"Milky" Diamond

[MattSz]

Are you referring to the 1.3 F from JA? TBH, without an IS, it's too big a risk for me. I've had a GIA 3x stone with similar specs and this opinion is through my lens and personal experience. I would not buy this one because I think it will be leaky due to the depth. And again, from my personal experience, I could see the leakiness and it bothered me a whole lot. I will admit this took time. It took 9-12 months of wearing it that I noticed it.

If you have to go with JA, I would rather try my luck with this one, and order it for real life viewing and see if the inclusions bother you.




Actually, to answer your question, "would this be considered a nice diamond at $9800?" The answer is yes, it's nice. It's not GREAT, but it's probably nice. And to be fair, also you are asking people on Pricescope, and we demand a lot from a diamond, generally speaking. So if you're truly just wanting nice, I think it's fine. Can you do better for your budget, assuming we are talking more sparkly, more visually lively and beautiful? Yes, you can do better. Depends on whether you can get over the G and SI1 hang up (I noticed that everything you are choosing is F and VS2 or better.) I know. I've been that newbie. So the great thing with WF is that you can slowly move up over time. Less $$$$ impact at the time of upgrade.

You're certainly right about being hung up on SI1! I went back and forth with blue nile reps on several SI1s and they were usually either not eye clean or milky, so I'm hesitant based on that experience. Color isn't as much of an issue, but would like it to be G+.

I actually found a very nice diamond that is slightly over budget but checks every box and scores a 1.4 on the HCA tool. The only thing that seems out of place is that it has a "very small" culet. Is that something to be worried about? The rep mentioned the light leakage is negligible in that scenario.

I also found this on white flash and it seems really nice on paper, but theres no images https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4368877.htm

 

[sledge]

Maybe @sledge can explain better why, but my gut says this may be leaky in the center. It's a little deep. And...ugh...it's a wee bit small for a 1.3 carat. The edges may not light up as much. Is it a really good deal? The dimensions are smaller than the 1.288.

Two main issues:

1. GIA rounding. We have to understand that the values shown on a GIA certification has been measured, averaged & rounded in some manner. For instance, there are 8 actual crown & 8 actual pavilion angles in a round diamond. Yet, there is a single crown & pavilion angle reported. In the case of crown angles, those are averaged and rounded to the nearest 0.5 degree. Pavilion angles are averaged and then rounded to the nearest 0.2 degrees.

While the averages may look good, the actuals may not work as well. Especially when you start compounding problems because it's not a single proportion but rather a series of proportions working in harmony. When there is too much variation, they won't work.

This can lead down another path of the cutter "cheating" the stone by painting or digging the girdle or twisting lowers, etc.

To learn more: https://www.gia.edu/diamond-cut/diamond-cut-anatomy-round-brilliant


2. Geometry. Ultimately, all the values lead back to the "simple" fact that a diamond acts as a big mirror. We want light to come in at the proper angle, and bounced around and leave in a certain path so that we get maximum fire & brightness. When these angles/proportions are off, it does not allow light to travel in this desired path.

This is illustrated in the chart below, and the effects of how it can even affect the size of a stone is shown in the video.

The only thing that does make a logistical difference in the long run is the upgrade policy. And if you guys are people that are NEVER going to upgrade, then that won't even apply to you. But if you and she are open to the possibility, WF does allow you much more future flexibility. Logistics.

In addition to upgrading, the WF policy can be used as a "hedge" as well. Meaning, because you can swap stones as long as they are $1 or more in value (w/ no other restrictions), you could theoretically make really small upgrades to reach a final goal. Or if you bought a G-SI1 and couldn't live with it, then you could upgrade to the same size F-VS2 later when you have more funds w/o breaking your piggy bank.

Ya JA said they couldn't provide an IS on that one, they also said no to a few others that I looked at. I placed the hold on it so hopefully they don't pull a Blue Nile if I decide to purchase it!

If you're heart is set on it, you could always order it and have it delivered LOOSE so you could inspect the stone in your home. Buy your own IS, ASET and H&A scopes and see how it checks out. If you're not happy, send it back. I have bought & returned items with JA and while I may not always like all their policies that aspect was very easy.

I completely agree about the size difference though. We sized the ring and looked at different carats at a store and I genuinely couldn't tell the difference between a 1.25 and a 1.3, but apparently it was obvious .

I don't know the stones you looked at, but the proportions matter greatly. If your girl looked at a fat & squatty (shallow flattop) 1.30 against a steep & deep 1.25 she may have noticed a difference. However, if you are looking at two ideal cut stones that difference dissipates. Close the gap to basically a 1.29 vs 1.30 and I think she's crazy if she says she can see it, lol.

No matter what I end up purchasing I plan to have it professionally inspected. I'll request an IS as well. The proposal won't be for another few months so I have time to shop around again.

If you end up buying a stone, don't wait around MONTHS to have it inspected. Most places have a 10-30 day return policy. Get familiar with the vendor's policy that you choose to buy from so you don't get an unexpected surprise.

I'd hope the plan isn't to upgrade! but as you can tell I don't have as much say in this as I like to think haha. Knowing my girlfriend, any upgrade would be for something at least 2x, so I don't think it'll be an issue in the future, but the $1 upgrade is nice to have!

Maybe you are just joking, and I certainly don't want to come across as "that guy" so I will ease in here and suggest you guys make sure to have some serious money talks before you tie the knot. I'm going to drop it there, but if you want to talk more about this then let me know.

As far as the upgrade, it's not the first 2x that is overly bothersome. But think about the 3rd or 4th time. Let me show you....$10k then $20k then $40k and then $80k. Gulp.

I'm still searching, but would this be considered a nice diamond at $9800?

$9,800 / 1.30 carats = $7,538 per carat

 

[sledge]

You're certainly right about being hung up on SI1! I went back and forth with blue nile reps on several SI1s and they were usually either not eye clean or milky, so I'm hesitant based on that experience. Color isn't as much of an issue, but would like it to be G+.

I'm not bagging on BN, but WF is a very different type of vendor. They are invested in this community and primarily interested in pushing the finest cut stones, hence their ACA, ES and PS lines.

If WF tells you it's clean, it will be clean regardless if an SI1 or not. A key difference being they OWN all their ACA, ES & PS stones. So for them, the difficulty is walking to their safe & pulling them out to do an evaluation for you. Unlike BN & JA who deal primarily with overseas vendors this is such a luxury! WF frequently pulls stones and does comparisons with other stones they have in-stock to allow people to see color differences, or maybe take additional photos & videos to highlight clarity or how it behaves in different lighting, etc.

Short version, they hold your hand and make you feel pampered because they want the experience for you to be phenomenal.

I actually found a very nice diamond that is slightly over budget but checks every box and scores a 1.4 on the HCA tool. The only thing that seems out of place is that it has a "very small" culet. Is that something to be worried about? The rep mentioned the light leakage is negligible in that scenario.

I also found this on white flash and it seems really nice on paper, but theres no images https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4368877.htm

While WF is known for their ACA, ES & PS stones, they do have access to virtual stones like BN & JA. The link you provided is for a virtual stone. Their upgrade policies do NOT apply to virtual stones. However, they can bring the stone in and provide advanced images, etc for you which is something BN & JA can't do.

Just a warning, that 35.5/40.8 will be iffy IMO.

FYI, the majority of MRB's are produced with no culet but some have very small (<1.5% of overall diameter) culets. They were used in old European cuts but aren't as popular now. I would prefer none myself. Some more info on the differences:

An Expert Guide to Old European Cut Diamonds | Whiteflash

Uncover the fascinating history of old European cut diamonds and how they paved the way for the modern round brilliant diamonds that we know and love today.

www.whiteflash.com

 

[MattSz]

Two main issues:

1. GIA rounding. We have to understand that the values shown on a GIA certification has been measured, averaged & rounded in some manner. For instance, there are 8 actual crown & 8 actual pavilion angles in a round diamond. Yet, there is a single crown & pavilion angle reported. In the case of crown angles, those are averaged and rounded to the nearest 0.5 degree. Pavilion angles are averaged and then rounded to the nearest 0.2 degrees.

While the averages may look good, the actuals may not work as well. Especially when you start compounding problems because it's not a single proportion but rather a series of proportions working in harmony. When there is too much variation, they won't work.

This can lead down another path of the cutter "cheating" the stone by painting or digging the girdle or twisting lowers, etc.

To learn more: https://www.gia.edu/diamond-cut/diamond-cut-anatomy-round-brilliant


2. Geometry. Ultimately, all the values lead back to the "simple" fact that a diamond acts as a big mirror. We want light to come in at the proper angle, and bounced around and leave in a certain path so that we get maximum fire & brightness. When these angles/proportions are off, it does not allow light to travel in this desired path.

This is illustrated in the chart below, and the effects of how it can even affect the size of a stone is shown in the video.

In addition to upgrading, the WF policy can be used as a "hedge" as well. Meaning, because you can swap stones as long as they are $1 or more in value (w/ no other restrictions), you could theoretically make really small upgrades to reach a final goal. Or if you bought a G-SI1 and couldn't live with it, then you could upgrade to the same size F-VS2 later when you have more funds w/o breaking your piggy bank.




If you're heart is set on it, you could always order it and have it delivered LOOSE so you could inspect the stone in your home. Buy your own IS, ASET and H&A scopes and see how it checks out. If you're not happy, send it back. I have bought & returned items with JA and while I may not always like all their policies that aspect was very easy.




I don't know the stones you looked at, but the proportions matter greatly. If your girl looked at a fat & squatty (shallow flattop) 1.30 against a steep & deep 1.25 she may have noticed a difference. However, if you are looking at two ideal cut stones that difference dissipates. Close the gap to basically a 1.29 vs 1.30 and I think she's crazy if she says she can see it, lol.




If you end up buying a stone, don't wait around MONTHS to have it inspected. Most places have a 10-30 day return policy. Get familiar with the vendor's policy that you choose to buy from so you don't get an unexpected surprise.




Maybe you are just joking, and I certainly don't want to come across as "that guy" so I will ease in here and suggest you guys make sure to have some serious money talks before you tie the knot. I'm going to drop it there, but if you want to talk more about this then let me know.

As far as the upgrade, it's not the first 2x that is overly bothersome. But think about the 3rd or 4th time. Let me show you....$10k then $20k then $40k and then $80k. Gulp.




$9,800 / 1.30 carats = $7,538 per carat

I owe you a beer.

Putting the WF policy in terms of a hedge actually speaks quite a bit to me and is not something I had considered, however I was joking about the future upgrades. We're actually extremely frugal which is why I'm being so picky, and we want to be sure that the diamond is "future proof". I totally agree about the money talks though! I've heard some first-hand horror stories, but the lady is a CPA so she's right on board with reaching our financial goals.

I'll be poking around WF a bit more to see if I can find something in house. I could certainly use the hand holding haha, but you all have done an amazing job getting me up to speed on what I need to be looking for. I've also included the GIA report for the diamond with the "very small" culet. It's only slightly over budget but it seems almost perfect otherwise.

 

[LLJsmom]

You're certainly right about being hung up on SI1! I went back and forth with blue nile reps on several SI1s and they were usually either not eye clean or milky, so I'm hesitant based on that experience. Color isn't as much of an issue, but would like it to be G+.

I actually found a very nice diamond that is slightly over budget but checks every box and scores a 1.4 on the HCA tool. The only thing that seems out of place is that it has a "very small" culet. Is that something to be worried about? The rep mentioned the light leakage is negligible in that scenario.

I also found this on white flash and it seems really nice on paper, but theres no images https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4368877.htm

You've got some hang ups, and that's ok. Since this purchase may be just the start of more to come, given your SO's wishes, where you start makes a difference. You have some deeply entrenched assumptions, and I think you need to see some stones in real life to dispel some notions. I suggest you order a WF SI1 to see if you don't like it. It's free shipping to you, and back to WF. No charge. And then order a non-WF stone, from JA. I think it's free shipping to and back. But trust me to say that the upgrade policy will matter more than you think.

And i'm so sorry to say that I would NEVER get an MRB with a culet. Don't get me wrong. I LOVE culets, on Old European Cuts or old mine cuts. See this super cute hole in the center? That's a culet, and it looks perfect with those big floral facets. Light does NOT get reflected back, but that's ok. It's not supposed to.



The whole point of a well cut MRB is light should get reflected back from every facet. And a culet is the antithesis of that. Hope that helps.

 

[MattSz]

You've got some hang ups, and that's ok. Since this purchase may be just the start of more to come, given your SO's wishes, where you start makes a difference. You have some deeply entrenched assumptions, and I think you need to see some stones in real life to dispel some notions. I suggest you order a WF SI1 to see if you don't like it. It's free shipping to you, and back to WF. No charge. And then order a non-WF stone, from JA. I think it's free shipping to and back. But trust me to say that the upgrade policy will matter more than you think.

And i'm so sorry to say that I would NEVER get an MRB with a culet. Don't get me wrong. I LOVE culets, on Old European Cuts or old mine cuts. See this super cute hole in the center? That's a culet, and it looks perfect with those big floral facets. Light does NOT get reflected back, but that's ok. It's not supposed to.



The whole point of a well cut MRB is light should get reflected back from every facet. And a culet is the antithesis of that. Hope that helps.

Wow! yah the culet is not what I was expecting. I can't see how light wouldn't escape through that. I can understand the appeal in certain design cases, but it isn't what we're looking for.

What are your thoughts on this

 

[LLJsmom]

I owe you a beer.

Putting the WF policy in terms of a hedge actually speaks quite a bit to me and is not something I had considered, however I was joking about the future upgrades. We're actually extremely frugal which is why I'm being so picky, and we want to be sure that the diamond is "future proof". I totally agree about the money talks though! I've heard some first-hand horror stories, but the lady is a CPA so she's right on board with reaching our financial goals.

I'll be poking around WF a bit more to see if I can find something in house. I could certainly use the hand holding haha, but you all have done an amazing job getting me up to speed on what I need to be looking for. I've also included the GIA report for the diamond with the "very small" culet. It's only slightly over budget but it seems almost perfect otherwise.

I'm a CPA, a tax practitioner now for 20 years, not counting the years I was in public accounting. And I can tell how the stone you are buying essentially is a down payment on the future stone. Just keep in mind that flexibility and getting full value for your current purchase will be key. If she wants to upgrade in say 5 years, and the stone you buy now is $10K, you can move forward with just $5-$6K. But you would need to throw down another $10K with another vendor. For the record HPD and Victor Canera also offer $1 more upgrade programs, and they also sell super ideal stones, but they have more limited supply and in some cases more pricey stones than WF. But if you want to investigate, you should. Their stones are absolutely beautiful.

 

[LLJsmom]

Wow! yah the culet is not what I was expecting. I can't see how light wouldn't escape through that. I can understand the appeal in certain design cases, but it isn't what we're looking for.

What are your thoughts on this

I'm sorry. I wouldn't.

Cut Advisor Score 3.6
Factor Grade Light Return: Good Fire: Very Good Scintillation: Good Spread: Very Good HCA Score : 3.6 - Very Good - Worth buying if the price is right

Looks Like size

Explain
Probably sparkles and looks the usual size for its carat weight. If the HCA is less than 2.5, and you can see good Hearts and Arrows, it can be a nice diamond. Confirm with Ideal-scope, ASET scope or send to an appraiser.
Diamond Stats

Carat:	1.31
Depth:	62.4
Table:	58
Crown:	36

Pavilion:	40.8
Symmetry:	Excellent
Measurements:	6.92x6.98x4.34
GIA/AGS report # :

Your diamond is not a great candidate. Below are some suggestions in the 1.31 carat size for your convenience.

 

[MamaBee]

No comment on anything else but I'd happily buy any fluoro up to and including Very Strong. There are a number of quite technical (and passionate) threads about it on here.
The overall consensus seems to be that the bias against fluoro is primarily a marketing thing, given they used to be considered desirable, and the possible negative effects from being overblue are actually very rare (and sought after by some people).
I think fluoro is cool and like a secret hidden power.

I agree @foxinsox! My I color antique asscher has medium blue fluoro..It is clear and whiter than I’s I’ve previously had.

 

[MattSz]

I'm sorry. I wouldn't.

Cut Advisor Score 3.6
Factor Grade Light Return: Good Fire: Very Good Scintillation: Good Spread: Very Good HCA Score : 3.6 - Very Good - Worth buying if the price is right

Looks Like size

Explain
Probably sparkles and looks the usual size for its carat weight. If the HCA is less than 2.5, and you can see good Hearts and Arrows, it can be a nice diamond. Confirm with Ideal-scope, ASET scope or send to an appraiser.
Diamond Stats

Carat:	1.31
Depth:	62.4
Table:	58
Crown:	36

Pavilion:	40.8
Symmetry:	Excellent
Measurements:	6.92x6.98x4.34
GIA/AGS report # :

Your diamond is not a great candidate. Below are some suggestions in the 1.31 carat size for your convenience.

Nice! Shes still paying the dues on the public side at the moment but she's almost free of that.

Thanks for looking into that one, I found another nice looking diamond, but I've run out of my free HCA checks for the day haha! Any thoughts on this?

Table is quite large, but it's nice otherwise.

 

[LLJsmom]

Nice! Shes still paying the dues on the public side at the moment but she's almost free of that.

Thanks for looking into that one, I found another nice looking diamond, but I've run out of my free HCA checks for the day haha! Any thoughts on this?

Table is quite large, but it's nice otherwise.

2.3 on HCA - Very good on everything. So this one is one that is more seen as a 60/60 stone, meaning the table and depth are somewhat close. Stones like these generally return more white light to the eye, rather than colorful fire. Some people prefer these kinds of stones. Maybe your SO does. But consider this. This stone is a D, so it's as white as you can get already. Not being white enough will not be a problem. What you may want when you get to these higher colors is more colorful flashes. That's just a suggestion. I did myself return a D that wasn't colorful enough for me. But again, very personal choice. And some people haven't even had a chance to compare stones that have more white light return to those that have more colorful return, so maybe she won't notice or care.

 

[MattSz]

2.3 on HCA - Very good on everything. So this one is one that is more seen as a 60/60 stone, meaning the table and depth are somewhat close. Stones like these generally return more white light to the eye, rather than colorful fire. Some people prefer these kinds of stones. Maybe your SO does. But consider this. This stone is a D, so it's as white as you can get already. Not being white enough will not be a problem. What you may want when you get to these higher colors is more colorful flashes. That's just a suggestion. I did myself return a D that wasn't colorful enough for me. But again, very personal choice. And some people haven't even had a chance to compare stones that have more white light return to those that have more colorful return, so maybe she won't notice or care.

Thanks! I think I'm likely going to order something off JA as well as the G/SI1 WF diamond and then compare the two as suggested. The return policies at both make it seem relatively easy.

 

[LLJsmom]

Thanks! I think I'm likely going to order something off JA as well as the G/SI1 WF diamond and then compare the two as suggested. The return policies at both make it seem relatively easy.

It's a good plan. That's the best way you can determine what is most important to you. And since you can ship back and forth for free, there is no risk to you. Please let us know how it goes.

 

[MattSz]

It's a good plan. That's the best way you can determine what is most important to you. And since you can ship back and forth for free, there is no risk to you. Please let us know how it goes.

Absolutely will do, I'll be sure to update this thread as I go throughout the process.

Any thoughts on this? Sledge did mention that the 35.5 - 40.8 could be iffy, but the price is right on this one. That being said, its only marginally cheaper than the diamond with the culet, which is a VVS2 and scores exceptionally on the HCA.

 

[LLJsmom]

Absolutely will do, I'll be sure to update this thread as I go throughout the process.

Any thoughts on this? Sledge did mention that the 35.5 - 40.8 could be iffy, but the price is right on this one. That being said, its only marginally cheaper than the diamond with the culet, which is a VVS2 and scores exceptionally on the HCA.

HCA is a 2.6. Very good on everything. Is there an ASET or IS? You will want to see if you are ok with fluor.

I would consider buying an ideal scope or ASET for yourself, since this may not be your only diamond. You should look at the stones and get comfortable with any stone you are seriously considering, cause it seems like it matters to you. Then you'll want to check out the inclusion, and see you're ok with it.

 

[sledge]

The problem with the 35.5/40.8 stone is that you start sacrificing the INVERSE relationship of the crown/pavilion angle. Essentially this means you want a steep crown paired with a shallow pavilion or vice versa, shallow crown with a steep crown.

This helps ensure you keep the proper angles so the diamond doesn't leak, obstruct, etc.

A crown of 35.5 is on the upper limits of a steep crown, so you need to compliment with a more shallow 40.6 pavilion to help balance it.

However, as I mentioned earlier, because of rounding & averaging, it may work but I'd expect problems more than success. It just depends how tightly the stone is cut.

Also, just helping people search for stones I personally hate the 35/40.8 combo in XXX stones because in the rare cases you get advanced images, it seems like quite a few have issues. Super ideals being cut tighter have more success. Which just supports my prior comments about how tightly the stone is cut. You're adding an extra 0.5 degrees of steepness to a combo that I already consider "risky".

 

[sledge]

Here's you a few more options from WF in addition to the 1.288 & 1.282 I previously recommended. This is a comparison chart view which I like to view multiple stones, but you can click on each one for larger individual views.

Just a warning, these new stones exceed your $10k limit.

Diamond comparison | Compare Diamonds to choose and buy the best one

Whiteflash gives you an excellent opportunity to compare diamonds to make a great deal. With diamond’s parameters provided, you can compare any detail.

www.whiteflash.com

My favorite is still the 1.288. IMO, the best bang for the buck. We just need to know about that feather. I also really like the two G-VS2's. While I like the color of the F-SI1 and big fire, I dislike the black crystals despite WF stating it's eye clean.

More importantly, in this view you can easily compare the dimensions. I know you are really hung up on carat weight, but you can clearly see the 1.288 has a spread right on par with that 1.313 G-VS2.

 

[sledge]

GIA 3x 1.35 E-VS2 @ $9,447 wire
https://www.victorcanera.com/diamonds/USBGS212/1.35ct-E-VS2-round-natural-diamond

57t, 61.7d, 35.5c/40.6p & 80lgf

Has MBF. Promising proportions. VC makes some amazing settings, and they also have some great super ideal stones. For clarity, this is NOT a super ideal but rather virtual inventory stone I found on their site. With super ideals, you get a price break on purchasing a stone & setting together. Not sure if that or their generous upgrade policy applies to virtual inventory stones, you will need to check.



GIA 3x 1.42 F-VS2 @ $10,397
https://diamonddealfinder.com/enquiry.php?id_field=2742216

55t, 62.5d, 35.5c/40.6p & 80lgf

Has MBF. Promising proportions, but pushing depth. Martin is a no thrills seller, but normally has some of the best prices around.




GIA 3x 1.30 F-VS2 @ $10,062
https://diamonddealfinder.com/enquiry.php?id_field=2737732

56t, 60.7d, 34.5c/40.8p & 75lgf

No flour. Love the proportions, as they show great potential. No video or pictures so you need to request. Cert looks very clean for a VS2. I am curious about the crystals and making sure they aren't black or something. Probably just a bit paranoid because I can't "see" anything with no pics or videos.



**************************************

GIA 3x 1.32 G-VVS1 @ $9,897 wire
https://www.b2cjewels.com/dd/18626768/round-diamond-G-color-VVS1-Clarity?sku=18626768

GIA cert = https://www.gia.edu/report-check?reportno=6371839080

56t, 62.6d, 35.5c/40.6p & 75lgf

Including this one as a WARNING of what I am talking about with proportions. This has similar proportions to some of the stones we are discussing and looking at.

However, this stone happens to include an ASET. A very overly backlight one, but at least we have something. The black circle is where the stone is leaking. The rest of the light pink is part of that backlight saturation. But also we have some painting & digging going on and other oddities.

This stone checks by the proportions by being on the border and gets a decent HCA score. Yet this is one I would reject because of the ASET. Also, this shows why the HCA is a decent tool to help narrow down or eliminate bad stones but shouldn't be the final say. Advanced images always trump the HCA.





**********************

 

[The Judge]

Hi everyone!

I'm currently looking at this diamond https://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-details/LD14702857 and have it on hold. However, the client rep informed me that it is considered milky. I've tried to find some info, but I'm seeing conflicting things. I was hoping someone could shed some light on what that means exactly and how badly it affects the sparkle etc of a diamond.

Thanks,
Matt

The stone looks and reads beautiful. I don't know why a rep would tell you it looks "milky". If a stone looks "Milky" due to inclusions, the grade would be SI-2 at best... Sometimes, the fluorescence can cause a stone to look 'milky", but I've haven't seen "faint" causing that reaction in a stone that reads as well as this one. If it was "strong" or more, yes. You're doing the right thing... why not just have them send it and make your own decision? If you don't like it, you can send it back!

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

The stone looks and reads beautiful. I don't know why a rep would tell you it looks "milky". If a stone looks "Milky" due to inclusions, the grade would be SI-2 at best... Sometimes, the fluorescence can cause a stone to look 'milky", but I've haven't seen "faint" causing that reaction in a stone that reads as well as this one. If it was "strong" or more, yes. You're doing the right thing... why not just have them send it and make your own decision? If you don't like it, you can send it back!

Barry did you check the grading report? It is 100% a dud in the category of deceptive IMHO.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Barry did you check the grading report? It is 100% a dud in the category of deceptive IMHO.

Yup, I wouldn't touch that stone with a 10' pole.

 

[sledge]

Barry did you check the grading report? It is 100% a dud in the category of deceptive IMHO.

Even the cloudy diamonds need a little love Garry. Sounds like he had his beer diamond goggles on.

Stay strong @The Judge. It gets better the next morning as long as you have cab fare, or in your case a good return policy.

 

[Karl_K]

The problem with the 35.5/40.8 stone is that you start sacrificing the INVERSE relationship of the crown/pavilion angle. Essentially this means you want a steep crown paired with a shallow pavilion or vice versa, shallow crown with a steep crown.

This helps ensure you keep the proper angles so the diamond doesn't leak, obstruct, etc.

A crown of 35.5 is on the upper limits of a steep crown, so you need to compliment with a more shallow 40.6 pavilion to help balance it.

However, as I mentioned earlier, because of rounding & averaging, it may work but I'd expect problems more than success. It just depends how tightly the stone is cut.

Also, just helping people search for stones I personally hate the 35/40.8 combo in XXX stones because in the rare cases you get advanced images, it seems like quite a few have issues. Super ideals being cut tighter have more success. Which just supports my prior comments about how tightly the stone is cut. You're adding an extra 0.5 degrees of steepness to a combo that I already consider "risky".

The difference is in the lower girdle angle the lower girdle angle is what makes or breaks them.
Do I really need to link it again :}

Do the pavilion mains drive light return in the modern round brilliant?

Article by Karl K. On many websites you will see it said that the pavilion main facets drive light return. Top labs and many grading systems use the pavilion angle […]

www.pricescope.com

 

[Karl_K]

At one time and not that long ago @The Judge would have been right gia was doing what they say they do and make transparency problems due to inclusions a si-2 max.
There were always mistakes but they were very very rare.
These days it is much more common for gia to give even vs grades to stones with transparency issues from inclusions.

 

[sledge]

The difference is in the lower girdle angle the lower girdle angle is what makes or breaks them.
Do I really need to link it again :}

Do the pavilion mains drive light return in the modern round brilliant?

Article by Karl K. On many websites you will see it said that the pavilion main facets drive light return. Top labs and many grading systems use the pavilion angle […]

www.pricescope.com

Thanks for poking at me, it's making me think, lol.

In your study case, your first proved lgf's leak when lgf angle > 42.24.

You then used a MRB 35/41.2 with 57 table & 80lgf (length) as your lab rat. Defunct of GIA gross rounding, all those proportions working harmoniously created a lgf angle > 42.24 and creating a leakage issue.

Perhaps, I missed it, but what was the exact lgf angle under those conditions? I want to use this as a check reference against math I am compiling to calculate this angle.

Your solution, from the standpoint of a designer, was one of three choices:

1. Shorten the lgf's to 40% to get them from under the table and stop leaking.
2. Lengthen the lgf's to 83% to change the lgf angle so it was <= 42.24.
3. Paint the girdles (brillianteering) to achieve lgf angle <=42.24.

Effectively, concluding your hypothesis that lgf's leak when lgf angle >42.24 and to avoid you must take some appropriate action to reduce the lgf angle to <= 42.24.

I found the formula for calculating lgf angle and will add in an Excel sheet I am compiling to quick check various things. Can you confirm this is correct?




Where I could still use some guidance is your concluding statement about a change in crown angle affecting the lgf angle as well. This is confusing to me because when I review the formula above, I do not see a reference to crown angle indicating the calculation does not consider crown angle, rather just pavilion angle & pavilion height.



Although I am somewhat confused, it's also not confusing in the sense that we are dealing with a complex geometry problem so when one proportion changes, it effects the others. And while I did not convey the lgf aspect as you did, I believe there are hints of truth in the fact that getting a more complimentary c/p relationship would likely resolve the adverse lgf angle.

And from a buyer's perspective, that may be the only option or control they have. Regardless I need to know that lgf angle before I spout off that comment.

The bigger problem I now have is I am not sure the lgf angle of a 35.5/40.8 w/ 57 table & 80 lgf (the stone that originated my comments). Nor have I exactly thought about how I want to address GIA gross rounding when calculating the lgf angle. Especially the 5% lgf rounding and with no pics (as with the stone in question) I can't make a visual determination if actuals were 78 or 83.

You used a computer model where things are perfect, yet in the real world there will be variety in the actuals so building a model to calculate multiple variables starts to become real work. I am sure this is what your fancy pants software does on the fly, but I don't have that software to use & check myself.

Any of this make sense?

 

[Karl_K]

Thanks for poking at me, it's making me think, lol.

In your study case, your first proved lgf's leak when lgf angle > 42.24.

You then used a MRB 35/41.2 with 57 table & 80lgf (length) as your lab rat. Defunct of GIA gross rounding, all those proportions working harmoniously created a lgf angle > 42.24 and creating a leakage issue.

Perhaps, I missed it, but what was the exact lgf angle under those conditions? I want to use this as a check reference against math I am compiling to calculate this angle.

Your solution, from the standpoint of a designer, was one of three choices:

1. Shorten the lgf's to 40% to get them from under the table and stop leaking.
2. Lengthen the lgf's to 83% to change the lgf angle so it was <= 42.24.
3. Paint the girdles (brillianteering) to achieve lgf angle <=42.24.

Effectively, concluding your hypothesis that lgf's leak when lgf angle >42.24 and to avoid you must take some appropriate action to reduce the lgf angle to <= 42.24.

I found the formula for calculating lgf angle and will add in an Excel sheet I am compiling to quick check various things. Can you confirm this is correct?




Where I could still use some guidance is your concluding statement about a change in crown angle affecting the lgf angle as well. This is confusing to me because when I review the formula above, I do not see a reference to crown angle indicating the calculation does not consider crown angle, rather just pavilion angle & pavilion height.



Although I am somewhat confused, it's also not confusing in the sense that we are dealing with a complex geometry problem so when one proportion changes, it effects the others. And while I did not convey the lgf aspect as you did, I believe there are hints of truth in the fact that getting a more complimentary c/p relationship would likely resolve the adverse lgf angle.

And from a buyer's perspective, that may be the only option or control they have. Regardless I need to know that lgf angle before I spout off that comment.

The bigger problem I now have is I am not sure the lgf angle of a 35.5/40.8 w/ 57 table & 80 lgf (the stone that originated my comments). Nor have I exactly thought about how I want to address GIA gross rounding when calculating the lgf angle. Especially the 5% lgf rounding and with no pics (as with the stone in question) I can't make a visual determination if actuals were 78 or 83.

You used a computer model where things are perfect, yet in the real world there will be variety in the actuals so building a model to calculate multiple variables starts to become real work. I am sure this is what your fancy pants software does on the fly, but I don't have that software to use & check myself.

Any of this make sense?

Glad you didn't say picking because that is not my intent.

Basically what it means in the real world for these combos especially with gia crazy rounding is get scope images before making a call and if no images are available error on the side of caution.
I just thought it was important to reinforce why and make it an educational moment.

Its the relationship between the lower girdle angle and the crown angle. Not a single number for all crown angles.
It has been a while since I wrote that and I chose those because of the historic information on the Morse/Wade cut in Al's book.
I could have picked any other crown/pavilion angle in the borderline steep/deep range the lower girdle angles would be different but the same effect.

 

[sledge]

Haha, no @Karl_K I never took it as "picking".

You know I enjoy getting all nerdy, so I've enjoyed the educational moment very much actually. Thank you!

 

[Ceilimom]

I was also recommended this diamond https://www.bluenile.com/ca/diamond-details/LD15106407?refTab=DIAMONDS&track=viewDiamondDetails . The rep mentioned it was eye clean and not cloudy but I do see mentions of clouds in the GIA Report.

No, I would pass on this one too. I see too many lines.