It''s done! A 1.60 J SI2 has found a new home...

[Stephan]

Date: 3/10/2005 5:41:41 PM
Author: Mara
The funniest thing is that even though my diamond is bigger than his small precise one, he still says his diamond TRUMPS all other diamonds in the household because it is an ACA, branded and sooooo perfect. I just smile and nod and ogle the ''Big J''!

Mara, you are very bad !!!

I''m very happy that you join me and the others.
Before, you didn''t want anything below H,
now that you agree with us, D-E-F will be... dirt cheap in a near future !

 

[headlight]

Date: 3/10/2005 5

9

5 PM
Author: Mara
headlight, my original stone specs were 61.4% table, 56.9% depth, 29.9 crown angle and 41.1 pav angle. it was a 1.23c that had the diameter of a 1.35c stone, which was part of why we liked it. but i didn''t know what we were trading off. when we first got it, it scored under a 2.0 on the HCA which is what also helped convince me that it was a good stone. back when I didn''t know as much as I do now. a month or so later Garry made some changes to the HCA and the stone was something like a 2.8 which made me sad even though I know the HCA is not the end all to be all, but back then it meant more to me since I didn''t know AS MUCH about the other details.

the stone was beautiful, but very white brilliant, BIC. it had more white brilliance and sparkles than color or scintillation. i find i prefer the ideal cuts that have more of a blend of all three rather than just one or the other. but again a BIC would be a fabulous pendant since it would wink whiteness from the neck and really be an eye-catcher. however good ones are harder to find!! sometimes they can border on fish-eye, darkness under the table, etc.

Gosh -- even at a 2.8 HCA, I would''ve thought it would display colors. I don''t even want to tell you what my stone scored (absolutely pathetic), but I do see color flashes, so I just don''t get the whole system.
What about in the jewelry store? Did you see color there? When I am in a jewelry store, my stone looks as good as the branded ones, so go figure. But, while the table on mine is similar to your first one (61.3), it is much deeper than yours (61), thus akin to a "60-60" stone. While mine does have the correct mm size for its carat weight (9.59mm for 3.29ct) I see why you were drawn to that original stone because it appeared much larger than its carat weight. I remember when my friends and I were getting engaged in the late ''80s and that was a popular way to go -- find a stone with a large table/shallow cut to give more "size" appearance.

Isn''t it so great that people are just now suddenly noticing your ring!!!!!!!!! Just goes to show that the increase in size IS a significant one

.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 3/9/2005 8:12:39 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
Mara

WOW !!! congrats, that''s a super nice J and from the I-scope pix the inclusions all look white

love the way it''s set with all 8 arrows showing ,when the arrows are lit up your finger will be on FIRE.

i think the next upgrade should go to Greg

guys also catch Diamond Shrinkage Syndrome.

 

[Mara]

here is the Sarin report on the stone for Lynn...

specs galore!!

 

[Mara]

headlight, the fact that my stone was a 2.8 on the HCA didn''t really have that much to do with whether it showed color flashes or not, it was that it was a BIC which means that it showed more white brilliance than fire or scintillation...aka a FIC is a fiery ideal cut meaning that it shows more fire than white brilliance. in the jeweler''s store when we first got it, we thought it looked fabulous however I did notice that the other stone we were comparing it to (which was an ideal AGS0 1.24c stone) did seem to have more ''colors'' in it but i didn''t really know what that meant at the time. i had been on PS for a few months absorbing what i could but i maybe only knew 1/10th of what I know now about diamonds. so i didn''t realize why the two stones looked different, didnt''t realize what the sacrifice would be to get a BIC spready stone vs a more proportioned ideal cut.

hope this makes sense!

 

[headlight]

Date: 3/10/2005 9

5:38 PM
Author: Mara
headlight, the fact that my stone was a 2.8 on the HCA didn''t really have that much to do with whether it showed color flashes or not, it was that it was a BIC which means that it showed more white brilliance than fire or scintillation...aka a FIC is a fiery ideal cut meaning that it shows more fire than white brilliance. in the jeweler''s store when we first got it, we thought it looked fabulous however I did notice that the other stone we were comparing it to (which was an ideal AGS0 1.24c stone) did seem to have more ''colors'' in it but i didn''t really know what that meant at the time. i had been on PS for a few months absorbing what i could but i maybe only knew 1/10th of what I know now about diamonds. so i didn''t realize why the two stones looked different, didnt''t realize what the sacrifice would be to get a BIC spready stone vs a more proportioned ideal cut.

hope this makes sense!

Yes, it does make sense, thank you.
You know, this is a "journey" -- for those that aren''t into diamonds, they get a ring and they''re eternally happy with it. Maybe they change the setting down the road. But for the rest of us (!), I think we learn something with each purchase/upgrade. I know I certainly have as I made my way to the current one. And, quite honestly, would I have done anything different in obtaining this current stone? Probably not, given that I wanted to get into that size and stay within a price point (and have to find someone who would accept my trade-in toward the price!). Thus, I had to make some compromises. It was a selfish enough purchase as it was, given that I''ve got two kids in private school, college educations that will be here before we know it, etc. Aah... life does interfere with the bling budget, does it not??!!!
I''m so thrilled for you, Mara. I can already tell it is going to be tough for you to give this one up when you go for the next upgrade in a couple years!

 

[FireGoddess]

Date: 3/10/2005 9:19:59 PM
Author: headlight
; I can already tell it is going to be tough for you to give this one up when you go for the next upgrade in a couple years!

Did you say YEARS?

 

[Mara]

hahah FG...I have already warned Greg that 2006 is my 2c+ year...he just laughed. Now what does THAT mean?!

He should be suspicious when I re-stock the wine cabinet next year...

Headlight, I totally agree on the learning something each time. It's been so interesting and amazing to have these various stones in my possession at any given point in time and to see the differences and variances on each one. My first white brilliant stone, my first ideal stone, this next ideal stone, not to mention my small ACA earrings. Each diamond has it's own personality and it's so fun to play around with them. It's funny because I don't wear alot of jewelry, aka right now I have on small platinum hoops, my Regent pendant and my ring set...but I just adore diamonds! I like some colored stones, but I adore the diamonds. So for me diamond sparklies are the fun part, big or small, too bad they are the most expensive of gems... but I am very lucky we can afford this habit...on a very small scale of course! The good part(!) is that because I don't own many pieces of jewelry nor would I wear them...I try to stay practical in terms of my main pieces.

I already warned Greg that I want to upgrade my earrings later this year...hehehe. I told him..don't worry, that will be a very small amount compared to next year!

 

[Mara]

here is one more amazing shot, in dim office lighting...look at the arrows!

 

[Buena Girl]

ooohhhh, very, very, nice !!!

I am curious about how your J looks in poor lighting? At work, we have horrible lighting and most of the girls diamonds look really sad. But I don''t know if they have well cut diamonds or not. Does your J sparkle and still look very white even in gross lighting?

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 3/10/2005 10:44

0 PM
Author: Buena Girl
ooohhhh, very, very, nice !!!

I am curious about how your J looks in poor lighting? At work, we have horrible lighting and most of the girls diamonds look really sad. But I don''t know if they have well cut diamonds or not. Does your J sparkle and still look very white even in gross lighting?

Mara,
I''m interested in this, too. My office is flourescent lighting, and while my diamond looks light years more sparkly than my co-workers, it still is NOT great light for it, to my eyes, anyway. You love the looks of your stone under flourescent lights? ???!
Thanks,
Lynn

 

[Kaili]

Mara,
Wholly Crap, and I mean that in a VERY good way!!! I haven''t had time to read through the entire thread, but I got the gist...

Your stone is beautiful, and it is perfect in the ring... I don''t think you need to make the band any thinner now.

CONGRATS!!! It is stunning!!! It looks gigantic, but even better, it looks amazingly white and sparkley!!

I''m sooo excited for you!!

 

[Leila]

Hi Mara. Congrats on such a beautiful ring! I noticed on the GIA cert, your new stone does not have a faceted girdle. The diamond in my pendant does not have a faceted girdle either and I purchased it thinking because it''s on my neck I won''t notice the girdle at all so it''d be a non-issue for me. I was wondering if it would be different if set in a ring and get scrutinize all the time. How does the girdle look to you? Is it noticeable? Does it detract from the stone''s beauty in any way? I noticed that a lot of the diamonds below H in color do not have a faceted girdle. I wonder why.

 

[Mara]

hmmm I don't know what fluorescent lighting is (flat lights on ceiling??)...but my diamond looks very sparkly at work, both my diamonds did.

the only time i have ever seen a well-cut diamond, whether it's the H or this J, look other than it's absolute best is in direct sunlight....it seems to wash out the sparkle and cause chaos in the stones. i prefer dimmer lighting and/or indirect lighting for sparkles.

the difference between the H and the J or even a D and the J will not be noticeable in *how* it sparkles, the sparkle comes from the cut regardless of color. the only difference would be in body color of the stone....and there isn't any, amazingly! i love this stone!

leila, faceted girdle vs non..didn't even notice it! the girdle is pretty thin on this stone, when i just looked at it i could see a very thin line but that's about it. it would bother me if there was a thick stone without a faceted girdle, but on this stone i didnt even notice til you just mentioned it! I didn't even notice it on the GIA..hehee. so much for my observant skills.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Lynn
your stone sounds like my wife''s stone, there isn''t much action under the white flourescent lighting.diamond needs color light for it to be on fire.

 

[Kamuelamom]

Date: 3/11/2005 2

4:33 AM
Author: Mara
hmmm I don''t know what fluorescent lighting is (flat lights on ceiling??)...but my diamond looks very sparkly at work, both my diamonds did.

Yes, I call this dental office lighting. The bright white lights usually around 4'' long, one or two of them at a time, usually disguised behind all sorts of various casing.

That said, Mara your upgrade looks great. Don''t think even for a second that you had the PS gang fooled.

Enjoy your new sparkly, at least until the next one rolls around.

It''s beautiful!

~kmom

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 3/11/2005 2:52:20 AM
Author: Dancing Fire
Lynn
your stone sounds like my wife''s stone, there isn''t much action under the white flourescent lighting.diamond needs color light for it to be on fire.

DF,
Why would this be? It sounds like the same kind of light as described above... and Mara''s thrilled!

The other day a co-worker was admiring my stone (in the office) and she said, "oooh, so sparkly!" Then she looked at hers (and there was a HUGE difference, hers was deader than a nit

) and she said, "Ew, I better clean my ring!" And I''ve noticed that my other co-workers rings do not do ANYTHING - and I mean ANYTHING - under those lights... while mine does do something... it''s just not in my favorite look (like at Home Depot!)

But yet some people LOVE flourescent lights! I honestly can''t imagine that mine looks much different than Mara''s in the same lighting situation? Perhaps my expectations are off? Is what I''m seeing mainly brilliance and/or scint instead? I am still not 100% sure I understand those terms, even after all this time here with you guys!!!

Lynn

 

[carolina]

Wow, Mara...what a beautiful stone and settings. The J color looks really great. How beautiful and huge!!! It is amazing how much larger the 1.60 looks!

That is a great upgrade. Looks like you got a very nice, eyeclean stone. Wow!!!

I really like your setting.

 

[Carolina Girl]

Mara, congrats on your upgrade!! It looks so great on your hand. Hope you enjoy it

 

[fire&ice]

I''m going to be bad - I mean really bad. But, Ana is the trouble maker. That visual she posted of the proportion of the 3c on your hand is the bomb! Don''t get me wrong, the 1.6 isn''t to shabby - but I can see why the eventual is 3c. I don''t think you should go 2c. I think you should just jump in with the 3c - even if you have to wait & build up more stash! I''m not sure the 2c is going to seem that much bigger to you.

Mr F&I will have a sympathy beer for Greg.

 

[hlmr]

Mara:

What a an absolutely breathtaking ring!!!

I have to admit though- that 3 carat shot is to die for...

Enjoy!!

Heather

 

[moremoremore]

trouble makers...all of you LOL

I was already looking online this morning for 3 ct stones. I better stop. I''ve only had mine for a few months...and I have two years until the 5th anniversary and my next upgrade...but stuff like this makes me want it NNNNNOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWW

 

[Gale]

Wow Mara. I am really surprised at how much bigger that stone looks than the one you had. It''s beautiful.

 

[pyramid]

Date: 3/11/2005 10:35:30 AM
Author: fire&ice
I''m going to be bad - I mean really bad. But, Ana is the trouble maker. That visual she posted of the proportion of the 3c on your hand is the bomb! Don''t get me wrong, the 1.6 isn''t to shabby - but I can see why the eventual is 3c. I don''t think you should go 2c. I think you should just jump in with the 3c - even if you have to wait & build up more stash! I''m not sure the 2c is going to seem that much bigger to you.

Mr F&I will have a sympathy beer for Greg.

Yes, that is a good idea, because then you could be getting interest on the money whilst you save for the 3 carat.

 

[JCJD]

Date: 3/11/2005 5:56:55 AM
Author: Lynn B

Date: 3/11/2005 2:52:20 AM

Author: Dancing Fire

Lynn

your stone sounds like my wife''s stone, there isn''t much action under the white flourescent lighting.diamond needs color light for it to be on fire.

DF,

Why would this be? It sounds like the same kind of light as described above... and Mara''s thrilled!


The other day a co-worker was admiring my stone (in the office) and she said, ''oooh, so sparkly!'' Then she looked at hers (and there was a HUGE difference, hers was deader than a nit

) and she said, ''Ew, I better clean my ring!'' And I''ve noticed that my other co-workers rings do not do ANYTHING - and I mean ANYTHING - under those lights... while mine does do something... it''s just not in my favorite look (like at Home Depot!)


But yet some people LOVE flourescent lights! I honestly can''t imagine that mine looks much different than Mara''s in the same lighting situation? Perhaps my expectations are off? Is what I''m seeing mainly brilliance and/or scint instead? I am still not 100% sure I understand those terms, even after all this time here with you guys!!!

Lynn

Maybe this is just because mine is a pear, but fluorescent lighting is actually pretty good for my diamond - small "internal" flashes of color, but not much brilliance. It''s blinding in direct sunlight and in coffee shops and nice restaurants with diffuse lighting. Church sanctuaries are great for it too! I haven''t noticed much fire or brilliance in Home Depot though, which is "supposed" to be great for diamonds.

 

[hoorray]

Wow, Mara -- I just saw this thread. (Been running ragged this week...)

What a great move! I love the proportions of the new stone on your rings and hand. It makes a huge difference (no pun intended) and really seems much more "right".. The 3c mock up is to die for, but that 1.6 isn''t too shabby. The pics are great -- you new stone obviously has lots of life. I knew it was just a matter of time. Once the seed gets planted, it doesn''t take long to grow!

I''ll have to remember that after much wine strategy. Shouldn''t be too hard to find a moment like that with DH.... Unfortunately the ROI is a bit difficult -- especially in his mind!

 

[Mara]

Date: 3/11/2005 10:35:30 AM
Author: fire&ice
I'm going to be bad - I mean really bad. But, Ana is the trouble maker. That visual she posted of the proportion of the 3c on your hand is the bomb! Don't get me wrong, the 1.6 isn't to shabby - but I can see why the eventual is 3c. I don't think you should go 2c. I think you should just jump in with the 3c - even if you have to wait & build up more stash! I'm not sure the 2c is going to seem that much bigger to you.

Mr F&I will have a sympathy beer for Greg.

Hahha I know that 3c will look fabulous, before Ana mocked it up, I did it myself! I have a 2c shot and a 3c shot as well.

I mocked it up originally to see what the 1.6 would look like and it's pretty accurate I have to say. So I guess the 2 and 3c will be very spot on.

Funny, last nite we were admiring the diamond on the couch and I was telling Greg about the appearance of Mr F&I (so honored!) and what everyone else was saying and some of the funny responses like flopkins and her coworker, etc and he said...'yanno I have to say that I am starting to like the idea of rather than spending $600 here and there on small stuff, just spending the money on making this one grow'...which was fabulous EXCEPT I can't have him thinking that the small $600 stuff is not useful also (earring upgrade?!) So there's a balance there! Except I plan to upgrade the earrings on my own, whereas when it comes to the big ring upgrades, he normally purchases them. Who knows, maybe next year that will change! We still have not merged accounts, so our money is fairly separate.

F&I... the plan for the next jump would be to something over 2c...I'm thinking around 2.3c or something, so that there is a significant increase in size, and then the next final jump can be to slightly over 3c (or as Greg said last nite...a 3.5c

...).

But I was telling him last nite that this diamond really feels right and that maybe this is where we should have STARTED rather than upgraded to get to it.

He said ... 'someone is spoiled, what young girl walks around with a ring like this on her hand'...' to which I had my response all ready 'lots of gals on Pricescope!'...forget the real world...PS is the world. Hehehe. Nevermind I am hardly a 'young girl' anymore but whatever..hehe. We got a good giggle out of it.

re: the lighting, I think it just depends on what you like to see your diamond in...I really dislike strong sunlight or being outside in sun with the stone, I think it washes it out. But others really like it. In my office, my stone appears more white sparkly than lots of color and scint. In dim office lighting like that last picture I took, tons of dark scintillation and fire...so it just depends on where you are and what your eyes prefer IMO!

oh and lop...the ROI is all how you spin it, aka happy wife, happy life? No ROI can be placed on that!!

 

[headlight]

Date: 3/11/2005 10:35:30 AM
Author: fire&ice
I'm going to be bad - I mean really bad. But, Ana is the trouble maker. That visual she posted of the proportion of the 3c on your hand is the bomb! Don't get me wrong, the 1.6 isn't to shabby - but I can see why the eventual is 3c. I don't think you should go 2c. I think you should just jump in with the 3c - even if you have to wait & build up more stash! I'm not sure the 2c is going to seem that much bigger to you.

Mr F&I will have a sympathy beer for Greg.

I agree with fire&ice, Mara! Next time, just GO FOR IT and make the leap to the 3ct. That's what I did -- first e-ring was the 1.01 D color (yes, that hurts me to type it!) marquise; then came the 1.51 RB, and then I went straight to the 3.29 RB. I, like you, got the 1.51 upgrade after not much time from the engagment, in just under two years. Then, I wore the 1.51 (with one setting change along the way) for 12 years. I think that amount of time was really "respectable", given my "illness" (!).
Like you, I thought I'd go up to a 2ct from the 1.51. Well, it just didn't seem like it made an impact. The jeweler showed me that it would take an increase of a carat to make a visual difference, so I was going to go for 2.5. But, I thought, "three" just felt like a better number (you know, rounded off, none of this "half" stuff!!!). So, I went searching for the 3 ct, and just happened to find the 3.29 stone which had the right price, a jeweler that would take my former three stone ring in on trade toward the purchase price and who has a fabulous trade-in policy for the future -- no more trying to "unload the old stuff in order to upgrade", and I honestly didn't care that it was graded by EGL -- I only cared that there was "some" paperwork on it and I was not just taking the word from the seller, as I was ultimately going by what my eyes saw rather than what the numbers read, and while the clarity and color are not where I thought I'd ever go, no one knows the difference -- I got into the size I so long dreamed of that looks beautiful and impressive in person. As for cut, it is the right mm size for carat weight, so I know it doesn't possess the negatives one gets with a deep or shallow cut. Its only "downside" is the table %, which is just a little too much but given that my stone perfoms in just about any lighting situation, I guess something in its measurements along the way "work" together. And, now that I got this size, of which I am so grateful to be able to say I love and that I have not endured any shrinkage syndrome and I've had it for almost two years now which I think is a respectable amount of time, I can use my trade-in option down the the road to focus on upgrading cut, color, and/or clarity. (And, to be honest, really the only thing that "bothers" me about my stone is the color -- I don't "love" the "hint of tint" -- the color flashes, the white light brililance, the scintillation, and most especially, the contrast are all very pleasing to me.) Thus, I don't know if I would really focus on all the "numbers" for a future stone, as even the head of the GIA contends that there are a multitude of combinations that can yield a beautiful diamond, and that ideal is a marketing term. And, actually, I won't even consider upgrading this stone until the new GIA cut grades come out as my dealer for whom I am now entitled to a full-value for price paid upgrade does sell GIA stones so I will probably just go for a respectable grade on a GIA grading report as far as cut is concerned -- but my eyes will be the final judge. To me, the clarity thing is really mental or ego for me -- my SI2 doesn't bother me in real life when I look at my stone -- the only time I can see inclusions to the naked eye is in one particular corner of my bathroom (!). It is "knowing" it is SI2 that gets under my skin -- all mental.
Getting the 3.29 was much bigger than I thought I'd get and, as you can see with your new upgrade, the almost third carat over the 3 ct mark that I got does show larger than a 3 ct -- and with its excellent spread (per the HCA) it looks more like a 3.5 ct. visually.
I can see how much you love this stone, so I think you might be able to hang on to it for a little while and just go straight to the 3 ct.

 

[Buena Girl]

re: the lighting, I think it just depends on what you like to see your diamond in...I really dislike strong sunlight or being outside in sun with the stone, I think it washes it out. But others really like it. In my office, my stone appears more white sparkly than lots of color and scint. In dim office lighting like that last picture I took, tons of dark scintillation and fire...so it just depends on where you are and what your eyes prefer IMO!

Thanks!! I am a bit concerned about how my stone (not sure of the color until it gets appraised) will look under flourecent lights, but it''s cut very well and the top looks pretty white. It looks like it has a little color when I look at the profile, though. It''s good to hear yours looks white in your office. It gives me hope

p.s. LOVE the "3 carat" picture! Mara, you should get a picture of you smiling and reaching your hand out towards the camera with a "3 carat mockup" over your diamond.

 

[moremoremore]

"yanno I have to say that I am starting to like the idea of rather than spending $600 here and there on small stuff, just spending the money on making this one grow"

My philosophy indeed. Then again, I really don''t care much for jewelry gasp. The only additions I want are a nice pair of 2ctw studs and a bigger 1 ct pendant one day soon. Other than that, I don''t really collect too much.