Sacrifice color or clarity?

posted 3 years ago in Rings
Post # 3
Member
786 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: February 2014

@kimmo416:  Hi Kimmo, do you have pics?  If not, no worries.  Just with the description you relayed, I would not take the ‘meh cut, yellowy’ one.  BUT, the other with inclusions near the table might bother you.  Are these two ones you have settled on and weeded out from many?

Post # 4
Member
41 posts
Newbee

Personally, I would go for better color and slightly lower clarity. You said yourself – the stone with a few small inclusions, with better color, sparkles like mad. As long as knowing where those little imperfections are won’t drive you crazy, I say go for the livelier stone.

 

Best of luck! Post a photo when you choose!

Post # 5
Member
926 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: September 2013

I would vote for the one that is better looking to the naked eye.  This is how everyone else is going to see it.  It sounds like the second one is making you feel more cheerful.  If it “sparkles” more, more people will notice that.  Can you see any of its inclusions with the naked eye?  Mine actually has a large ugly one on one side but it was easily covered by a prong and you can’t see it.  That one inclusion gave us an incredible discount on the diamond and no one will ever know.

Post # 6
Member
10986 posts
Sugar Beekeeper
  • Wedding: May 2009

I definitely would — and did — prioritize color over clarity.

Post # 7
Member
12 posts
Newbee
  • Wedding: February 2014

Mine sparkles like crazy with 2 visible inclusions. If you know where they are. My mother and fiance can’t see them without a loupe but I have amazing near sighted vision. Mine are almost always hidden behind a prong and the table but you will always be able to find them. You get over it. Pretty much anytime the sun hits your diamond you won’t care about the inclusions. 

Pick the sparkles. Everyone comments how clear and sparkly my diamond is. And if someone ever gets close enough to see the inclusions they need to back up! I mean really no one will see them but you.  Also makes it easy to know no one switched out my diamond when cleaning. I KNOW my diamond. 🙂

Post # 8
Member
1517 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: February 2012

This is easy for me. I would go with the lower colour, since being able to see an inclusion would drive me crazy.

Post # 10
Member
2047 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2013

@kimmo416:  Personally, I’d go with one that looks better to my own eye.  If you’re more color sensitive, get the whiter stone.  My stone is graded by EGLUSA and I know it isn’t the color it would be if it was graded by GIA.  However, my stone for 95% of the time looks very white and is H&A cut, which helps with my sparkle factor and color.  At least to me.  I think you should get the stone that you will feel most happy with.  🙂

Post # 11
Member
768 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2013

Hmm…. based on these options I would probably ditch both options and look for a smaller diamond that encompassed both of what I wanted. Is that even an option? Read your last post and saw that you said a 0.75 looks decent on your hand. What about a stone in between 0.75-1.00 with a whiter color and is eye clean? I’d sacrifice SIZE for color AND clarity combined.

 

Side note – an ideal cut should hide any flaws, so if I had to choose between both? I’d sacrifice clarity.

Post # 12
Member
2047 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2013

@MargaritaVille:  Looks like she said her fi wouldn’t budge on a smaller stone.

so before you say why not go with a smaller better quality diamond – trust me I’ve tried. He is very set in his way on this and I’ve decided this is one of those things that it’s not worth fighting about. He wants to buy me a beautiful gift and that’s what I’m focusing on.”


I was actually going to suggest that too.  LOL

 

Post # 13
Member
1872 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: April 2013

I’d go for the second because you seem to think it looks better overall.

Post # 14
Member
768 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2013

@heathuhhhhwebbbb:  dang! how did i miss that?! Thanks!

 

So… FI isn’t willing to budge on a smaller diamond, but he’s the one who pulled the plug on the budget? God bless you OP, I’d have probably smacked him in the face with the largest couch cushion we had.

Post # 15
Member
181 posts
Blushing bee

just by reading your own description i believe you like the second option best. Realistically, no one is gonna put a loupe to your diamond, and check it for inclusions. Even if some of them are evident without the loupe, no one really stares at your ring long and hard looking for them. most people (if not all) just grab your hand, see the ring and immediately congratulate you on its beauty. in the end, even you, are just going to love the sparkle and the overall look of it. i believe the second choice is going to be the people pleaser.

on the other hand, if you value unique look, and one of a kind stones the first option sounds interesting. i love the fact that diamonds are very unique and that and all the c´s make up one final one-of-a-kind stone. I absolutely adore champagne/natural colored diamonds and the fact that it has a beautiful clarity sounds to me like it will hold on through time….the only thing that makes me doubt it is the fact that you say it doesn´t sparkle that much?? i love sparkle….=( still i think i´d go for that one—-i really really enjoy engagement ring individuality.

 

Post # 16
Member
3693 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: August 2013

Could you tell us what your budget is and we could help you look for a better alternative?

Leave a comment


Sent weekly. You may unsubscribe at any time.

Find Amazing Vendors