Help me understand the 3 diamonts HCA results

[Matriochka]

I'm new to this forum and to the diamonds world. 3 weeks agoI choose an ering with an D, VVS1, 0.72ct diamond to be set (see first GIA report), but 2 days ago I had a call from my local jewellers saying that the diamond was damaged during the prossess and I have to go for another one - they proposed me 2 other option:
Option #1 a G,VVS1, 0.70ct
Option #2 an E, VVS1,0.75ct

In the meantime, after the purchase of the ering, I found the pricescope and ran an HCA estimation of my ering diamant and 2 days ago, I ran estimations for the 2 options:
- damaged original diamand D,VVS1, 0.72ct HCA 3.4 (GIA_6382423807) https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=6382423807
- Option #1 a G,VVS1, 0.70ct HCA 2.4 (GIA_2166287967) https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=2166287967
- Option #2 an E, VVS1,0.75ct HCA 5.3 (GIA_2356535517) https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=2356535517

Knowing I'm not based in US, so I cannot by from AJ, WF or BG, and I will buy from my local jewellery store, could you please have a look and explain to me the huge gap of HCA scores especially with the 2 options. Looking to the GIA certifacates, the main measures are not far away from the original one, so I cannot really understand the 2.4 vs 5.3

 

[TXwidow]

it is the 'numbers' - you got very good on stone 2 but fair, good, good on three of the factors on stone 3.

 

[DejaWiz]

2166287967 has the more favorable proportions and angles, but the report shows it's for a 0.7 D VVS1, not a G color.

Is there a certain reason why you are targeting such an extreme level of clarity for this carat range?
You're going to be paying a lot of extra money for extra clarity that your unaided eyes won't be able to see over all VS1, almost all VS2, and most SI1. By dropping the clarity a notch or two, the same money could get you a diamond with a noticeably bigger spread/diameter.

To answer your question about the HCA scores: even tiny changes in the angles can significantly mess up the light return, so a diamond with 41.0/35.0/57 combo (pavilion angle, crown angle, table width) could potentially have a greater chance of exhibiting light leakage than, say, a diamond with a 40.8/35.0/57 combo. This is *not* taking into consideration some other important measurements such as girdle thickness or LGFs, which aslo have an impact on overall optical performance.

An important factor to remember is the *inverse* relationship between the PA and the CA: as one gets steeper, the other should get shallower for best results...here are some examples:
40.6 PA paired with a 35.0 CA
40.8 PA paired with a 34.5 CA
40.9 PA paired with a 34.0 CA

All in all, regardless of the angles and proportions, always have your jeweler provide you with ASET and/or Ideal-Scope images of any diamonds that you are interested in to ensure proper light return and performance.

 

[Diamond Girl 21]

I'm a bit confused. They damaged your D, VVS1, but they are offering you an E or G as a replacement? That wouldn't be acceptable to me.

 

[DejaWiz]

I'm a bit confused. They damaged your D, VVS1, but they are offering you an E or G as a replacement? That wouldn't be acceptable to me.

According to the GIA report links, the replacement options are 0.7 D VVS1 and 0.75 E VVS1

 

[Matriochka]

Thank you all for your replies.

To answer your questions:
The option 1 diamant is D, not G color, I didn't find the way to edit my post....

For the clarity, I know that with clarity greade VVS1 I'll pay extra fees, but I'm not looking for a much bigger diamond - I really like stones around 0.7 - 0.8cts and how they are on me...and as initially I went for D color (I'm looking for ice white stone), I wanted to have an "equilibrated" diamond with quite similars parameters in Color and Clarity (ideally should be D, IF...but didn't found and also not sure that I'll be able to afford the price gap of +30% for IF clarity).

After they broke the initial stone - I'm quite curious how it can be possible? They shortly proposed the 2 options. For the moment, I said that I need to see more options and that I reject option 2 (based on HCA score).

I'm also wondering, as in GIA reports, angles and proportions are rounded, how does it reflect in HCA tool? E.g. option 1 scoring 2.4, can it be worst / better ?
Also for option 1 - what do you think on the type of inclusions - i'm pretty fine with pintpoint, and cloud but I'm struggling with intended natural...

Thank you so much for your valuable advices, and please bear with me on my english.

 

[DejaWiz]

Consider having you jeweler include VVS2 and VS1 in your criteria... they'll be just as indistinguishable to IF/FL with the unaided eyes as VVS1 would be, while giving you much more options to choose from and vastly increase your chances of finding some that fall into the 1.0-2.0 HCA range.

 

[Matriochka]

Consider having you jeweler include VVS2 and VS1 in your criteria... they'll be just as indistinguishable to IF/FL with the unaided eyes as VVS1 would be, while giving you much more options to choose from and vastly increase your chances of finding some that fall into the 1.0-2.0 HCA range.

Thank you, will call them and ask.

Few questions below, if somebody can explain :

After they broke the initial stone - I'm quite curious how it can be possible? They shortly proposed the 2 options. For the moment, I said that I need to see more options and that I reject option 2 (based on HCA score).

I'm also wondering, as in GIA reports, angles and proportions are rounded, how does it reflect in HCA tool? E.g. option 1 scoring 2.4, can it be worst / better ?
Also for option 1 - what do you think on the type of inclusions - i'm pretty fine with pintpoint, and cloud but I'm struggling with intended natural...

 

[DejaWiz]

Thank you, will call them and ask.

Few questions below, if somebody can explain :

1. After they broke the initial stone - I'm quite curious how it can be possible? They shortly proposed the 2 options. For the moment, I said that I need to see more options and that I reject option 2 (based on HCA score).

2. I'm also wondering, as in GIA reports, angles and proportions are rounded, how does it reflect in HCA tool? E.g. option 1 scoring 2.4, can it be worst / better ?

3. Also for option 1 - what do you think on the type of inclusions - I'm pretty fine with pinpoint, and cloud but I'm struggling with intended natural...

I'll try my best to answer your questions...
1. It is possible, albeit extremely rare, to chip/shatter a diamond during setting, especially diamonds that don't have squared corners. If there were any areas of strain or even a grain boundary in the diamond, then that could make for a weak point, despite being completely undetectable unless it was closely inspected under polarization by someone with the knowledge of what to look for under such a viewing condition.
Another possibility is heat from the jeweler's torch caused stress to the diamond.

2. The HCA Tool uses only the data listed on the grading report, which is an averaged value of many measurements which is then rounded.
Example: An MRB with 8 seperate PA measurements comes back at 40.6, 40.6, 40.7, 40.7, 40.7, 40.8, 40.8, 40.8 so the average is 40.7125 which is then likely to be rounded to 40.7°
Always keep in mind that the HCA is a mass-rejection tool, not an individual selection tool. It will help you compose a short list of diamond candidates, but you should still use due diligence and have each one of those candidates checked and verified for symmetry, optical precision, and light return to ensure that you are getting your full money's worth of your expensive diamond purchase.

3. For such high clarity grades (VVS1, VVS2, and VS1), I wouldn't necessarily be concerned about an indented natural, especially if it's on the girdle...it's likely to be so small that 10X magnification would probably be a hunting expedition to even find and see it, so it won't cause any interference with light performance.
Pinpoints and clouds at these higher clarity grades are of no concern.

 

[Diamond Girl 21]

According to the GIA report links, the replacement options are 0.7 D VVS1 and 0.75 E VVS1

Thanks @DejaWiz! I couldn't open the reports, and I was thinking G was not acceptable when one wants icy white, IMHO.

 

[Matriochka]

I'll try my best to answer your questions...
1. It is possible, albeit extremely rare, to chip/shatter a diamond during setting, especially diamonds that don't have squared corners. If there were any areas of strain or even a grain boundary in the diamond, then that could make for a weak point, despite being completely undetectable unless it was closely inspected under polarization by someone with the knowledge of what to look for under such a viewing condition.
Another possibility is heat from the jeweler's torch caused stress to the diamond.

2. The HCA Tool uses only the data listed on the grading report, which is an averaged value of many measurements which is then rounded.
Example: An MRB with 8 seperate PA measurements comes back at 40.6, 40.6, 40.7, 40.7, 40.7, 40.8, 40.8, 40.8 so the average is 40.7125 which is then likely to be rounded to 40.7°
Always keep in mind that the HCA is a mass-rejection tool, not an individual selection tool. It will help you compose a short list of diamond candidates, but you should still use due diligence and have each one of those candidates checked and verified for symmetry, optical precision, and light return to ensure that you are getting your full money's worth of your expensive diamond purchase.

3. For such high clarity grades (VVS1, VVS2, and VS1), I wouldn't necessarily be concerned about an indented natural, especially if it's on the girdle...it's likely to be so small that 10X magnification would probably be a hunting expedition to even find and see it, so it won't cause any interference with light performance.
Pinpoints and clouds at these higher clarity grades are of no concern.

Thank you so much for your clear explanations DejaWiz! Very pedagogical and helpful!

 

[Matriochka]

I had some new proposals from my jeweler, and one looks quite interesting - can you please have a look on the GIA report & HCA (score 1.2). It is an E, VVS1, 3ex, Fluorescence None diamond and when I check with AGS tables, it is falling into Ideal Cut.

 

[Kim N]

I had some new proposals from my jeweler, and one looks quite interesting - can you please have a look on the GIA report & HCA (score 1.2). It is an E, VVS1, 3ex, Fluorescence None diamond and when I check with AGS tables, it is falling into Ideal Cut.

This definitely has potential as a well-cut 60/60 style diamond. It will be brighter and return more white light than a stone with more balanced proportions, but I think it will be better cut than the other options they've given you. It also has the advantage of facing up larger due to the shallower depth. Can they provide you with an Ideal-Scope image?

 

[Matriochka]

This definitely has potential as a well-cut 60/60 style diamond. It will be brighter and return more white light than a stone with more balanced proportions, but I think it will be better cut than the other options they've given you. It also has the advantage of facing up larger due to the shallower depth. Can they provide you with an Ideal-Scope image?

Hi Kim N, thank you for your fast reply. Unfortunately, they told me they don't have an Aset / Ideal Scope images

 

[Kim N]

Hi Kim N, thank you for your fast reply. Unfortunately, they told me they don't have an Aset / Ideal Scope images

Can you go view it in person and take it into a few different lighting environments (or at the very least, view it away from their jewelry store spotlighting) to see if it performs to your satisfaction?

 

[Matriochka]

Can you go view it in person and take it into a few different lighting environments (or at the very least, view it away from their jewelry store spotlighting) to see if it performs to your satisfaction?

Yes, I'll call them and ask if I can tomorrow morning.

 

[DejaWiz]

I had some new proposals from my jeweler, and one looks quite interesting - can you please have a look on the GIA report & HCA (score 1.2). It is an E, VVS1, 3ex, Fluorescence None diamond and when I check with AGS tables, it is falling into Ideal Cut.

All the proportions and angles look great for this F VVS1 diamond!

 

[Matriochka]

I called the jeweller today and he'll bring the stone for real live examination for me.

Another small question - the GIA report I had for this stone is a GIA origin report. Do you know why some diamonds are coming with an origin report - it cost 2 times the price of a GIA Dossier, especially for the small diamonds below 1ct? All the other options I had were coming with GIA Dossier...except this one that was far the best one (at least based on HCA)...

 

[Kim N]

I called the jeweller today and he'll bring the stone for real live examination for me.

Another small question - the GIA report I had for this stone is a GIA origin report. Do you know why some diamonds are coming with an origin report - it cost 2 times the price of a GIA Dossier, especially for the small diamonds below 1ct? All the other options I had were coming with GIA Dossier...except this one that was far the best one (at least based on HCA)...

As I understand it, the origin report is meant to build trust, so that you know the diamond is natural and not lab, and that it's not a blood diamond. It costs a lot more because it's gone through two levels of analysis, one for the rough and one for the diamond after it's cut.