (HCA 1.4 - all excellent). I thought she was "the one!" Then I received her Ideal Scope and I am not so sure anymore... What do you, guys...

www.pricescope.com