Diamond stud earrings - need some advice please...

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#18
Although I'm not as knowledgeable about cut & clarity as these women, I do have an excellent piece of advice... get the screwbacks. I bought myself expensive diamond studs, and these are a great way to insure you will never lose them. Good luck with your search!
 
#19
Just my two cents but I think with stones that size you don't need to spend tons extra on clarity because they're small and will be further in distance (versus a ring which people may see much closer up) so a true SI could be fine. Once you get up into 1 ct per stone on earrings I think it's a much bigger deal. Just in case you you were looking for a way to reduce cost :smile1:.
 
#20
Thank you all for your advice! I will definitely get the screwbacks!

I found this other pair, which is about 200 EUR less expensive. Off course, I would love to reduce cost, but if the more expensive one's would sparkle more or be in any way a little bit more beautiful, I would definitively go for these...

So these are the two pairs I had in mind right now:

#1
Total Carat weight: 0.62
Grading report: AGSL
Cut: Ideal
Colour: I
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 61.4 and 61.2
Table: 55 and 55
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: Very small and None

#2
Total Carat weight: 0.66
Grading report: GIA
Cut: Ideal
Colour: I
Clarity: SI2 but I had them inspected and they are 100% eye clean
Depth: 60.9 and 61.2
Table: 57 and 57
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick and thin to medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Medium

I clearly don't know how important the polish, symmetry, girdle, etc. is in the look of a diamond...

Very very confusing! :smile1:
 
#22
Kathd said:
Thank you all for your advice! I will definitely get the screwbacks!

I found this other pair, which is about 200 EUR less expensive. Off course, I would love to reduce cost, but if the more expensive one's would sparkle more or be in any way a little bit more beautiful, I would definitively go for these...

So these are the two pairs I had in mind right now:

#1
Total Carat weight: 0.62
Grading report: AGSL
Cut: Ideal
Colour: I
Clarity: VS1
Depth: 61.4 and 61.2
Table: 55 and 55
Polish: Ideal
Symmetry: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted
Culet: Very small and None

#2
Total Carat weight: 0.66
Grading report: GIA
Cut: Ideal
Colour: I
Clarity: SI2 but I had them inspected and they are 100% eye clean
Depth: 60.9 and 61.2
Table: 57 and 57
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Excellent
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick and thin to medium
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Medium

I clearly don't know how important the polish, symmetry, girdle, etc. is in the look of a diamond...

Very very confusing! :smile1:
Click to expand...

I prefer the first but the VS1 is overkill. What about the last sets? Did you rule all of them out?
 
#23
To be honest: I don't know! :confused1:

Hubby is more like "just take the I/VS1's so you can rest on both ears", but obviously it would be stupid to pay more if you can't tell the difference!
 
#24
True, I just don't think it's worth it if you're just using them in your ears. HOWEVER, if you plan to dismantle your ring and make a three stone, they would make nice side stones, but Tiffany's probably won't let you use those for their three stone.
 
#26
I would need more details on these to narrow them down but here's my list:


for side stone purposes later:
Pair 6
0.48 ct – Ideal – E – VS2
Depth: 61.6% - 61.6%
Table: 56% - 56%

These would also be good assuming all are completely eye clean to your definition (mine means any distance, any angle, any lighting, at all ever with no loupe, if I see it at all without a loupe it’s not eye clean)

Pair 12
0.60 ct – Ideal – I – SI1
Depth: 61.8% - 61.9%
Table: 56% - 55%

Pair 9
0.60 ct – Ideal – H – SI1
Depth: 61.6% - 61.7%
Table: 56% - 56%

Pair 8
0.62 ct – Ideal – I and H – SI1
Depth: 61.9% - 61.5%
Table: 56% - 56%

Pair 7
0.60 ct – Ideal – H – SI1
Depth: 62% - 61.7%
Table: 56% - 56%
 
#27
#6:
.48 ct - Ideal - E- VS2
Polish: excellent
Symmetry: excellent
Depth: 61.6 - 61.6
Table: 56 - 56
L/W: 1.01 - 1.01
Girdle: medium to slightly thick
Culet: none
Fluorescence: none

#7:
.6 ct - Ideal - H - SI1
Polish: excellent
Symmetry: excellent
Depth: 62 - 61.7
Table: 56 - 56
L/W: 1.01 - 1.00
Polish: very good
Symmetry: very good
Girdle: medium to slightly thick
Culet: none
Fluorescence: faint - none

#8:
.62 ct - Ideal - I and H - SI1
Polish: very good
Symmetry: excellent
L/W: 1.01 - 1.01
Depth: 61.9 - 61.5
Table: 56 -56
Polish: very good
Symmetry: excellent - very good
Girdle: medium to slightly thick
Culet: none
Fluorescence: none

#9:
.6 c - Ideal - H - SI1
Polish: very good
Symmetry: very good
L/W: 1.01 - 1.00
Depth: 61.6 - 61.7
Table: 56 - 56
Polish: very good
Symmetry: very good
Girdle: thin to medium - medium to slightly thick
Culet: none
Fluorescence: none

#12:
Appears to have disappeared from the website!
 
#28
I think Im ranking them in the order you just posted them--the only issue with the smallest pair I see is do you want EVS2 studs that are slightly smaller than the others for Iassume the same or slightly higher price. You're paying for color there.
 
#29
ame said:
True, I just don't think it's worth it if you're just using them in your ears. HOWEVER, if you plan to dismantle your ring and make a three stone, they would make nice side stones, but Tiffany's probably won't let you use those for their three stone.
Click to expand...

^^Agreed.

Kathd said:
So if I am 100% sure that I will never use the earrings to reset my e-ring, what would be my best bet from all of the pairs I listed so far?
Click to expand...

IMHO at <1ct tw a VS is kind of just a waste for earrings unless you do plan to remake them into a ring later, and even then I'm not sure a super expensive VS is needed on a stone that's ~.3ct.
 
#30
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top