shape
carat
color
clarity
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Which pair of ACAs would you pick?

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by raindrops on roses, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:06 PM.

  1. raindrops on roses
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    51
    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    by raindrops on roses » Sep 13, 2018 at 12:06 PM
    Hi all! I had recently upgraded my original smaller ACA studs to around 1.6ctw, J VVS/VS. They are really sparkly and I enjoyed the size upgrade, but having worn them for a couple of months now, I've come to realize that J color diamonds really isn't for me, personally. So I'm looking to change them into diamonds of similar ctw, but with H SI1 specs. The WF rep has helped to shortlist 3 diamonds - so I need to pick 2 out of 3.

    https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/compare.aspx?idnos=3961918,3964547,4027052

    Her assessment of the diamonds is as follows:

    All of them made our eye clean. From the side each of these had inclusions that could be seen from 10 inches, though for earrings I’m not sure how much that would really matter. When it comes to the inclusions the 0.816ct (ending in 0067) does have a combination of darker and light inclusions while the 0.816ct (ending in 2009) are all lighter inclusions. The 0.823ct has lighter inclusions as well but to me it’s the easier of the three to see the inclusion from the side.

    I'm confused and waffling, and would really appreciate some advice on which 2 diamonds to pick, given that the other variables such as the color and performance are equal. My current pair of studs are very clean (VVS/VS), and going down to SI1 might be an adjustment. I know this is probably a mind-clean issue, given that the diamonds are for earrings, but I want to make the best/most well-informed choice here. Thank you and sorry for the long post!
     
  2. MissGotRocks
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    10,392
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    by MissGotRocks » Sep 13, 2018 at 7:06 PM
    I think to my eye the second and third stones look more visually matched although they will not be side to side. Perhaps it boils down to what you think about the inclusions but I think the side view won't be nearly as important as it would in a ring.

    How do you plan to set them?
     
  3. ILikeShiny
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,215
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    by ILikeShiny » Sep 13, 2018 at 7:24 PM
    First, all of these would be gorgeous. Its a matter of preference from here on out.

    I’m a “specs” girl, so I like #1 and #3 because the angles are closest to each other (if I’m doing my math right... I’m on my phone so I can’t see all of them at the same time!). Btw, I have very similar stones! And I LOVE mine (even being SI1/2). No inclusions can be seen and they sparkle like mad.
     
    rocks likes this.
  4. raindrops on roses
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    51
    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    by raindrops on roses » Sep 13, 2018 at 7:35 PM
    Thanks for your reply! I'll likely be going with the 6 prong martini settings. My inclination is to pair diamonds #1 and #3, but my dilemma is that diamond #1 has black/darker inclusions (even though the inclusions fall further away from the table). Diamond #2 has light inclusions, but they are right smack in the middle of the table.
     
  5. raindrops on roses
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    51
    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    by raindrops on roses » Sep 13, 2018 at 7:41 PM
    Thanks! I've admired your beautiful studs from the other thread, and it's great that you mention no inclusions can be seen. I feel more reassured about choosing SI1 stones!
     
    ILikeShiny likes this.
  6. sledge
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,717
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
  7. SimoneDi
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    2,660
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2014
    by SimoneDi » Sep 14, 2018 at 10:53 AM
    The size difference between these two is too significant IMO. I prefer AGS-104098170067 and AGS-104101293058. I am all about matching cut proportions, but in this case, the stones will be set as earrings, not as side stones and the actual dimensions are more important.

    @raindrops on roses no one will notice a crystal inclusion in that size, especially since these will be earrings. I wouldn't stress over it.
     
    ILikeShiny likes this.
  8. sledge
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,717
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Sep 14, 2018 at 11:15 AM
    Agree weight difference is funky but 0.07mm variance shouldn't be visible to the naked eye.

    5.92x5.95x3.67 mm
    5.99x6.02x3.71 mm
     
  9. raindrops on roses
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    51
    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    by raindrops on roses » Sep 14, 2018 at 1:10 PM
    Thanks SimoneDi, I'm also inclined to go with the 2 diamonds that you mentioned, since their measurements and angles closely match one another. I'm feeling much more certain about my selection, thanks!
     
    ILikeShiny, sledge and SimoneDi like this.
  10. raindrops on roses
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    51
    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    by raindrops on roses » Sep 14, 2018 at 1:19 PM
    Thanks for your input! Unfortunately, I can indeed easily tell even a 0.07mm difference. My current pair of studs are 5.90x5.92 and 5.97x5.99, and the size difference is definitely noticable even on my ears. My BF and mum can also consistently correctly point out the bigger diamond stud. I never would have thought it was possible, had I not seen it for myself!
     
    ILikeShiny and sledge like this.
  11. sledge
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,717
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2018
    by sledge » Sep 14, 2018 at 1:55 PM
    o_O

    Interesting. It appears everyone in your family has excellent vision. I would think most would struggle to see it side by side, let alone with the distance between your ears.

    Although another PS member has a diamond that is out of round by about 0.09mm or so, best I recall and I spotted that. He couldn't see it though.

    FYI...
    • 0.07mm = 0.002755906 inches = 1/360th of an inch
    If you don't mind, I'd love to see a photograph of them. Not because I don't believe you, but just to see if I can detect the difference. Please don't say which is bigger until I've had a chance to review.
     

Share This Page