Well I am back from TX and my visit to Whiteflash, that was a long week. So what happened. Well the 1.788 was a slightly better performer, it's just got something more going on with it. When I got there Brittany had them in a tray and I did not know which was which. We lookied at them in multiple different lighting sources, while we are completely splitting hairs she saw the same did. Well then she pulled out the 2.08 GVS2. Yep it's bigger. The color difference grading upside down with splitting hairs. Had the G Neenah the same size as the F it would have been harder. It's not like you can go oh that's the G, it took a few moments of intense focus and getting the right angle of light. Face up, i can see any difference but my mind almost creates tint in the g as I know it's a G, Brittany confirmed I am imagining something that's not there. The GVS2 was 100% eye clean and it's a boarder line vs2-VS1 in my opinion. The inclusions are very similar to the FVS1, just a tad bit smaller so easier to spot. The specs are right in my wheelhouse on both stones. The only thing that really concern me o the 2 Ct was one of the "v"s is smaller than all the others, Brittany said it looks like sjustma slight misaligned facet. Still a awesome ACA stone but that bothers me a bit. Yeah I know, it's in my head. I was ther about 2.5 hrs, just love Whiteflash and Brittany is jut "The Best", so helpful. My wife and I did not get to discuss the two diamonds and so we will discuss over the weekend and make the call Monday morning on the which one to go with. She is leaning towards the 2.08 GVs2. I am thinking if we go that way I could alway swap out for a F later if I just can't life with it, lol. I figure we can still use the setting as long as the stone is around the same 8.2 mm size. I will post a video of the two diamonds I took with my iPhone.
300x240.png)