PreciousBesche
Rough_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 20
For Stone #2 The arrows under the table are shorter on top in the IS and shorter on the bottom for ASET. This is either just a tilt of the image slightly or some assymetry in the diamond you would have to ask.Date: 2/12/2010 4:26:22 PM
Author: PreciousBesche
2
Its personal preference but the differences between these types of diamonds is incredibly subtle so I don't know if it is personally worth holding out for one if you haven't seen any in person and know you have a distinct preference.Date: 2/13/2010 1:48:47 AM
Author: PreciousBesche
I spoke to Bob from WF and he said he thought the idealscope from 2 was a little better. I ordered a diamond from JA yesterday that I decided to cancel after realizing that the depth was an issue, now I have this one (the IS/ASET image 2 above) on hold at WF - it's ACA AGS 1040363060169 - Bob says I will be blown away by it...
My brother gave my SIL an amazing diamond (he found it in Philadelphia's diamond district - it's almost 1 carat round cut) that I've always admired and I asked him for the measurements the other day and put them into the HCA, it came back as a 0.6 BIC - I have probably HCA'ed more than 50 stones in the last few days and I have never found a BIC...where can you find diamonds that will be BIC rated on the HCA? Is one better than the other (BIC, TIC), or is it a matter of personal preference?
Thanks for all the help here!
Just saw that you had in fact seen this diamond and admired it, the proportions would be essential with that HCA score as it might have separate issues such as obstruction ( visible darkening due to head shadow when viewing at close range), but before you go all out for one like that see if you can compare some diamonds in person such as AGS0 Peerless from Jareds or Hearts on Fire if there is a dealer near you.Date: 2/13/2010 7:49:25 AM
Author: Lorelei
Its personal preference but the differences between these types of diamonds is incredibly subtle so I don't know if it is personally worth holding out for one if you haven't seen any in person and know you have a distinct preference.Date: 2/13/2010 1:48:47 AM
Author: PreciousBesche
I spoke to Bob from WF and he said he thought the idealscope from 2 was a little better. I ordered a diamond from JA yesterday that I decided to cancel after realizing that the depth was an issue, now I have this one (the IS/ASET image 2 above) on hold at WF - it's ACA AGS 1040363060169 - Bob says I will be blown away by it...
My brother gave my SIL an amazing diamond (he found it in Philadelphia's diamond district - it's almost 1 carat round cut) that I've always admired and I asked him for the measurements the other day and put them into the HCA, it came back as a 0.6 BIC - I have probably HCA'ed more than 50 stones in the last few days and I have never found a BIC...where can you find diamonds that will be BIC rated on the HCA? Is one better than the other (BIC, TIC), or is it a matter of personal preference?
Thanks for all the help here!
Thats a very nice diamond from WF, as for setting I believe JA will cover a stone they didn't sell against breakage if they set it but they charge a setting fee of $125 thereabouts, Jim if you are out there, can you correct me if this is wrong please?Date: 2/15/2010 4:50:30 PM
Author: PreciousBesche
Thanks for all of the advice everyone. Stonecold - I asked my brother to email me the numbers for my SIL's diamond but I am still waiting on them.
After everything, I think I have decided on this stone - it is being reserved for me - are there any objections?
http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/whiteflash-aca-cut-diamond-2231005.htm#
One last question, would setting it in this be bad http://www.jamesallen.com/Rings/engagement-rings/m-geller-items/14k-White-Gold-Soft-Squares-Designer-Engagement-Ring/ because the prongs are so large and cover a large part of the diamond?