Reserved 2.5 carat Princess and setting

[tonyjlopez]

After 4 months of searching, and probably non stop for the last week, with enourmous help provided by reading this forum, I reserved this diamond and setting from James Allen for my 20th anniversary gift to my wife:

Stone:

http://jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/princess-cut/2.51-carat-H-color-VS2-clarity-sku-194909

Setting (with all diamonds, and not the sapphires as shown - look at the flashplayer images that show a princess center stone with all diamonds) :

http://jamesallen.com/#!/engagement...ess-shaped-diamond-engagement-ring--item-2160

I think I did quite well!

 

[04diamond<3]

You're ok with the brown hint?

 

[tonyjlopez]

You're ok with the brown hint?

Yes. In the end she wanted a larger stone and it overode my thoughts about an IF stone. The group here convinced me of that.

Sitting on her finger as she walks around vs. sitting next to a GIA color set of diamonds, I doubt she or anyone else will ever notice. If we hate it, James Allen has a great return policy.

 

[Christina...]

I actually prefer a brown tint to a yellow one. I think that they look whiter and brighter especially viewing it through the pavilion where tint is most noticeable. I also agree that IRL you will never see it! Congrats to you both and I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts and seeing many many pics!!

 

[jstarfireb]

Sorry if this isn't the type of feedback you're looking for...but I much prefer the cutting on this one:
http://jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/princess-cut/2.54-carat-H-color-VS1-clarity-sku-141671

The one you picked isn't terrible but has 2 chevron-shaped areas of leakage at the top and bottom of the table in the photo. I would strongly encourage you to reserve this one and ask the JA gemologists to get ASETs on the 2 and compare them.

 

[JulieN]

Not the worst but light performance is weaker than I'd like.

 

[tonyjlopez]

When I put the two next to each other I can definately see the difference. I am going to give them a call...

 

[tonyjlopez]

I have both on reserve, and ASET images are forthcomong. Thanks!!

 

[jstarfireb]

Fantastic! I have really high hopes for that one. The only issue with the one I picked is that it's a bit off-square. Ask the gemologist if it's perceptible to the naked eye.

 

[tonyjlopez]

I ordered the ASET image on he 2.20 as well.

If the performance is greater than or equal to the 2.54, I need to consider whether it is worth paying almost an additional $9,000 -nearly 50% mord - to get a stone that is 1/3 of a carat larger. Is passing the 2 1/2 carat cusp worth the juice?

This is a gift - family piece, and not an investment, so deciding whether size or flash is most important? With a slight difference in flash, size matters the most, I think out there in the novice world where this will live. Not considering the additional cost, to my wife it does, I'm betting.

 

[JulieN]

Let's see if the SI2 is eye-clean and which one has better performance first.

As I said, the 2.5 is larger than the 2.20 by 2.75 percent.

 

[tonyjlopez]

Julie, if you measure the area, in fact the diamond is about 6% larger to the eye. Remember the diamond exists in two dimensions. Length x width vs. length x width. This from a one time math teacher.

 

[JulieN]

Oh, then we are colleagues! Math/Econ, UCLA 2009.

The surface area of the 2.5 H is 54.80 mm^2, and the surface area of the 2.2 is 53.36 mm^2. A 1.5 mm^2 difference is very, very small.

 

[tonyjlopez]

Oh, then we are colleagues! Math/Econ, UCLA 2009.

The surface area of the 2.5 H is 54.80 mm^2, and the surface area of the 2.2 is 53.36 mm^2. A 1.5 mm^2 difference is very, very small.

The psychology of a 2 1/2 carat vs 2.2 is worth something, but for the price difference I am leaning to the 2.2. And for the difference I can buy a beautiful 1 carat pendant!

Julie - you have been so incredibly helpful, and I'm betting that ultimately I will be selecting the stone you recommended. Still, I need to make sure we get this math right...The 2.20 is 7.14 x 7.24. So looking down it would be 51.69 mm^2. 54.8-51.69 = 3.11 mm^2 difference, or am I missing something? 3 square millimeters is still a small difference small though, I will agree. Indiscernible without this stone laying right next to the larger stone.

And this stone will live on my wife's finger and not in a jeweler's case, and with those smaller channel set diamonds a 2.2 or 2.54 will both look large and impressive.

One concern I always have with a princess stone is that X shaped area looking right through the center of the stone. I have seen cases where you can literally see the skin of the finger right through the center of a princess stone. This for me is really distracting, and a deal killer. I wonder if it could still get a high grade for light performance? For example I wonder if this diamond, an AGS Ideal 0, could be such a stone:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9978/

I realize from reading this forum, several lengthy discussions with James Allen and Whiteflash, and watching a plethora of the videos at GOG, that my experience with diamonds 30 years ago is now basically meaningless. I am much more of a novice than I believed, and the science of diamond grading and selection has taken a monumental leap forward. And rightfully so. Thank goodness for this forum, or I would be lost.

 

[JulieN]

We must be looking at different stones, I thought you were referring to this one: http://jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/princess-cut/2.20-carat-E-color-SI2-clarity-sku-167266

Has JA gotten back to you with a gemologist's review?

 

[tonyjlopez]

We must be looking at different stones, I thought you were referring to this one: http://jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/princess-cut/2.20-carat-E-color-SI2-clarity-sku-167266

Has JA gotten back to you with a gemologist's review?

I was talking about this stone:

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/princess-cut/2.20-carat-H-color-VS1-clarity-sku-40039

The large dimension on the other 2.20 stone you linked is sizable for the stone size, and it is more square (1.04 vs 1.05) than the 2.54 stone. Great size to the eye. Still I want a minimum of VS2 to assure it is eye clean. The 2.2 stone you reference here has one large crystal under the table I fear will be visable to the naked eye.

Haven't heard back from them yet...

 

[jstarfireb]

We must be looking at different stones, I thought you were referring to this one: http://jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/princess-cut/2.20-carat-E-color-SI2-clarity-sku-167266

Has JA gotten back to you with a gemologist's review?

I was talking about this stone:

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/princess-cut/2.20-carat-H-color-VS1-clarity-sku-40039

The large dimension on the other 2.20 stone you linked is sizable for the stone size, and it is more square (1.04 vs 1.05) than the 2.54 stone. Great size to the eye. Still I want a minimum of VS2 to assure it is eye clean. The 2.2 stone you reference here has one large crystal under the table I fear will be visable to the naked eye.

Haven't heard back from them yet...

For what it's worth, I do think Julie's pick will have better light performance, but I don't think your 2.20 will be bad. They're a very different faceting pattern (more chevrons, leading to smaller splintery reflections), and I prefer Julie's. At the same time, I also understand being leery of SI2 clarity. I personally wanted VS2 or higher...but I wasn't looking at a 2.5ct stone, so we didn't have much trouble affording a stone of higher clarity, as premiums for each bump in color or clarity are much higher the bigger your stone is. Just food for thought in case that SI2 is indeed eye-clean from all angles (which their experts can tell you).

As for the psychology related to size, you're right...there's a bonus when you get over certain sizes. However, I think once you're over 2 ct, it doesn't matter that much (IMHO). I think 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, and 2 are significant mental milestones, but above 2, I don't think the half-carat jump matters quite as much. Again, this is just my opinion, but it may enable you to buy a little smaller and put the savings toward the wedding band, setting, wedding, or a house/car/computer/etc.

 

[jstarfireb]

One concern I always have with a princess stone is that X shaped area looking right through the center of the stone. I have seen cases where you can literally see the skin of the finger right through the center of a princess stone. This for me is really distracting, and a deal killer. I wonder if it could still get a high grade for light performance? For example I wonder if this diamond, an AGS Ideal 0, could be such a stone:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9978/

For sure a window is a dealbreaker. I can't imagine any high-performing stone would have one. That said, the white area in the center of the GOG diamond's ASET and IS is concerning to me because it represents leakage. It takes a pretty shallow cut to make a diamond have a window, though, and this has a respectable 72% depth...so I think it will just be a little dull in the center but not see-through. I don't really like the faceting on that one, with the big wide X staring you in the face. I prefer a skinnier X pattern.

 

[04diamond<3]

One concern I always have with a princess stone is that X shaped area looking right through the center of the stone. I have seen cases where you can literally see the skin of the finger right through the center of a princess stone. This for me is really distracting, and a deal killer. I wonder if it could still get a high grade for light performance? For example I wonder if this diamond, an AGS Ideal 0, could be such a stone:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9978/

For sure a window is a dealbreaker. I can't imagine any high-performing stone would have one. That said, the white area in the center of the GOG diamond's ASET and IS is concerning to me because it represents leakage. It takes a pretty shallow cut to make a diamond have a window, though, and this has a respectable 72% depth...so I think it will just be a little dull in the center but not see-through. I don't really like the faceting on that one, with the big wide X staring you in the face. I prefer a skinnier X pattern.

The hole in the middle of this stone would totally bug me!

 

[Roxy]

One concern I always have with a princess stone is that X shaped area looking right through the center of the stone. I have seen cases where you can literally see the skin of the finger right through the center of a princess stone. This for me is really distracting, and a deal killer. I wonder if it could still get a high grade for light performance? For example I wonder if this diamond, an AGS Ideal 0, could be such a stone:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/9978/

For sure a window is a dealbreaker. I can't imagine any high-performing stone would have one. That said, the white area in the center of the GOG diamond's ASET and IS is concerning to me because it represents leakage. It takes a pretty shallow cut to make a diamond have a window, though, and this has a respectable 72% depth...so I think it will just be a little dull in the center but not see-through. I don't really like the faceting on that one, with the big wide X staring you in the face. I prefer a skinnier X pattern.

The hole in the middle of this stone would totally bug me!

The apparent hole in the center of the stone seriously concerns me as well.

 

[jstarfireb]

Any word on the ASETs and gemologist reports?