- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 33,888
TristanC|1308962160|2954458 said:Alright, seems quite settled. It will come down to a visual inspection. Good thing is, I've been obsessively looking at gems for a long time (and I am wont to go into strange new hobbies) so it hasn't really set her off. It seems the langermann ones are too vivid to her tastes (she doesn't like the Argyle Aphrodite stone for example)
@Diamondseeker - the pref would have been a nice princess I believe, around 0.7ct would be optimal due to the small size of the shape, D and eyeclean vvs2-vs1. If it were colourless. Colour never entered her frame of reference. Tiny fingers so it isn't a matter of how large a size. Even a 1ct looks comically large on her hands (a 1ct would look like a 2ct from a distance). It is all relative I guess.
diamondseeker2006|1308956392|2954373 said:May I ask if you have input from the special lady on her preferences? Because if this was for me and I could choose between a .25 pink diamond or a 1.0-1.5 ct. white diamond for $18,000, there just wouldn't be any deliberating for me to do. I'd rather have a pink sapphire right hand ring or even a pink sapphire engagement ring that was larger than .25. I appreciate fancy pink diamonds, but I'd rather have a larger diamond for the money.
The only one posted that I really liked was the first one. And if you are telling me it is $70,000+, then I would have to say I wouldn't even consider it. You could buy 10 one carat diamonds for that amount.
TristanC|1308962160|2954458 said:@Diamondseeker - the pref would have been a nice princess I believe, around 0.7ct would be optimal due to the small size of the shape, D and eyeclean vvs2-vs1. If it were colourless. Colour never entered her frame of reference. Tiny fingers so it isn't a matter of how large a size. Even a 1ct looks comically large on her hands (a 1ct would look like a 2ct from a distance). It is all relative I guess.
TristanC|1308962160|2954458 said:Alright, seems quite settled. It will come down to a visual inspection. Good thing is, I've been obsessively looking at gems for a long time (and I am wont to go into strange new hobbies) so it hasn't really set her off. It seems the langermann ones are too vivid to her tastes (she doesn't like the Argyle Aphrodite stone for example)
@Diamondseeker - the pref would have been a nice princess I believe, around 0.7ct would be optimal due to the small size of the shape, D and eyeclean vvs2-vs1. If it were colourless. Colour never entered her frame of reference. Tiny fingers so it isn't a matter of how large a size. Even a 1ct looks comically large on her hands (a 1ct would look like a 2ct from a distance). It is all relative I guess.
diamondseeker2006|1308968706|2954555 said:TristanC|1308962160|2954458 said:Alright, seems quite settled. It will come down to a visual inspection. Good thing is, I've been obsessively looking at gems for a long time (and I am wont to go into strange new hobbies) so it hasn't really set her off. It seems the langermann ones are too vivid to her tastes (she doesn't like the Argyle Aphrodite stone for example)
@Diamondseeker - the pref would have been a nice princess I believe, around 0.7ct would be optimal due to the small size of the shape, D and eyeclean vvs2-vs1. If it were colourless. Colour never entered her frame of reference. Tiny fingers so it isn't a matter of how large a size. Even a 1ct looks comically large on her hands (a 1ct would look like a 2ct from a distance). It is all relative I guess.
Well, if her preference would be a .7 D VVS-VS princess cut, then that is what I'd be searching for! You are right that size is relative. I am imagining that you are in a country other than the US.
A princess diameter is less than the diameter of a round, so .8 is not as big as it sounds. Here is an ideal cut E VS1:
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/princess-cut-loose-diamond-2594770.htm
(this diamond measures 5.18mm in diameter while a .5 ct. round is about that diameter)
TristanC|1308962160|2954458 said:Alright, seems quite settled. It will come down to a visual inspection. Good thing is, I've been obsessively looking at gems for a long time (and I am wont to go into strange new hobbies) so it hasn't really set her off. It seems the langermann ones are too vivid to her tastes (she doesn't like the Argyle Aphrodite stone for example)
@Diamondseeker - the pref would have been a nice princess I believe, around 0.7ct would be optimal due to the small size of the shape, D and eyeclean vvs2-vs1. If it were colourless. Colour never entered her frame of reference. Tiny fingers so it isn't a matter of how large a size. Even a 1ct looks comically large on her hands (a 1ct would look like a 2ct from a distance). It is all relative I guess.
kenny|1308962862|2954468 said:diamondseeker2006|1308956392|2954373 said:May I ask if you have input from the special lady on her preferences? Because if this was for me and I could choose between a .25 pink diamond or a 1.0-1.5 ct. white diamond for $18,000, there just wouldn't be any deliberating for me to do. I'd rather have a pink sapphire right hand ring or even a pink sapphire engagement ring that was larger than .25. I appreciate fancy pink diamonds, but I'd rather have a larger diamond for the money.
The only one posted that I really liked was the first one. And if you are telling me it is $70,000+, then I would have to say I wouldn't even consider it. You could buy 10 one carat diamonds for that amount.
You bring up a good point that had not occurred to me, since I'm a lover of small FCDs.
I suspect most women would rather get, for the same budget, a colorless diamond than a nice FCD that is 1/4 the weight or less.
I think I'll start a poll.
kenny|1309021046|2954830 said:To be fair though Tristan and his lady are not who the poll was asking about.
The poll asked about what people thought the majority of gals would prefer.
Even if the poll results were a Trillion to zero, Tristan and his gal are not the majority.
They are individuals.
He knows her; he's about to propose.
(BTW, the poll results was no surprise to me at all; I totally get that few people get FCDs)
Tristan has now heard the perspective of the poll results, but if he still feels surprising her with a pink (which will be much smaller than a white for the same budget) is what will make her heart sing I feel we should respect this.
I'm an FCD lover.
I'm on a mission to spread FCD awareness but in this case after mentioning the poll results, it's entirely up to him.
Also let's not forget that although an ering is for HER it is also from HIM.
He's already said he does not like halos and wants something subtle.
Should we force him to get a halo if the majority of women prefer them?
His style may be to offer something unique and not what the majority understands.
I recently spent the price of a new Lexus on a 10-point red diamond.
I can totally understand the appeal of putting it into an ering and offering it as a symbol of my unique and special love to a unique and special person.
The world be dammed!
That nobody understands that this little red dot was more expensive than many white honkers ADDS to the appeal IMHO.
That'y my personality.
I can also understand how a few people love a smaller D IF; it's value is more quiet and secret and that can be a reflection of the personalities of the couple.
People vary.
If Tristan wants to give her a pink that's much smaller than a white he could afford he knows her better than we do.
slg47|1309021529|2954837 said:I totally agree! but we see some guys on PS (not accusing the OP) who do not take their GFs preferences into account while shopping, so I think us ladies just wanted to make sure that the OP did that!
The more specific poll would have been a question of:
0.75ct D, VS1-VVS2, Excellent cut Princess (her favorite shape)
OR
0.5 ct round pink, beautiful fancy pastel shade without undesirable modifiers with at least a G/G cut. (her favorite colour - but would NEVER have asked for pink diamond, they cost far far too much... do you see where this is coming from now? )
TristanC|1309055708|2955158 said:Thanks for the interesting poll! Certainly in such a large purchase, there are many factors to think about and it is good to take on all sides. I'm really thankful for all the posts - it would be sad to have proceeded without considering the myriad outcomes that could have resulted. In THAT poll though, I too would have went with the 1ct. Personally I do feel 0.2 is just too small to be visible.
The more specific poll would have been a question of:
0.75ct D, VS1-VVS2, Excellent cut Princess (her favorite shape)
OR
0.5 ct round pink, beautiful fancy pastel shade without undesirable modifiers with at least a G/G cut.
diamondseeker2006|1309122781|2955571 said:If you are wealthy enough to spend $50,000 on a diamond, I am in a quandry as to why you think a .75 ct. stone is the maximum she could wear unless you live in an area where it is unsafe to wear jewelry of value or there are no other women with diamonds over .75.
kenny|1309127009|2955604 said:diamondseeker2006|1309122781|2955571 said:If you are wealthy enough to spend $50,000 on a diamond, I am in a quandry as to why you think a .75 ct. stone is the maximum she could wear unless you live in an area where it is unsafe to wear jewelry of value or there are no other women with diamonds over .75.
It's not what it's worth.
It's what is appears to be worth to the FCD-uninformed public.
Virtually nobody is likely recognize a half-carat $50,000 pink diamond as being either a diamond or being worth that much.
Except on Pricescope few people have seen a pic of one and are certainly not expecting to see one in person, outside a couple communities like the more exclusive parts of Beverly Hills or Manhattan or the Oscars catwalk.
In the rest of the world a $50,000 white diamond will attract a zillion times more attention to the woman, perhaps unwanted and dangerous attention.
Ironically wearing a 1/2-carat $250,000 Fancy Red diamond may make you less of a crime target than wearing a typical $10,000 white diamond.
In this sense FCDs are more discrete than white diamonds.
This can appeal to a person who wants something of high value that is not showy.
Sure, it's possible you may run into a GG or a jeweler who recognizes it but among the public it may as well be glass.
I like that.
kenny|1309141241|2955831 said:I totally understand and, while far from the norm, share many of the sentiments you have expressed.
I buy designer clothes at the thrift store and use a seam ripper to removed the stupid polo player, or other unpaid advertising, before wearing them.