A love for "not perfect" diamonds

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thank you Gary for explaining that! The sparkle is great in sunlight!

Daylight is great - but never direct sunlight - a bad way to enjoy diamonds unless you like the powder blue of a fluorescence effect. But you can get that with a $5 LED UV torch

 

[rungirl]

I am new here - just found this forum about 2 months ago and have been reading and learning a lot. I found the forum after I sadly lost one of my diamond earrings and I was researching how to go about replacing it.

I had some general knowledge of diamonds but nowhere near the kind of expertise some of you have! I had these earrings for 24 years and had been told by a couple of jewelers along the way that they were unusually nice diamonds for earrings. But honestly, they were not anywhere near the Ideal or Super Ideal cuts some of you mention.

So as I learned more and considered my options I thought about maybe just replacing the pair. But I kept looking at that lone remaining earring and realized how much I still like it - it still looks sparkly and I've had it for so long. So ultimately I learned enough to pick out what I thought was a good match, received the diamond and was very happy with it (again, not ideal but pretty good). So I am having both diamonds reset now and should be receiving my earrings in the next week or two. I am so excited to be able to wear them again! These are my everyday earrings, and I really do enjoy wearing them, perfect or not.

Ultimately I am happy with my decision to enjoy these diamond earring studs that I've had for so long. And just as a side note, you all have me really interested in the old cut (Mine Cut or OEC) diamonds now too!

 

[Horsegirl76]

I had a three stone ring that was good cut. I loved the size of it, but the stones were just dead. In fact, it’s what lead me to PS. I didn’t understand. It was cut shallow so it faced up big but there was no sparkle, no brilliance, so I sold it and bought my GIA XXX. I could not be happier with my new stone. For me it is enough, although yes, I admit to fantasizing about a two carat CBI in a six prong platinum solitaire. Not sure how that would go down in my circle here in the PacNW though.

That said, I just acquired a one carat champagne (c4-c5) diamond, and I could not be more enamored. I took a chance with it being uncertified, but I felt strangely attracted to it so I took a chance. I cannot capture the rich yellow-orange it flashes and there’s even a pink tint to it in certain light. It’s far from what most would value, but I think it’s beautiful. I love the blend between color and diamond, as at the end of the day, I think I’m more of a colored gemstone girl. I’m hoping diamonds like these start getting more appreciation because they truly are beautiful and quite affordable.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I had a three stone ring that was good cut. I loved the size of it, but the stones were just dead. In fact, it’s what lead me to PS. I didn’t understand. It was cut shallow so it faced up big but there was no sparkle, no brilliance, so I sold it and bought my GIA XXX. I could not be happier with my new stone. For me it is enough, although yes, I admit to fantasizing about a two carat CBI in a six prong platinum solitaire. Not sure how that would go down in my circle here in the PacNW though.

That said, I just acquired a one carat champagne (c4-c5) diamond, and I could not be more enamored. I took a chance with it being uncertified, but I felt strangely attracted to it so I took a chance. I cannot capture the rich yellow-orange it flashes and there’s even a pink tint to it in certain light. It’s far from what most would value, but I think it’s beautiful. I love the blend between color and diamond, as at the end of the day, I think I’m more of a colored gemstone girl. I’m hoping diamonds like these start getting more appreciation because they truly are beautiful and quite affordable.

There is not much point adding a grading report cost to champagne diamonds.
GIA and no other lab will grade the color anyway.
There is a chance a stone can be synthetic.
And regarding the split color grade - there is almost no price difference between C3 and C5

 

[Horsegirl76]

There is not much point adding a grading report cost to champagne diamonds.
GIA and no other lab will grade the color anyway.
There is a chance a stone can be synthetic.
And regarding the split color grade - there is almost no price difference between C3 and C5

Yes, I had read some of your previous information on certificates and grading of champagne diamonds in an old PS thread about them before purchasing mine, which was helpful, so thank you. mine was purchased from Ilya at Ivy and Rose so I did not worry about a synthetic stone. Having the c4/c5 grade helped me to determine the color when purchasing online and mine was purchased solely because of the color it exhibits.

 

[lovedogs]

Yes, I had read some of your previous information on certificates and grading of champagne diamonds in an old PS thread about them before purchasing mine, which was helpful, so thank you. mine was purchased from Ilya at Ivy and Rose so I did not worry about a synthetic stone. Having the c4/c5 grade helped me to determine the color when purchasing online and mine was purchased solely because of the color it exhibits.

You made a great choice. Pretty sure I almost purchased that stone. Its lovely!

 

[Horsegirl76]

You made a great choice. Pretty sure I almost purchased that stone. Its lovely!

Thank you!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

A friend retired scientist and gemologist took these photos of the 'bubble'like inclusions in the 1.5ct I2 radiant I posted a video of earlier:
(if you want a single image enlarged I have them all)

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I will show you mine I put it on Vimeo - way better resolution

I could look at that all day

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I am new here - just found this forum about 2 months ago and have been reading and learning a lot. I found the forum after I sadly lost one of my diamond earrings and I was researching how to go about replacing it.

I had some general knowledge of diamonds but nowhere near the kind of expertise some of you have! I had these earrings for 24 years and had been told by a couple of jewelers along the way that they were unusually nice diamonds for earrings. But honestly, they were not anywhere near the Ideal or Super Ideal cuts some of you mention.

So as I learned more and considered my options I thought about maybe just replacing the pair. But I kept looking at that lone remaining earring and realized how much I still like it - it still looks sparkly and I've had it for so long. So ultimately I learned enough to pick out what I thought was a good match, received the diamond and was very happy with it (again, not ideal but pretty good). So I am having both diamonds reset now and should be receiving my earrings in the next week or two. I am so excited to be able to wear them again! These are my everyday earrings, and I really do enjoy wearing them, perfect or not.

Ultimately I am happy with my decision to enjoy these diamond earring studs that I've had for so long. And just as a side note, you all have me really interested in the old cut (Mine Cut or OEC) diamonds now too!

Awsome !
Looking forward to ear shots after they arrive

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

 

[LLJsmom]

I fell in love with my OEC when I saw her. And she is definitely not perfect. And I’m super OCD and love super ideal diamonds. I still want one. But this girl made me love her, in spite of myself.

 

[Vivatwo]

I love this thread, thank you OP!
My first large-to-me (it’s all relative!) diamond is an AGS graded G colour RB and although it’s a lovely stone, it really seems a little too cold and white to me. It almost looks fake. In fact, I’ve been asked 'is that real'?!
I recently received a second engagement ring with a GIA graded I colour cushion cut. The difference is slightly warmer and has much more of a natural look to it, which I love.
Edited to add that my dream diamond would be a chunky warm old European cut.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I fell in love with my OEC when I saw her. And she is definitely not perfect. And I’m super OCD and love super ideal diamonds. I still want one. But this girl made me love her, in spite of myself.

That is an especially highly likely to be very firey off those big mains inside the table LLJ.
A slight rocking will cause the facets to go from dark to blue to bright white and fade off with a touch of orange red!

 

[winnietucker]

I do think we may do a disservice to some posters with all the emphasis on super ideal cuts. I think we tend to give the impression that anything else is inferior. Not everyone wants to spend that kind of money or go down in size to afford the stone.

This is actually a criticism of PS that pops up on another forum I frequent. I’ve seen it a few times at this point. To be fair it is disheartening to hear that the diamond you selected is inferior.

I remember being so malcontent with the quality of my own GIA triple ex diamond that I considered taking a large loss on it so I could get a super ideal. It wasn’t until I saw it next to a super ideal that I realized it was perfectly fine for me cut wise. Size wise is a different story lol.

 

[Cerulean]

I had a three stone ring that was good cut. I loved the size of it, but the stones were just dead. In fact, it’s what lead me to PS. I didn’t understand. It was cut shallow so it faced up big but there was no sparkle, no brilliance, so I sold it and bought my GIA XXX. I could not be happier with my new stone. For me it is enough, although yes, I admit to fantasizing about a two carat CBI in a six prong platinum solitaire. Not sure how that would go down in my circle here in the PacNW though.

That said, I just acquired a one carat champagne (c4-c5) diamond, and I could not be more enamored. I took a chance with it being uncertified, but I felt strangely attracted to it so I took a chance. I cannot capture the rich yellow-orange it flashes and there’s even a pink tint to it in certain light. It’s far from what most would value, but I think it’s beautiful. I love the blend between color and diamond, as at the end of the day, I think I’m more of a colored gemstone girl. I’m hoping diamonds like these start getting more appreciation because they truly are beautiful and quite affordable.

I also tried on one JUST like it if it was from Ivy & Rose! I considered it for my e-ring but went for M colored instead

Just lovely

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

This is actually a criticism of PS that pops up on another forum I frequent. I’ve seen it a few times at this point. To be fair it is disheartening to hear that the diamond you selected is inferior.

I remember being so malcontent with the quality of my own GIA triple ex diamond that I considered taking a large loss on it so I could get a super ideal. It wasn’t until I saw it next to a super ideal that I realized it was perfectly fine for me cut wise. Size wise is a different story lol.

I agree and disagree.
I have been a strong advocate of de-fanging some of our helpers for being over the top with narrow selection criteria and frowning on anything other than Hearts and Arrows etc. so I agree.
But many of the people interested in this threads idea are into quirky or old / antique diamonds with some other type of 'character'.
So there is more than just the strive for perfection

 

[Cerulean]

Love this thread.

True confession.

I was so aggressively put off by the D-colored sparkle bombs I kept encountering in stores, I thought I just didn't like diamonds at all. They all looked almost fake and character-less to me. I mean no offense.

I felt really alienated and alone in my e-ring diamond search. Either I had to embrace the narrative around perfect, colorless diamonds, or rally against it (like many of my millennial peers)...the big, bad blindly unethical diamond marketplace, get a moissy, sapphire, or something non-traditional...I felt stuck and alienated from both sides, and i felt confused.

Then I learned about things like inclusions. And lower colors. And fancy colors. And vintage cuts. I warmed up to diamonds a lot. Had it not been for my fiance - I would've ended up with something funkier...I was really drawn to visible inclusions, wonky old cuts, rose cuts, champagne diamonds, you name it. I had fallen in love with a big MRB with a constellation of small black carbon inclusions that reminded me of Dalmatian spots. I LOVED it. He didn't. this was pre-PS...So we settled on something a bit more "traditional" - and I started hunting for a vintage cut M-color (I learned that was my sweet spot for color). I went to multiple stores and they looked at me like I was crazy. I'd ask for M explicitly, and they'd pull out fancy yellows. Most online marketplaces didn't even include M or lower in their options. How lonely!

There are still times when I read threads when someone gleefully reports how happily they'd turn down an option due due to some inferior quality and i feel a little wounded, even knowing it has nothing to do with me and is certainly not meant as an insult. i look down at MY stone, and think - gee, mine has FAR worse stats than that! and for a moment, i feel a pang - and doubt, about whether i really like my diamond, with its SI2 clarity, off white color, and imperfect cut.

and i take a moment to re-center and remind myself of who i actually am and why i loved what i did and what it represents to me. i have never sought perfection, really, for anything. why would i for a diamond?

 

[LLJsmom]

That is an especially highly likely to be very firey off those big mains inside the table LLJ.
A slight rocking will cause the facets to go from dark to blue to bright white and fade off with a touch of orange red!

Thank you Garry, I think. Yes, lots of colors. But how you can tell what colors it fires off at what point is so beyond me!!! Then again, you did create that scope I'm using... LOL!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thank you Garry, I think. Yes, lots of colors. But how you can tell what colors it fires off at what point is so beyond me!!! Then again, you did create that scope I'm using... LOL!

Sergey Sivovolenko taught me (AKA Serg)

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

I agree and disagree.
I have been a strong advocate of de-fanging some of our helpers for being over the top with narrow selection criteria and frowning on anything other than Hearts and Arrows etc. so I agree.
But many of the people interested in this threads idea are into quirky or old / antique diamonds with some other type of 'character'.
So there is more than just the strive for perfection

I do think we may do a disservice to some posters with all the emphasis on super ideal cuts. I think we tend to give the impression that anything else is inferior. Not everyone wants to spend that kind of money or go down in size to afford the stone.

This is actually a criticism of PS that pops up on another forum I frequent. I’ve seen it a few times at this point. To be fair it is disheartening to hear that the diamond you selected is inferior.

I remember being so malcontent with the quality of my own GIA triple ex diamond that I considered taking a large loss on it so I could get a super ideal. It wasn’t until I saw it next to a super ideal that I realized it was perfectly fine for me cut wise. Size wise is a different story lol.

I wonder if we might be able to find like a happy medium that helps the newbies that come here. Perhaps a way to help newbies figure out how sensitive are they to differences in cut quality (since I find that cut preference is probably the most difficult to pin down - you might be able to find examples of different color and clarity in B&M stores but rarely a range in cut quality)? Like winnietucker said, sometimes a triple ex is “good enough” for people and they don’t need AGS0 super ideal (or at least they’re not willing to compromise on the other Cs for it). Or sometimes they like a more brilliant look (which I would say is more 60-60 style?) or a more fiery look (which falls on the super ideals side of things). By steering everyone towards the super ideal camp we might be doing those who don’t prefer that look a disservice because they don’t even know what they don’t know, so they can’t articulate their preferences here. Just a thought. I have seen some videos that compare super ideals to other diamonds online, but for me, personally, I couldn’t see a huge difference in the stones being compared (and in one of them I actually preferred the non-super ideal ) , and they’re always made by people with some kind of agenda or bias - would be really cool to see a completely neutral, even a “blind test” video where you reveal which is which at the end of the video. Not sure if that would be beyond the scope of pricescope, as it were

 

[winnietucker]

I wonder if we might be able to find like a happy medium that helps the newbies that come here. Perhaps a way to help newbies figure out how sensitive are they to differences in cut quality (since I find that cut preference is probably the most difficult to pin down - you might be able to find examples of different color and clarity in B&M stores but rarely a range in cut quality)? Like winnietucker said, sometimes a triple ex is “good enough” for people and they don’t need AGS0 super ideal (or at least they’re not willing to compromise on the other Cs for it). Or sometimes they like a more brilliant look (which I would say is more 60-60 style?) or a more fiery look (which falls on the super ideals side of things). By steering everyone towards the super ideal camp we might be doing those who don’t prefer that look a disservice because they don’t even know what they don’t know, so they can’t articulate their preferences here. Just a thought. I have seen some videos that compare super ideals to other diamonds online, but for me, personally, I couldn’t see a huge difference in the stones being compared (and in one of them I actually preferred the non-super ideal ) , and they’re always made by people with some kind of agenda or bias - would be really cool to see a completely neutral, even a “blind test” video where you reveal which is which at the end of the video. Not sure if that would be beyond the scope of pricescope, as it were

I don’t think it’s bad to recommend super ideals. Clearly they’re gorgeous and if they were around the same price as GIA triple ex stones it’d be a no brainer. But because most people think of GIA triple ex as the best maybe the first thing after “this super ideal is better,” should be “now here are some places where you can see them in person and compare for yourself.” And then if super ideals aren’t someone’s thing they’ll know, they can come back and say so, and PS could find a fantastic stone that isn’t a super ideal.

Let’s be real, PS offers the most comprehensive diamond buying advice. On another forum I saw someone say all GIA triple ex’s are good and to just pick one. That was all of the advice. If I were buying my first diamond I would prefer the care and attention that PS provides given I’m spending that much money. I just think it’s good to remind people that their opinion is the most important and that they may need to see diamonds in person first.

I know CBI has their diamonds at other jewelers. It’s a wonderful thing to offer IMO. My eye is just not critical enough to justify the price difference. But that’s a me thing. My eye is also not critical enough to see how tinted my K is until it’s right next to a significantly higher colored diamond.

 

[mommylawyer]

I wonder if we might be able to find like a happy medium that helps the newbies that come here. Perhaps a way to help newbies figure out how sensitive are they to differences in cut quality (since I find that cut preference is probably the most difficult to pin down - you might be able to find examples of different color and clarity in B&M stores but rarely a range in cut quality)? Like winnietucker said, sometimes a triple ex is “good enough” for people and they don’t need AGS0 super ideal (or at least they’re not willing to compromise on the other Cs for it). Or sometimes they like a more brilliant look (which I would say is more 60-60 style?) or a more fiery look (which falls on the super ideals side of things). By steering everyone towards the super ideal camp we might be doing those who don’t prefer that look a disservice because they don’t even know what they don’t know, so they can’t articulate their preferences here. Just a thought. I have seen some videos that compare super ideals to other diamonds online, but for me, personally, I couldn’t see a huge difference in the stones being compared (and in one of them I actually preferred the non-super ideal ) , and they’re always made by people with some kind of agenda or bias - would be really cool to see a completely neutral, even a “blind test” video where you reveal which is which at the end of the video. Not sure if that would be beyond the scope of pricescope, as it were

Haha! I totally agree! When I watch the comparison videos, the only way I know which diamond is "better" is because the poster tells me so. They all look pretty to me. But honestly, the super ideals going dark in sunlight makes me a little nuts. It's sunny here all the time.

 

[Rfisher]

I fell in love with my OEC when I saw her. And she is definitely not perfect. And I’m super OCD and love super ideal diamonds. I still want one. But this girl made me love her, in spite of myself.

yours IS gorgeous!
I’d be terrified to ever see the scope analysis on mine. Don’t think it would sway my thoughts -but not sure so not willing to risk

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

I don’t think it’s bad to recommend super ideals. Clearly they’re gorgeous and if they were around the same price as GIA triple ex stones it’d be a no brainer. But because most people think of GIA triple ex as the best maybe the first thing after “this super ideal is better,” should be “now here are some places where you can see them in person and compare for yourself.” And then if super ideals aren’t someone’s thing they’ll know, they can come back and say so, and PS could find a fantastic stone that isn’t a super ideal.

Let’s be real, PS offers the most comprehensive diamond buying advice. On another forum I saw someone say all GIA triple ex’s are good and to just pick one. That was all of the advice. If I were buying my first diamond I would prefer the care and attention that PS provides given I’m spending that much money. I just think it’s good to remind people that their opinion is the most important and that they may need to see diamonds in person first.

I know CBI has their diamonds at other jewelers. It’s a wonderful thing to offer IMO. My eye is just not critical enough to justify the price difference. But that’s a me thing. My eye is also not critical enough to see how tinted my K is until it’s right next to a significantly higher colored diamond.

I didn’t mean to criticise PS btw - I think the vast vast majority of posters are incredibly welcoming and knowledgeable (and kind enough to share that knowledge)! It’s fantastic to see the kind of pro bono knowledge sharing that happens here all for love of pretty shiny things. My only point was to say that for a forum that otherwise pushes the stance that 3 of the 4Cs are absolutely a personal choice, the 4th is treated almost as though there’s only one specific flavour of diamond that is acceptable (Older cuts notwithstanding). I am not disputing that super ideals are beautiful, not at all. They absolutely are and for a lot of people I can totally understand that the look is just the most perfect thing they want in a diamond. I appreciate the fact that people raise the very valid issue of deep diamonds that achieve triple ex (at the expense of both light performance and face up size!) But I do think that even with cut there are places to compromise (like for me personally, I am not the biggest fan of old cuts but neither am I a diehard fan of super ideals... I like what I like, and a fair few times it’s not the super ideal which can, as another poster mentioned, go dark in sunlight. I just prefer white light to fire, and I would always go for the spready stone as long as I don’t end up with something much much grayer and unpleasant; because I’m a size ho and I prioritise carat almost over cut). That is just ME though. I don’t know how much my perspective jives with the whole “customer education” aspect of this site so I try not to offer “stone picking advice” most of the time.

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

Haha! I totally agree! When I watch the comparison videos, the only way I know which diamond is "better" is because the poster tells me so. They all look pretty to me. But honestly, the super ideals going dark in sunlight makes me a little nuts. It's sunny here all the time.

This is actually why I feel like I like super ideals in pictures and videos more than in real life, haha! I live in a very sunny place. Also, I cannot see an arrow if it came with a blinking LED light attached. They’re all the same to me: pretty That being said, I don’t like the appearance of deep diamonds. I think a diamond that is cut to be smaller face up than the average is a lose-lose proposition because you get neither the superior performance nor the visible size. So I definitely weed those out. I think that my stance basically comes from the fact that I am generally a bigger fan of fancy cuts than of rounds, and in fancies it’s all about buying with your eyes. I just like to pay for the things I appreciate - a really stunning cut is clearly lost on me! I am a blight upon my PS usership

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

For average Joe GIA plus HCA works pretty well.
For people like us super symmetry is a benefit once you get into knowing the difference.
Just like cars.
Most people are pretty happy with a Toyota, GM, Ford. For them a good enough diamond may be OK.
But some want that extra bit of performance of luxury.
And some of us like to drive a vintage car.

 

[AV_]

@Garry H (Cut Nut) I will never protest early brilliant models rendered with perfect symmetry. I find that these models are less mangled by approximations & this perks my interest [why target unnatural crystall planes.]

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

A friend retired scientist and gemologist took these photos of the 'bubble'like inclusions in the 1.5ct I2 radiant I posted a video of earlier:
(if you want a single image enlarged I have them all)
Grant is a retired scientist and was for a while the editor of the Australian Gemmologist Journal

Grant Pearson has added some more photos and information.
I am sharing it because it shows how detailed and smart he is. I am in awe of the way some super smart people think:

Anyway, I think I've probably played around enough with your most-generously loaned 1.5Ct included radiant diamond. The attached photomicro images, for your amusement, are repetitions of the exactly same field of view in each selection of a few shots, such as one being of the stone in just plane polarised light, the next between crossed polars at extinction to detect birefringence (in the inclusions, as perhaps some indication of their nature & composition?) & there are also a couple of shots of the same view but illuminated by 405nm laser pointer to generate any fluorescence.

No elastic-strain colour fringes ("isochromes") were observed, perhaps suggesting an absence of such strain, which is suspect really, considering that tension haloes & expansion fractures are observable at stress-concentration zones on very many of these transparent, high-relief, colourless semihedral microcrystallites, indicating that localised tension stresses from differential thermal expansivities of the inclusions relative to their host matrix?, or even due to actual physical expansion-growth of the inclusion crystals themselves?, have exceeded the diamond rupture strength to initiate fracture of the matrix, so that remnant intense elastic-strain isochromes should perhaps be expected?. Perhaps I should even consider preparing a "half-wave" retardation plate from a cleaved suuitably-thin piece of mica to enhance microscopic stress/strain colour fringes at polarisation extinction for such specimens, but then that's another project for later, & something I've not yet attempted, only read about!

Anyway, the almost black images (at polars extinction) do show a few bright spots, but which are actually reflections off inclusion surfaces which can also be located in the fully illuminated image, & since they are not extinguished they most probably are unpolarised reflections from the overhead lamp I suppose, but at least they serve to locate features in the image series. No birefringence was detected between the polars, suggesting that the inclusion crystals are probably isotropic, but their high optical relief relative to their diamond host matrix certainly suggests that they are probably not encapsulated microdiamonds too, with RIs well remote from that of diamond. Their composition is uncertain to me, (perhaps someone else might be able to suggest possible compositions?) Nor are the inclusions fluorescent to any significant extent relative to the matrix, which is itself mildly fluorescent to the 405nm. The brownish-pink inclusions, presumably pyrope garnets which are frequently associated diamond-indicator minerals & occasionally known to be included in diamond crystals of course, are also not displaying any birefringence (so probably are not something else like zircon for instance, altho their crystal shapes look distinctly elongated & much more like tetragonal, consistent with zircon for instance, than isometric like pyropes) & are also not fluorescent to 405nm. Their location within the stone makes it difficult to obtain a clear optically-non-interfered image (ie from reflecting facet edges) but the attached images do show the described features well enough hopefully,

Anyhow, I thank you for your most generous access to this very interesting stone for my own amateur microscopic fiddling, but it's probably time to return it now. How would you like me to get it back to you?

Cheers, G.

 

[evergreen]

I'm a little annoyed with myself for posting here, bumping this oldish thread (though, of course, not sorry for reminding people there are a lot of fun diamonds in this world that don't "meet parameters" ). I wanted to put it in the "odd/unusual mined diamonds" thread, but after 15 minutes on the search tool, I couldn't find it!

Anyway: look at this cool diamond. It has a big ol' spessartite (?) crystal right on the table, AND VSBF, and it's an F. It's even niftier in the video, but in the still, the crystal is around 11 o'clock.

0.85 Carat Round Diamond

Shop for diamonds with confidence using our Transparent Diamond Pricing tool. Discover high-quality engagement rings, wedding rings, & fine jewelry.

www.ritani.com