Should I buy this 2.6 I SI2 from Whiteflash? just got the images and have 24 hours to decide!

[chitowngal]

hey guys-

the diamond FINALLY arrived at whiteflash from the manufacturer. something went wrong with the shipping, so it was delayed a full week. anyways, i have the images from white flash, and i have 24 hours to decide whether i want to purchase. help!! your honest opinions would be greatly appreciated!

Oh, and this is an eye-clean SI2.

 

[Ellen]

Do you have all the numbers? before I say what I think?

 

[chitowngal]

sarin

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 2/20/2008 6:35:00 PM
Author: Ellen

Do you have all the numbers? before I say what I think?
Yes, and how about a regular image too?

 

[chitowngal]

40X

 

[chitowngal]

wow thanks for such fast responses. i just uploaded the other files.

i see that the idealscope doesn't look as red as i'd like...the redder the better right? whiteflash told me that this diamond would be rated between their ES and ACA as the numbers are extremely close to making ACA. it's strange though because the arrows look kinda funny...

oh, and this diamond is 20,800. what do you all think about the price?

 

[kcoursolle]

It is probably a very lovely stone in person and if it is truly eye clean, it's probably a great value!! The HCA gave it a 1.1 which is excellent. It has some very minor symmetry issues, but this probably won't be that noticeable in person and it wouldn't stop me from buying it.

 

[shel]

From the IS image, it looks like there is something weird going on with the girdle.

 

[Ellen]

It''s not a super duper louper stone, but my guess is it would a be very pretty. The price is not bad.

 

[Maisie]

Date: 2/20/2008 6:45:40 PM
Author: shel
From the IS image, it looks like there is something weird going on with the girdle.

How can you tell that?

 

[shel]

How can you tell that?

The leakage at the edge (white triangular patterns) are usually more uniform in a non-painted stone. But maybe they're of no consequence to the eye.

 

[whatmeworry]

What are your expectations/standards? I think it''ll be a pretty stone.

 

[chitowngal]

Date: 2/20/2008 7:24:57 PM
Author: whatmeworry
What are your expectations/standards? I think it''ll be a pretty stone.

cut, carat, color, clarity.

i don''t mind if the arrows are not fully formed if the diamond has great light performance. i am just not experienced enough to know if this will be an optimal performing diamond- whiteflash assures me it is, but i won''t be able to actually see it until i purchase it, so i''d like as many as your expert opinions as possible.

thanks for everyone who''s responded so far! it''s definitely helpful, and it helps me ask the right questions to my wf rep

 

[Mara]

in terms of how the image looks a little off, it could be photography..or that could be the stone. i would ask WF about that either way.

visually it's got very good light return. it's not a painted to the edge stone, so you might have a bit more scintillation than in a painted stone (though i have seen great scint in BOTH painted and unpainted!). i also have a 'almost ACA' ES stone...and mine is a firecracker that i adore. mine is a 2.3 J SI from WF and i love it.

this 2.6 I SI seems like a very good deal for $20k, and that spread, swoonable. i'd def consider if i was looking to upgrade hehee. i'm trying to remember but i thought that WF had a 2.6 I SI a year or two ago. hmm!

i'd ask more Q's about the images, and that bottom 6 o'clock arrowhead being misaligned, again is that the image or the stone? but even with small imperfections re: arrows, if the price is right then visually on this stone probably all you'd see would be amazing fire and scint. as long as it's eye clean as well. nice find.

 

[chitowngal]

Date: 2/20/2008 7:34:54 PM
Author: Mara
in terms of how the image looks a little off, it could be photography..or that could be the stone. i would ask WF about that either way.

this 2.6 I SI seems like a very good deal for $20k, and that spread, swoonable. i''d def consider if i was looking to upgrade hehee. i''m trying to remember but i thought that WF had a 2.6 I SI a year or two ago. hmm!

hmmm i wonder...although they did have to call this stone in from a third party. this stone has been sitting there for some time though...the cert is from march of 2005. any idea as to why??

whiteflash just confirmed that the SI2 is very eye clean, even up close and from the sides!

 

[jackk]

Have you tried using the pricescope diamond finder? There are a lot of similar diamonds and some are better priced.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/20/2008 9:10:32 PM
Author: chitowngal

Date: 2/20/2008 7:34:54 PM
Author: Mara
in terms of how the image looks a little off, it could be photography..or that could be the stone. i would ask WF about that either way.

this 2.6 I SI seems like a very good deal for $20k, and that spread, swoonable. i''d def consider if i was looking to upgrade hehee. i''m trying to remember but i thought that WF had a 2.6 I SI a year or two ago. hmm!

hmmm i wonder...although they did have to call this stone in from a third party. this stone has been sitting there for some time though...the cert is from march of 2005. any idea as to why??

whiteflash just confirmed that the SI2 is very eye clean, even up close and from the sides!

Sometimes these diamonds just take a while to find a home. I would also definitely consider this diamond if I was looking for a large stone!

 

[arjunajane]

"whiteflash just confirmed that the SI2 is very eye clean, even up close and from the sides!"

May I ask what your personal definition of *eyeclean* is? Are you an eagle eye, etc? Just my line of thinking..although WF are by all accounts good ppl, they are still ppl who are wanting to sell you a 20K diamond

. I would make sure you are asking the *right* questions to get the answers you want. And I agree to doublecheck if the slightly off symmetry is the photography or not..Although, if it doesn''t bother you, than fantastic go for it!

Pls take what I say with a very large pinch of salt, as I have very little experience with RB''s.

 

[Mara]

chiming in on the WF eye clean question...i have had numerous stones from WF and my last stone was a J SI2 and it was totally eye-clean to me. part of the definition of eye-clean has to do with how good YOUR eyes are going to be when looking at the stone. WF does have a definition of eye-clean, you should ask them what it is, it has to do with distance and viewing conditions. but i would say from my experience that if someone at WF was saying it was totally eye-clean, i''d believe them until i saw it and could say otherwise...lucky for me i am not a hawkeye so i do fine with a great SI2 but some people do have xray visiion and have to stay higher in the clarity wheel.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/21/2008 5:04:44 AM
Author: Lorelei

Sometimes these diamonds just take a while to find a home. I would also definitely consider this diamond if I was looking for a large stone!

Ditto. Not everyone can afford, nor wants a stone this big. Yes, it''s true.

I say bring this puppy home and have a good look at it with an appraiser. But like I said, I bet it''s a very pretty stone!

 

[chitowngal]

according to wf, it is very eyeclean at 8cm. the inclusions are white. if you hold it closer than 8cm and with effort, you may be able to see the inclusions. i''m pretty sure i''m not a hawkeye. i was looking at a diamond for a long time at a local jeweler, and didn''t realize there ws a black inclusion until the sales rep pointed it out to me

. that said, i don''t think it will bother me too much....and i trust wf when they say this is a really good SI2.

i am actualyl more worried about the I color....hopefully it is not too yellow from the side.

i''ve asked wf to take actual pictures of the diamond, so i''m waiting for those and hopefully make a decision soon.

so much to think about, so little time!

 

[Ellen]

Date: 2/21/2008 11:28:23 AM
Author: chitowngal
according to wf, it is very eyeclean at 8cm. the inclusions are white. if you hold it closer than 8cm and with effort, you may be able to see the inclusions. i''m pretty sure i''m not a hawkeye. i was looking at a diamond for a long time at a local jeweler, and didn''t realize there ws a black inclusion until the sales rep pointed it out to me

. that said, i don''t think it will bother me too much....and i trust wf when they say this is a really good SI2.

i am actualyl more worried about the I color....hopefully it is not too yellow from the side.

i''ve asked wf to take actual pictures of the diamond, so i''m waiting for those and hopefully make a decision soon.

so much to think about, so little time!

I would too, because from what I''ve heard, they''re really picky when it comes to eyeballing stones.

As for the color, that''s just something you''ll have to see for yourself. But I bet all you''re really going to care about is the size and massive sparkles.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/20/2008 6:48:35 PM
Author: Ellen
It's not a super duper louper stone, but my guess is it would a be very pretty. The price is not bad.

yep.

part of the issue with the IS image is the very strong lighting, part is the symmetry of the diamond.
Strong lighting doesn't hurt super-ideals IS images and makes the photos pop but can make lesser stones look worse than they are.
edit: After lookin at the reg. picture the diamond is also slightly tilted in the IS image.
If your still in doubt have Brian if he is available go over the stone with you on the phone.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Chitowngal -- Did you take the plunge? Are you making this lovely yours?

 

[chitowngal]

yes!! i decided on the stone. however, i started thinking about how big it is...and i''m afraid it might look too big on me! my finger is approx 5.5 (although i''m not completely sure)...what do you guys think? i know i know...i have buyer''s remorse already and i haven''t even seen the stone

i talked to brian the cutter from whiteflash today, too. he is hilarious! what a character

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 2/21/2008 8:55:33 PM
Author: chitowngal
yes!! i decided on the stone. however, i started thinking about how big it is...and i''m afraid it might look too big on me! my finger is approx 5.5 (although i''m not completely sure)...what do you guys think? i know i know...i have buyer''s remorse already and i haven''t even seen the stone

i talked to brian the cutter from whiteflash today, too. he is hilarious! what a character

OK, two things...

1. NO, it is not "too big"!!!

Egads, girl! Repeat after me, "It is not too big. It is not too big" Good. Now one more time.

Ever heard of DSS?!!

I wear a 2.36 on a 4.75 finger and believe me, the darn thing has shrunk down to nuthin''!!!
2. Tell us more about your conversation with Brian, please!!!

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 2/21/2008 8:55:33 PM
Author: chitowngal
yes!! i decided on the stone. however, i started thinking about how big it is...and i''m afraid it might look too big on me! my finger is approx 5.5 (although i''m not completely sure)...what do you guys think? i know i know...i have buyer''s remorse already and i haven''t even seen the stone

i talked to brian the cutter from whiteflash today, too. he is hilarious! what a character

Congrats!

Not too big at all ... It is an enviable size to which I have no doubt you will become quite comfortable ... in no time!

I can''t wait to see it.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 2/21/2008 9:01:11 PM
Author: Lynn B

Date: 2/21/2008 8:55:33 PM
Author: chitowngal
yes!! i decided on the stone. however, i started thinking about how big it is...and i''m afraid it might look too big on me! my finger is approx 5.5 (although i''m not completely sure)...what do you guys think? i know i know...i have buyer''s remorse already and i haven''t even seen the stone

i talked to brian the cutter from whiteflash today, too. he is hilarious! what a character

OK, two things...

1. NO, it is not ''too big''!!!

Egads, girl! Repeat after me, ''It is not too big. It is not too big'' Good. Now one more time.

Ever heard of DSS?!!

I wear a 2.36 on a 4.75 finger and believe me, the darn thing has shrunk down to nuthin''!!!
2. Tell us more about your conversation with Brian, please!!!

Ditto. And diamonds DO shrink, trust us on that!

 

[chitowngal]

thanks everyone for reminding me of DSS

my biggest concern was that it would look gigantic/fake for my hand! let's hope DSS doesn't hit me TOO hard because i don't plan on upgrading ever (well, i can't say that for sure

)

and per lynn's request

brian was just so passionate about the industry and his work, not to mention extremely knowledgable. he had me close my eyes and imagine all sorts of scenarios. "imagine yourself in the middle of the desert with your diamond and nothing else around"..."close your eyes and imagine what the lighting will look like when he officially proposes to you"..."give me 4 adjectives to describe your dream diamond when you first lay eyes on it"...interactive yeah?

he also told me that this is a great SI2 and that it would be difficult to find another diamond at this price point due to the high demand/low supply of larger diamonds. he personally doesn't mind inclusions because he feels that they are what makes each diamond unique and "that's how mother nature made them". he also would NOT give me his opinion on the "I" color (which is another concern of mine) because he can't tell my color sensitivity is (which i understand).

lastly, i asked him if he felt that the diamond would be too big, and he told me to draw a 10mm circle (which is how big it will look once mounted), cut it out, and put it on my finger. he also stressed to use gray, and not white paper because white would contrast too much...well, guess what? i just did that and it looks like i have DSS already.

well, i am done rambling. here is a pic of the diamond that whiteflash sent me. i know, why does it look so small?? let's hope it's on a gigantic hand.

 

[Lorelei]

That is the 2.6?? Must be a large hand!