11 replies to this topic

[south]

I am in my final stages of narrowing down an engagement stone and thanks to the wealth of shared information on this site I have been able to narrow down what I want (well sort of). With that being said I am well aware that buying a stone is not the same as shopping for a high end watch. I also know that with any large purchase knowledge certainly provides much bargaining power when it comes to getting the most your money. Here is where I seek the valued, experienced opinion of members on this forum


What I want:

Round Cut

1.50 carat

Budget: 10k (not counting setting)

Certification: GIA/AGS

Color: G or better

The stone will be set in a solitaire platinum setting with no baguettes



That being said, I would like to determine the characteristics that I should look for in a stone that will provide me with the most beautiful stone, in a platinum solitaire setting for the money.


Taking the above limited details into account, what characteristics, measurements or cut/polish/symmetry would you recommend I look for in a stone?


You advice is greatly appreciated.

Edited by south, 04 June 2008 - 05:34 PM.

[barry]

You will have to revise your budget upwards by a significant amount. A GIA or AGS, 1.50 Round, G color, Ideal cut for 10K does not exist.

[Adylon]

barry, on Wednesday, Jun 4 2008, 10:22 PM, said:

You will have to revise your budget upwards by a significant amount. A GIA or AGS, 1.50 Round, G color, Ideal cut for 10K does not exist.

A 1.50ct GIA EX G/SI2 might be possible to purchase for 10k, I'm sure I could find a decent one. 10k is definately doable for 1.50ct GIA EX H/SI2, maybe even H/SI1.

[jan]

I would look for the best cut grade my dollar can buy. Even if I had to change my color and clarity grade or size range to get it. An ideal cut diamond will look bigger to the eye and get alot of sparkle if you choose the right one. There are plenty of stones in the 10,000 range, you just need help in sorting out and finding the right one.

[barry]

Yosef;

South made no mention of clarity. By the tone of his post it appeared that SI clarity was not an option. VS for 10K in a 1.5 GIA/AGS does not exist. If SI is an option that is a different story.

South, are you OK with a SI-2 clarity?

[denverappraiser]

Hi South,

I think you need to nail down your specs a little further. It’s a balancing act that sort of reminds me of the old whack-a-mole carnival game. When you hit one, it comes up somewhere else. With most people, the price is the one that is carved in stone and you’re trying to adjust everything else in order to get the most satisfactory result within that limit. As has been pointed out above, you’ve omitted 2 major attributes that can have a huge effect on price namely clarity and cut and your budget forces that at least one, possibly both of these are going to be pushing the limits of what is popularly acceptable.

Spend some time playing with the database at the top of the page titled ‘find online jeweler’. Even if you have no intention of buying online this can be a useful tool in seeing how the various attributes relate to each other and to the price. If you haven’t done so, you should also spend some time visiting real jewelry stores to get a feel for what the various terms mean in real life. Can you live with an SI2? Is an ideal cut something you’re willing to pay extra for? Can you see the difference between an F and an H color? Something is going to have to give and it’s that’s a decision to make thoughtfully.

Neil

[south]

First let me say thank you for the many replies. If I were to revise my original question and present the below details, what would the pricing and measurement opinions be?

Round Cut
1.50 carat
Budget: Open
Certification: GIA
Color: F, G
Clarity: SI2
Cut: Ex
Polish: Ex
Symmetry: Ex
Measurements: ?
Table: ?

It seems as though the actual measurements of even an excellent cut stone may vary from stone to stone and have a significant impact on the way the stone captures light. Assuming a GIA "excellent" cut rating, what measurements should I be focused on to optimally capture the beauty of the stone? Maybe I should be asking, what measurements fall on the low end of the GIA "excellent" parameters?

Edited by south, 05 June 2008 - 05:18 PM.

[barry]

South;

It is impossible to determine a diamonds beauty from external measurements. You have to see it or if you're shopping on line have the Vendor see, examine, and evaluate it and send you the pertinent data and photos together with their opinion.

This week we evaluated two diamonds in the 1.50 carat range for a client. Both had H&A patterns with GIA grading and excellent "numbers".

Diamond # 1 was a G-SI/2; Diamond #2 was a I/SI-2.

The I/SI-2 had inclusions that were thin, wispy white lines that were off to the side and easily prongable or to be set with the prong(s) adjacent to these ID markers (our preference). The stone faced up like a G color because of its excellent light refraction. A Beauty and a great value!

The G/SI-2 had a round deep hole in the girdle with black inclusions under the Table, off center. The diamond faced up dull and opaque due to the nature of the diamond rough it was cut from.

"Excellent" cut ratings and "numbers", formulas, and rating charts tell you nothing about the diamonds light performance and face up appearance nor does it give you a good read as to whether there exist any Red Flags in the stone, a very important consideration if you're going to buy and SI-2 clarity diamond.

[Bradley]

Each diamond is individual. There is no one set of measurements. I do like to keep diamonds in this carat weight close to the 7.50 mm range diameter myself. Then it`s a matter of light return and how the diamond looks over all.

I can tell you that you can get a very nice diamond in an SI1 F GIA EX for around $12,800.

[mmath]

Bradley, on Friday, Jun 6 2008, 12:04 AM, said:

Each diamond is individual. There is no one set of measurements. I do like to keep diamonds in this carat weight close to the 7.50 mm range diameter myself. Then it`s a matter of light return and how the diamond looks over all.

I can tell you that you can get a very nice diamond in an SI1 F GIA EX for around $12,800.

That light performance isn't completely determined by measurements isn't a reason to ignore them altogether. I have a better chance of finding oysters in the sediment of a bay than in the middle of the Atlantic. True, I might find an oyster anywhere, but by using narrowing parameters, I have a much higher probability of finding a stone that scintillates. Either this is true, or the whole certification process is a fraud.

[diamondsbylauren]

mmath- I'd caution against making such generalizations as a consumer.

I have ZERO faith in any light return machine. Move the diamond on the platform, and get a different result.
Check a fancy colored, or fancy shaped diamond- if you're trusting a laser being flashed through a diamond, then you could never buy anything but a round brilliant. These are only a few reasons these machines are worthless.

But that has nothing to do with GIA , or AGS and the reports they publish.

Edited by diamondsbylauren, 09 June 2008 - 09:14 AM.

[mmath]

diamondsbylauren, on Monday, Jun 9 2008, 01:14 PM, said:

mmath- I'd caution against making such generalizations as a consumer.

I have ZERO faith in any light return machine. Move the diamond on the platform, and get a different result.
Check a fancy colored, or fancy shaped diamond- if you're trusting a laser being flashed through a diamond, then you could never buy anything but a round brilliant. These are only a few reasons these machines are worthless.

But that has nothing to do with GIA , or AGS and the reports they publish.

I think I was overly ambiguous in my post. What I meant to say was that the physical measurements of a diamond are useful for filtering the duds from the studs. I don't know anything about light machines. The argument was that there is no set of physical measurements that will guarantee light performance. I meant to make the point that physical measurements can give you a population that will have a higher probability of getting a diamond that is, qualitatively and completely subjectively, a good light performer.