|
Coca Koala posted:I'm starting to look for some jewelry to celebrate my one year anniversary with my girl. Does she want a pear shape, or a briolette? Briolettes are when it's more like a three dimensional tear drop and looks like a drop from all sides, pears are when it looks like a tear drop from the front but as you tilt it you can see the pavilion is faceted to a point. Regardless, you can google both shapes and see which one she means. Honestly, although you can have a jeweler custom make very nice amethyst earrings for you, amethyst is pretty common and you should be able to find what you need just by walking into a store or googling what you want online. Then again I get all of my stuff custom made because I'm a snob so I'm certainly not frowning on that route, it mostly depends upon how much you're looking to spend.
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2010 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 11:16 |
|
|
Calef posted:I came thinking to post an Ask thread about the following, but instead I'll post it here: As for the mark up, that's a much trickier question because it depends what you're using as a basis for comparison. For example, if you walk into a brick and mortar jewelry store and they have a ring in the case that looks exactly like the one you want except you want one or two tiny details changed, a couple of things can happen: Your custom piece may be vastly more expensive because the ring you're looking at was made in hong kong, and to custom make it here costs more because of the price of labor. OR, the ring you're looking at could have been made here by their goldsmith a week ago, in which case it you really should be paying the same price for the piece in the case vs. the custom version, plus or minus a few dollars depending upon the changes you want to the design. OR, the ring you're looking at was crafted when metal prices were higher and so it's tagged at a certain price to recover that cost, but to custom make the ring for you now would be cheaper since you'd be paying less for the base metal. In short, comparing the cost of a custom piece to a piece of ready made jewelry is a difficult task because you've got to compare the factors of when and where the pieces were made, and how those factors are different relative to what you want done now. If you want an idea of what something costs, get more than one quote, but also be sure to see a gallery of the store's previous custom designs so you know what you're paying for.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2010 00:44
|
|
|
JohnnyRnR posted:Many socialites won't accept anything less than a 2 carat. I've heard of boyfriends being turned down on the proposal and sent back to the store to fetch a bigger diamond. My favorite was always the girls who get proposed to, accept the ring, and then go behind the man's back to buy themselves a bigger diamond without him knowing about it. Hell, at least they're putting up the money to be flashy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2010 00:21
|
|
|
grendelspov posted:I've just been on BlueNile.com pricing out a ring for my girlfriend. She wants a 1 ct. center stone and I have noticed a lot of good cut, ok clarity, J colored stones in my price range. Is it true that J color looks great to the naked eye if the cut and polish are excellent? It's like anything else, there are going to be beautiful Js and there are going to be less attractive Js, even within the perfect cut/polish range. I'd want to look at in person to be sure if it's good. But to answer your question, in a roundabout way, yes, J CAN look great if you get the right one.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2010 00:56
|
|
|
CaughtByTheRiver posted:
You've got a lot of content but I can grab the easy ones here. 2) The only truly "bad" girdle is an extremely thin, as a girdle that is extremely thin all of the way around is going to more prone to chippage. A thicker girdle can take a little more punishment. However, above that it gets a little grayer. There's ideal %s just like everything else, especially with round, but it all comes down to looking at the diamond and using your best judgment. For example, is the girdle relatively even all of the way around, or is it wavy like a weird circus tent? The most even girdles are either going to have one rating, ie medium, or two close ratings, ie thin to medium. If you have a girdle going very thin to slightly thick, you're going to have a girdle that's razor thin in one place and much bulkier in another. This can occasionally work if the diamond was otherwise masterfully faceted, but usually detracts from the look. As for overall thickness, your technically correct girdle would be medium all of the way around, but the diamond isn't going to be impacted if it's thin to medium or slightly thin to slightly thick, or some slim variance like that. The thickness gets worrysome if its too big - in an extreme case, extremely thick all of the way around. Again, nothing is wrong with the diamond, per se, you just have to realize that more of the weight of the diamond is hiding out in the middle section and therefore the spread on the top is smaller. For example, if you have a one carat round diamond with a medium girdle, all other factors being as good as they are, you might have a 6.4mm round. If you have that same diamond, same carat weight and same cut with a thicker girdle, you might find it has a face-up diameter of 6.35 or even lower. Again, this is fine, you won't die from it, but you'll find yourself in the unenviable position of paying for weight you can't see. Purchase accordingly. 4) In the technical sense, there are two kinds of radiant cuts. The Original Radiant Cut, which is a cut cornered modified brilliant cut diamond, is a patented diamond cut that can only be purchased from ORCD vendors (or a jeweler who happens to have one or two lying around). The other kind, the kind everybody talks about, is your standard Radiant cut. Just like there are Royal Asschers and there are generic Asschers, your standard Radiant cut is for all intents and purposes the same as the ORC, just perhaps not cut to the same standard. The facet pattern is going to be similar, the critical angles are going to be similar, and the outline is going to be similar. What the radiant is not, however, is the princess cut - neither the ORC nor the standard radiant bare any resemblance to a princess cut above the superficial level. Aside from the obvious cut corners, the radiant and the princess have different facet patterns on both the crown and pavilion, different sized girdles, and vastly different crown heights. The difference in crown height is probably the easiest to see. A princess is cut on top to look a bit like an ice rink; there's almost no height from the top of the girdle to the top of the table, and the table itself is far larger than the table on any other commonly cut diamond. This means you can look straight down at a princess and see almost no faceting on top, and straight down into the pavilion. A radiant has a taller crown and a smaller table, and will bear more of a resemblance to an oval on top than it will a princess. Well, not really an oval, but it's kind of an apples to oranges comparison so I'm making a reach here. The odds that someone is going to try and jam you with a cut cornered princess when you want a radiant is extremely low, given that a) most jewelers are good people, and b) there's not too many cut cornered princesses. I've seen maybe two in my lifetime, both resulting from regular princesses that had to be repaired after a corner got chipped. For what it's worth, they're not bad looking, but they're still a princess on the inside. Therefore, in the highly unlikely event that someone DOES have a cut cornered princess and IS out to sell it without full disclosure, you shouldn't have a big problem telling the difference if you just look at the height of the top half of the diamond and compare it to most other modified brilliants. If you really think a jewelers trying to stiff you, ask to see a regular princess and a regular radiant, and decide for yourself which it looks like more. But like I said, nobody's out to get you, and by and large you shouldn't have to worry. You ask for a radiant, chances are you're going to see a radiant. EDIT: Looking at the GIA cert also helps since they should say what it is and also show a diagram of what the crown and pavilion look like. FormerPoster fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Oct 21, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2010 00:43
|
|
|
That's how I clean all of my jewelry, just water, detergent, and a very soft toothbrush. Diamonds and white gold can be steam cleaned or cleaned in an ultrasonic with whatever fluid is in there (don't remember off of the top of my head), but home cleaning really is just as simple as soap, water, and light scrubbing to get out the gunk. edit Actually ultrasonic fluid might wear down rhodium over time but most people rarely ultrasonic their jewelry so that should be ok every so often. I'm sure Johnny's got better advice on this than I do. FormerPoster fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Nov 17, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2010 14:39
|
|
|
Progression Please posted:I have a Diamond I will be putting in a band. This is the band: I don't know anything about itshot but I'm reluctant to think highly of any product that has a whole tab for videos of D-list celebrities doing promotions.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2010 15:10
|
|
|
Nelsocracy posted:Would anybody be able to give me some advice on this ring? My girlfriend seemed interested in getting a ring, so I'm going to get one for her for her birthday. It isn't an engagement ring or anything, and I don't want it to look like one either. When it comes to silver jewelry, you're paying more for the original design/labor/artist's overhead than you ever are for the stones or the metal. Maybe it would cost you twenty bucks to buy the basic elements to make the ring, but you'd have nothing but a lump of silver and unset stone. I'd say the price tag is fair since it's a hand made piece and an original design. Cool ring, by the way.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2011 01:00
|
|
|
Zratha posted:Great thread! I recently started taking gemmology classes and I am totally loving it. That's assuming corundum and tangerine have the same specific gravity, which they don't. A ruby the size of a tangerine would likely be heavier but since I don't know the specific gravity of tangerine, I couldn't tell you for sure. Edit I actually got curious and looked this up. Your average tangerine, according to some paper I just googled, is going to have a specific gravity of around 0.9 (so it about 90% as dense as water). Corundum, meanwhile, has a specific gravity of 4, give or take, so if you take the weight of an average tangerine, which I'm going to take to be about 85 grams, and apply the specific gravity of corundum, you get a ruby that weighs about 375g for occupying the space. Multiply that by five and you get a carat weight of 1,875cts, which, while not unheard of, would make it one of the world's largest rubies and utterly priceless if the crystal was of any kind of quality. FormerPoster fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Oct 8, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2011 03:09
|
|
|
Yeah I'd have thought they'd be denser than water myself but it makes sense that they're pretty close. Guess we all learn something new today.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2011 06:19
|
|
|
Just shooting from the hip here, I'd say what you're asking is definitely possible, but it might take you some time to find what you're looking for. Truth be told, even though I worked as a jeweler for a few years somewhat recently, I still don't know much about palladium because none of my goldsmiths were willing to work with it. One was, maybe, but they much preferred gold or platinum. Just going off of hearsay - Johnny or anyone else, feel free to correct me - but it is a tad more brittle and that makes all the difference when setting a stone or bending a prong into place. Plus you have to get all new supplies to work with an all new metal, and most jewelers aren't going to do that if they don't think the demand is there. Which, from what I've seen, it isn't really since palladium just doesn't have a strong marketing campaign behind it. Were I you, I'd start looking at custom jewelers online and getting quotes from all the designers you can find. There's only so much that someone can bullshit you through an email, and it's a lot easier to talk to more people and filter out the bad info when it takes you five minutes to send out your request. On a non palladium related note, do you know exactly how you want to set your sapphire? Trillions aren't a common shape for engagement rings (or most other rings) and you're probably going to have to do some hand holding during the customization process or you'll end up with something you don't like. Be prepared to be firm with people and don't be afraid to be super specific with what you want, as long as you aren't bitchy about it. Having pictures of what you want helps too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2011 11:32
|
|
|
Dead Pikachu posted:Also, what is the general consensus on moissanite? To get a ring within our budget (1k) we'd have to get a tiny diamond. The gemologist said we should consider moissanite because it's nearly impossible to tell the difference. Nobody would know it wasn't a real diamond. If she's cool with it and you're cool with it, go ahead and get moissanite. It looks just as nice as a diamond and you can get a much bigger look for the price. No one will ever call you out on it, and on the off chance they do, they're an rear end and their opinion doesn't matter.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2012 03:50
|
|
|
KillHour posted:She has a larger wrist (I'd need an 8" bracelet), so I know I'll be paying a little more for that. Does $1000-1200 sound reasonable for a budget? What could I expect to get in that range? To be blunt? You can expect a real piece of poo poo. Check any place online, and you're going to be looking at at least $1,500 for the privilege of buying a <1ct total weight, sterling silver bracelet with HIJ I3 stones - and it will most definitely be 7". For what you want - an 8" GSI2, metal not specified - you're looking at more than $4,000, easy. The thing that's tripping you up is the idea that the biggest cost is in the metal. There's a decent amount of metal in a tennis bracelet, but you're paying way more for the diamonds and the labor. The smaller the stones, the less they cost, but then you've got more stones to set in the bracelet. Let's say, for the sake of math, you're making a tennis bracelet with 100 .01ct stones. Say your goldsmith is charging you $5 per stone to set them, plus you're paying $300-400 for the diamonds. You've got to charge almost $1,000 right there just to make up the cost of the goods. Add in the cost of the metal, which is going to be at least another $300-400, and you're at $1,400. Since your jeweler isn't going to sell it to you at his cost (because, you know, he needs to be able to pay his staff and his bills), he's probably going to end up doubling the price to cover all his expenses. Hence, you end up with a $2,800 bracelet full of extremely tiny diamonds. You can't really do a tennis bracelet with diamonds that small (unless they're illusion set, and even then I think they're a little small for the true tennis look), so your cost per diamond is going to go up as the size of your diamonds increases. Your setting cost goes down because there aren't as many diamonds, true, but the exponential rise in the price of the stones will more than offset any savings you gain from using fewer stones. To make a long story short, I bet you can find someone to sell you a tennis bracelet for what you want to pay, but you're not going to like what you get. You're far better off putting that same amount of money towards a nicer 'diamonds by the yard' style bracelet, or something else that isn't quite so stone-intensive. Alternatively you could try moissanite and get a bracelet similar to what she wants (quick search found this: http://www.moissaniteco.com/round-moissanite-bracelet-33ct-25mm-14k-wy-p-6091.html ), but that's still a little outside your price range and if she has her heart set on a diamond, it may not make her happy. I hope I didn't come off like Sally Dreamcrusher here (and my numbers may be wrong since I've been out of the industry for some time now), but I'd rather be straight with you instead of seeing someone sell you something you don't want. Also if somehow Johnny swoops in and makes a tennis bracelet for you for $1200 and saves Christmas, disregard everything I just said!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
KillHour posted:She wants it because it's a "statement piece." Tell her that in the year of our lord 2013 there is no greater statement one can make than disregarding corporate marketing bullshit in favor of sound financial decision making.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2013 04:32
|
|
|
JohnnyRnR posted:For a ruby report take the stone to the PGS Gem Lab. They're on the row in Chicago. Good people who can give you an honest independent opinion. I can vouch for PGS as well. I've worked with them in the past and they're pretty good at giving you straightforward, no bullshit opinions. Johnny's right about the red. True red is wicked rare in the gem world, and doubly so in the affordable bracket. I've seen some killer garnets that have great red coloration with only a hint of brown, but based on my experience it's gonna be pretty drat unlikely that you can find a garnet like that in chicago. There isn't much of a colored stone scene here, unfortunately; there just isn't the demand. I know a few people who travel through chicago who might have stones like that, but nobody working full time in the city. I'd tell you to find a jeweler who can get you a synthetic ruby on short notice. They're not expensive and they're the best of the best when it comes to true reds. They're also free of inclusions so they're more durable than the majority of their natural counterparts. Failing that, I don't know hat else I'd recommend you do on such a short schedule. My gut says you should wait on the proposal until you get a ring you're really comfortable with, but If you feel like this is the right moment, then the jewelry doesn't matter.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
Stupid_Sexy_Flander posted:What's a decent price (ballpark) for bumping a sterling silver ring up from around a 7 to around a 12.5? I have no idea what that would cost these days but going up to almost twice the size is a tall order since it changes the fundamental circular structure of the ring. Is this a plain band or are there stones set in it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Evil Robot posted:You must be better at this than I am. Staring at this diamond in direct sunlight I was unable to see hints of color... Well, what grade did it get? Suspense is killing me!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
JohnnyRnR posted:I was digging through some photos and was reminded of one of my favorite rings today. It's a pinkish-red Rubelite Tourmaline from Nigera. It's funny to see that ring, because I got a cushion cut rubellite about 5 years ago (cut by Stephen Avery, I think) and set it in the exact same style. I went and looked in my old photos folder and I actually had a photo of the stone unmounted, which is pretty cool. It's on the dark side but I've always liked the cut and it's one of my favorite rings. Glad to see we have similar taste!  
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
goodness posted:And here is a picture of that wonderful Alexandrite in an engagement ring you talk about in the OP Oh god I don't even want to know what this ring costs. It's like 25k+, right?
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
SMDFTB posted:Asking for more advice on another diamond: I can see multiple inclusions as marked on the cert at the 20x blow-up, but that's a hell of a lot bigger than how a diamond looks when it's sitting on your hand. I highly doubt you'll be able to see the inclusions in the stone during day to day wear. Also fwiw, I can only see the inclusions easily because I've spent a lot of time looking at diamonds and notice little things like distortion in the facet pattern (like what the feather is doing in the top right corner of the video/bottom left corner of the cert). Your average person is never going to notice something like that and it doesn't detract from the diamond's visual appeal at all. As for the color, the difference between G and HI is narrow enough to fall in between a grader's margin of error. There's no way you'll notice a difference between the stones in the setting and the stone in the center.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
AlbieQuirky posted:The argument is that they have low/no resale value, which, holy gently caress, like natural gems have reliable resale value It's not that they have no resale value, it's just that you'll never recover what you paid. They're like cars. People still buy cars every day knowing full-well that they cut the value in half the second they pull it off the lot because it suits their purposes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 04:59
|
|
|
SMDFTB posted:Hopefully the last post from me... Well, you're getting something noticeably bigger for essentially the same price, so that's good. Re: the fluorescence, the fluorescent gem does appear to be whiter than the inert one, which is interesting because they both have the same color of G. I can't tell if that's because of the fluoro or a simple color grading discrepancy, however, and the difference is small enough that I'd say it's more or less a moot point. If I had to pick one? This is a tough call. If I were strictly buying online and couldn't see both diamonds next to each other, I'd buy the 1.07 because it's a mathematically safer bet. It's closer to the ideal square, the girdle is even, I don't give a poo poo about the inclusions, and I happen to like a small table. I also wouldn't trust a call on haziness from fluoro without seeing it myself, and I'm too drat lazy to buy a diamond I'm unsure about just so I can look at it and send it back. If I'm going to buy something, I'm not doing the whole 'consideration period' thing; I'm buying it because I want to keep it. If I could see both in person in a store, however, I would probably make the opposite call and end up buying the 1.21. The fluoro probably isnt a big deal, I doubt the rectangular shape or wavy girdle makes a visible difference, and it's larger in both carat weight and face-up size. It's not a stone I would personally buy sight-unseen, but I'm betting that if I saw it in person, I'd buy it over the 1.07. Ultimately, I guess what I'm saying is that I think the 1.07 is the 'safer' purchase, but if you're willing to get the 1.21 and look at it to see if the potential issues don't matter, then it's probably the better buy in terms of value. Either way, they're both good stones with solid grades and certs, so you can't gently caress up regardless of the choice you make.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
Scarodactyl posted:While blue fluorescence is rated as a flaw by the strict (and artificial) guidelines of the diamond trade, I've always thought of it more as a desperately-needed bit of personality. Sometimes it looks really badass, sometimes it does give the diamond a little bit of a greasy look in the wrong light. Fluoro is super weird.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
SMDFTB posted:Will it be pretty easy for an untrained eye like myself to tell? If you have a very clean diamond with no fluoro next to it, yes. If you're staring at a questionable diamond on its lonesome, no. The greasiness imparted by fluoro isn't so prominent that you'll notice it on it's own; it's only when you compare it to another diamond that doesn't have that quality that you can really see it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Claes Oldenburger posted:Finished this sweet piece for a fellow goon: I'm crazy about that shank. Do you have pictures of this from any other angles?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Madbullogna posted:I likely missed it and am sure it's been covered, but...... Normally I'd say 'just find a local jeweler and have them do the resize', but I'm almost positive you're right about the warranty. There's probably a million bullshit clauses in there that break the warranty; taking it somewhere else for a resize is one of the big ones. The whole point of those lifetime warranties from chain stores is that they get the best return when you nullify the thing after shelling out the extra money for it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
pogothemonkey0 posted:That's not a bad idea. What constitutes "on the cheap," by the way? I have zero frame of reference for the cost of jewelry. I really like the design of this piece but $300 for such a simple ring seems way too high for me. Is that just designer markup? Without seeing the other rings you've looked at, I'd say some of it's designer markup and some of it's the varying densities of the designs. The ring you posted looks very solid, which means it requires a decent amount of silver. Some similar rings may be hollowed out underneath, which means they look the same from up top but require far less metal. It's little things like weight that can make a huge difference in price and feel.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Total spitball number here, but I'd say you're looking at $1000 to $1500 depending upon whether it's heated or unheated. That's assuming it's a pretty standard Ceylon blue - obviously you're going to pay less if you go overly light or dark, or more if you're going for some neon Kashmir poo poo. Also does it have to be round? There's nothing wrong with rounds, per se, but there are so many more oval/cushion cut sapphires out there that you'll have a much easier time finding something in the size and quality you want.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
Scarodactyl posted:
Those are a lot nicer than any Be sapphires I've ever seen. The ones I usually come across look like they got carved out of old traffic cones, complete with specks of torn-up asphalt.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 06:43
|
|
|
Dienes posted:I apologize in advance if this isn't the best place to ask. About a decade ago, I was given a ring as a gift from a family member, who passed recently. Unfortunately, the ring was a cheap (~$30) silver wrap ring and broke from heavy wear. I would be so happy if I could replace it. This ring was ubiquitous at various shops at the time I got it, but I haven't been able to find it anywhere now. Always bet on Etsy https://www.etsy.com/listing/492491...f=sr_gallery_17
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Dienes posted:That's it! Holy cow, that price tag is a bit more than I expected. Yeah the listing seems like BS given that they're calling it a unique piece of vintage jade - which, lol - but it was the right ring so I figured I'd link it anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Claes Oldenburger posted:Colour wise it isn't that they aren't as "ideal", it's more they're just not as popular. So many more single colour rings get made than two tone, and of those two tone rings most will be a yellow shank (ring part) and white head (claws or bezel). Adding to this, there's one time you'll frequently see the opposite (white shank/yellow head) and that's in yellow diamond settings. The white shank makes a nice contrast and the yellow head brings out the yellow in the diamond. Definitely one of my favorite looks.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
Claes Oldenburger posted:Cut a Montana sapphire last week, 1.855ct and definitely one of the nicest pears I've done! I'm also through the roof at material return...got 47% out. I don't think I'll be beating that for a while haha That's a great color for a Montana sapphire. The ones I usually see tend to be darker/more grey, but that almost looks like an unheated aqua. Very pretty!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2017 05:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 11:16 |
|
|
Xun posted:Just remember that half a carat of diamond is not the same size as half a carat of sapphire! You probably already know but I've seen some ppl gently caress that up It's a fair thing to gently caress up, since it's not intuitive to people who don't have a reason to think about things like specific gravity on a regular basis. It doesn't help that corundum is probably one of the densest commonly-used gems.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2017 15:17
|
|