someone esplain diamonds to me

[RelaxTheMind]

Maybe its because i not broke and not a loser... but I actually like having thing that I can buy for a woman that pretty much make a woman let you do anything you want.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: RelaxTheMind
Maybe its because i not broke and not a loser... but I actually like having thing that I can buy for a woman that pretty much make a woman let you do anything you want.

so you are paying a woman for services?

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan
Housing -> People saying "why do you live in such an expensive area, I like in bumblefuck, KY and my mortgage payment is $500 a month!"

And just as many people saying "$500k? That might buy you a box to sleep in here. And mind you, not a nice, big, thick refrigerator box. That'll set you back $1 million."

What can you do but ignore the trolls?

 

[QueBert]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan

Originally posted by: ElFenix
buncha damn nefs :|

It is inevitable in diamond threads. Most cant afford them, so they badmouth them. There is a market for people buying ridiculously expensive cars as well. Still gets you from home to the grocery store.

People talk bad about:
1) things they don't know
2) things they can't afford

Diamonds usually fit into both categories.

Anyway, to answer your question... I'd recommend reading http://www.suncoastgemlab.com/diamond_education.asp.

Why would any rational person pay thousands of dollars for a lump of compressed coal, that was sold by a company that started off exploiting labor in a war ravaged?

The same reason someone buys a 5500 sq ft house or a $50K car. It is a luxury.

Why ATOT feels the need to crap in people's threads is beyond me.

Gun threads -> People bad mouthing guns
Diamonds -> People bad mouthing diamonds
Housing -> People saying "why do you live in such an expensive area, I like in bumblefuck, KY and my mortgage payment is $500 a month!"

Seriously, if you have no constructive input, don't type.

You can shoot people and protect property with guns...
You can live, sleep and do other things in a house.


Diamonds...you can scratch a glass with them and usually get sexual favors in return for them....think that's about it...

What he was getting at was that a lot of people spent way too much on things. You won't sleep any better in a million dollar house over a $195,000 one but people still buy million dollar ones. And he was saying a BMW type car isn't going to get you to work any differently then a Nissan Sentra would.

Diamonds might not do anything for a person but make them happy. That's enough though, who cares about usefulness if a woman smiles every day when she sees the ring on her finger? I'd give any amount of money for any object that made my woman that happy.

 

[SSSnail]

Originally posted by: QueBert
...I'd give any amount of money for any object that made my woman that happy.

So... wanna buy these enlargement pills I have? For a very small cost...

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: sandorski
DeBeers can't really be blamed for the appeal of Diamonds. People have been gaga over them for Millenia.

People have been gaga over pretty much all gemstones for millennia. The diamond did not enjoy strict precedence until the middle of the 20th century. Prior to that point you were as likely to see a sapphire, ruby, or other colored gemstone in an engagement ring as you were to see a diamond. Still, they are very pretty stones and I can see why people like them.

They also make excellent styli for my record player.

ZV

 

[mrrman]

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: ElFenix
just taking a look at the physical measurements over at blue nile, i noticed that diamonds don't increase in dimensions very fast as the carats increase. a .3 carat diamond is about 4x4 mm for princess cut, while a .75 carat is about 5x5 mm. 1.5 carat is 6.5x6.5. area is a square function while volume is a cubic function, of course, but i doubt anyone could tell the difference in carats just by looking at the diamonds.

Are you saying that it's hard to tell the difference between a .3ct, .75ct and a 1.5ct diamond just by looking?

I dont think the above statement is true, there is a difference visually between a .3ct( 3x.3ct ring) and 1.5( 1 single diamond)...I have both

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: mrrman

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: ElFenix
just taking a look at the physical measurements over at blue nile, i noticed that diamonds don't increase in dimensions very fast as the carats increase. a .3 carat diamond is about 4x4 mm for princess cut, while a .75 carat is about 5x5 mm. 1.5 carat is 6.5x6.5. area is a square function while volume is a cubic function, of course, but i doubt anyone could tell the difference in carats just by looking at the diamonds.

Are you saying that it's hard to tell the difference between a .3ct, .75ct and a 1.5ct diamond just by looking?

I dont think the above statement is true, there is a difference visually between a .3ct( 3x.3ct ring) and 1.5( 1 single diamond)...I have both

Obviously. The difference is pretty dramatic. That's why it was a question and not a statement.

 

[ColdFusion718]

Judging color is best done by groups: { D E F}, {G H I}, {J K L}, etc. D = completely colorless. There is minimal difference between the letters within the same group. The difference between an F and a G is not very noticeable. If the difference is over $100, go with the G color instead of F color.

Cut and polish are more important. If you get a diamond with poor cut quality, the light will not refract/reflect well, in fact, you'll see light leak out of the bottom (this is bad). A good cut with poor polish makes an otherwise great diamond a mediocre one. It's akin to looking at clear LEDs vs. diffused ones.

Go with a Gemesis cultured diamond instead. You'll save a ton of money and it's also "blood-less."

 

[oogabooga]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan
Housing -> People saying "why do you live in such an expensive area, I like in bumblefuck, KY and my mortgage payment is $500 a month!"

And just as many people saying "$500k? That might buy you a box to sleep in here. And mind you, not a nice, big, thick refrigerator box. That'll set you back $1 million."

What can you do but ignore the trolls?

You can engage them in a somewhat entertaining albeit slightly repetitive exchange of retort-counter-retort for the amusement of the general ATOT population and possibly venting your own frustration.

That or ignore them.

 

[JimRaynor]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Diamonds are very good things to have around. They are incredibly good conductors of heat, and are quite useful in industry in abrasives and cutting tools. Want a heatsink to overclock the hell out of a processor? Forget about copper, aluminum, or watercooling - use a diamond heatsink.

This is completely incorrect. Diamonds are the worst conductors of heat. They are used in cuttings tools because of this and their strength. Why would heat absorption be good in a cutting tool, so you can melt your blade faster? They are used cause they DON'T get hot--but more for their hardness.

A heatsink made out of diamond wouldn't be a heatsink at all. The surrounding air would probably absorb more heat from the processor than the diamond. A diamond heatsink would fry your processor for sure. A diamond would be terrible for a heatsink, but if you wanted to make some kind of vehicle to travel to the center of the earth it would be good.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: JimRaynor

This is completely incorrect. Diamonds are the worst conductors of heat. They are used in cuttings tools because of this and their strength. Why would heat absorption be good in a cutting tool, so you can melt your blade faster? They are used cause they DON'T get hot--but more for their hardness.

A heatsink made out of diamond wouldn't be a heatsink at all. The surrounding air would probably absorb more heat from the processor than the diamond. A diamond heatsink would fry your processor for sure. A diamond would be terrible for a heatsink, but if you wanted to make some kind of vehicle to travel to the center of the earth it would be good.

Diamond has a thermal conductivity over twice that of copper. However, it has terrible electrical conductivity. Might want to check your sources next time!

And you WANT a cutting tool that conducts heat well. Otherwise the cutting tip will melt. If it conducts heat away from the cutting zone, it lasts longer, and you can work at a higher cutting speed.

 

[rgwalt]

Originally posted by: yovonbishop

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: yovonbishop
I'll reply regarding your question rather than knock diamonds because I've got a rock on my hand and can vouch for what's important in one (although I told my SO I'd be perfectly happy with a cheap ring or none at all as long as we could get married).

Clarity is more important in appearance than size in a diamond. Two of my friends are engaged as well, and we got together and saw each other's rings (obviously we didn't get together for that purpose). Friend A's ring is huge, but has absolutely no shine whatsoever - so it quickly loses its appeal. Friend B's ring is small, and shines a bit more, it is overall better looking because you can tell the quality is better than A. My ring size-wise is between friend A and friend B, but I know my SO threw in some more money because he wanted the best clarity in the diamond. It certainly outshines the other two and makes size not even seem like a factor - only clarity because of the reflectiveness of light.

I want to point out that obviously the price of an engagement ring shouldn't at all be a factor in whether or not the girl likes it - it should be the concept of getting engaged and eventually married to that special someone. But you asked, and I told. My ring is gorgeous.

You have confused clarity with cut.

Generally, Cut, Color and Clarity define how the diamonds reflects light with cut being the most important.

I guess I left out cut. Both mine and friend A have princess cut. I prefer princess cut because of the way it looks, but I suppose I know less about cut than other things. Both our rings are PPF style. Still, it's pretty.

By cut he means the quality of the cut itself, not just the shape of the stone. Diamonds can be cut from raw stone with many different facet sizes and angles where the facets meet. These facets and angles determine how well light bounces around inside the stone and is reflected back. In reality, the cut comes down to optics.

Clarity refers to the "stuff" that is inside of a diamond, like crystals, carbon flecks, and internal fractures. Color refers to, well, the color or lack there of in the stone.

Many women like princess cuts, or even other cuts of diamonds, because they like the shape. However, when cut exceptionally well, round brilliant diamonds will reflect the most light of any diamond shape.

R

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: DBL

Are you saying that it's hard to tell the difference between a .3ct, .75ct and a 1.5ct diamond just by looking?

if you didn't have them side by side i bet you couldn't tell the difference between a mounted .3ct and a mounted .75ct diamond.

Originally posted by: yovonbishop

I'll reply regarding your question rather than knock diamonds because I've got a rock on my hand and can vouch for what's important in one (although I told my SO I'd be perfectly happy with a cheap ring or none at all as long as we could get married).

Clarity is more important in appearance than size in a diamond. Two of my friends are engaged as well, and we got together and saw each other's rings (obviously we didn't get together for that purpose). Friend A's ring is huge, but has absolutely no shine whatsoever - so it quickly loses its appeal. Friend B's ring is small, and shines a bit more, it is overall better looking because you can tell the quality is better than A. My ring size-wise is between friend A and friend B, but I know my SO threw in some more money because he wanted the best clarity in the diamond. It certainly outshines the other two and makes size not even seem like a factor - only clarity because of the reflectiveness of light.

I want to point out that obviously the price of an engagement ring shouldn't at all be a factor in whether or not the girl likes it - it should be the concept of getting engaged and eventually married to that special someone. But you asked, and I told. My ring is gorgeous.

thanks! :thumbsup:






is bluenile overpriced?

 

[Pepsi90919]

don't forget to wipe the blood off

 

[imported_yovonbishop]

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: yovonbishop
I guess I left out cut. Both mine and friend A have princess cut. I prefer princess cut because of the way it looks, but I suppose I know less about cut than other things. Both our rings are PPF style. Still, it's pretty.

Sure there is the cut aka shape of the diamond but cut (when talking about the 3 C's) refers to the quality of the cut. This is determined by the skill of the stone cutter and many factors are considered when cutting the diamond. An excellent cut round will in general look better than an average cut round, even if the average stone has better color and clarity (within reason, of course).

That's why the cut is the most important factor. Look at the cert for your diamond. It should have a reference to the cut (other than the shape).

Well thank you good sir. Learn something new every day

 

[imported_yovonbishop]

Originally posted by: rgwalt

Originally posted by: yovonbishop

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: yovonbishop
I'll reply regarding your question rather than knock diamonds because I've got a rock on my hand and can vouch for what's important in one (although I told my SO I'd be perfectly happy with a cheap ring or none at all as long as we could get married).

Clarity is more important in appearance than size in a diamond. Two of my friends are engaged as well, and we got together and saw each other's rings (obviously we didn't get together for that purpose). Friend A's ring is huge, but has absolutely no shine whatsoever - so it quickly loses its appeal. Friend B's ring is small, and shines a bit more, it is overall better looking because you can tell the quality is better than A. My ring size-wise is between friend A and friend B, but I know my SO threw in some more money because he wanted the best clarity in the diamond. It certainly outshines the other two and makes size not even seem like a factor - only clarity because of the reflectiveness of light.

I want to point out that obviously the price of an engagement ring shouldn't at all be a factor in whether or not the girl likes it - it should be the concept of getting engaged and eventually married to that special someone. But you asked, and I told. My ring is gorgeous.

You have confused clarity with cut.

Generally, Cut, Color and Clarity define how the diamonds reflects light with cut being the most important.

I guess I left out cut. Both mine and friend A have princess cut. I prefer princess cut because of the way it looks, but I suppose I know less about cut than other things. Both our rings are PPF style. Still, it's pretty.

By cut he means the quality of the cut itself, not just the shape of the stone. Diamonds can be cut from raw stone with many different facet sizes and angles where the facets meet. These facets and angles determine how well light bounces around inside the stone and is reflected back. In reality, the cut comes down to optics.

Clarity refers to the "stuff" that is inside of a diamond, like crystals, carbon flecks, and internal fractures. Color refers to, well, the color or lack there of in the stone.

Many women like princess cuts, or even other cuts of diamonds, because they like the shape. However, when cut exceptionally well, round brilliant diamonds will reflect the most light of any diamond shape.

R

Thanks for the info!

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: sandorski
DeBeers can't really be blamed for the appeal of Diamonds. People have been gaga over them for Millenia.

People have been gaga over pretty much all gemstones for millennia. The diamond did not enjoy strict precedence until the middle of the 20th century. Prior to that point you were as likely to see a sapphire, ruby, or other colored gemstone in an engagement ring as you were to see a diamond. Still, they are very pretty stones and I can see why people like them.

They also make excellent styli for my record player.

ZV

I won't deny that, but diamonds have always had a place of Desire/Expense. DeBeers may have raised Diamonds above other Gems, but they didn't create the Demand.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
what color and clarity are actually visible? how about cut grades? also, seems like round cut is far more expensive than princess. whyzat?

<--- knows of the levels but not real world

Depends how it's set. Setting a diamond in yellow gold is more forgiving to the stone's color.

The larger the stone the easier to see inclusions, but in general SI1 and better should be nearly impossible to 'see'. There is some debate on light effect but for anyone but a tester it would be not noticible. An inclusion in the table is most visible, if it's wear a prong would go anyway then not so much an issue.

Round's are more in demand and usually have better specs.

For color and clarity G/H or better is usually fine for most people and VS or better on clarity. Going up on color doesn't add a whole lot, but moving closer to IF/FL clarity will.

Most will pick D-H and VS1-SI1. It's best to go down a color (from D-F) if the specs of the stone are better.

You want to check out diamondtalk and gemappraiser's site to learn how cut is really about more than round, princess, etc. Gemappraiser has a download that you can type in your stone's specs and have it graded (beware that some jeweler's lie on specs). Under Diamond Education is great info.

SI can show flaws to the naked eye. The definition is more or less easily seen under a loupe (10X). It's a myth that these inclusion are only visible under 10x.