Ellen
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2006
- Messages
- 24,433
Best 2.0 ct Round Diamond $12K could buy ?
- Thread starter iameuro
- Start date
- Status
David, this is truely my experience & observations of what goes on in real life. Im glad you are talking about it because I have often felt that anything less than the best cut as a priority is taboo around here. I think that it is ok for `size` to be a priority for some over cut as long as the cut is still doing its job!!!!!Date: 1/28/2009 2:20:57 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Thank you Ellen!
The terms ''Fire'' and ''Brightness'' are probably the best we have in terms of semantics, to describe what we''re talking about- yet they are still lacking in descriptiveness.
My experience has shown me that some people will be able to spot subtle difference, and others won''t.
For example: If we compare a stone of smaller table, and greater depth- one that might be called ''Ideal'' to a well cut 60/60 there are tools that can demonstrate that there''s more ''fire'' coming from the smaller table diamond.
Not everyone will be able to see this with their eyes.
ON the other hand, if the two stones we''re comparing are both well cut ( properly proportioned with a nice girdle) the 60/60 is likely to have a greater spread- so there will be a percentage of people who will see a difference in size, but not be able to see a difference in ''fire''- OR- they may see the increased ''brightness'' of a slightly larger tabled diamond and see that as preferable. Many people do. I do.
I''m not going to call myself an expert- but I am a vendor with over 30 years experience- and I was trained to grade diamonds at Harry Winston.
That by no means makes me right- and I appreciate that you did not say my views are wrong- but it''s important to note that a great deal of diamond professionals- people who never compromise on quality of cut- feel as I do about this.
That''s one reason I''m so glad to be here- to at least explore, and represent the alternative viewpoint.
I still feel that the 1.95ct stone may very well be a great one- and don''t feel that it''s possible to eliminate it based on the information we have at hand.
If anyone who did re-cut a steep deep to better proportions can post the specifics- beginning weight and stats, and stats and weight after re-cut, I''d be so grateful- I really am interested to see what the actual losses were.
Thank you again for the stimulating conversation!
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
Sharon, I just wanted to add I agree with you that sometimes it feels as if anything less than the best cut is taboo around here and personally I don't want to perpetuate that. BTW I just wanted to add concerning Ellen's descriptions of steep deeps that she was spot on in that case, I mean generally concerning cut quality.Date: 1/28/2009 11:16:23 PM
Author: Sharon101
David, this is truely my experience & observations of what goes on in real life. Im glad you are talking about it because I have often felt that anything less than the best cut as a priority is taboo around here. I think that it is ok for `size` to be a priority for some over cut as long as the cut is still doing its job!!!!!Date: 1/28/2009 2:20:57 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Thank you Ellen!
The terms 'Fire' and 'Brightness' are probably the best we have in terms of semantics, to describe what we're talking about- yet they are still lacking in descriptiveness.
My experience has shown me that some people will be able to spot subtle difference, and others won't.
For example: If we compare a stone of smaller table, and greater depth- one that might be called 'Ideal' to a well cut 60/60 there are tools that can demonstrate that there's more 'fire' coming from the smaller table diamond.
Not everyone will be able to see this with their eyes.
ON the other hand, if the two stones we're comparing are both well cut ( properly proportioned with a nice girdle) the 60/60 is likely to have a greater spread- so there will be a percentage of people who will see a difference in size, but not be able to see a difference in 'fire'- OR- they may see the increased 'brightness' of a slightly larger tabled diamond and see that as preferable. Many people do. I do.
I'm not going to call myself an expert- but I am a vendor with over 30 years experience- and I was trained to grade diamonds at Harry Winston.
That by no means makes me right- and I appreciate that you did not say my views are wrong- but it's important to note that a great deal of diamond professionals- people who never compromise on quality of cut- feel as I do about this.
That's one reason I'm so glad to be here- to at least explore, and represent the alternative viewpoint.
I still feel that the 1.95ct stone may very well be a great one- and don't feel that it's possible to eliminate it based on the information we have at hand.
If anyone who did re-cut a steep deep to better proportions can post the specifics- beginning weight and stats, and stats and weight after re-cut, I'd be so grateful- I really am interested to see what the actual losses were.
Thank you again for the stimulating conversation!
Remarks have been made to this effect concerning cut quality and that it has been noticed that AGS0 cut grade are being recommended often and pointed out. We all need to keep an open mind that not everyone wants a top make diamond and that there are well cut GIA graded diamonds out there ( which can still be top make) and if they are being sold by a vendor who has all the images available, then they can be an excellent and valid choice.
If a poster expresses they want a top cut AGS0 then that is perfectly fine and the ones to look at, also other diamonds of high cut quality can have GIA reports. AGS1 can be a good choice in some cases. Yes AGS are considered to be the strictest on cut grading particularly with the 0 grade but as I said, if images are provided for GIA diamonds and they check out then no reason to not consider these diamonds, or even other diamonds of which aren't cut to the same exacting standards but have good proportions if that is what the poster wants and the info is available. For those who might have other priorities and just want a nicely cut diamond then we need to keep an open mind in helping them find the best diamond for their particular needs, explain the trade offs of course in not going for top cut quality, but we don't want newbies to be put off posting because they might not want the best cut money can buy and I feel we need to be mindful of that after being here a long time and watching RT evolve, and I know for a fact I am not the only one who feels this way. In my opinion, we want Rocky Talk to be a place where anyone can post regardless and receive balanced and useful advice to help them find the right diamond - yes cut is important and always will be but we need to treat each poster as an individual according to their requirements rather than just recommending top cut diamonds especially if that poster makes it clear they have other priorities and understand the possible results of the choice they make in not wanting the very best cut, otherwise I feel we are not best serving those who come here for advice. There are various levels of beauty as one of the experts recently and rightfully pointed out, and sometimes one can be quite happy with a diamond which isn't cut to the highest standards but has good proportions. I am just a consumer who spends a lot of time here and I say the above from my consumers point of view and experience.
Lorelei, I actually love the high standard of cut excellence that is strongly promoted here. Education is never wasted, whether or not the info is followed or rejected.Date: 1/29/2009 4:54:08 AM
Author: Lorelei
Sharon, I just wanted to add I agree with you that sometimes it feels as if anything less than the best cut is taboo around here and personally I don''t want to perpetuate that. BTW I just wanted to add concerning Ellen''s descriptions of steep deeps that she was spot on in that case, I mean generally concerning cut quality.Date: 1/28/2009 11:16:23 PM
Author: Sharon101
David, this is truely my experience & observations of what goes on in real life. Im glad you are talking about it because I have often felt that anything less than the best cut as a priority is taboo around here. I think that it is ok for `size` to be a priority for some over cut as long as the cut is still doing its job!!!!!Date: 1/28/2009 2:20:57 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Thank you Ellen!
The terms ''Fire'' and ''Brightness'' are probably the best we have in terms of semantics, to describe what we''re talking about- yet they are still lacking in descriptiveness.
My experience has shown me that some people will be able to spot subtle difference, and others won''t.
For example: If we compare a stone of smaller table, and greater depth- one that might be called ''Ideal'' to a well cut 60/60 there are tools that can demonstrate that there''s more ''fire'' coming from the smaller table diamond.
Not everyone will be able to see this with their eyes.
ON the other hand, if the two stones we''re comparing are both well cut ( properly proportioned with a nice girdle) the 60/60 is likely to have a greater spread- so there will be a percentage of people who will see a difference in size, but not be able to see a difference in ''fire''- OR- they may see the increased ''brightness'' of a slightly larger tabled diamond and see that as preferable. Many people do. I do.
I''m not going to call myself an expert- but I am a vendor with over 30 years experience- and I was trained to grade diamonds at Harry Winston.
That by no means makes me right- and I appreciate that you did not say my views are wrong- but it''s important to note that a great deal of diamond professionals- people who never compromise on quality of cut- feel as I do about this.
That''s one reason I''m so glad to be here- to at least explore, and represent the alternative viewpoint.
I still feel that the 1.95ct stone may very well be a great one- and don''t feel that it''s possible to eliminate it based on the information we have at hand.
If anyone who did re-cut a steep deep to better proportions can post the specifics- beginning weight and stats, and stats and weight after re-cut, I''d be so grateful- I really am interested to see what the actual losses were.
Thank you again for the stimulating conversation!
Remarks have been made to this effect concerning cut quality and that it has been noticed that AGS0 cut grade are being recommended often and pointed out. We all need to keep an open mind that not everyone wants a top make diamond and that there are well cut GIA graded diamonds out there ( which can still be top make) and if they are being sold by a vendor who has all the images available, then they can be an excellent and valid choice.
If a poster expresses they want a top cut AGS0 then that is perfectly fine, also other diamonds of high cut quality can have GIA reports. AGS1 can be a good choice in some cases. Yes AGS are considered to be the strictest on cut grading particularly with the 0 grade but as I said, if images are provided for GIA diamonds and they check out then no reason to not consider these diamonds, or even other diamonds of which aren''t cut to the same exacting standards but have good proportions if that is what the poster wants and the info is available. For those who might have other priorities and just want a nicely cut diamond then we need to keep an open mind in helping them find the best diamond for their particular needs, explain the trade offs of course in not going for top cut quality, but we don''t want newbies to be put off posting because they might not want the best cut money can buy and I feel we need to be mindful of that after being here a long time and watching RT evolve, and I know for a fact I am not the only one who feels this way. In my opinion, we want Rocky Talk to be a place where anyone can post regardless and receive balanced and useful advice to help them find the right diamond - yes cut is important and always will be but we need to treat each poster as an individual according to their requirements, otherwise I feel we are not best serving those who come here for advice. I am just a consumer who spends a lot of time here and I say the above from my consumers point of view.
Sometimes I just want to scream that cut is actually something that is built into the price. And for people with very fixed budgets, sometimes I feel that a little more size couldnt hurt!!!! But in chasing the very top cuts, size has to be compromised. And sometimes I wonder if the wearers best interests has really been served.
As my own example, everyone here emphatically warned me not to purchase my diamond (bought by my jeweller husband actually). And to be honest, it caused many a fight between me and hubby over the cut & therefore the look of my diamond. For ages I even hated the fact that my diamond wasnt cut right etc.
But oh boy....if you could experience even one day of wearing this ring. I get hounded over this diamond....people swoon..people stare.....I get soooo many adoring comments it is unbelievable. And, the diamond actually does perform...maybe not to the degree of a top cut but there is still 4 carats of really good diamond realastate working here!!!!!
So, in a way...I have to speak about the other side of the story.
And in saying all this, if I could choose size and top cut ....I would be there in a second.
Infact for my smaller diamond purchases li8ke eternity ring, I will strive for top cuts.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
And the above highlighted sentence is the crux of the matter and what we need to be mindful of at all times when offering advice.Date: 1/29/2009 5:29:35 AM
Author: Sharon101
Lorelei, I actually love the high standard of cut excellence that is strongly promoted here. Education is never wasted, whether or not the info is followed or rejected.Date: 1/29/2009 4:54:08 AM
Author: Lorelei
Sharon, I just wanted to add I agree with you that sometimes it feels as if anything less than the best cut is taboo around here and personally I don't want to perpetuate that. BTW I just wanted to add concerning Ellen's descriptions of steep deeps that she was spot on in that case, I mean generally concerning cut quality.Date: 1/28/2009 11:16:23 PM
Author: Sharon101
David, this is truely my experience & observations of what goes on in real life. Im glad you are talking about it because I have often felt that anything less than the best cut as a priority is taboo around here. I think that it is ok for `size` to be a priority for some over cut as long as the cut is still doing its job!!!!!Date: 1/28/2009 2:20:57 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Thank you Ellen!
The terms 'Fire' and 'Brightness' are probably the best we have in terms of semantics, to describe what we're talking about- yet they are still lacking in descriptiveness.
My experience has shown me that some people will be able to spot subtle difference, and others won't.
For example: If we compare a stone of smaller table, and greater depth- one that might be called 'Ideal' to a well cut 60/60 there are tools that can demonstrate that there's more 'fire' coming from the smaller table diamond.
Not everyone will be able to see this with their eyes.
ON the other hand, if the two stones we're comparing are both well cut ( properly proportioned with a nice girdle) the 60/60 is likely to have a greater spread- so there will be a percentage of people who will see a difference in size, but not be able to see a difference in 'fire'- OR- they may see the increased 'brightness' of a slightly larger tabled diamond and see that as preferable. Many people do. I do.
I'm not going to call myself an expert- but I am a vendor with over 30 years experience- and I was trained to grade diamonds at Harry Winston.
That by no means makes me right- and I appreciate that you did not say my views are wrong- but it's important to note that a great deal of diamond professionals- people who never compromise on quality of cut- feel as I do about this.
That's one reason I'm so glad to be here- to at least explore, and represent the alternative viewpoint.
I still feel that the 1.95ct stone may very well be a great one- and don't feel that it's possible to eliminate it based on the information we have at hand.
If anyone who did re-cut a steep deep to better proportions can post the specifics- beginning weight and stats, and stats and weight after re-cut, I'd be so grateful- I really am interested to see what the actual losses were.
Thank you again for the stimulating conversation!
Remarks have been made to this effect concerning cut quality and that it has been noticed that AGS0 cut grade are being recommended often and pointed out. We all need to keep an open mind that not everyone wants a top make diamond and that there are well cut GIA graded diamonds out there ( which can still be top make) and if they are being sold by a vendor who has all the images available, then they can be an excellent and valid choice.
If a poster expresses they want a top cut AGS0 then that is perfectly fine, also other diamonds of high cut quality can have GIA reports. AGS1 can be a good choice in some cases. Yes AGS are considered to be the strictest on cut grading particularly with the 0 grade but as I said, if images are provided for GIA diamonds and they check out then no reason to not consider these diamonds, or even other diamonds of which aren't cut to the same exacting standards but have good proportions if that is what the poster wants and the info is available. For those who might have other priorities and just want a nicely cut diamond then we need to keep an open mind in helping them find the best diamond for their particular needs, explain the trade offs of course in not going for top cut quality, but we don't want newbies to be put off posting because they might not want the best cut money can buy and I feel we need to be mindful of that after being here a long time and watching RT evolve, and I know for a fact I am not the only one who feels this way. In my opinion, we want Rocky Talk to be a place where anyone can post regardless and receive balanced and useful advice to help them find the right diamond - yes cut is important and always will be but we need to treat each poster as an individual according to their requirements, otherwise I feel we are not best serving those who come here for advice. I am just a consumer who spends a lot of time here and I say the above from my consumers point of view.
Sometimes I just want to scream that cut is actually something that is built into the price. And for people with very fixed budgets, sometimes I feel that a little more size couldnt hurt!!!! But in chasing the very top cuts, size has to be compromised. And sometimes I wonder if the wearers best interests has really been served.
As my own example, everyone here emphatically warned me not to purchase my diamond (bought by my jeweller husband actually). And to be honest, it caused many a fight between me and hubby over the cut & therefore the look of my diamond. For ages I even hated the fact that my diamond wasnt cut right etc.
But oh boy....if you could experience even one day of wearing this ring. I get hounded over this diamond....people swoon..people stare.....I get soooo many adoring comments it is unbelievable. And, the diamond actually does perform...maybe not to the degree of a top cut but there is still 4 carats of really good diamond realastate working here!!!!!
So, in a way...I have to speak about the other side of the story.
And in saying all this, if I could choose size and top cut ....I would be there in a second.
Infact for my smaller diamond purchases li8ke eternity ring, I will strive for top cuts.
It needs to be said from time to time Sharon, and I am glad it was brought up. Personally my diamond has proportions that would be considered unsuitable by some here, but I wanted size, knew the trade offs I would be making with the cut and was fine with it, but my hand gets grabbed left right and centre and my diamond sparkles. I am extremely happy with it, yes I have seen top cut diamonds in person and they are stunning, but mine is plenty beautiful enough for me. It also has an EGL report which checked out and is of L colour which is also white enough for me. So my point is that if you understand that you could do better for cut and are ok with that then there are varying levels of beauty and a diamond which isn't ' perfect' might just be the right choice for some if they have looked at some top cuts in person to compare and are happy with just a decent cut to get size, D colour, IF or VVS clarity or whatever their priority may be. It is easy for me anyway to get caught up in all the numbers, proportions, images, grading reports and everything that comes up in RT on a regular basis, all the number crunching and hairsplitting that goes on, so it is good to step back and look at the bigger picture of how RT is operating and being seen by others. Especially now it is so busy we need to be on our toes to encourage newbies to post with their questions - whatever those might be - and to keep an open mind to be able to cater for everyone. So I am grateful to you for bringing it up Sharon!
There was a poster only recently in fact who said to me " isn't Pricescope all about helping people find the best cut?" And I replied in my opinion no, or it shouldn't be and as a consumer I certainly wouldn't want it to be. Pricescope should be there to help anyone regardless of what their priorities are, yes cut is crucial as always but some do have other priorities and we don't want newbies to feel there is little point posting about a particular diamond if it won't pass muster with PSers. Yes we will be honest if the diamond is badly cut but I hope we try to find out exactly what that poster wants and advise accordingly. As above, sometimes posters don't want the best cut money can buy and if they understand the potential trade offs then fine - but a diamond doesn't always have to have a top cut to be beautiful.
iameuro - I do apologize for hijacking your thread.
Ellen
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2006
- Messages
- 24,433
Sharon, just for the record, I never suggested to the OP he get a smaller, better cut stone. If you look back, I suggested 2 of the 2 ct. stones already linked in here to him, that were the size he wanted, in a better cut. I''m quite aware some want size over cut, and I always try to find/suggest the best cut in the size someone wants if that''s their main objective.
But I will never recommend a steep/deep. I don''t think you''d find most vendors on here doing that either. And there''s no reason to, as there is almost always an alternative stone.
*threadjack over*
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 9,859
threadjack almost over....
I applaud the sentiment Sharon.
And that''s part of what I''m saying- BUT- I am also saying that with the evidence we have in hand, it''s not possible to say the the 1.95ct stone is not really well cut.
Indeed, I have seen many cases where someone asks about a diamond to have it knocked under the same circumstances.
I applaud the sentiment Sharon.
And that''s part of what I''m saying- BUT- I am also saying that with the evidence we have in hand, it''s not possible to say the the 1.95ct stone is not really well cut.
Indeed, I have seen many cases where someone asks about a diamond to have it knocked under the same circumstances.
Kelli
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,455
David,
I saw you requested this info so I decided to post it here so you could find it with little searching.
Here are the old specs: And here are the NEW ones!
1.44 I vs2 1.35 H vs2
table 56 table 55.4
depth 61.5 depth 60.6
CA 35.5 CA 34.5
PA 41.2 PA 40.7
HCA score 4.3 HCA score 0.9
For some reason I didn't post the measurements. It went from a 7.3 mm to a 7.18 mm.
I saw you requested this info so I decided to post it here so you could find it with little searching.
Here are the old specs: And here are the NEW ones!
1.44 I vs2 1.35 H vs2
table 56 table 55.4
depth 61.5 depth 60.6
CA 35.5 CA 34.5
PA 41.2 PA 40.7
HCA score 4.3 HCA score 0.9
For some reason I didn't post the measurements. It went from a 7.3 mm to a 7.18 mm.
Kelli
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,455
Ok it wasn''t jumbled like that in my old post and it won''t let me fix it, but if you read it line by line you can compare the old and new specs.
And for fun, here are two before and after handshots.
Before: Steep deep diamond. Pretty but dark in center. There was sunlight coming from behind my hand in the pic, so in real life, the darkness was much more obvious. You can see it a little bit here though.
And for fun, here are two before and after handshots.
Before: Steep deep diamond. Pretty but dark in center. There was sunlight coming from behind my hand in the pic, so in real life, the darkness was much more obvious. You can see it a little bit here though.
Kelli
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,455
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 9,859
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
I Love My Sailor
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2009
- Messages
- 353
I would not choose an SI2. I think you can get an SI1 within your budget. In my opinion, SI2s are rarely eye clean but there are a few. Its up to you. If your willing to go for a J color, this diamond might be an option, and at a better cut.
Good Luck with your search
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/J-SI1-Premium-Cut-Round-Diamond-1094398.asp
Good Luck with your search
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/J-SI1-Premium-Cut-Round-Diamond-1094398.asp
Kelli
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,455
Hello All,
So I ended up going to a diamond dealer. He''s shown me several stones and I actually did not see any diffirence between I or J color. So I think I stay with a J color stone since it will allowe me to stay within my range.
He offered me the following stone: GIA Cert # 15299142 2.05 ct (http://www.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=15299142&weight=2.05)
and told me they will recreate the following band in platinum (http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/data/media/6/r1007_020Ww.jpg) all in $14.5K....
The stone is eye clean and Total Visual Performance 0.8 - Excellent within TIC range..
He said the setting is around $2K so that means he is charging me $12.5 for the stone...
What do you guys think ?
So I ended up going to a diamond dealer. He''s shown me several stones and I actually did not see any diffirence between I or J color. So I think I stay with a J color stone since it will allowe me to stay within my range.
He offered me the following stone: GIA Cert # 15299142 2.05 ct (http://www.gia.edu/reportcheck/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showReportVerification&reportno=15299142&weight=2.05)
and told me they will recreate the following band in platinum (http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/data/media/6/r1007_020Ww.jpg) all in $14.5K....
The stone is eye clean and Total Visual Performance 0.8 - Excellent within TIC range..
He said the setting is around $2K so that means he is charging me $12.5 for the stone...
What do you guys think ?
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
It looks promising, one thing though with the diamond being SI2 clarity, do you know what the grade setting inclusion/s are, such as a cloud? That would be useful to know as sometimes if a cloud inclusion is the reason a diamond gets an SI2 grade, then occasionally it can cause a loss of brilliance in the diamond - however '' clouds not shown'' in the comments section is not an issue. So if you could find this out, it would be helpful.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 9,859
HI All!
iameuro- if you''ve seen the diamond and love it, the price sounds totally reasonable.
In terms of the imperfection(s) that caused GIA to call it SI2- Lorelei''s suggestion is a good one.
Personally, the two things I''d want to know:
1) Can you see it ( them) with your naked eye?
2) Have the vendor explain the imperfection, and it''s location.
You should be able to see it with a 10 power loupe, especially if the vendor has the proper tools ( a loupe or a microscope, and tweezer, which is likely he does have) and assists you to look.
It''s highly unlikely that such an imperfection poses a durability threat- but have the vendor assure you on this.
SI2 diamonds are another subject that I feel is brushed off too quickly many times. An SI2 can offer tremendous value- especially if you can look at the stone and make sure it''s eye clean- many SI2''s are eye clean so ruling them out with no cause can eliminate some beautiful choices to many buyers.
iameuro- if you''ve seen the diamond and love it, the price sounds totally reasonable.
In terms of the imperfection(s) that caused GIA to call it SI2- Lorelei''s suggestion is a good one.
Personally, the two things I''d want to know:
1) Can you see it ( them) with your naked eye?
2) Have the vendor explain the imperfection, and it''s location.
You should be able to see it with a 10 power loupe, especially if the vendor has the proper tools ( a loupe or a microscope, and tweezer, which is likely he does have) and assists you to look.
It''s highly unlikely that such an imperfection poses a durability threat- but have the vendor assure you on this.
SI2 diamonds are another subject that I feel is brushed off too quickly many times. An SI2 can offer tremendous value- especially if you can look at the stone and make sure it''s eye clean- many SI2''s are eye clean so ruling them out with no cause can eliminate some beautiful choices to many buyers.
Imdanny
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2008
- Messages
- 6,186
gryffindor
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2008
- Messages
- 156
I do not like SI2s with carbon inclusions. However, I saw other SI2s without carbon inclusions where I liked the inclusion and didn't mind it even if it was somewhat visible. For me, the stone that got away was a D SI2 that had an inclusion in the shape of a straight line off to the side of the table that could be seen with the naked eye only after you found it with the loupe first. I thought it was really cool because the inclusion was so "perfect" looking and its presence would be a way to easily orient and locate my diamond. Apparently others thought it was cool too because the stone was bought by someone else while I was still deciding.
The vendor did have the right tools and I was able to see the inclusion under the loop. But otherside it looked eye clean.
Vendor did show me the inclusions but I honestly do not remember what they were... all i know it looked very nice and when I compared the J color to H color diamond, to me they looked identical.
One thing which bothers me is that GIA Cert is dated back to Sept, 2006... does this mean the stone was never sold ???? is there something wrong with it ?
Vendor did show me the inclusions but I honestly do not remember what they were... all i know it looked very nice and when I compared the J color to H color diamond, to me they looked identical.
One thing which bothers me is that GIA Cert is dated back to Sept, 2006... does this mean the stone was never sold ???? is there something wrong with it ?
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 9,859
Kelli
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,455
vespergirl
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,497
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 6,418
Hi All,
I was able to find the GIA Cert of the stone which I saw at the vendor. The cert is a bit blurry but you can still see where and what are the inclusions.
The stone is eye clean and got a very good score on the Cut Advisor.
Please let me know what you guys think, do you think the inclusions will mess around with the fire / light of the stone ?
Appreciate all the help...
I was able to find the GIA Cert of the stone which I saw at the vendor. The cert is a bit blurry but you can still see where and what are the inclusions.
The stone is eye clean and got a very good score on the Cut Advisor.
Please let me know what you guys think, do you think the inclusions will mess around with the fire / light of the stone ?
Appreciate all the help...
Kelli
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- May 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,455
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
Imdanny
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2008
- Messages
- 6,186
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 42,064
" Additional clouds not shown" is basically a non issue and nothing to worry about, this is a commonly seen remark in the comments section of a grading report. If a cloud is a grade maker - in other words a reason or one of them that the diamond received an SI2 grade, then that warrants checking. The only way to check with a grade setting cloud if it has a negative effect on a diamond is to ask the vendor or an appraiser.
Same with "surface graining not shown" in the comments report, in these circumstances nothing to worry about.
This page shows examples of surface graining,
http://www.goodoldgold.com/4Cs/Clarity/InclusionGallery/
- Status
300x240.png)