Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Calling for antique emerald cut experts - close to pulling the trigger on 4+ carat stone!

RX1990 said:
Thanks! Just to clarify, all the still image photos in my last post are actually of the 4.46 K diamond (not the 4.81 ring that's in the one side by side video for size comparison).
Click to expand...

Haha-I caught that-but not soon enough to delete that part!
 
Grace just posted a video of the 4.46 on her IG, and truly, I’m obsessed with it. It’s such a pretty cut and faceting pattern!

I wonder what the story is behind it changing hands and now being up for consideration again by OP of this thread!

 
Update. The 4.46 K IF is unfortunately no longer an option as it's no longer for sale. I'm okay about it as I just take it as a sign of not meant to be!

This has been a long, extensive search process and I am hoping I can come across an ideal match soon.

The 5.41 carat I VS2 I mentioned in post #51 is still available (short video link and GIA report link).

This new option came up today. 5.69 carat J VS1 with medium blue fluorescence. It's about ~10% less expensive than the 5.41 option. Here is a 360 view link and GIA report link. At first glance, it checks so many boxes in terms of shape, culet size, and general windmill facets/overall look (to me at least). It's within budget and separate from the color grade, I like the overall look of this one more than the 5.41 option. In a perfect world, I wish color grade was a little higher (and would be fine with it being a little smaller). Any thoughts?
 
RX1990 said:
Update. The 4.46 K IF is unfortunately no longer an option as it's no longer for sale. I'm okay about it as I just take it as a sign of not meant to be!

This has been a long, extensive search process and I am hoping I can come across an ideal match soon.

The 5.41 carat I VS2 I mentioned in post #51 is still available (short video link and GIA report link).

This new option came up today. 5.69 carat J VS1 with medium blue fluorescence. It's about ~10% less expensive than the 5.41 option. Here is a 360 view link and GIA report link. At first glance, it checks so many boxes in terms of shape, culet size, and general windmill facets/overall look (to me at least). It's within budget and separate from the color grade, I like the overall look of this one more than the 5.41 option. In a perfect world, I wish color grade was a little higher (and would be fine with it being a little smaller). Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

I much prefer the 5.69. It's so lovely and it gives all the twinkle/life that I hope for in step cuts.
 
RX1990 said:
Update. The 4.46 K IF is unfortunately no longer an option as it's no longer for sale. I'm okay about it as I just take it as a sign of not meant to be!

This has been a long, extensive search process and I am hoping I can come across an ideal match soon.

The 5.41 carat I VS2 I mentioned in post #51 is still available (short video link and GIA report link).

This new option came up today. 5.69 carat J VS1 with medium blue fluorescence. It's about ~10% less expensive than the 5.41 option. Here is a 360 view link and GIA report link. At first glance, it checks so many boxes in terms of shape, culet size, and general windmill facets/overall look (to me at least). It's within budget and separate from the color grade, I like the overall look of this one more than the 5.41 option. In a perfect world, I wish color grade was a little higher (and would be fine with it being a little smaller). Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Sorry. Meant to say K color. Correcting myself as I can't edit prior post.
 
I second this, I like the 5.69 very much.
 
DONE. The 5.69 is a DREAM STONE. Facet is perfect. MBF is also amazing
 
madelise said:
DONE. The 5.69 is a DREAM STONE. Facet is perfect. MBF is also amazing
Click to expand...

I appreciate your endorsement! Like I said, it's a bit bigger than I was initially looking for but it seems to check all the other boxes and easily one of the best I have come across that is actionable and still within budget.

I am seeing it in person this Friday. If all goes well, I think this could be the one!

Regarding the MBF - do you mainly view it as a positive because of the K color grading? I've been under the general impression that I should be avoiding fluorescence on higher color gradings (targeting either none or faint) but that it can help with slightly warmer color diamonds such as the J and K range by making them look "whiter". Is that the only real benefit of its presence with a diamond like this?
 
Love that 4.69. Medium fluor is very unlikely to cause the negative effects that fluor gets a bad rap for, and like you said, it can make a diamond appear whiter and brighter in strong sunlight. Many people on PS who are diamond aficionados love fluor and hunt it down!!
 
The 5.69 is a gorgeous stone! K would be a touch warm for me too but you did consider another K, plus the fluor should help a bit with the face up colour… definitely worth looking at it in person.
 
Dreamer_D said:
Love that 4.69. Medium fluor is very unlikely to cause the negative effects that fluor gets a bad rap for, and like you said, it can make a diamond appear whiter and brighter in strong sunlight. Many people on PS who are diamond aficionados love fluor and hunt it down!!
Click to expand...

5.69 I meant! Of course!
 
I’m definitely no expert, but just wanted to make sure you’re considering that the larger the stone is, the deeper it is too. The 5.69ct is lovely, but it’s also 6.6mm deep (which is quite a lot). This translates to it needing to be set higher. All of this is to say, check with her on her comfort level having a higher setting diamond. Maybe you could go test some out before Friday. It doesn’t bother some, but others hate it because it more easily snags and knocks into things.
 
BlingDreams said:
I’m definitely no expert, but just wanted to make sure you’re considering that the larger the stone is, the deeper it is too. The 5.69ct is lovely, but it’s also 6.6mm deep (which is quite a lot). This translates to it needing to be set higher. All of this is to say, check with her on her comfort level having a higher setting diamond. Maybe you could go test some out before Friday. It doesn’t bother some, but others hate it because it more easily snags and knocks into things.
Click to expand...

Thanks for flagging this. She has tried the "inspo ring" on before (shown in original post). That diamond is 6.11mm tall and she definitely had no issue with the height. Concerns with height never ever came up with that one. I recognize an additional ~0.5mm is not nothing (this diamond is about ~8% taller) but I would hope this isn't a very noticeable difference once it is mounted.

I plan on recreating a setting that is in line with the "inspo ring" if I go with this particular diamond. May need to tweak a few minor things to get the ratios right, but I think this center stone will still work beautifully with this mounting despite it being a 1.18x length to width ratio (vs. 1.28x for the inspo ring). I think it will have a little extra flair as well with the deeper cut corners.

I am far from an expert on this style and era of diamonds, but it seems like smaller tables and steeper crowns are common features of the ones that really stand out to me. These also tend to be the ones that come with deeper pavilions and additional overall height. I am still learning though and this community has been an incredible resource the past month during my search :-)
 
Look forward to hearing your thoughts and seeing more pics on Friday!
 
RX1990 said:
I appreciate your endorsement! Like I said, it's a bit bigger than I was initially looking for but it seems to check all the other boxes and easily one of the best I have come across that is actionable and still within budget.

I am seeing it in person this Friday. If all goes well, I think this could be the one!

Regarding the MBF - do you mainly view it as a positive because of the K color grading? I've been under the general impression that I should be avoiding fluorescence on higher color gradings (targeting either none or faint) but that it can help with slightly warmer color diamonds such as the J and K range by making them look "whiter". Is that the only real benefit of its presence with a diamond like this?
Click to expand...

Fluorescence is just a thing. Many of us love it because of how cool it looks under black lights and seek it out. It can sometimes make warmer stones look cooler. I actually dream of a stone with fluorescence, set in a halo of alternating fluorescence melee.

It’s very rare but sometimes fluorescence makes a stone look oily or milky. This stone doesn’t have that issue.

Re: depth, for antique stones, most are cut deeper in order to make space for the chunkier facets and higher crown angles. It’s a part of the allure. Don’t discount it due to depth unless you believe it then faces up too small for your intended’s preferences. Since you already are concerned about it being too big, it doesn’t seem to be an issue. The deep look is sometimes lovingly called a “ring pop look” amongst antique diamond aficionados here.

You need to throw a lot of what you think you learn about modern diamonds out the window for antiques.

It’s a fricken beautiful stone and if I was in the market, I’d want it. Done deal want it. My original e-ring from my spouse is an antique emerald cut, and I just finished shopping for my upgrade diamond and antique ECs were a shape I still considered amongst other antique styles. It’s perfectly what I would want, ideal ideal.
 
RX1990 said:
I am far from an expert on this style and era of diamonds, but it seems like smaller tables and steeper crowns are common features of the ones that really stand out to me. These also tend to be the ones that come with deeper pavilions and additional overall height. I am still learning though and this community has been an incredible resource the past month during my search :-)
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly this. If it wasn’t as deep of a stone, it wouldn’t look as bright and lively as it does with chunky facets!

I just checked and my original engagement ring stone is 78% depth. It’s an incredibly bright stone that never has a “dark/dead” zone. The ASET is ridiculous when I’ve played with it. https://www.pricescope.com/communit...ique-emerald-cut-from-jewels-by-grace.218562/

Those diagrams online of depth being a problem in MRBs do not translate.
 
My ring stands 8mm and the height is no big deal. I think the height won’t be an issue with this diamond. The overall size is another matter but that seems to be what she is after!
 
Dreamer_D said:
My ring stands 8mm and the height is no big deal. I think the height won’t be an issue with this diamond. The overall size is another matter but that seems to be what she is after!
Click to expand...

Thanks. Regarding size, I know she was very happy with the general size of how the "inspo ring" fit. Separate from carat weight, I have been keeping in mind overall length, width, and height diamond measurements while evaluating options. The 5.69 K for instance is basically an exact match on length and ~9% wider than the "inspo ring" diamond.

She was separately able to try on this 4.8 carat last week that measures ~11.2 x ~9.7 x ~5.6 for length x width x height. When I compare this to the length x width of the new 5.69 K candidate, it's basically an exact match on length and just a hair narrower (which I prefer). Measurement-wise, the big difference between that 4.8 carat diamond and the 5.69 option is in the height, as the 5.69 diamond is about 18% taller. The 5.69 measures 11.15 x 9.47 x 6.62.

Here is are two photos of her trying on the 4.8 carat ring (link). I am a little concerned I am now approaching a size that is "too big" -- never thought I'd ever be saying that haha!

Just to be clear though, my whole search process here has been driven by having a general target size in mind but being open to options on the high and low ends so long as they are within budget and check off other boxes. This hasn't been a chase to continue trying to go bigger and bigger on carat weight. There have been very few options that check all these boxes (most importantly the overall antique "appearance", including facets and shape), so it's forced me keep an open mind on my search for the right diamond :-)
 
The size of the spready 4.8 ct looks great on your girlfriend's hand!

When it comes to diamonds, it's always better to err on the size of too big versus too small-I mean obviously we're a biased bunch :lol:

Also, the stone that you are seeing on Friday reminds me of Ksluice's incredible antique emerald cut. You may enjoy this thread:

5.23 K VS2 Antique Emerald Cut in CVB Sienna 3 stone

Many of you have helped me so much finally realize my 50th birthday dream ring (I think it took fully 1/2 of you regulars assuring me and cheering me on—especially all you step cut experts), and yes, it took 16 months from my first searches to actually getting the ring on my hand, and yes, I am...
www.pricescope.com
 
lulu_ma said:
The size of the spready 4.8 ct looks great on your girlfriend's hand!

When it comes to diamonds, it's always better to err on the size of too big versus too small-I mean obviously we're a biased bunch :lol:

Also, the stone that you are seeing on Friday reminds me of Ksluice's incredible antique emerald cut. You may enjoy this thread:

5.23 K VS2 Antique Emerald Cut in CVB Sienna 3 stone

Many of you have helped me so much finally realize my 50th birthday dream ring (I think it took fully 1/2 of you regulars assuring me and cheering me on—especially all you step cut experts), and yes, it took 16 months from my first searches to actually getting the ring on my hand, and yes, I am...
www.pricescope.com
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing this with me! I never saw this before when I was first doing some searches on Pricescope before starting this thread. What an incredible journey for her - read both the thread you linked to as well as her original thread on finding/purchasing the diamond. I had never heard of the Krupp diamond / Elizabeth Taylor diamond until reading this either!

@ksluice - if you see this, you have one of most breathtaking and stunning diamond rings I have ever seen!
 
The added depth of the old cuts is half the appeal anyway. When you look at your hand you often see your ring from a side angle and a tall crown makes that view so divine.
 
The half mm “extra depth” is like the thickness of 3 sheets of paper too! Not an issue.
 
madelise said:
It won’t face up too large in comparison to the OG inspiration ring. It’s pretty negligible visually.

IMG_6637.jpegIMG_6638.jpegIMG_6639.jpeg
Click to expand...

Thank you for this! This is an incredibly helpful visual that helps bring this a little bit more to life beyond the numbers/measurements alone. I’ll need to keep this in mind for other comparisons, but I am feeling pretty good about the one I am seeing this Friday!

Dreamer_D said:
The half mm “extra depth” is like the thickness of 3 sheets of paper too! Not an issue.
Click to expand...

Definitely a “non-issue” when you put it like that. Thanks!
 
Big update!

Saw the 5.69 K VS1 and 5.41 I VS2 today in person. Here are some video clips of them. The 5.69 was originally in a rose gold setting, so I needed to remove that to get a better sense of true color face up since it would be going in a platinum mounting.

Both beautiful diamonds but there is one here that instantly connected with me. They are about ~$5k different in price and both within budget (both in $8x,xxx range).

Here are some video comparisons (each video has a few clips stitched together). The 5.69 K VS1 is on the left and 5.41 I VS2 is on the right.

Video 1 - below window inside
Video 2 - near window with hand covering inside
Video 3 - resting on fingers (sorry for my ugly hand!)
Video 4 - 5.69 K only in mounting
 
Two more videos outside of the 5.69 K VS1. Asked jeweler for these because it was very overcast this morning when I saw the diamonds.

Here is one under direct sunlight outside (link) and one outside in the shade (link).

madelise said:
Well? *pins and needles*
Click to expand...

I was waiting for your expert opinion. Personally for me, I instantly connected with the 5.69 in person!
 
The faceting on the 5.69 ct looks spot on! The culet facet on the 5.41 is a bit off to my eyes.

How did the stones compare face up color-wise?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top