Would you buy a HoF diamond if it was only 5-10% more?? Should I?

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 7/2/2004 9:33:39 AM Paul-Antwerp wrote:

It may be a bit late in the discussion, but I would like to reply to the original question.

You are comparing a HOF I-SI2, with ideal cut H-SI1's. There is a serious basic price difference between H and I-colour, and between SI1 and SI2.

If you take the basic price of I-SI2 at a ratio of 100, then an I-SI1 is about 115, an H-SI2 is about 111 and an H-SI1 is about 130. Therefore, you cannot directly compare an I-SI2 with an H-SI1. The second one has inherently a 30% higher price, so if you get the I-SI2 at the same price, you are paying a premium of 30%.

Live long,----------------

Hey, what he said. And, said so well! HOF isn't all that and a bag of chips.

 

[brandonb]

Hey everyone! I don't think I'm going to get the HoF, but I'll still look at it next week.

Regarding that 1.7 from DI, the inclusions are visable.
"The 1.736 H SI2 diamond has a black crystals on the table edge, a cluster of gray crystals under the table and pinpoints scattered around the stone. At first glace the diamond is eye clean. When scrutinized carefully for a while, you will probably see the black crystal. "

Elepri, are those diamonds on page 13-14 of White Flashes site or Prisescope?

Thanks for the help,
-Brandon

 

[elepri]

Those are on pgs. 13 and, I think 14 on the Whiteflash site, in their Expert selection section. SOrry i wasn't clear -e

 

[brandonb]

What do you guys think of this one?
http://www.whiteflash.com/round_ideal_cut/Round-Ideal-Cut-cut-diamond-553275.htm#

Thanks,
-Brandon

 

[Mara]

I have scrutinized the specs and images on the other WF I SI stones a long time ago...and found that the first one that Val posted from WF in my opinion is best of them all. In terms of price, diameter, angles, etc. Also one of the other ones is only VG and not EX on pol/symm.




So if you are looking between their I SI stones in that carat range, I like the first one posted best still. That VS that you just posted is very nice, the angles are beautiful, the IS image is beautiful. The only thing that would bother me and this is a very small thing is the VG for pol vs EX. That is probably one of the things that knocked this stone out of ACA running. Price is nice though!! And honestly your naked eye can probably not tell VG from EX.




Bummer about the 1.73 from DI. I would still be tempted however, no one looks at a stone to pick out inclusions, and the size is sooo desirable.

 

[valeria101]

Between the 1.53cts I-SI I picked earlier and the current 1.6 I-VS2... sure tha VS2 wins. Both stones are worth a look, but I would bet the 1.6 will look better and not because of clarity alone: everything about it seems to be ever-so-slightly better (size, proportions).

Now, the GIA cert of the VS2 reads "clarity grade based on clouds not shown" - that could mean that there is absolutely NOTHING showing inside that stone or may spell disaster. However, visible (at 1X, not 10X) clouds would have meant SI2 not VS2 - this stone soudns like a rare find, and "rare" for the better. Of all I see mentioned on this thread, your choice (the 1.6, I-VS2) gets my vote, for what that matters.

As a secondary note, the type of inclusions (clouds) does offer an excuse for the non-Ex polish. You may find appropriate explanation of this issue on THIS thread

.

I would not expect those clouds to be easy to catch on camera - but WF's comments will definitely help. Besides, you will get to see the stone before the sale gets final, right?

 

[brandonb]

Val...thanks for that link. I was actually wondering how much of a difference symmetry and polish made. And apparently, on a well cut stone, not much.

With that 1.6 VS2, why would that spell disaster? Also, why would they not show the clouds on the GIA cert? Could there be other inclusions that are not shown on that cert? I'm just wondering because the inclusion map is perfectly clean.

I may not be able to drive down there to check them out. I would like to, but it is a 6-8 hour drive. They seem to be extremely reputable and well liked here, so I may trust them and just have them shipped to me to check them out. Do you think it would be worth the drive to see them in person?

Thanks!

-Brandon

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 7/5/2004 1:56:10 PM brandonb wrote:




Do you think it would be worth the drive to see them in person?

----------------

8h drive! No idea... Would it work to have some merchandise dropped at a local appraiser if available or just to your door if the return policy allows?

The polish and symmetry issue has been debated lots around here (ex. the thread I cited in the previous post - on on which professionals contributed as well). I would think anything starting at "Good" would do. Polish is a non issue - there is no way to see imperfections there unless something is mentioned as part of the clarity grading (such as surface graining). "Symmetry" on the certificate means a different thing than the 3D facet alignment that determines light return (and the H&A pattern in rounds, for example) - as far as I know it would take into account the shape, size and meeting points of facets as well as the overall shape of the stone. These rules are way more lax than teh geometry required for good light return.

This, as far as I know, of course.

 

[brandonb]

I think I may just have them send it to me. Should I be worried about the clouds that are not shown on the GIA report? What exactly does that mean?

Thanks,
-Brandon

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 7/5/2004 9:12:47 PM brandonb wrote:

I think I may just have them send it to me. Should I be worried about the clouds that are not shown on the GIA report? What exactly does that mean?

Thanks,
-Brandon----------------

I do not know... you must see the stone to decide how good or bad such a grading feature is. Very rarely, a diamond with extensive "clouds" would be, well, hazy throughout - but definitely not with a VS grade. Given the high overall clarity grade, I would expect no sight of inclusions without magnification - this is why the offer sounded so good to me.

By definition, "clouds" mean more or less dense aggregations of included particles - each particle too small to identify under 30X.

Dense clouds, with those particles close together, appear as spots inside the stone - but those would be noted on an inclusion chart. Very thin clouds (with the particles far apart) may be a grading factor, but are not plotted - as was the case of this stone.

Such pieces are not at all usual - I hope the seller would chime in with a comment, but that may be stretching PS rules.

 

[brandonb]

Ah, I see. Here is a picture of it they sent to me!

I think this one may be the one!

Thanks!
-Brandon

 

[dcraig]

----------------
On 7/1/2004 8:07:37 PM lop wrote:

I think it depends on what is important to you. If you want to buy locally, this may be a beautiful stone. It boarders on steep and deep (both the crown and pavilion angles are on the steep side, so I would want to see it personally in different lights to see if it gets the dark center of steep stones.) I would also want to really understand the inclusions. You don't want to start seeing them a few weeks from now.

Sorry to jump in late, but I'll add my two cents: I agree that you should see the stone in different lights to see the inclusions... and that you might be upset if you see them in a few weeks and they bother you then. Good luck!

 

[brandonb]

Well, I saw the HoF stone today. It was beautiful. I couldn't see the inclusions at all without magnification. The hearts and arrow patterns were perfect. The I color looked just as bright and white as a G I compared it to. In the outside light, it was extremely clean and white looking. However, this 1.6 through WF seems to be a better stone for a better price. I am going to buy the WF stone and bring it in to the B&M store with the HoF diamond. I told the guy if his HoF diamond is so great, we'll see how it compares to a non-branded ideal cut GIA diamond. Then I'll let my eyes be the judge. If the WF stone looks as good or better, I'll keep it. But if the HoF is truly that much better, then I'll have a decision to make. I'll keep everyone updated. I wanted to thank everyone who has gave me their input on this process, including valeria, vtigger, mara and others. Your help has been greatly appreciated.

Thanks
-Brandon

 

[fire&ice]

Keep us posted. I would be very interested in what your findings are.