How to read an AGSL Platinum Light Performance Document

[Smith1942]

Hi,

Please can one of the experts tell me what the graphic on this AGSL Platinum Light Performance document means? The numbers look so good for this diamond yet there seems to be a green splodge of darkness in the middle??

http://www.bluenile.com/certs/104063055026.pdf?params=cHJvZHVjdD1CTiZwaG9uZT04ODgtNTY1LTc2NDEmbGluaz1odHRwJTNBJTJGJTJGd3d3LmJsdWVuaWxlLmNvbSUyRl9MRDAzMTExNzUxJnNrdT1MRDAzMTExNzUxJmxhYj1hZ3NsJnNpemU9MTYwMCZjdXJyZW5jeT1VU0Qm

And also this one:

http://www.bluenile.com/certs/104063283006.pdf?params=cHJvZHVjdD1CTiZwaG9uZT04ODgtNTY1LTc2NDEmbGluaz1odHRwJTNBJTJGJTJGd3d3LmJsdWVuaWxlLmNvbSUyRl9MRDAzMTIwMTE1JnNrdT1MRDAzMTIwMTE1JmxhYj1hZ3NsJnNpemU9MTYwMCZjdXJyZW5jeT1VU0Qm

I'm considering increasing the budget for my stud upgrade to get what I really want so they would be lifetime diamonds. These two score 0.8 and 1.1 on the HCA and fall into the narrower AGS white box on the HCA graphic, but I'm a bit worried about what the colour graphics show on these light performance docs. If an expert could help me interpret these pics I'd be most grateful. Since it's an upgrade, an exchange or return is more problematic as I'd probably have to eat the setting cost if I wanted to change again, so I'm trying hard to get it right!

Thanks!

 

[JulieN]

They will make a stunning pair.

 

[Smith1942]

Really? Thanks. Since this will be my only upgrade (can't keep spending double!) and I'll therefore have these earrings for decades, I'm just concerned to get the super-best cut possible, you know? And I was a bit concerned by the green in the middle, especially as I've seen AGS images which have only red in the middle.

 

[bunnycat]

they'll be fine. I don't think it will be dark in the middle. That a computer generated image and the red versus green middle has something to do with the crown and pavilion angle combo. There was a thread on it somewhere that I read about it because I wondered as well.

 

[Smith1942]

Thanks!

Now, could the ASET images look any better? These will be lifetime diamonds and I'm trying to get the most precision, top-notch cut possible.

 

[JulieN]

No, they are excellent!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

They are AGS Ideal cut. That is the best under hearts and arrows ideal cut. You never put AGS Ideal cut diamond numbers into the HCA because AGS has already graded their light performance. The only unknown is whether they are eyeclean. Will Blue Nile tell you that?

 

[Smith1942]

Thanks, peeps!

DS, I asked Blue Nile and they gave me an answer within hours. They said that this pair, 1.28 ctw E SI2, are not eyeclean and that there are some "slighly visible" inclusions. Now, while I feel I could live with that as I really don't care about clarity (barring obvious black marks), however I know that inclusions can affect the diamond's performance. That I do care about. And this pair is $3,690 whereas the others that I like are under the $2,900 mark.

So, it's looking like I'll go for the first pair I posted, the D colour Si2 1.12 for $2,856. Blue Nile has confirmed that these are eyeclean and I've been assured by PS members and BN that, although the stones are 1.4 and 1.8 on the HCA, (and the latter only has 1 excellent and 3 vgs) that they are a fantastic cut.

Here are the specs again. I think they look good, just can't understand why the HCA score isn't more around the 1 mark.

Diamond 1
Cert: GIA
Shape: Round
Carat: 0.56
Depth %: 61.8
Table %: 56
Crown Angle: 34.5
Pavilion Angle: 41.0
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Size: 5.28 x 5.33 x 3.28 mm
HCA Score: 1.8

Diamond 2:
Cert: GIA
Shape: Round
Carat: 0.56
Depth %: 61.4
Table %: 57
Crown Angle: 34.0
Pavilion Angle: 41.0
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium
Culet: None
Size: 5.29 x 5.32 x 3.26 mm
HCA Score: 1.4

 

[diamondseeker2006]

That is great that they can give you a definite answer about eyecleanness!

You don't use the HCA at all with AGS ideal cut stones. The evaluation by AGS that says the stone is ideal cut is more meaningful than HCA scores. And in fact, a score of 1.0 on the HCA is not better than a 1.8. It is just that stones that score under 2.0 will likely fall into the ideal cut area. So forget the HCA when dealing with AGS Ideal cut stones!

With the D pair with GIA grading, yes, we'd use the HCA. Both are under 2.0 so they are worth considering. But we cannot know if they are as well cut as the E pair graded by AGS because we do not have an idealscope or ASET image to confirm if the stone has any leakage. That is the difference between the two pair. But that is great that the D pair is eyeclean!

 

[Smith1942]

Yeah, kudos to Blue Nile - I've spoken with two consultants who have both advised definitely against getting the 1.28 E pair because they are not eyeclean. They cost about $800 more than the other two pairs, so it's great that they are more concerned that I get a great diamond than making as much money as possible.

I've asked for ASET images of the 1.12 pair. They were not at all sure that they could provide the images, but said they will ask the lab. The diamonds are part of a virtual inventory so they said, for example, if the diamonds are in New York or Antwerp, they might have the ASETs on hand, but possibly not if they are elsewhere.

I think the HCA doesn't like the 41 degree pavilion angle so much as those below 41, especially with these crown angles. I think that's why although everyone says the numbers are fab, they are not coming up at the 1 mark that AGS Ideals do and that Blue Nile Sigs do. I read on here that Brian Gavin has said that 1 is his sweet spot on the HCA. All my sparkliest diamonds score around 1 on the HCA, so I feel it's a risk to get stones which score 1.4 and 1.8 as I don't know what they look like. I'm aware that HCA is not the definitive tool but as it's Blue Nile, HCA is all I have to go on. No pics.

 

[Smith1942]

Just read most of the 11-page thread on pavilion angles. Brian Gavin doesn't like 'em over 40.75! But basically, I gather that 41 with a 34.5 - 35.00 crown angle can produce an amazing stone, but if any of the angles of the pavilion facets are at much more than 41 then it can produce leakage/darkness, to some degree. Anyway, although this combo can be fab, I gather the 41 stops the stone from technically being considered a super-fine cut. Whether you would see the difference with the naked eye, I don't know.

None of this would be an issue if BN could produce ASET or IS images! One lab has already said no. I am absolutely not impressed - I am sure they could produce them if they really wanted to. I am quite happy with my current 0.68 ctw super-sparkly super-ideal E/F studs, so might just save my money and forget the upgrade.

 

[new4diamond]

Just read most of the 11-page thread on pavilion angles. Brian Gavin doesn't like 'em over 40.75! But basically, I gather that 41 with a 34.5 - 35.00 crown angle can produce an amazing stone.............

It seems most of Brian Gavin Signature Diamonds are around 40.9 pav. I have looked at several stones from BGD & WF in their H&A Ideal cut and the pav angles in most cases are 40.7-40.9 and the crown from 34.5 - 35.0

 

[Smith1942]

Fascinating thread on 41 degree pavilion angles. Some are for them, when combined with the right crown angle, and some not so much.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/41-degree-pavillion-angle.65301/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/41-degree-pavillion-angle.65301/[/URL]

Brian Gavin weighed in and had some interesting things to say on p.4 of this thread.

"I disagree because it [41 degree pav angle] is a perilous threshold for color entrapment. Sorry guys, but this is something the labs and theorists do not pay heed to. Go much steeper or shallower than Tolkowsky’s 40.75 and you increase the intensity of color in a stone. It’s unavoidable. I’ve seen it since the days when my grandfather was teaching me. Once you’re over 40.9 in sizes over half a carat this effect kicks into place and the stone darkens further as you increase the angle."

And this, also REALLY interesting:

"As margins shrink and rough prices climb cutters are pressed to save as much weight as possible. This is the reason you find pavilions creeping up and fewer 40.75 angles. It’s simply not as profitable to produce them in some situations (by the way, 1-5ct goods in collection colors have gone up in price again). 41 combinations are close enough to ‘make the grade’ at labs and they are better money-makers for cutters. My family has always aimed for Tolkowsky’s pavilion. [40.75]. We could make extra money cutting deeper but that’s not what it’s about – it’s about striving for the best of the best.

"Do not misunderstand. I’m speaking as a diamond cutter (and some may say a snob). Combinations at 41 can be beautiful and we don’t tell people not to buy them. In fact, we recommend them to clients seeking to be cost-effective, but they must be inspected firsthand because labs are blind to this issue. Well-cut diamonds can be beautiful at the threshold, but as an expert diamond cutter I do not approve of the reason factories are aiming high and pushing limits. I learned these things at the wheel long before the labs ever graded cut."

Bottom line, I need ASET images of these two stones and Blue Nile has confirmed that they cannot provide them. I'm quite sure they could if they wanted to. Well, perhaps I'll just save my money! Pity, as they could be fab stones at a great price due to the SI2 grade and the slightly steep pav angle, which may have turned out wonderfully anyway due to the crown angle. But how would you ever know, without ASET or IS images??

 

[diamondseeker2006]

You really are fine with an idealscope image on a round stone. Generally, stones with crown angles falling between 34-35 and pavilion angles falling between 40.6-41.0 and tables 54-58, depths 60-62.3 will fall into ideal cut territory. You need the idealscope image because those numbers are rounded so you can't make assumptions about the perfection of the cut. One reason I buy my studs at WF is because they do cut their stones to very specific standards and that makes the stones so easy to match.

If you want super-ideal cut stones, you really need to go with the Signature stones.

 

[Smith1942]

And here is a contrasting view from the same thread, written by Michaelgem. Again, VERY interesting.


"34/41 is smack dab in the middle of the Ideal sweet spot in most grading systems and for most Ideal cutting houses.

As far as there being some transition between 40.9 and 41 from good to bad, or as Wink said "41 is at the edge of the cliff" is just not supported by the evidence either from AGS, GIA, MSU or me.

The evidence I discuss in my article does show that as you increase the pavilion angle from Tolkowsky''s 40.75 to 41.4, you should reduce the crown angle from 34.5 somewhat along the "axis of Ideal" to maintain Ideal, Excellent or Ags Ideal 0 light performance.

So if you want to split hairs, and we all do, I can say with confidence and a large body of evidence, that this 1.90ct with a 41 pavilion in combination with the appropriate crown angle close to 34 is equal to and, in a hair splitting but observable way, superior to Tolkowsky’s theoretical 40.75 and 34.5.

You will not find a super ideal cut diamond with better beauty/ light perforrmance. You can take that to the bank."

 

[Smith1942]

You really are fine with an idealscope image on a round stone. Generally, stones with crown angles falling between 34-35 and pavilion angles falling between 40.6-41.0 and tables 54-58, depths 60-62.3 will fall into ideal cut territory. You need the idealscope image because those numbers are rounded so you can't make assumptions about the perfection of the cut. One reason I buy my studs at WF is because they do cut their stones to very specific standards and that makes the stones so easy to match.

If you want super-ideal cut stones, you really need to go with the Signature stones.

Thanks DS. BN won't do any images at all.

I was trying to avoid Signature stones again. They fall into those vey narrow crown and pav angles where you're guaranteed a beautiful diamond, but of course you pay a premium for that and can't get a stone with such high specs/size. From my research it seems that there are other combos which produce a diamond every bit as beautiful, without the price premium. (I found some last night on BN in the Ideal range which have the exact Sig Ideal specs and came out at 1 on the HCA.) The difference between the high-performing Ideals and the Sigs is that you really need to see some kind of image - IS or ASET - and that's what BN won't give me. So I'm in a position where I either risk returning them and eating the setting cost, not to mention return shipping and insurance, or getting Sig diamonds which are barely any bigger than I've got due to the premium. Negates the point of the whole exercise.

I am very annoyed at BN's refusal to provide images because I feel they totally could if they really wanted to. Of course, I bought my BN studs when I didn't know about any of the other vendors.

 

[Smith1942]

Oh, and the Sig stones aren't actually a guarantee either - I ran at least one last night which came out higher than 2 on the HCA. I've started to feel that BN's "Signature" line is a marketing ploy for which I don't want to pay the extra any more!

You know, my current Sigs are very beautiful indeed. Due to the thin bezel and the amount of light they chuck out, they look much bigger than 0.34 each. I'd say they look just about like half a carat.

Last night I went to Macy's and saw a pair of mystery diamonds. I was running an enormous amount of errands due to storm coming today, it was late and the good jeweler's opposite had closed, so I thought, well I'll just go into Macy's and check out the sizes of the studs. I was shown a pair of 1.25 ctw studs. They were barely bigger than my 0.68ctw. The cert was IGI (I know, I know. I felt dirty after looking at it!) and the diamonds were apparently I colour, I3 clarity. The weird thing was that they looked totally eyeclean, very sparkly, and I compared them to my HoF AGS graded e-ring which is an I. The Macy's crap stone looked whiter. I was taken aback by how small they were compared to my stones of MUCH less carat weight. They must have been wrongly labelled or something. So that was a waste of time - I'll need to go back to the proper jeweller after all, to check out sizes.

BN must think I'm a right pain - I've got diamonds on extended holds and everything. But this is a lifetime purchase and unless it's exactly what I'm looking for, I'm not going to buy.

 

[Smith1942]

I could, of course, simply jacket my existing studs. These look nice from BGD, cost a fraction of the upgrade spend, and would fit my 0.34 bezeled studs nicely...

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/diamond-earrings/jackets/jackets-18k-white-gold-5412w18


It would certainly be a cost-effective option, given that I would not have to eat any setting costs or pay for shipping and insurance. My only reservation is that my BN studs are set in a tall bezel, the kind with the holes in the sides, so I wonder if they might stick out from the jackets.

Anyway, I'm off to E.B. Horn in Boston for a look-see before the storm starts. Last time I went, I got a Tiffany Etoile ring 70% off retail in their preowned Tiffany section, pristine condition.......I also got my gorgeous sparkly G-colour half-carat diamond cross in there for $600....and my F 0.46 center pear pendant in a diamond halo for $1400.......Anything can happen in E.B. Horn, so wish me luck!!

 

[bunnycat]

Yeah, kudos to Blue Nile - I've spoken with two consultants who have both advised definitely against getting the 1.28 E pair because they are not eyeclean. They cost about $800 more than the other two pairs, so it's great that they are more concerned that I get a great diamond than making as much money as possible.

I've asked for ASET images of the 1.12 pair. They were not at all sure that they could provide the images, but said they will ask the lab. The diamonds are part of a virtual inventory so they said, for example, if the diamonds are in New York or Antwerp, they might have the ASETs on hand, but possibly not if they are elsewhere.

I think the HCA doesn't like the 41 degree pavilion angle so much as those below 41, especially with these crown angles. I think that's why although everyone says the numbers are fab, they are not coming up at the 1 mark that AGS Ideals do and that Blue Nile Sigs do. I read on here that Brian Gavin has said that 1 is his sweet spot on the HCA. All my sparkliest diamonds score around 1 on the HCA, so I feel it's a risk to get stones which score 1.4 and 1.8 as I don't know what they look like. I'm aware that HCA is not the definitive tool but as it's Blue Nile, HCA is all I have to go on. No pics.

I don't know how the HCA was when the article was written, and if it's programming has been updated since 2007, but one thing I've found running number for people over and over here is that it's generally the shallower stones that get a 1 or below. Most of the 60/60 stones I've run numbers on are the ones that score below 1. Again, I'm not sure how HCA worked in 2007, but as it works now, a 1.2 isn't better than a 1.8 or 1.9 or a 1, though sometimes I feel like it is tellimg me the "kind" of diamond I am looking at.

I haven't read the entire thread (yet!) on pavilion angles, but the other poster is right that at this time, most of BG stones fall in to the 34.5-34.9 corwn range and usually 40.7-40.9 pavillion and that tends to produce a mid-1's score on the HCA (1.5 or so though I've seen up to 1.9).

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Oh, the E B Horn trip sounds like fun!!! I do wish you luck there!!! I love finding pre-loved Tiffany bargains myself!

I love the idea of jackets, but I almost feel like I'd do the upgrade to at least .5 and then later get jackets for those. The only thing is, I don't love jackets as much with a bezel setting as I do a prong setting. You'd pretty much have to buy some that could be returned just to be sure they fit. Or maybe you could send the studs to BG or WF and have the jackets made to fit. I have seen a pair from WF that I love, but I'd probably have to do the same thing and have them made to fit my studs.

 

[Smith1942]

Baste - v. interesting. If B's Sig's have pav angles of 40.9 I guess he must have revised the 40.75 idea as being the ultimate pav angle (when combined with the right crowns.) So 40.9 is good, just not sure about 41 still. I need images!

DS - those jackets will apparently fit a 0.50 center stone or a 0.30 with bezel. My bezel is very thin, but the "cup" is really quite tall, so that's why I'm concerned about it sticking out of the jacket. Perhaps I'll try some on at E.B. Horn. I feel it would be a waste of money to do upgrade AND jackets, seeing as I'm not Rockefeller! I want the best jewelry box at the best price! Not sure how much difference I'd see in a 0.50. Those earrings in Macy's last night were 0.64 each,so almost double my 0.34s, and there was barely a difference. Maybe it's my bezels, although the bezel is thin. It's a bit of a mystery.

Given BN's reluctance to provide images, I'm falling out of love with this purchase as it's turning into a pain. I'm also feeling suspicious of the economics of an upgrade. It SEEMS really good - 100% credit - but IS it, when you consider that diamond prices have risen in the last two years, that you have to pay for the upgrade in so far as eating the $275 cost of the original setting plus the shipping and insurance costs to send the earrings back, plus buying a new setting...I might just treat myself to a different trinket altogether!

Let's see what the jewellery cave has in store, aka E.B. Horn. I am NOT buying anything today though, so don't get too excited!

Until later!

 

[bunnycat]

Baste - v. interesting. If B's Sig's have pav angles of 40.9 I guess he must have revised the 40.75 idea as being the ultimate pav angle (when combined with the right crowns.) So 40.9 is good, just not sure about 41 still. I need images!

DS - those jackets will apparently fit a 0.50 center stone or a 0.30 with bezel. My bezel is very thin, but the "cup" is really quite tall, so that's why I'm concerned about it sticking out of the jacket. Perhaps I'll try some on at E.B. Horn. I feel it would be a waste of money to do upgrade AND jackets, seeing as I'm not Rockefeller! I want the best jewelry box at the best price! Not sure how much difference I'd see in a 0.50. Those earrings in Macy's last night were 0.64 each,so almost double my 0.34s, and there was barely a difference. Maybe it's my bezels, although the bezel is thin. It's a bit of a mystery.

Given BN's reluctance to provide images, I'm falling out of love with this purchase as it's turning into a pain. I'm also feeling suspicious of the economics of an upgrade. It SEEMS really good - 100% credit - but IS it, when you consider that diamond prices have risen in the last two years, that you have to pay for the upgrade in so far as eating the $275 cost of the original setting plus the shipping and insurance costs to send the earrings back, plus buying a new setting...I might just treat myself to a different trinket altogether!

Let's see what the jewellery cave has in store, aka E.B. Horn. I am NOT buying anything today though, so don't get too excited!

Until later!

Well- I can say that one of the prettiest stones I remember looking at (in terms of sparkle) when we looked at e-ring stones was a 34/41 combo if I remember correctly, or maybe 34 40.8. I don't have the info for it anymore. I sent it back because it had too much color for me.

I did give a read through a big chunk of that thread you referenced and can only say this: caution. Take everything with a grain of salt. Each person was writing from their own personal preference point and it was 7 years ago. People change, ideas change and even with people like BG, not every stone is cut to exactly the same measurements, there's always some variation, it just has to fit together right in that stone.

I don't know how you could arrange it with BN because their business model may just not work this way, but if there was a way to get the stones in first to view them, then send it all in for the exchange if you like what you see, and get credited for you previous stones, that would be my suggestion. (And in the meantime buy yourself a little Idealscope, they're like $30.)

If you do decide to get them in (and can find a way to get BN to let you see them first and still trade in your old ones), I'd forget all the hair pulling and over analyzing. It's easy to completely overanalyze. Double check them in an idealscope and look at them with your eyes in a bunch of different lights since you've already narrowed it down by the numbers and let those be the final decision, and not the numbers on the paper. The numbers on the paper are just the start because I have a strong feeling the person in that original thread did much the same thing, let the numbers dictate the diamond to and she may have lost out on a really nice stone because of what seemed to be overriding fears of the numbers. (Just my .02 though.)

 

[Smith1942]

Hi baste, thanks for your suggestions. I could always do it somewhat like you suggest and get the diamonds in the usual exchange way but not get them set by BN. That way, it would be really easy to exchange the diamonds if I don't like them, and I could get them set locally by E.B. Horn, who do wonderful bezels, once I've got a pair I like. I would have to let my current diamonds go, of course. Not sure if BN would do it the other way, but it IS the way with the best outcome, and if I got them set locally..... I hope BN agrees to your plan! And I could get an IS like you said. Not sure if I could read the image very well though!

Trip to E.B. Horn was a little disappointing. And I forgot to look in the Tiffany cabinet! They did not have a good selection of diamond studs, but they said they can get some in and if I'd like to take my Signature paperwork in they'll see about a trade-in. I don't think it's going to happen, but it wouldn't hurt to know what I'd get for them.

However, they DID have some lovely estate brooches! A large 14k gold flower with a center of four of the best-colour opals I've ever seen ($975), a diamond brooch in the shape of a sunburst with a 0.50 ct center stone and diamond tips on the edges of the "rays" for $1,100, and a gorgeously delicate butterfly. The butterfly had pearls along the body, diamond-tipped wings and sapphire eyes, and it was $295. Of course the stones are very small and not first quality for that price - except the pearls were akoya - but it had beautiful filigree gold and the workmanship on it was lovely, the way the wingtips were painted in a kind of oval shape with teensy diamonds and white metals that contrasted with the gold.

I could get the butterfly as a wee treat anyway. For the same price as the upgrade with the D studs I could have the diamond sunburst and the butterfly, and still have my current sparkly Signature studs! I don't think the diamonds in the sunburst were exactly ACA/Sig quality but it still looked very nice and it was a unique piece. Also a great way to afford a diamond brooch, which would usually be out of my reach.

About a year ago I got a brooch from E.B. Horn in the shape of a rose, from a New York jeweler operating in the 1940s. I can't remember the name without getting it out and looking at the hallmark - Harry something? H something? - It's solid 14k and has a dusting of diamonds on the leaves. It's absolutely beautiful, and cost about $450. Later, I saw the exact same H brooch advertised online for $1,000. I must post it sometime. It's a breathtaker.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Oh, yes, we need to see that broach!

Now that you mention that your current bezel studs would fit in the half carat jackets, I am almost in agreement that that might make the most sense. Then you have a choice whether you want them simple or more blingy! You are very right about the problem with doing a trade-in if the diamonds were bought before 2011. And I am sorry, I can't remember exactly when you said you got the current ones. The loss on the settings is another issue. It probably doesn't make good financial sense to trade these in if they were bought before 2011. If they were bought in 2012, it is probably fine.

 

[Smith1942]

Which brooch - the butterfly or the sunburst??

The studs were bought March 2011. The diamonds are F/VS1 and E/SI2, both 0.34 and both Signature Ideal. One cost $638 and the other $773. BN currently has nothing with these specs so I can't compare. The setting costs plus trading diamonds for old prices and buying at today's prices...yes DS, I am also wondering if the upgrade makes financial sense. I do really like the current studs. With the bezel and the great sparkles, I'm sure they look like half a carat each. I tried on some 1.40 ctw today at E.B. Horn and they didn't look that different on my ear, I didn't think. They were not bezeled and they were darker stones at uncertified J, but still. And I could always get mine re-set in a setting that I like better and get a thicker bezel - the current one is really thin. Oh - and I tried my studs with jackets today and they did not look good, I think because the bezel is so very tall. It's the type with holes in the sides.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Well, I'd love to see them all! But I was speaking of the rose one that you already have!

I am going to agree that since you got good prices on the current diamonds, it would make more sense to keep them than trade. If you later desire a larger pair, I'd just keep these and set one pair differently than the other. Or use them for side stones next to a colored stone or something. I am sorry the jackets didn't work with the current settings, though.

 

[Smith1942]

Oh yes - of course! I've actually got quite a bit to post in SMTB later this week....

I'll have to think about the upgrade. I think the D 1.12 pair are a good price. It's just a real pity that there are no images. It really comes down to whether I want to take a risk or not. I could manage the risk with all the to-ing and fro-ing discussed by me and bastecat above, but that's a pain. Being an all-or-nothing sort of gal, I'll probably either go for the full monty or decide not to purchase at all. The diamonds are on hold until Wednesday.

Something that has been interesting about shopping at E.B. Horn and Macy's is that even with a stone of 0.70, I don't see much difference on the ear size-wise from what I've already got. If you hold them side-by-side you can see, but on the ear I really don't see a great difference. The salesperson in E.B. Horn thought it was due to the bezel. I said that it was only thin, and she said it didn't matter, it still added a lot visually.