Which Whiteflash diamond looks better?

[Tcf_diamond]

Hi Pricescope Community

I am trying to decide between two diamonds from Whiteflash and would love any advice; specifically on table size, angles, ASET images etc.

Which diamond would you choose and why?

Diamond #1
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3928597.htm

Diamond #2
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3932393.htm

Thanks so much in advance! I really appreciate it.

 

[Lachinoiserie]

The first one is already sold, isn’t it?

 

[Tcf_diamond]

I recently purchased the first one, but before it ships out, I'm wondering if I should switch it for the second option instead.

Will the smaller table on diamond #2 give it more fire?

I'm just not sure which diamond looks better on paper.

Any opinions would be helpful

 

[gm89uk]

Based on stats, #2 would be my ideal proportions. Different flavours, different tastes. #2 likely to be slightly more fiery.

Ask WF to make side by side video and compare them in person and give their professional opinion.

 

[EvaEvans]

#2 looks better! I prefer smaller table and crown height above 15%.

 

[tanalasta]

The second diamond goes over the magic 3.0 decimal point. Whiteflash are quite honest in their opinions and you can ask them to compare side by side and give you an answer Re: eye clean, look, colour and what they think is better.

The first one is unavailable.

Hopefully you put it on hold before posting here.

 

[rockysalamander]

#2 looks to have a cleaner table visually, although both look eyeclean. I suspect in person you would have difficulty telling them apart, but the angles on #2 are more appealing to my taste in diamonds.

 

[jadesilver]

There’s probably going to be a significant price difference since it’s 2.9 vs 3 ct right, yet it will look the same size?

I’d personally buy the 2.9 to avoid the price jump, knowing that WF ACAs are gonna be outstanding anyway and I don’t need to spend the extra money.

But I would ask WF to compare the two diamonds, make a video and tell me their thoughts.

I don’t think you need to spend a lot more, I don’t know how much more for the 3 ct since they are both ACAs and already at the top of their level, but that’s just me.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Proportion wise #2 .small table + a high crown..

 

[Tcf_diamond]

Thank you so much for all of your responses!
Diamond #1 (2.968 H VS2) is actually slightly more expensive because it's a VS2.
Based on your replies, it looks like diamond number 2 has better angles (3.088 H SI1). I think I also like the smaller table on this one as well.
I will get more information from Whiteflash, and additional comparison photos etc on Monday; but it looks like I will be exchanging the first diamond for the second one instead!

Thanks again for your opinions!

 

[tanalasta]

Good luck!
Don't forget you can also ask questions
i.e. Is it a high 'H' colour and are the SI1 inclusions visible if one looks closer/at an angle (they may be, even for a VS2) and how much it matters? They're obviously eye-clean according to the WF definitions. The colour and inclusion tolerance may be more noticeable in a diamond that size. The main one is the inclusion at 8 o'clock.

You're certainly 'up there' in diamond choices! There are no "bad" ACA diamonds. The whiteflash criteria is very strict so at the end of the day, it's splitting hairs. But you cannot call a 2.9xCt a 3ct so decide if having a 3Ct really will mean something to you and your FI.

 

[GearGirly]

I definitely think you can call your 2.9 carat a three carat, so ifnthat natyers to you I think most people ifntheybasked would be comfortable with you saying it’s three carat lol. But I like number 2 as well.

 

[bmfang]

As others have said, get the folks are WF to check both stones for you and give you their opinions on which is better. Ultimately the decision is yours.

If both of these are around the same price and I had no issues with budget, #2 looks cleaner to the eye than #1 to me. Like its specs as well.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yes, I agree with having a WF gemologist discuss the pros and cons of each with you. Mentally, I prefer VS2 and up. So I'd have a hard time going with an SI1 in a 3 ct stone. Be sure inclusions are not visible from the sides of the stone, because clarity is graded from the top. A stone can be eyeclean from the top and not the sides. I see someone above did mention checking the clarity closely, which is important.

I do like the measurements of the second one, but the first one faces up at the same diameter of the other. So really, checking which is the higher H color would be important to me, and how eyeclean the stones are would be the other factor. Both are fabulous stones, so you can't go wrong. Just try to determine which is best overall.