Mikey...only 3 years?...
I had mine waiting 12+....
Do yourself a favor Mikey....meet somewhere in the middle. I'm not just talking about the coin $$, but also the quality of the gem. As much as women want a perfect stone, they would much rather have a stone a little larger but with maybe a few
slightimperfections. Here is a great post explaining some good points to think about while doing your shopping. Don't always go by the charts on a certain stone. Compare the color of an F to an H, then compare the price. You can actually find an I color that will fit your needs...and your pocket, and STILL be very pleasing to her eyes.
Good Luck -
Bloo
Here's that post:
I have heard many opinions on this matter and have come to the grand conclusion (through my engagement ring search) that - it really depends. Most people are working on a budget, we all make tradeoffs to get the best "bang for your buck". Since everyone has their own opinion which "C" has the greatest affect on a diamond's beauty, we typically sacrifice in the areas that we feel are less important. For me, the most important qualities (from most to least important) are as follows.
1. Cut - by far the most important
2. Color
3. Size
4. Clarity
Most people would not agree with my putting size before clarity, so let me explain. For me clarity is the least important factor as long as it meets several minimum requirements - this is just my personal opinion. I have found that it is far more important to actually see a stone than to go strictly by the clarity grading.
The stone must be absolutely "eye clean" - this is a must for me. Since my eyes are not too great (very farsighted), I use some general guidelines when viewing the inclusions though a ten loupe. I try to stay away from diamonds with notable inclusions under the table. I dislike black or dark inclusions, even if smaller because I think they are more likely to be seen. A feather or cloud, if present, are much more preferrable if they run perpendicular to the table (some feathers can not be when looking at a diamond "face up"). Even better, if the inclusions are near the crown and close to the girdle - they are more likely to be masked by the diamond's scintillation and crown facets. Pinpoints should generally not a problem for me, but I prefer them to be white and not under the table.
I have seen SI2's with one significant inclusion which could be easily hidden by a prong. After set, they might look like a VS1 or better. For me, a lower clarity stone with "desireable" inclusions is better than a high clarity stone with undesireable inclusions. I have seen VS2's which I would not accept and SI1's that were GREAT - my opinion, of course.
This should go without saying, but I must mention that the grading lab is very important. I have seen many diamonds - GIA and AGS are definitely the most consistent. I learned long ago not to trust second-tier gem labs or the jeweler's opinion of a stone's clarity grade.
An expert could tell you how inclusions affect the refraction of light through the diamond and how they might affect the strength of the diamond. I would prefer to get good insurance and not worry about a diamond being more succeptible to breakage.
I could go on for hours about clarity, because it truly varies from diamond to diamond. I think it is very important to LOOK at the diamond rather than using a clarity grading. Personnally, an SI1, with "desireable" inclusions might be good enough for me and would allow me to get a large diamond of the same cut and color without sacrificing the diamond's beauty to the naked eye. I would rather buy a larger "good" SI1 or VS2 diamond than a smaller VVS or IF diamond of comparable cut and color.
Just my opinion - hope this helps.