Should I upgrade? Please help!

#16
ame said:
That's your answer right there. Don't get it. The stats are giving you hesitation, so it's not the one for you. Keep looking.



The table is slightly bigger than is considered ideal, plus it is quite deep. The crown angle is also pretty outside of ideal as well. You kind of want to stay in the 33-35 range if you're going to have a range. But it's important that it be a complementary angle to the pavilion and that combination is just not favorable. A 41 is generally in the ideal range for pavilion, but not when paired with a 36.5 degree crown angle. It also is having a lot of weight in the middle so instead of being 8mm it's just under. A true 2ct should hit right at 8mm. So you're paying for really a 1.95ish ct, not a true 2ct.
Click to expand...

Wow your knowledge is invaluable! Thank you! You are amazing with diamonds! Can you tell me which of the HCA categories are most important? Light, fire, scintillation, or spread?
 
#17
If you really love your current diamond, don't change it. Bigger isn't always better. My original ring I absolutely loved, it wasn't a solitaire but the largest diamond fell out. DH knew I just wanted my original ring repaired but decided to to go up from 2 to 3 carats in replacing my ring with a similar but larger ring in an attempt to surprise me. While I appreciate what he tried to do I was secretly upset for a long time, I loved the ring I had and my wedding band didn't line up correctly with the new ring, not to mention that was the actual ring I wore to my wedding. I can never get that back now, maybe I'm just sentimental but I would never of upgraded that ring it was exactly what I wanted and I loved it. Hope this gives a different perspective :biggrin: both diamonds are beautiful and I wish you the best of luck in deciding!
 
#18
lilmountaingirl said:
Wow your knowledge is invaluable! Thank you! You are amazing with diamonds! Can you tell me which of the HCA categories are most important? Light, fire, scintillation, or spread?
Click to expand...

Well, really they all are. They all represent different important aspects of the qualities found in ideal stones. But it's rare to hit all four as excellent, it happens, but it's not common. If you can get Excellent on Light, Fire and Scint, then Very Good on Spread, that's good too. Id rather have better light fire and scint than spread on the HCA. But the HCA isn't the end-all. It's just one tool to help weed out stones. Ultimately your eyes (and mind) need to be happy with the stone, regardless of the HCA.
 
#19
ame said:
Well, really they all are. They all represent different important aspects of the qualities found in ideal stones. But it's rare to hit all four as excellent, it happens, but it's not common. If you can get Excellent on Light, Fire and Scint, then Very Good on Spread, that's good too. Id rather have better light fire and scint than spread on the HCA. But the HCA isn't the end-all. It's just one tool to help weed out stones. Ultimately your eyes (and mind) need to be happy with the stone, regardless of the HCA.
Click to expand...

Can I please solicit one more opinion from you? :flowers:
2.17 ct
8.37-8.4 x 5.08
table 56
depth 60.5
crown angle 34
crown height 14.5%
pav depth 43.0%
pav angle 40.6
star length 50% (what the heck is this btw?)
Lower half 80%
girdle thin to medium 3.0%
hca was 0.5/0.7 (do i like that?). Ex on all but VG spread.

Please and thank you!
 
#20
Short answer, Star facets are on the crown, they're the little "triangles" right around the table facet. They need to be appropriately sized and angled in relation to the lower girdle facets to produce good fire return. The relationship also is related to how skinny or fat the "arrows" you see in an H&A cut are. 78% would be fatter, 82% would be skinnier. 78% better light return, 82% better fire/scint.

Just based on the numbers, I would say that's a definite winner, and the star length is perfect, the lower half...depends on the lab. GIA tends to "estimate" those, so it could be less than 80 or more than 80. But I like everything about this one on paper. Have you seen this in person? Especially compared to the other one you've seen?

Here is a REALLY good writeup with diagrams on the facets.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/Articles/MinorFacets/
 
#21
ame said:
Short answer, Star facets are on the crown, they're the little "triangles" right around the table facet. They need to be appropriately sized and angled in relation to the lower girdle facets to produce good fire return. The relationship also is related to how skinny or fat the "arrows" you see in an H&A cut are. 78% would be fatter, 82% would be skinnier. 78% better light return, 82% better fire/scint.

Just based on the numbers, I would say that's a definite winner, and the star length is perfect, the lower half...depends on the lab. GIA tends to "estimate" those, so it could be less than 80 or more than 80. But I like everything about this one on paper. Have you seen this in person? Especially compared to the other one you've seen?

Here is a REALLY good writeup with diagrams on the facets.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/Articles/MinorFacets/
Click to expand...

Thank you for the help and writeup! They are shipping it in for me to look at. It is GIA, so what should I look for re "80"? It is still an SI1 so I really have to examine it but it is an I with medium blue flour and that is probably my favorite color combo. I love those I through M color diamonds so much! I am passing on the 2.02. If I depart from my current stone, it has to be for something exceptional. I'm excited to see the 2.17 though because I think it is cut better than my current stone. This is all my husband's fault. He is always on the hunt for beautiful diamonds. But I think my diamond is gorgeous! But he wants bigger. He feels we paid a premium for the IF (which is true) and this stone is priced a few hundred less than wholesale. He has a diamond problem. Lol.
 
#22
4everonwaitlist said:
I would stay with the stone that you own now. It looks wonderful and has a lot of good things going for it. The other stone has an inclusion with fluorescence (I'm not a big fan of fluorescence personally) and a slightly lower colour grade. I know if it was my stone, I'd forever be examining it to try and find that inclusion and then I'd be dissapointed that I traded away something that was both beautiful inside and out. The only thing that I feel you'd be gaining is a bit of carat weight which in my opinion, is not worth losing the quality for. I'd wait for something better to come along.

Good luck with your decision!
Click to expand...

nc.girl said:
If you're happy with your current stone and you like the idea of perfect specs on paper, I wouldn't upgrade. You sound pretty unsure of the upgrade stone and its specs. I think both stones are gorgeous in the pic you posted, but it's hard to say how the unset stone's appearance will chance once it's set. It would be nice if that stone could be set so that you could get a better feel for it, as far as how the finished product would look.

Would your DH be willing to get you a right hand ring or maybe some diamond studs, if you decide against an upgrade?
Click to expand...

whoops said:
what a choice to make!

Personally if it was me, id stick with the G IF. I'm a perfectionist and the stone u currently have is cut better and is higher color and clarity. That appeals to me more.

As much as the size is tempting with the 2 carats. it's a big clarity dip to go from IF to SI1. Have u seen the si1 stone and inspected the inclusions closely? Mentally do you think you could handle that dip and know your ring is an si1 or do you think down the line it would bother you enough to want to upgrade the clarity?
Click to expand...

LVoeShopping said:
If you really love your current diamond, don't change it. Bigger isn't always better. My original ring I absolutely loved, it wasn't a solitaire but the largest diamond fell out. DH knew I just wanted my original ring repaired but decided to to go up from 2 to 3 carats in replacing my ring with a similar but larger ring in an attempt to surprise me. While I appreciate what he tried to do I was secretly upset for a long time, I loved the ring I had and my wedding band didn't line up correctly with the new ring, not to mention that was the actual ring I wore to my wedding. I can never get that back now, maybe I'm just sentimental but I would never of upgraded that ring it was exactly what I wanted and I loved it. Hope this gives a different perspective :biggrin: both diamonds are beautiful and I wish you the best of luck in deciding!
Click to expand...

Thank you so much everyone for the great advice and it is all great advice! I decided not to trade my current stone for the 2.02. It just is not exceptional in my opinion and the one i have is (to me). I am however going to look at a different potential upgrade tomorrow so we shall see. I'm not really set on upgrading, i love my diamond and could be happy with it forever, but if I can find a great stone why not?
 
#23
I think you said it perfectly: don't change the current lovely stone if it isn't for an AMAZING stone.

As far as the "80": It will likely only say 80 on the report, that can mean it's either 78 or 82. Either way you're fine. And likely you wouldn't be able to see the difference in person without seeing a stone of exactly the same specs with that one thing different.

I look very forward to your review of this in person. The clarity plot would be my only flag on this. If it's not eye clean that's a shame. If so, it's a great stone!
 
#27
What a wonderful thing to have a DH with a "diamond problem"! The new stone sounds excellent, and I hope it lives up to its numbers and looks as amazing in person as it sounds. Many SI stones are amazing and eye-clean, which is what matters in my book!
 
#28
ame said:
I look very forward to your review of this in person. The clarity plot would be my only flag on this. If it's not eye clean that's a shame. If so, it's a great stone!
Click to expand...

Thank you. If it is not eye clean, i can't do it. If it is eye clean, still might not be able to do it. Lol. I am a little worried about the inclusions to be honest. There is an "SI1 quantity" of very tiny inclusions dispersed somewhat evenly throughout the whole diamond. So it might just look dirty. I have never seen anything like it.
 
#29
You really may have a hard time with mind-cleanliness coming from an IF. Look at it from every angle, in a few lighting situations and hopefully it pans out. I've been all over the map myself on what I've had, but I think VS1 is probably my sweet spot. I have owned SI2s that were totally eyeclean, and one that was eyeclean with the exception of a prongable inclusion. But VS1 has just enough "character" for me under a loupe but not with bare eyes.
 
#30
HauteMama said:
What a wonderful thing to have a DH with a "diamond problem"! The new stone sounds excellent, and I hope it lives up to its numbers and looks as amazing in person as it sounds. Many SI stones are amazing and eye-clean, which is what matters in my book!
Click to expand...

Thank you SO much for the encouragement! Once you train your mind that the premium you paid for an high clarity was worth it, it is hard to train your mind the other direction. But i am a fan of "special" diamonds. And special to me is not necessarily best color or best clarity. It is a special warmth or shine or cut.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Back