Which Diamond is Best? The Tiffany or the Whiteflash?

[CanadaGirl3440]

I won't say which is which.

Clearly the sizes are different. 2.1 vs. 1.2.

Both are H colour.

I know it's hard to tell from a photo (video wouldn't upload so tips on how to do that appreciated!).

What do you think?

 

[Snowdrop13]

Not really a fair question without more info! Tiffany has lovely stones but I'd hazard that, at least with the ACAs Whiteflash cut quality would be better.

 

[CanadaGirl3440]

Hey Snowdrop. Yes, I agree it is not really a fair question. I was trying to post a video and tried all different formats but to no avail. I finally posted a screenshot in the end. Doesn't really do it justice.

I will post the video showing both diamonds from every different angle under the jewelry store lighting if I can work out how to do.

I will identify which ring is which after I get 20 votes!!!

 

[ringo865]

What is the clarity of each stone?

 

[CanadaGirl3440]

2.1 Carat
H Color
VS1

1.2 Carat
H Color
VVS1

 

[tyty333]

Hard to say about the Tiffany but Whiteflash provides all the images necessary to know that it is a well cut stone (aset, idealscope,
H&A shots, AGS000 grading) and a video to boot minus the major up cost for the Tiffany name.

The picture is not enough to even comment on the stones (they both arent facing the camera).

So...what is your opinion since you saw them both in person?

 

[gm89uk]

No one can answer you reliably from the info provided. If you want meaningful answers, you'll need to give more. Try youtube for video.

From what I've seen around these forums, and elsewhere, ACA WF is much more consistent in cut quality than tiffany.

 

[AprilBaby]

I would guess the WF. And I'm also guessing the WF is the larger stone given the Tiffany mark up. I suppose these two are the same price?

 

[bmfang]

I'm guessing the 1.2 is the Tiffany based solely off the band and prong design. From the pic provided, both stones look as good they can for an off centre camera shot in that type of lighting.

 

[CanadaGirl3440]

The 2.118 Carat, H, VS1 is my new ring from Whiteflash - it is from their "A Cut Above" selection. We popped into Tiffany to compare cut quality. They didn't have an H in a similar size so I put it next to a 1.2 Carat, H, VVS1 from Tiffany for the sole purpose of comparing cut. This video was shot on an iphone under Tiffany lighting - you can see the oscillation effect they use in their stores to make the diamonds sparkle!

The Tiffany diamonds are beautifully cut but it is interesting to note that they look more "grey" in appearance. You can see the fire and brilliance within their diamonds but the overall body is - on average - darker than I expected. My Whiteflash H coloured diamond looks whiter than the Tiffany H and reflects back a similar amount of sparkle and fire.

The effect held even when I put the Whiteflash diamond next to a higher coloured F Tiffany diamond. The Tiffany diamonds are clear and sparkly but darker. I prefer the whiteness of my Whiteflash stone.

Can this colour difference be attributed to cut alone?

I am not an expert by any means so all of this is from the perspective of a normal consumer.

 

[ringo865]

Your stone is definitely brighter. Great stone!!

Out if curiosity, was the smaller Tiffany comparable pricewise to your gigantic WF ACA?

 

[kenny]

Canadagirl3440, posting a link to a personal videos on PS violates the rules you agreed to when you registered.
Reason for this rule: Bad people with computer skills can locate YOU via your Youtube channel.
PS does not want to be associated with you losing your security and safety since this is a diamond site.

May I recommend you edit your post to remove the link?
It is only possible to do this for 45 minutes after your post went up.
If you don't remove it, Admin likely will, eventually ... but I'd rather protect my security ASAP.

 

[CanadaGirl3440]

Your stone is definitely brighter. Great stone!!

Out if curiosity, was the smaller Tiffany comparable pricewise to your gigantic WF ACA?

I don't recall the price on the 1.2 Carat Tiffany ring. However, we did do a price comparison on similar stones at Tiffany (Singapore) before purchasing.

Tiffany 2.06 Carat, H, VVS1- US$65,991.47
Whiteflash 2.118 Carat, H, VS1 - US$25,987 (including wire discount).

Needless to say, we went with the Whiteflash stone and are thrilled with the diamond!

 

[CanadaGirl3440]

Canadagirl3440, posting a link to a personal videos on PS violates the rules you agreed to when you registered.
Reason for this rule: Bad people with computer skills can locate YOU via your Youtube channel.
PS does not want to be associated with you losing your security and safety since this is a diamond site.

May I recommend you edit your post to remove the link?
It is only possible to do this for 45 minutes after your post went up.
If you don't remove it, Admin likely will, eventually ... but I'd rather protect my security ASAP.

Video removed! Thanks Kenny. You raised an excellent point. We just wanted to share our recent buying experience with others to try to help out folks trying to decide on a diamond.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

You made a very wise choice to get the ACA! H VS1 is great, too!

 

[MissGotRocks]

So anyone want to venture a guess as to why the Tiffany stone looks 'darker'? Would you attribute it to size, lighting, cut, rough or something else? Just curious as to what everyone's thoughts are about it!

 

[bunnycat]

So anyone want to venture a guess as to why the Tiffany stone looks 'darker'? Would you attribute it to size, lighting, cut, rough or something else? Just curious as to what everyone's thoughts are about it!

I read or saw something recently that was saying something about shallower crown angles (but not so shallow as to be out of excellent cut) can make a stone look a little greyer overall in body tone. So the only way to know if that may have played a role in this case is if we had the Tiffany stone specs....

 

[flyingpig]

So anyone want to venture a guess as to why the Tiffany stone looks 'darker'? Would you attribute it to size, lighting, cut, rough or something else? Just curious as to what everyone's thoughts are about it!

I say lighting and/or photography.

Looking at the photos, the main light is coming from a very specific direction (1/2 o clock) and angle (narrow and high) based on looking at the shade and light reflection. The smaller stone is simply not exposed to the same lighting condition as the bigger stone; even a slightest tilt results in a big difference, because each facet grabs and returns light from a very specific and narrow range of angles only.

Both diamonds are not exposed to enough diffused light, therefore both appear rather dark.

 

[bunnycat]

So anyone want to venture a guess as to why the Tiffany stone looks 'darker'? Would you attribute it to size, lighting, cut, rough or something else? Just curious as to what everyone's thoughts are about it!

I say lighting and/or photography.

Looking at the photos, the main light is coming from a very specific direction (1/2 o clock) and angle (narrow and high) based on looking at the shade and light reflection. The smaller stone is simply not exposed to the same lighting condition as the bigger stone; even a slightest tilt results in a big difference, because each facet grabs and returns light from a very specific and narrow range of angles only.

Both diamonds are not exposed to enough diffused light, therefore both appear rather dark.

That too, but I didn't get to see the video the others did. And I did see a video recently where the crown angle played a part in a greyer "flatter" body tone in a fair comparison. So if the remark was made off the video or just the image... then who knows...

 

[CanadaGirl3440]

Hi everyone,

It's not the lighting or the photography as I was there and I viewed both diamonds in person. I compared my H coloured Whiteflash to a smaller Tiffany diamond which was also an H for the purpose of matching colour only. The Tiffany was nicely cut but darker grey in appearance than the Whiteflash.

I then asked for a Tiffany diamond of a similar size to mine so she took out an F that was slightly larger (2.2 Carats). It had the same deep grey but sparkly appearance.

From what I have witnessed there is a real difference when comparing a Whiteflash Cut Above Diamond to a Tiffany in terms of appearance. Both are beautiful but I don't understand why the Tiffany stones appear darker. It's like you can see deeper into the stone because of the darker colour and see internal sparkles within the diamond whereas the Whiteflash is always reflecting back light and looks brighter.

Any other opinions as to why this is?

I will stop into a larger Tiffany outlet soon where I know they have an H two carat stone, VVS1 - assuming it hasn't already sold. I will take more photos this time of two diamonds the same size and colour side by side.

Just wondering if the deep grey is an indication of a desirable trait in diamonds which is why Tiffany chooses them.

I absolutely prefer the Whiteflash but to be fair I am biased as this is the ring my Fiance and I selected together.

I could talk about diamonds all day!

 

[bunnycat]

Hi everyone,

It's not the lighting or the photography as I was there and I viewed both diamonds in person. I compared my H coloured Whiteflash to a smaller Tiffany diamond which was also an H for the purpose of matching colour only. The Tiffany was nicely cut but darker grey in appearance than the Whiteflash.

I then asked for a Tiffany diamond of a similar size to mine so she took out an F that was slightly larger (2.2 Carats). It had the same deep grey but sparkly appearance.

From what I have witnessed there is a real difference when comparing a Whiteflash Cut Above Diamond to a Tiffany in terms of appearance. Both are beautiful but I don't understand why the Tiffany stones appear darker. It's like you can see deeper into the stone because of the darker colour and see internal sparkles within the diamond whereas the Whiteflash is always reflecting back light and looks brighter.

Any other opinions as to why this is?

I will stop into a larger Tiffany outlet soon where I know they have an H two carat stone, VVS1 - assuming it hasn't already sold. I will take more photos this time of two diamonds the same size and colour side by side.

Just wondering if the deep grey is an indication of a desirable trait in diamonds which is why Tiffany chooses them.

I absolutely prefer the Whiteflash but to be fair I am biased as this is the ring my Fiance and I selected together.

I could talk about diamonds all day!

there's tons of videos about diamond cut from various places. This is the one I saw that talks about the difference in sparkle between 3 XXX diamonds. To analyze what may have been going on in the stones you saw, you need more than just a picture. You need IS or asets of everything, diamond specs for the Tiffany stones...etc...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz3qn2Tx6oI

 

[CanadaGirl3440]

I don't think Tiffany provides ASET images of their stones. Do they? I think consumers are just supposed to trust it because it is a Tiffany diamond.

Here is the Ideal Scope and ASET for my diamond.

 

[bunnycat]

I don't think Tiffany provides ASET images of their stones. Do they? I think consumers are just supposed to trust it because it is a Tiffany diamond.

Here is the Ideal Scope and ASET for my diamond.

Exactly....that IS exactly how jewelry retailers have operated for many many years. You should just "trust" them. Do you really think Tiffany vets their stones to Super Ideal specs? Because that IS what a WF ACA diamond is. You'd need to do your own. Buy an idealscope or asetscope to compare. The video shows you how 3 "same on paper" excellent cut diamonds perform differently, and to give you a possible (can't know for sure without tests and metrics) reason why for what you saw. Those same XXX type stones are going to be found at Tiffany. Why? Because up until a few years ago, cut quality was not the focus- color and clarity only...Even now at most jewelry stores, that is all they are going to mention. It's a lot to know even the basics about past cut and clarity...especially for a retail associate.

I'd never be able to work at a place like that. I'd be like "you can't buy that one, it sucks. So does that one...and that one too...."

 

[CanadaGirl3440]

Does anyone have suggestions on how I can upload a .mov file so I can show a video of the diamonds? Is there a different extension that is accepted by this site? Are we even allowed to post movie files in the chat forums?

 

[kenny]

Does anyone have suggestions on how I can upload a .mov file so I can show a video of the diamonds? Is there a different extension that is accepted by this site? Are we even allowed to post movie files in the chat forums?

Sorry, but PS doesn't allow links to personal videos.
This is for security reasons, this being a diamond site and all.
Reportedly, it is possible to find you via a link to your private Youtube account.

.mov is not one of the file formats that can be uploaded.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Interesting discussion. My guess from the picture would have been lighting as well.

I could concur with the idea that ACA stones are super vetted but if you look at them enough, you will realize that they choose many different crown/pavilion combos in their ACA stones. That being said, it can't only be because of a shallower crown angle that the Tiffany stones appear 'darker' than the ACA stones because some of the ACA stones have shallower crown angles as well. Certainly nothing below 34 - guess it depends on what you call shallow in terms of crown angle.

And yet, both of those stones that you photographed are probably beautiful - just in different ways. We all know that you can cut two diamonds exactly the same and while overall their look is very similar, you could still find small differences in each stone if you studied them for a bit.

 

[tanalasta]

Lighting in Tiffany stores if I recall correctly are spot direct LED's from the ceiling and in the displays which can accentuate fire. Hold it closer to a window in natural light and they appear different again.

Not sure if my recollection is correct re the Tiffany environment.

However, in general order of likelihood of an ideal cut quality:
- Triple Excellent GIA: Usually a quality cut but some variability in light performance as to what the 'excellent cut' is.
- AGS 000 - somewhat more reliable that the cut and light performance are ideal
- Branded diamonds with specific requirements to meet the top grade of ideal cut
e.g. WF ACA ; Brian Gavin etc...

I would say Tiffany sit somewhere between the Triple Excellent GIA and AGS000.

In terms of markup, roughly back of the envelope ACA have a 10-20% mark-up over the ones that don't quite meet the grade. Tiffany has a >20-30% mark-up.

I'm sure someone more in the know will actually correct my numbers.