3.01 Carat- 2.8 HCA Score. Help Please!!

[leighton1984]

FYI - I have not read this thread but did notice you took a photo in sunlight and the diamond looked black. That is really good. Bad cuts look good in direct sunlight.
I wrote about that a few times here. And have a blog on the topic - you should be able to find it.
As Karl wrote - this is on the verge - if the pavilion angle is 41.11 then it will look great.
Personally I think +2ct for colorless you should be at G, but it is a personal thing.

And one of the diamonds @mrs-b found IS a G 3.03 G, SI1-- so sounds like in line with your preference!

 

[lulu_ma]

And one of the diamonds @mrs-b found IS a G 3.03 G, SI1-- so sounds like in line with your preference!

Hi @leighton1984 did you ever get your new stone in?

 

[leighton1984]

Hi @leighton1984 did you ever get your new stone in?

Nope! They estimated the ship date to be 2/12... so patiently waiting!!

 

[Honeybasil]

Nope! They estimated the ship date to be 2/12... so patiently waiting!!

I was just coming on here to ask about it!

 

[leighton1984]

I was just coming on here to ask about it!

Yes, I am patiently— or impatiently waiting...

 

[luckygreen317]

I sourced diamonds through Blue Nile for my 5 stone ring. I think they are an excellent source if you know exactly what you want. With all 5 stones being excellent, H color, si1, I based my decision on table, depth% then ran them through HCA. All 5 are 1.8 or under. I have a 1.75 diamond (purchased pre-pricescope) that is a 2.9 on the HCA. It's a pretty stone but those 5 stones are amazing.
I hope this helps. This forum has so many knowledgeable members, I have learned so much.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I sourced diamonds through Blue Nile

All 5 are 1.8 or under. I have a 1.75 diamond (purchased pre-pricescope) that is a 2.9 on the HCA. It's a pretty stone but those 5 stones are amazing.
I hope this helps. This forum has so many knowledgeable members, I have learned so much.

 

[leighton1984]

OK, I just received the diamonds tonight— pictures to come tomorrow during daylight!

 

[munchee]

OK, I just received the diamonds tonight— pictures to come tomorrow during daylight!

Yeayyy finally!!! So exciting!!!

 

[nala]

It’s tomorrow! It’s tomorrow

 

[leighton1984]

OK, I am going to do my best here—- lighting is odd— in Palm Springs and the sun is STRONG!! I can take more pictures.

The left is the 3.33 I SI1 (AGS) w negligible florescence and the right is 3.03 G SI1 (GIA) w medium blue.

Here are my initial thoughts. They both look smaller than the original BN ring— from my research online— the right is 1.16 mm smaller than the left...

The I shows imperfections from the side and top when you look from 6 or so inches away... I think that may bother me... kinda surprised they said it was eye clean.

The I looks slightly more yellow than the G. In light, they both look slightly blue—- similarly blue... which is odd since one is negligible florescence and one is medium blue...right?

They both look MUCH better than the original blue nile— the setting and the diamonds— my mom saw the BN in December and she was like wow, what a difference in quality and sparkle...and both look much less yellow... even the 3.33 I.

I tried to attach videos, but for some reason it’s not allowing video attachments...

I don’t love the settings—- the JA Tiffany setting is much more like a knife edge setting w a basket vs tall narrow prongs? Is that what it’s called? The actual ball of the prongs are much better than BN— which looked like the end of a staple...rigid, more rectangular and pointed.

OK, dive in w the comments! I think I don’t want the I, given the inclusions... but not sure if this G is the best I can get or what you guys honestly think... after looking online more today... I definitely this was a great deal... but not sure how the G looks vs a Super Ideal... again, wish I could attach some videos! Will keep trying...

Finally, setting is platinum— and I am a size 5.

Thank you for all of your support— and thank you, thank you to @mrs-b because I wouldn’t have found either of these without her help and support!!
Andrea

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Can you link the GIA report for the G here so we don't have to go back and search for it, please? Part of the blue you are seeing may be reflection of the blue sky!

 

[leighton1984]

Can you link the GIA report for the G here so we don't have to go back and search for it, please? Part of the blue you are seeing may be reflection of the blue sky!

Sorry! Does this work?

 

[leighton1984]

Sorry! Does this work?

OK, figured out the link too:

GIA - Report Check

www.gia.edu

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, my main concern would be the inclusions since it says additional twining wisps, pinpoints, and surface graining not shown. Look at it good in the sunlight and see if you can see wisps in it or anything that hinders transparency. Sometimes fluorescence and these kinds of inclusions are not a good combination. An experienced independent appraiser would be helpful in this case, and maybe someone can recommend one in your area.

How do you feel when you see the G? Do you feel like you love it? Is it visually better to you compared to the original diamond?

If this is the stone, I think it looks beautiful as far as cut goes. It will be better than most diamonds out there, but not as perfect as super-ideal. But that is okay, as long as you can see this stone is far better than the first one. But you do need to be sure there aren't issues with the clarity even if you have to go to an independent appraiser. I personally would not buy a 3 ct SI1, but that's just me. I'd rather have a 2.7 VS. If someone can confirm that the stone has no transparency issues in the bright sunlight, then I think you've found a good SI1!

3.03 Carat round diamond

This 3.03 carat round diamond G color si1 clarity has Excellent proportions and a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

 

[leighton1984]

When you say transparency —- can you expand? When I look at the 3.33 I, I can visibly see black specs or specs on side and top... I can’t really see anything on the 3.03 G— I start to maybe think I do, but also think my head may be seeing things bc I’m trying to see something since it’s a SI1...

Would the feathering and twinning wisps only show up in direct sunlight? What would they look like? Like white inclusions vs the black specs perhaps?

I thought I read that if they say “not shown” it’s almost not detected to naked eye or of significance? Or is that a false assumption?

Additionally, I think I read that twinning wisps can be white and then hard to detect? I feel like maybe I need to do more research now...

Finally, how much do appraisers typically charge to appraise? And does anyone have anyone they recommend in Orange County— and/or Southern California?

Thank you!

 

[leighton1984]

And this is also the first time I have seen “surface graining”— will research now, but assume I should be detecting some type of different texture near surface of top of stone?

 

[leighton1984]

And this is also the first time I have seen “surface graining”— will research now, but assume I should be detecting some type of different texture near surface of top of stone?

Also, yes a HUGE difference vs original stone. I don’t know if I LOVE it because this is all so hard— especially when you don’t have other better diamonds to compare— but I love it a lot more than the original!!
Also, this was $35,730... which seems to be a very good price for a 3 ct G stone... but again, please give all of your transparent feedback— I want to be confident in next step and you all are pros!!

 

[mrs-b]

Leighton - I can't tell a difference between the left and right hand stones, size-wise. Also - the left hand stone is larger than your original diamond. The right hand stone is so close in parameters, they could be used as a matched pair, were the other stats the same (which they aren't - the G is markedly whiter).

Re the first diamond, you're going off memory here, and I think you're remembering the first stone as being larger than it really is. The new left hand diamond is actually *larger* than the original diamond, and the right hand diamond is, as I said, so close in size as to be indistinguishable.

Out of the three you've seen, would you be happy with any of them? Do any of them hit the spot? Or do you at least have a preference so we have a bench mark? If you want to go up in size or specs, I think you'll need to increase your budget considerably.

I have to say, I think the G looks larger than the I. But what are *your* thoughts?

 

[munchee]

if you don’t mind the I color in general, do you want to see how a super ideal I color looks like? If you feel like its not worth the color sacrifice you still can get the G. But at least see it in person first and compare so you really get the best bang of your bucks. WF have 2.968 I/VS2 which measure almost the same as the G. Or 3.058 I/Si1.

 

[leighton1984]

Leighton - I can't tell a difference between the left and right hand stones, size-wise. Also - the left hand stone is larger than your original diamond. The right hand stone is so close in parameters, they could be used as a matched pair, were the other stats the same (which they aren't - the G is markedly whiter).

Re the first diamond, you're going off memory here, and I think you're remembering the first stone as being larger than it really is. The new left hand diamond is actually *larger* than the original diamond, and the right hand diamond is, as I said, so close in size as to be indistinguishable.

Out of the three you've seen, would you be happy with any of them? Do any of them hit the spot? Or do you at least have a preference so we have a bench mark? If you want to go up in size or specs, I think you'll need to increase your budget considerably.

I have to say, I think the G looks larger than the I. But what are *your* thoughts?

I can tell the I is bigger than the G in person— I know the photos aren’t the best... odd JA didn’t identify which diamond was which and put both boxes in the same
Package! My mom
Keeps asking me how I can tell them apart— but I can from a sizing perspective.

I also can tell the G is whiter than the I— which I couldn’t tell the difference between stone color in other diamonds I saw when comparing a G to an I— so I liked that I was confidently able to look at these and know I would prefer the G due to whiteness and lack of the black specs in the I.

I definitely like the G better than the original and the I. And I am not second guessing myself w the warmth in the G like I did w the original... I like that. It definitely is white.

And yes, the I is bigger than the original— and the G is slightly smaller than the original— 2% and 1.16mm which I realize makes me sound crazy...

Now, just really wondering if it gives the best sparkle and fire I should be seeing in a great diamond... like a super ideal would give... and if I should be worried about the inclusions above (twinning wisps, feathers, graining).

 

[munchee]

@leighton1984 to be able to know if it gives the best sparkle, if it performed like a super ideal, you need to see how super ideal looks like first, otherwise you’ll keep wondering all the time without any conclusions. If its performing nearly/same like an super ideal you got a steal and you’ll wear it with confidence that you made a best decision. If its far from a super ideal, there’s a $10000 difference in price tag anyway. Its your choice if you can let that $10000 difference slide or you go down in color or size so someday you’ll get there
PS. I also want a 3ct, but for me I can’t sacrifice cut. So I ended up with a smaller 2.8ct H VS1. If you’re following my thread I was obsessed with 9.20mm and I want that coverage. I settled with Halo-ing my ring so I can get that coverage

 

[leighton1984]

@leighton1984 to be able to know if it gives the best sparkle, if it performed like a super ideal, you need to see how super ideal looks like first, otherwise you’ll keep wondering all the time without any conclusions. If its performing nearly/same like an super ideal you got a steal and you’ll wear it with confidence that you made a best decision. If its far from a super ideal, there’s a $10000 difference in price tag anyway. Its your choice if you can let that $10000 difference slide or you go down in color or size so someday you’ll get there
PS. I also want a 3ct, but for me I can’t sacrifice cut. So I ended up with a smaller 2.8ct H VS1. If you’re following my thread I was obsessed with 9.20mm and I want that coverage. I settled with Halo-ing my ring so I can get that coverage

Yeah, def can’t spend anymore $$!! This is my cap!! The cap was $25K and the fiancé to be has increased to $35K lol... because of my pickiness... albeit we have been dating 10.5 years so I kinda think he should

 

[munchee]

Yeah, def can’t spend anymore $$!! This is my cap!! The cap was $25K and the fiancé to be has increased to $35K lol... because of my pickiness... albeit we have been dating 10.5 years so I kinda think he should

So your option now is take this G, stop thinking about super ideal because it is what it is, there’s no way you’ll get a super ideal with that price or see a super ideal stone first, its good if it performs the same, it is a probability that it’ll be the same too. You get a big win, or if you like how super ideal performs, you go lower in color, or lower in carat. If you don’t want go lower in color and/or carat, you now know that this is the best you can get within your budget.

 

[leighton1984]

So your option now is take this G, stop thinking about super ideal because it is what it is, there’s no way you’ll get a super ideal with that price or see a super ideal stone first, its good if it performs the same, it is a probability that it’ll be the same too. You get a big win, or if you like how super ideal performs, you go lower in color, or lower in carat. If you don’t want go lower in color and/or carat, you now know that this is the best you can get within your budget.

I like your perspective!

Here is a photo from JA site— is it bad it doesn’t show the eight points as vividly/specifically as others?

 

[leighton1984]

@leighton1984 to be able to know if it gives the best sparkle, if it performed like a super ideal, you need to see how super ideal looks like first, otherwise you’ll keep wondering all the time without any conclusions. If its performing nearly/same like an super ideal you got a steal and you’ll wear it with confidence that you made a best decision. If its far from a super ideal, there’s a $10000 difference in price tag anyway. Its your choice if you can let that $10000 difference slide or you go down in color or size so someday you’ll get there
PS. I also want a 3ct, but for me I can’t sacrifice cut. So I ended up with a smaller 2.8ct H VS1. If you’re following my thread I was obsessed with 9.20mm and I want that coverage. I settled with Halo-ing my ring so I can get that coverage

Is yours a super ideal?

 

[nala]

Go to Vimeo to attach videos

 

[leighton1984]

Go to Vimeo to attach videos

Thank you!!

 

[munchee]

Is yours a super ideal?

Yes I ended up with Canera Ideal H&A 2.8ct H VS1.
Here’s a comparison 2ct G VS2 GIA 3ex (My SIL’s ring) and my 2.8ct H VS1 CIH.


imo her stone also have a good performance, for the price that she bought, its a good buy.
I think it came down to if you’re happy with your purchase and if you know thats the best you can get within your budget its all good, super ideal or not.
But if you still having a doubt, keep thinking about if you’re making the best decision, I think you should see more options, until you’re sure you’re making the best decisions. Its not small money, you need to be happy and content, before its too late and nothing you can do about it.

 

[leighton1984]

I realize I am a terrible
Videographer... and my hands look very wrinkly!