Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

The story of my ring's grading issue

post from Jpie:
Exactly. You’re gonna apologize for being a dick to White Flash now, right?

Reported your post to Admin, you should be banned. You can disagree with me, but using profanity does not belong on this forum.
 
Julyisjuly said:
Wow! The style is designed by @cflutist, amazing!! Its so phenomenal! It is much better than the Vatche design based on her picture posted in her original post. The beautiful flow of the crossing is just breath taking. I looked a lot of styles on WF website and saw a lot in store as well, never find one I like so much. Simple and Elegant.
The polish and prongs from the HPD is better than the Vatche setting. I may want one in plain platinum, depends on how much it costs. Thank you @cflutist, coming up with a such beautiful design.
20171011_profile-jpg.597318
Click to expand...

I’m glad you found CFlutist’s photographs. Having recently worked with HPD, I would guess that if you want to modify the Symphonie to eliminate pave, eg create a smooth shiny shank, their bench could do it. HPD is friendly and more than accommodating so shoot them an email if you are curious. If you go that custom route, I’d recommend looking at a CBI cut diamond to go into the HPD setting.
 
LightBright said:
Hi JulyisJuly! White Flash can order Vatche, I’m pretty sure. Alternately, the HPD setting you selected looks very much like the Vatche model posted here, although I think the shank width and pave sizes are slightly larger.

The setting you selected from HPD was a custom ring executed for the larger of CFlutist’s CBI F color MRBs. Both setting and stone are stunning, I’m a huge fan. My opinion is that you should put a CBI in that HPD setting, not a WFACA because of the convenience factor.

If you go with ACA, doing a Vatche would be less complicated. My understanding is that you can customize a Vatche ring shank and pave. I’d call WF to discuss that opportunity. Just my opinion...

Here’s a link to Cfltuist’s Symphonie.
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...nie-ring-with-2-793-f-vs1-cbi-diamond.234765/
Click to expand...


WOW! What a gorgeous ring!!!
 
I personally think the Vatche 1513 and Symphonie has such a smooth flow. Simple yet eloquent. That flow is continued in the Royal Crown Vatche that @Siamese Kitty suggested with the wider shank that tapers into the diamond. I really like that look and think it makes the diamond shine.

To me it appears the Royal is about 2.80mm wide whereas the 1513 is about 2mm.

I mention this because as you pointed out, in person settings can look very different. Items I thought looked perfect online looked very different with my eyes. It's because of the magnified views.

Also as pointed out WF is a Vatche dealer so they can access any of their settings. There are usually lots more available on the designer sites. Just get a model number and tell them. Also I think if you want a 1513 with minor tweaks then maybe WF can have Vatche do a modified custom with them. Not to mention I think Vatche sort of does that already as they proportionally size up/down the ring to properly match the center stone.

IMO, you definitely need to talk with WF to know your exact options.
 
Julyisjuly said:
Hi everyone! Happy new year.
❤️️The day I went to WF store, I also saw another diamond in color I. I took pictures and videos for the 2.14 I, the 1.94G, and the other 2.28I. I was not thinking too much about that 2.28 I when I was in store since it's was on hold for someone else. But when i went home and showed the videos to the family. They think the 2.28I has more sparkle.
❤️️In person, the 2.14I looked slightly slightly whiter than the 2.28I. That's the reason I picked out 2.14I. Or maybe it's brighter, I can't distinguish the difference of "white" or "bright" you guys mentioned.

Today the 2.28I was released from previous hold and so I have it hold for me to think about it seriously now: Between the 2.28I vs 2.14I. Advise needed!!!
In terms of price, only 1k difference between the two I, both are cheaper than the 1.94G.
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4068031.htm
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4068032.htm

IMG_3266.PNG IMG_3267.PNG IMG_3286.JPG
IMG_3206.JPG
Attached videos here: The location is as same as the picture. My ring finger has 1.94G, the Middle finger has 2.28I on top and 2.14I on bottom.

❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️❤️️
Setting: I looked at these settings on WF website as well some styles they have in store, I didn't find a one that I 100% like. However, yesterday, I saw a nice 6 prong setting I like a lot on HPD website. I really like the six prongs setting, maybe consider do a plain platinum version without these pave diamonds. I can imagine both versions are absolutely gorgeous!!!
Question: Can I buy a stone from WF and have HPD do the setting? Will it be very complicated?
IMG_3287.PNG
Click to expand...

There is one small trick to use when in dilemma:

I have read it on Niceice dot come before.

Just use the dimensions of the stone and multiply by 0.0061 to get the calculated weight of the diamond and see if the cutter cheated. Preferably, the actual carat weight is exact or even lower. For both of the ACA stones here, they are indeed cut to maximize beauty and not retaining extra weight for profit.

Please note that for stones at this size, it is common for the stones to have some sort of extra weight difference, even for a super ideal, but again, for both the stones here, we can assume that the cutter doing some pretty good work.

WF ACA I VS2, 2.14ct
8.33 x 8.35 x 5.07 x 0.0061 = 2.151ct

WF ACA I VS2, 2.28ct
8.45 x 8.46 x 5.23 x 0.0061 = 2.281ct

So, since we are comparing super ideals like this, I think I will just use my preferred proportions to get what I want ultimately. I like what @sledge has commented, regarding the smaller table and the taller crown, as well as the steeper crown angle. Those are some good proportions for better fire, which I believe is what you prefer personally based on your comments.

The 2.14ct could work well too, because the wider table is compensated with a shorter total depth, giving it a good spread. I believe if the crown angle goes slightly steeper and the crown height goes beyond 15%, it will be a wonderful choice for fire as well, unfortunately, it is not the case here. I also don't really prefer star length that is below 50%. I like star length like 50% - 55% for that extra contrast. This contrast can sometimes be picked up from the ASET in the AGSL grading report where by the center part looks busy. Anyway, this is just my personal preference.

And yes, the actual diamond video uploaded on WhiteFlash could work well too, again, as what @sledge has mentioned. In case of dilemma, that could work well. Just use your finger (or mouse, depending on device) to move the diamond from one side to another and see how the light show played out.

In the case of CBI diamonds, HPD has a See it to believe it program (SITBI):
https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonds/diamonds-home
You just need to have the extra cash to let them hold on to it while you view the diamonds at your place. I never own any CBI before, but I find that a lot of forumers here really like the CBI diamonds. Their price should be slightly higher that WF, but it is worth to expand your alternatives.
 
WillyDiamond said:
post from Jpie:
Exactly. You’re gonna apologize for being a dick to White Flash now, right?

Reported your post to Admin, you should be banned. You can disagree with me, but using profanity does not belong on this forum.
Click to expand...

Seriously? That's *barely* a swear word, and you were quite rude.
 
WillyDiamond said:
post from Jpie:
Exactly. You’re gonna apologize for being a dick to White Flash now, right?

Reported your post to Admin, you should be banned. You can disagree with me, but using profanity does not belong on this forum.
Click to expand...

lovedogs said:
Seriously? That's *barely* a swear word, and you were quite rude.
Click to expand...

LOL, no one else sees the irony in someone named @WillyDiamond reporting such a term?

While name calling is bad, it's not grounds for banning especially when you consider the context of the entire conversation and the aggressive attitude displayed that provoked the comment.

Lighten up man. Maybe I will change my username to tallywhacker...

 
Last edited:
lovedogs said:
Seriously? That's *barely* a swear word, and you were quite rude.
Click to expand...
Calling a duck, a duck, especially when they're acting like a duck and sounding like a duck, couldn't possibly be offensive. Now acting and sounding like a duck, could be offensive.... :oops2:
 
Siamese Kitty said:
Please forgive if this is a repeat, but has anyone brought up the Vatché royal crown yet? https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...n-solitaire-engagement-ring-by-vatche-347.htm
I think that one looks a lot like this setting from the side, although it tapers in and is a solitaire. Yes, three stones would probably add to the issue of choosing, not help, ha!

I don't think my stone has noticeably less fire than other ACAs I have or have had in the past with smaller tables. I personally think the LGFs affects the personality of fire more than the table and again, mine are longish at 78. With all of this said, I have never found my stone lacking in fire. It's actually amazing!
Click to expand...

@Siamese Kitty, what a good find on that setting! @Julyisjuly, what do you think of that one? :geek2:
 
Agree with @TreeScientist on the width with a bigger stone.

Also I really like the charming effect of how the width changes depending where you look on the shank. From the top view you can see how it tapers into the diamond, but look at the side profile and see how it tapers there as well?

My fiancee's ring has various width similar to this and a small detail I really like and think adds character and interest.

Not to mention if it works no expense, time or headache of a custom design. Given some of the emotional rollercoaster ride this far, this could be a very big positive.

Vatche-119-Royal-Crown-Solitaire-Engagement-Ring-in-White-Gold_gi_1333_4-32087.jpg
 
Folks, keep it clean.
 
I think AGS is softer on color grading and harder on clarity. I was told by two certified gemologists that my D SI1 looked more like an E VS2. Everybody has an opinion, but it doesn't make them right. Send it to GIA and see what they say.
 
Hi everyone! First working day in the new year, busy busy! Have no time to check my thread. LOL
Here is the video of two 2.14I and 2.28I with the 1.94ct G in the middle. There was no special lighting used on this video:
As said my vedio were took under WF's jewelry store lighting, here is my request under normal lighting.
Any thoughts? Tahnsk! :appl:
 
In these videos under normal lighting I prefer the stone on the far left. Is that the 2.14 I? It has the best edge-to-edge brightness of the three while still having good scintillation and fire.
 
TreeScientist said:
In these videos under normal lighting I prefer the stone on the far left. Is that the 2.14 I? It has the best edge-to-edge brightness of the three while still having good scintillation and fire.
Click to expand...
WF didn't specify which I here, the one in middle is 1.94G. Based on the size in the video (hope my eyes are good) I think far left is 2.14. In person, 2.14 looks slightly whiter/brighter than 2.28
 
July
I am sorry I am no help on this last request, these tired eyes can not tell the difference, so sorry.
 
As IRL you saw more fire/sparkle in the 2.28, I would stick with it, but all the 3 diamonds are very well cut. I wouldn't buy the G because of the color issues.
 
Hi @Julyisjuly,

I would agree with you on the size difference, certainly looks like the one on the right is the largest.

Basically what I'm getting from this video is that the differences are barely anything.

The 2.14 is slightly more brilliant to me with less fire - and it has a bigger table so that fits. The 2.28 is slightly less brilliant but more firey but still very brilliant and larger. It looks most similar to me to the light performance of the G.

Based on characteristics I like myself, I would choose the 2.28, especially as that has the added advantage of being the largest. Having said that, I'm not you and I think you need to think carefully about which characteristics you prefer in person. Having a slightly more brilliant stone in an I colour is not a bad thing, and if you liked that more in person then get that one.

Honestly what does your gut say?

If it's any consolation, when I had to choose between two CBIs, I couldn't bear it and couldn't do it. They both had different characteristics and the one whose light performance I preferred was the one whose clarity I was less keen on. I ended up choosing a different one and not comparing it to anything :lol: Because I know I'm my own worst enemy.

Best of luck, let us know what you decide!
 
Honestly I watched the videos several times and it's such a tough call, all are good. Maybe the one on the far right?! Although it may just catch my eye more could be due to its size. I would actually go with whichever one stands out in your mind from seeing it in person than a from a short video. Honestly I think whichever of the I s you choose will be excellent, don't think you can lose!
 
I too don't see much difference in performance in the last video. I think from a performance point of view you would be good with any of them. In your videos from the WF visit, I thought the 2.28 looked whiter but I hate to only have that short clip to make a decision. Did the rep think that the 2.28 looked whiter than the 2.14?
 
The video clearly shows that the G does not perform as a G color regardless its lab grading.
2.14 and 2.28 both perform nicely, but if I were you, I would look at more options.
 
I stand by my previous choice of the 2.14. It is almost as white as the 1.94, looks very close in size to the 2.28, and performs similar to my current stone. It is also the lowest in price :))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top