Your opinion...did I pay too much?

[ihavenoclue]

I'm new to this forum and a relative diamond newbie. I'm sure this thread has been posted many of times before but I could certainly use your input/feedback/suggestions.

I recently went to a jeweler to purchase a brilliant cut round diamond in a solitaire setting (14k white gold). I'm feeling as if I may have not made the best decision but would appreciate your input.

What do you feel the following setup is worth...what should someone pay for for this exact thing?

I appreciate your help and input in advance.

Thank you.

 

[two_little_birds]

Using the search function above, I found 5 diamonds with the following specs:

SI2 Clarity
F Color
1.22 ct
Good Cut
Table 57%
GIA Certification

Price ranges from $7175 to $8332

How much did you pay?

 

[diamondloveaffair]

Got to be honest here, I wouldn't pay a single cent for such a ring. Cut grade is really all that matters in round diamonds. In my personal opinion, a GIA good grade just ain't worth forking out any money for.

 

[ihavenoclue]

I paid about $8500. $8900 out the door with the setting.

 

[heididdl]

a little sensitivity here he already bought the ring

 

[Niel]

can you return it? I think if you feel like "maybe i picked poorly" you're always going to look at it and think that. If you are within the return period return it and we can help you find something you feel fabulous about

a little sensitivity here he already bought the ring

+100000

 

[ihavenoclue]

I have thick skin...and I asked for opinions so I expect nothing but real ones.

I don't know if I can return it or not. Worked with someone I know through someone.

I like the ring and think it looks good but that doesn't mean I'm not second guessing.

 

[Niel]

If you can return it I would. With your budget you can get something of better quality. If you can't return it, stop second guessing. You said you think its lovely, and you were comfortable with what you paid at least at the beginning or you wouldn't have bought it.

 

[ihavenoclue]

If you can return it I would. With your budget you can get something of better quality. If you can't return it, stop second guessing. You said you think its lovely, and you were comfortable with what you paid at least at the beginning or you wouldn't have bought it.

I am looking at it now and it looks good. So you're saying that another stone with a higher cut, say VG, would be much more brilliant than the stone in my image?

Perhaps I should call the person I bought it from. Go down in size, up in cut and leave all else the same?

 

[Dancing Fire]

I have thick skin...and I asked for opinions so I expect nothing but real ones.

I don't know if I can return it or not. Worked with someone I know through someone.

I like the ring and think it looks good but that doesn't mean I'm not second guessing.

Rule #1 ...never buy a diamond from a friend of a friend.

 

[Niel]

Cut is most important. VG isn't really even what you want to strive for. You want the cut grade to me Excellent. And, to add to it, not all GIA EX cuts are equal, there are specific angles you look for to try and get the best cut. As for clarity, if you can find an eye clean si2, then yes leave it that clarity, but I wouldn't buy one that has visible inclusions when you look at it from like 6 inches away. Now eye clean si2s do exist but they are harder to come by. Either bump your clarity up to vs2, si1, or have some patience while waiting for a nice eye clean stone, don't settle foe one with visible inclusions.
Color is a personal thing, but something you can use to get a lot for your money. No reason you need an F, when an I is super white when its well cut. Sometimes a seller will put the stone upside down on white paper to show you the color in it, that of course is the way to show the most color in a stone. That's not a great guide, I mean, when will you ever look at a diamond like that again? Take a look at this video to see how white a stone can look even at "near colorless ranges

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vI3Tkd3VQU&sns=em

Shopping at online vendors you could get an eye clean I color well cut stone thats 1.2-1.3 ct for under 9k, with plenty left for a simple solitaire

 

[westcoastmom]

In direct sunlight and under certain warm lights, I could definitely tell the difference between a G and I.
To me, color and cut come first.

 

[Niel]

In direct sunlight and under certain warm lights, I could definitely tell the difference between a G and I.
To me, color and cut come first.

I am not claiming an I won't be less stark white. , but when it is alone and not compared to a G or H an I isn't yellowy or unattractive! and to an untrained eye for diamonds an I color will be fairly unnoticeable. Much less so than a poor cut, large inclusions, or a reduction in size would be

 

[hawk25]

I agree with the others, if there's any way you can return it, I suggest doing that. If you can't, then remember how you thought how good the ring looked when you bought it, and tell yourself that PS consists of crazy diamond enthusiasts

I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of people out there haven't seen anything better than a GIA very good, or even only a good cut diamond. I for one had no idea before coming to PS, and just accepted what the mall stores offered. So don't feel too bad! If you manage to return it, make a new thread and we can help you out. It would have to be a lower color, like Niel mentioned, to get around the same size, but the difference in cut would be like night and day.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Just a word of wisdom even if it is too late this time...never buy jewelry unless you have an unconditional return period. Most diamonds look pretty good, but why spend $8k unless you are going to get excellent cut? I would try to return it because you can probably do better elsewhere. But if they absolutely won't let you, then tell them you want to exchange for GIA Excellent cut only. And come here and run the cert by us before you commit to a stone.

 

[JulieN]

Shallow angles plus very thin girdle is higher chip risk.

 

[Christina...]

I agree that the girdle is a risk. For this reason alone I would try to return the stone.

 

[Lula]

It scores a 0.9 on the HCA (Holloway Cut Advisor https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca) and HCA labels it a "BIC" which stands for brilliant ideal cut http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/23_bicfic.htm. The HCA is used on this site as a selection/rejection tool, and stones scoring under 2 on the HCA are considered worthy of further consideration. The HCA uses a mathematical metric that favors shallow crown/shallow pavilion combinations such as your stone. So you did not necessarily choose a "bad" stone, even considering the GIA Good cut grade. There are many "flavors" of round cut diamonds. Most people on this forum prefer the Tolkowsky Ideal Cut (TIC) which is a deeper stone with a smaller table. Others prefer diamonds that are bigger and brighter looking -- diamonds cut similar to yours -- with larger tables and shallow crown and pavilion angles.

The biggest concern with this stone is the thin girdle, as others have mentioned, which may be why GIA gave it only a "Good" cut grade. You will need to make sure the stone is insured, and you may want to reconsider such an open setting -- maybe a halo or a six-prong setting to protect the girdle.

There is nothing wrong with paying a bit more for an F color -- people notice color before inclusions, unless the inclusions are affecting the brilliance of the diamond or are dark and visible within normal viewing distance. Color and clarity are personal preferences.

So, in my view, there's really no reason to rush off and return the diamond. It has the potential to be a very nice diamond, based on the HCA's evaluation. It's simply not the type of diamond that is preferred on this site, which is why so many posters are suggesting that you exchange the stone. You need to take into account your preferences for color, clarity, carat weight, and appearance. BIC and a TIC cut stones have very different appearances, but that doesn't mean one is necessarily "better" than another.

ETA: I see that GIA rated the symmetry as "very good" which also indicates to me that this stone may not be as badly cut as some are suggesting.

 

[Lula]

Got to be honest here, I wouldn't pay a single cent for such a ring. Cut grade is really all that matters in round diamonds. In my personal opinion, a GIA good grade just ain't worth forking out any money for.

There are many diamonds that receive a GIA excellent rating that are not well-cut. See this article for some examples:
http://www.whiteflash.com/about-diamonds/diamond-education/laboratory-cut-grades-what-the.htm

I don't recommend buying a diamond by the numbers or a laboratory cut grade alone. Visual inspection is necessary and personal preference for 60/60, TIC, BIC, and FIC "flavors" must be taken into account.

 

[Niel]

I thought the HCA wasn't applicable for that type of symmetry

 

[TC1987]

It's most likely a very pretty diamond. But the very thin girdle would concern me, too.

Here are some other points to ponder:
That diamond might be better suited to a pendant than a ring because of the thin girdle and also because of the shallower depth. Look directly at the table of the diamond and then move the diamond very close to your face and watch it as you move it back to arm's length. Does it look brighter farther away and darker close-up? If so, it has "head obstruction." You can look that up here. And you might want a deeper diamond. Or not. These things are a personal preference, and different people prefer different looks.

Is the fire more around the rim of the diamond and is it seen more when you rock the diamond from side to side? With that low crown angle and lower crown % and big table, it might be. The larger table + flatter / lower crown is why the HCA cut adviser labels it BIC, or Brilliant Ideal Cut. Those tend to be bright diamonds but not as firey as FIC firey ideal cut or TIC Tolk Ideal Cut. There's nothing wrong with any of those. People just might prefer one type more than the other two, or something.

If you have a Hearts On Fire dealer, you could go there and look at some of their round diamonds with the hearts & arrows. Most of those probably fall in the range of what we PS people have bought, but an unbranded H&A can cost you a lot less money than a HoF. I just suggest them as a known entity that's readily available for inspection.

I always link this thread because it's so easy to find. It's a little restrictive in th range of values it allows, but it's shortcut to picking the kind of modern H&A diamond that you see on PS. [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/preferred-specs-cheat-sheet-for-rounds.88548/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/preferred-specs-cheat-sheet-for-rounds.88548/[/URL]

 

[Lula]

I thought the HCA wasn't applicable for that type of symmetry

'

Very good symmetry? I think HCA assumes very good or excellent symmetry and a medium girdle. But I'll double-check that.

 

[two_little_birds]

I have thick skin...and I asked for opinions so I expect nothing but real ones.

I don't know if I can return it or not. Worked with someone I know through someone.

I like the ring and think it looks good but that doesn't mean I'm not second guessing.

Rule #1 ...never buy a diamond from a friend of a friend.

+1

Try your best to return it, we can help you get a MUCH better stone. $9K is a lot to drop on a stone that you're already questioning, the setting itself was probably only $300 or $400.

 

[TC1987]

I thought the HCA wasn't applicable for that type of symmetry

The caveat on it says "HCA gets no info on symmetry, polish and minor facets; use it only to reject likely bad performing diamonds to narrow down your final selection." The HCA is just a first-pass test of the diamond's geometry. I owned an older diamond that the HCA labeled a only 2.2 or so. But it was a gorgeous diamond and a good performer, just a bit more "unique" appearance than the modern H&A very symmetrical look. It was also a shallower stone in the 58-59% range, and spready for its weight, and a big table, and less than very good symmetry. It was out-of-round, in fact. And the fire was more out around the rim. But it had a very good spread and showy look, and definitely had fire.
The diamond in question in this thread is nowhere near as wonky as that one I had. A diamond doesn't have to be perfect to be pretty.

 

[heididdl]

Learned my lesson over paid for my 2.41 EGL international studs by about $1,000 but I love them and lesson learned but I will never buy anything without ideal cut GIA certification. That being said as diamondappraiser said to me did I over pay maybe but it is still a beautiful ring (earrings in my case) and your GF will love it as you gave it to her. This is of course if he will not take it back.

 

[Lula]

I thought the HCA wasn't applicable for that type of symmetry

The caveat on it says "HCA gets no info on symmetry, polish and minor facets; use it only to reject likely bad performing diamonds to narrow down your final selection." The HCA is just a first-pass test of the diamond's geometry. I owned an older diamond that the HCA labeled a only 2.2 or so. But it was a gorgeous diamond and a good performer, just a bit more "unique" appearance than the modern H&A very symmetrical look. It was also a shallower stone in the 58-59% range, and spready for its weight, and a big table, and less than very good symmetry. It was out-of-round, in fact. And the fire was more out around the rim. But it had a very good spread and showy look, and definitely had fire.
The diamond in question in this thread is nowhere near as wonky as that one I had. A diamond doesn't have to be perfect to be pretty.

+1

And here's a link to a thread that discusses symmetry variations and the HCA.
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/gia-excellent-vs-very-good-symmetry.9060/

 

[distracts]

Yeah, even before seeing the HCA results, based just on the GIA cert, I guessed this was likely a BIC-type. If OP finds it suitable and likes that type, then I'd say all is good.

 

[SB621]

Just a word of wisdom even if it is too late this time...never buy jewelry unless you have an unconditional return period. Most diamonds look pretty good, but why spend $8k unless you are going to get excellent cut? I would try to return it because you can probably do better elsewhere. But if they absolutely won't let you, then tell them you want to exchange for GIA Excellent cut only. And come here and run the cert by us before you commit to a stone.

Bam +1!!

I would return it if you can and look somewhere else for a better cut diamond. If you can't return it then I'm sure it is still lovely and you definitely weren't ripped off. You just could have found a better cut diamond for a little bit less. Shame yes, horrible no.

 

[Dreamer_D]

It scores a 0.9 on the HCA (Holloway Cut Advisor https://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca) and HCA labels it a "BIC" which stands for brilliant ideal cut http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/23_bicfic.htm. The HCA is used on this site as a selection/rejection tool, and stones scoring under 2 on the HCA are considered worthy of further consideration. The HCA uses a mathematical metric that favors shallow crown/shallow pavilion combinations such as your stone. So you did not necessarily choose a "bad" stone, even considering the GIA Good cut grade. There are many "flavors" of round cut diamonds. Most people on this forum prefer the Tolkowsky Ideal Cut (TIC) which is a deeper stone with a smaller table. Others prefer diamonds that are bigger and brighter looking -- diamonds cut similar to yours -- with larger tables and shallow crown and pavilion angles.

The biggest concern with this stone is the thin girdle, as others have mentioned, which may be why GIA gave it only a "Good" cut grade. You will need to make sure the stone is insured, and you may want to reconsider such an open setting -- maybe a halo or a six-prong setting to protect the girdle.

There is nothing wrong with paying a bit more for an F color -- people notice color before inclusions, unless the inclusions are affecting the brilliance of the diamond or are dark and visible within normal viewing distance. Color and clarity are personal preferences.

So, in my view, there's really no reason to rush off and return the diamond. It has the potential to be a very nice diamond, based on the HCA's evaluation. It's simply not the type of diamond that is preferred on this site, which is why so many posters are suggesting that you exchange the stone. You need to take into account your preferences for color, clarity, carat weight, and appearance. BIC and a TIC cut stones have very different appearances, but that doesn't mean one is necessarily "better" than another.

ETA: I see that GIA rated the symmetry as "very good" which also indicates to me that this stone may not be as badly cut as some are suggesting.

I also agree with all of this. Polish is only Good and symmetry very good which may hurt cut grade (I can't recall the metric) but the numbers are not terrible, and the photo clearly shows a bright stone. The super long lower halves help as does the shallower crown -- the proportions can work. That said, the HCA is a rejection tool -- the diamond requires further evaluation. Did you by chance compare it to a more standard GIA Excellent cut to see if you are happy with this type of cut?

A safer bet is to get a GIA Ex cut stone that also has an HCA score under 2. In the end, in my opinion the most important thing is paying a fair price for what you bought and going in with eyes open regarding your choice and any compromises you may have made from the "ideal" desired specs. You can use Blue Nile to look for comps, or the search tool above, though you will need to select "Good cut" grade.

 

[Adrienne2006]

Lula,

Thanks for the link you posted. Could you tell me the names of what each diamond is called in the article (60/60, Bic, HOF,Tic)? For example my eye went straight to No. 6 as the most beautiful to me, as I scrolled down to the numbers it sounded like a PS Diamond : ) Is No. 6 called a specific name? This adds a new dimenson to people's searches. Thanks!