Engagement Rings (merged)

IdealD

Most of these online Diamond Boutiques can help you. They are very reputable. They can help you with both the diamond and the setting.

You can drop them all an email and see who comes up with the best stone.

http://goodoldgold.com - Jonathon
http://whiteflash.com - Traci Arneson
http://highperformancediamonds.com - Wink Jones
http://jamesallen.com
http://engagementringsdirect.com

It may be preferable to buy a GIA or AGS certified stone. The IGI lab tends to be softer on its grading of color and clarity compared to the first 2 labs. It has been known for the IGI lab to sometimes be 1 or 2 grades off in color and clarity.

Having said that. If you have your heart set on an IGI stone, going to an online vendor to help you find a good IGI stone may be the best course of action. They should be able to tell you the true grading of the stone.

Please check with the vendor, I don't think IGI stones are included in their buy-back or upgrading policies. This may or may not worry you.

IdealD

stumpjumper

Dhiammara wrote: »

We started ring hunting in earnest this weekend, intending to head up to the Birmingham Jewellery Quarter after gaining a feel for settings/stone quality. Would consider buying online, but most sites either don't list the cut quality at all, or list the table/depth information which is still gobblydegook to us.

The parameters we have decided on are 0.4ct, round (brilliant) cut, D-F colour (saw a gorgeous IGI certificated D, VS2 yesterday but with a £2250 price tag! ), VS2 or possibly SI1 if inclusions not visible. Basically we would like the nicest ring (with attractive fire/brilliance) looking in a £700 - £1000 price range.

It's really the cut that's stopping us from ordering online although I expect that's where the best value is to likely to be found. It's also difficult to gauge what type of setting will genuinely sit flush with a plain gold band (around 2mm); I prefer low settings in yellow gold such as some crossover designs.

Can anyone suggest an online retailer or even particular rings that would help to meet these specifications?

As a comparison: 0.45ct D VS2
As you can see on the listing that this stone has a AGS Cut grading of 0 (top). and at $1130 (or $1090 if you mention the stone was found on pricescope) then your looking at paying £915, or from around £1450 if set in a platium ring (depending on the style, i have quoted with the $600 tiffany style 4 prong 2mm ring)

James Allen has lots of stones inhouse that are really excellent cut stones,

coming in under your £1000 budget then: these are 0.41ct E/F VS2 stones
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1213069.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/F-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1197125.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/E-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1195007.asp?b=16&a=12&c=77&cid=131

matched with http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/classic-solitaire-settings/ring/item_57-2245.asp?module=
in 18K white gold will come in about £900 inc. all import duty and VAT. (tho budget around £30-40 for shipping costs on top of that price.)

PaulS9_

Hi guys, me again, what do we think of Diamond with GIA Certificate number 19299

cheers,

Paul

stumpjumper

if you could help us locate the stone, by giving us the carat weight

ie 0.73ct and the 8digit GIA cert number as i cant spot it on the CD.com site.

ahhh forget it, just found it

Report Check for
GIA Report Number: 17366054



Report Type: GIA Diamond Dossier®

Date of Issue: June 23, 2008

Laser Inscription Registry: GIA 17366054

Round Brilliant

Measurements: 5.31 - 5.33 x 3.38 mm

Carat Weight: 0.60

Color Grade: F

Clarity Grade: VVS2

Cut Grade: Very Good

Proportions:

Depth: 63.5 %

Table: 60 %

Crown Angle: 36°

Crown Height: 14.5 %

Pavilion Angle: 41.8°

Pavilion Depth: 44.5 %

Star length: 55 %

Lower Half: 75 %

Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick, Faceted

Culet: None

Finish:

Polish: Very Good

Symmetry: Very Good

Fluorescence: None

Clarity Characteristics: Feather, Pinpoint



ermmm... what can i say..but...

steer.
well.
clear!

this what you can class as a Steep Deep stone. and consiquently the light performance of the stone is compromised.
to explain, at 63.5% depth, this is on the deep side of the depth range, means the stone is heavier for less visual width, making the stone look smaller than a shallower stone of equal weight. and with this depth the crown and pavilion angle are much greater than is considered 'ideal' for light return, the combination of a 36° crown and 41.8° pavilion means the stone will 'leak' alot of light from the stone rather than returning it to your eyes, making the stone appear smaller still, because the edges of the stone will be dark due to this leakage.

here is a comparison, does one look bigger than the other?


the stone on the left is an ideal cut stone, the stone on the right is a steep deep stone cut similar to the one your looking at, at CD.com

IdealD

stumpjumper wrote: »

if you could help us locate the stone, by giving us the carat weight

ie 0.73ct and the 8digit GIA cert number as i cant spot it on the CD.com site.

ahhh forget it, just found it

Report Check for
GIA Report Number: 17366054



Report Type: GIA Diamond Dossier®

Date of Issue: June 23, 2008

Laser Inscription Registry: GIA 17366054

Round Brilliant

Measurements: 5.31 - 5.33 x 3.38 mm

Carat Weight: 0.60

Color Grade: F

Clarity Grade: VVS2

Cut Grade: Very Good

Proportions:

Depth: 63.5 %

Table: 60 %

Crown Angle: 36°

Crown Height: 14.5 %

Pavilion Angle: 41.8°

Pavilion Depth: 44.5 %

Star length: 55 %

Lower Half: 75 %

Girdle: Slightly Thick to Thick, Faceted

Culet: None

Finish:

Polish: Very Good

Symmetry: Very Good

Fluorescence: None

Clarity Characteristics: Feather, Pinpoint



ermmm... what can i say..but...

steer.
well.
clear!

this what you can class as a Steep Deep stone. and consiquently the light performance of the stone is compromised.
to explain, at 63.5% depth, this is on the deep side of the depth range, means the stone is heavier for less visual width, making the stone look smaller than a shallower stone of equal weight. and with this depth the crown and pavilion angle are much greater than is considered 'ideal' for light return, the combination of a 36° crown and 41.8° pavilion means the stone will 'leak' alot of light from the stone rather than returning it to your eyes, making the stone appear smaller still, because the edges of the stone will be dark due to this leakage.

here is a comparison, does one look bigger than the other?


the stone on the left is an ideal cut stone, the stone on the right is a steep deep stone cut similar to the one your looking at, at CD.com

Stone is overly deep

TediousPhoenix

I found a nifty site: http://3dbook.octonus.com/dataeng/3dbook.html

Go to Workshop then Optical features and if you have the diamond specifications you can input them and see how it performs to light.

IdealD

Try these stones..

http://www.bluenile.com/round-diamond-1-carat-or-less-ideal-cut-f-color-vvs2-clarity_LD01454006

http://www.whiteflash.com/round/Round-cut-diamond-1948024.htm

IdealD

PaulS9_

Cheers for those Ideal, am a bit confused now, is a few % points in depth really that different?

Also for the Blue Nile one, that price, what would I be looking to add to it, for taxes, and a Platinum band setting (NSEW design if that helps)

Just been offereed a nother one

0.62 carats, cert number 20055

Paul

stumpjumper

heres the same BN stone on the UK site.
so its £1697 ex vat or £1951.55 inc VAT. + a ring.

with diamond cut - to a certain extent - its quite a sensative thing - we're talking just a few 1/10ths a degree between ideal light return... and dull as dishwater.
I know it sounds quite complicated, the depth is express as a % of how deep the stone is compared to it's width or diameter.

and can you help us to help you?
please post the GIA cert number the above links to as i cant find 20055

have a look here: the GIA cert number is GIA 2101462138

PaulS9_

That is all they gave me for this one unfortunately, , sorry! Have asked them for more detail.

Paul