Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Diamond advice

ComputerGuy1211|1291315906|2785293 said:
I believe that my gf is only joking around when she cuts out the HW and Tiffany's rings. If she expects me to drop 100k on a ring, then she's going to be disappointed. I've been spending all this time looking for the center stone and thought that finding a setting would be easy. I have this one in mind (http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/channelset-rings/ring/item_58-2) but I'm not sure if it may be too big for her 4.5 ring finger. Also is there and advantage of Plat over w gold? My friends w plat settings are telling me to get white gold and those with white gold are telling me to get plat.
Click to expand...

Having had both plat. and wg, I have a definite preference for one over the other.

WG -
-less pricey
-doesn't patina
-many different alloys, some of which require plating to look truly "white" and some of which do not, your vendor will have more info if you're interested
-if you choose a nickel alloy, it will need the rhodium plating to look bright white - the true colour will be slightly creamy, and if your gf has a nickel allergy it could be problematic
-will likely wear out over the years, sooner if she often has it polished

Plat -
-pricier
-patinas: few alloys, some claimed to be 'stronger' or 'more resistant to patina', but in all honesty *all* platinum *will* patina sooner than later regardless of how much you baby the ring, simply by virtue of wearing it day-to-day
-no allergy problems
-negligible metal loss during polishing
-no replating needed - naturally "steely"
-preferred for prongs, because does not have 'metal memory' - as in, if a prong is bent out of shape it won't try to snap back, it will simply deform and continue to hold the stone in its new lopsided configuration

I personally much, much prefer wg. I cannot stand the patina, and I have had both the 'strongest' and 'weakest' plat alloys and both got that patina - one took longer than the other, but the end result after a few months was the same. I chose a nickel plated alloy and left it unplated because I prefer the creamy colour, and I do not have Ni allergies.
 
many of the online vendors have HW/Tiff style mountings. As far as the band you posted I personally prefer a band where the head is more integrated, but that is personal preference only :) You should get what you think your GF would like!
 
I love bands with the side stones. I am more of a "consistent" stone girl. My stone is a RB so I wanted the stones in my band to be RB- if i had a princess I would have gotten princess stones in the band. Something to think about. Others love the mixing of stones.


Also- I have a 5 size ring and my band is 1.5mm. The one you picked out is 2.8-3.4mm. Its personal preference, I wanted thin and dainty- I have friends with a 2.5-3mm band and they love it. Another thing to think about

BTW I think the 1.3ct stone you prices is dreamy. She will love it!
 
Hi all:
Hope you had a good weekend. I received the IS image and it was determined that the diamond would not be eye clean :? The twinning wisps and surface graining would significantly impact the diamond's light performance. Looks like its back to the drawing board...

1320132id.jpg
 
 
Sorry to hear that :sick: Buying an SI2 blind has an element of luck I'm afraid.

Of the four you've chosen I like the last best, 1 or 2 would also be a pretty stone - looks slightly leaky under the table but I doubt you would see those problem facets IRL, with both eyes and a moving stone. Don't like 3.


ETA: sl th girdle no problem - GIA grades girdle thickness in the valleys, AGS grades overall max/min, so AGS' ranges are usually wider.

ETA: just saw you added another - I v much like that last - #5. I reckon they could put it under a prong even if it's not eyeclean unset - definitely something to inquire into. This is what I did with my own SI2 - not eyeclean, but with the bogey under a prong it is a VS/SI1 look for an SI2 price.
 
Yssie|1291673359|2789151 said:
1 or 2 would also be a pretty stone - looks slightly leaky under the table but I doubt you would see those problem facets IRL, with both eyes and a moving stone.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the quick response. I just added one additional stone to my list. Just curious how you can tell if the diamond could look "leaky" under the table. Is it a number in the GIA spec or could you tell by looking at the magnified image?
 
I did - see the second edit.

You can *sometimes* tell by the photos. Sometimes. And even then, you may be wrong - it is dependent as much on the photography as the stone configuration itself.

But, in JA's case where they provide 3 ISs before you have to pay, if there's a metric available to use - even one that lets some winners through the cracks - I'll try it. Much like the reasoning for the HCA, actually.
 
As far as platinum vs. white gold: for a ring with a lot of exposed, smooth metal, I prefer white gold. Platinum gets that patina on it that I think doesn't look so great with plain metal. totally a personal preference thing so YMMV.

However PT and AU are really similar in price as far as jewelery is concerned right now, so that may impact your decision some too.

Personally I prefer platinum in ornate filigree settings, especially antique ones, because it lends itself to more lacey, delicate designs.

But for the type of setting you linked to, I'd probably go with white gold, and if they have the option of getting a gold/palladium alloy to make it a true white and not need rhodium plating, that's my personal favorite variety of metal. You get the white-white color w/o the annoyance of rhodium plating it, and no patina, as well as the lower price for white gold. I've got a couple of right hand rings that are 14K palladium white gold, and they've held up beautifully over the five or so years I've owned them.
 
in order to determine if there will be leaky light under the table you will need ASET- Idealscope images that show light return.
 
I didn't think it would be so difficult to find an 'eye clean' SI2 stone in the 1.25 Ct. Each one I found has turned out not to be eye clean. It looks like I will have to improve the clarity in my searches.

The link below are the stones the JA rep have sent for my consideration.

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/diamond-comparison.asp?p=1333796,1343205

Since they both look fine to me, I wanted to get your opinions in case i may have missed something.

Thanks!
 
yeah, you should have better luck with SI1s. the ones from JA look nice, get IS image and ask them to evaluate.

alternatively, I think BGD and WF might be a good bet for SI2s because I think their branded stones are likely to be eye-clean, also you would not have to wait for IS images/etc because they have these in house. They will be more $$ though.
 
The AGS certified one looks better to me.
 
The VS2 looks better to me.
 
I doubt there would be any visual difference between those two. Perhaps call WF and ask them to evaluate doing a blind test?
 
Thanks everyone for your help! I ended up getting this stone: http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2199916.htm

Since there aren't many settings to choose from, I decided to go with one from BN. Just need some advice from the ladies since my GF has small fingers (size 4.25). Is there one setting over the other you would prefer?

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-engagement-ring-platinum_12925
http://www.bluenile.com/build-your-own-diamond-ring?forceStep=STYLE_STEP&offer_id=7798

Thanks again all for your help!
 
I don't think BN will sell their settings without a diamond (you could call and ask, but I remember another poster saying this). if you are looking for a pave setting, WF has a lot of options

some of their pave settings
http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/diamond-settings/the-legato-micro-pave-diamond-engagement-ring-1012.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/diamond-settings/legato-sleek-line-pave-diamond-engagement-ring-1120.htm
http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/diamond-settings/harmony-diamond-engagement-ring-890.htm
 
I think it takes longer because it is specifically made for your diamond so that the proportions are right

ETA, some of the WF settings that are similar only have 8 days turnaround?
 
The ring is finally almost ready to be shipped! Here's a picture of the finished product I received prior to shipping today:
Thanks again for everyone's input. Hopefully my next update will be letting everyone know that she said yes!
gameover[1].jpg
 
ComputerGuy1211|1299021572|2862466 said:
The ring is finally almost ready to be shipped! Here's a picture of the finished product I received prior to shipping today:
Thanks again for everyone's input. Hopefully my next update will be letting everyone know that she said yes!
Click to expand...

just reloaded your pic -

gameover.jpg


Lookin' good!
Good luck with the proposal :bigsmile:
 
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