Oval bow tie significantly more prevalent in person

[Siratoe]

Today I received my oval diamond engagement ring purchased online from BE (1.61 carat, F, very good cut, vvs2 ).

As with ovals, I was concerned about a potential bow tie effect so I made sure to go with a diamond that had optimal table and depth characteristics *and* that showed minimal bow tie effects in the 360° real image animation.

Unfortunately, the bow tie is significantly more severe than I expected. It was almost impossible to take a picture without dark shades prevalent: http://imgur.com/a/NkPs4

This is way different than what I saw online. The online video showed almost no signs of bow tie. Here is the link to the exact diamond I bought along with the real image preview: https://www.brilliantearth.com/search/?q=2339522

Seeking advice on whether I should return the ring and if you have any tips on avoiding this issue on a future replacement.

 

[whitewave]

Personally, I would return that one. If you want to stay with them, ask for a gemologist to evaluate future ones for bow tie effect/windowing.

What you have is not desirable.

 

[whitewave]

I agree that your stone doesn't look like the video.

Let me ask you:

1) do you want to stay with BE?
2) budget?
3) lab created?

Do you want us to help you find another one?

 

[ringo865]

Yah that is very apparent. Since you will be wasting your ring in person, that is the perspective that will matter most.

I'm sure they (or better yet, PSers) can find you a better oval. Post your budget, desired specs, etc.

 

[Siratoe]

Appreciate the feedback.

I am looking for:

L/W: 1.38-1.5
Color: >H (will be on rose gold setting)
Clarity: >SI1
Cut: Very good (table: 53-63, depth: 58-62)
Fluorescent: Preferably none but from what I understand not a deal breaker

Thanks for your help!

 

[Siratoe]

Appreciate the feedback.

I am looking for:

L/W: 1.38-1.5
Color: >H (will be on rose gold setting)
Clarity: >SI1
Cut: Very good (table: 53-63, depth: 58-62)
Fluorescent: Preferably none but from what I understand not a deal breaker

Thanks for your help!

Doesn't necessarily have to be BE, but perhaps easier for the exchange?

Budget: <$8,500

Also size is important, hence why I do not mind lab created, but if I can identify a good deal for a relatively smaller diamond, that's fine

 

[whitewave]

Budget? (I'm walking out the door but I'm sure someone will be around to help).

Do you want lab created?

 

[marymm]

FWIW I think the bow tie you see in the set ring is the same bow tie that is visible in the video.

I am just realizing your center stone is a lab created stone ... not sure current forum rules permit discussing lab stones in the Rocky Talky forum ... that said, if you are able to return the entire ring, setting + stone, to Brilliant Earth for a full refund, that's what I would recommend.

And, you may want to re-think your oval idea, because to my eyes the bow-tie visible in your current ring is an average bow-tie for an oval. If it is too much for you, finding a stone with zero-to-minimal bow-tie will be a lengthy and perhaps unsuccessful search unless you have a lot of time and are willing to buy/inspect/return loose ovals until you find one that meets your preferences.

 

[drk14]

It was almost impossible to take a picture without dark shades prevalent:

Some observations:

• Your pictures all seem to feature strong oblique lighting, which preferentially lights up the crushed ice facets above and below the belly. Thus, by comparison, the belly region will appear darker than the surroundings, giving the appearance of a bow tie. Try viewing/photographing the diamond in a more natural lighting environment.
• What was the imaging setup? If the distance from the camera to the diamond was small (small compared to the distance at which your eyes would normally view the ring, say 1-2 ft), then the bow tie effect will be amplified because the camera obstructs the light that would normally be reflected off the belly facets (hint: the light that reflects from the belly facets does not originate from your oblique light source).
• Because the diamond appears to be dirty, and your camera has trouble focusing on the diamond facets, it is pretty much impossible to recognize the faceting pattern from the BE video in your images.
• Although the BE video does not show any bowtie, the belly facets are quite static (they do not flash on and off), which suggests that a bowtie may appear when an overhead obstruction is present. The video also indicates that this oval features mainly crushed ice faceting (as your pictures confirm).

There are photography tips available in the SMTB forum. But more importantly, if you take the ring to a normal lighting environment (normal office lights, natural light from a north-facing window, etc.), and view it at a normal viewing distance (arm's length) using your eyes (not a camera), does the bow tie really appear as prominent as in your pictures?

None of the above is meant to negate your feelings about this oval, nor to dissuade you from the feedback you have received here recommending that you return the ring. I just want to attempt to find an explanation for why your real-life impression of the oval was so different from what you had expected based on the BE video. This may help you (and others) from avoiding a similar situation in the future.

 

[LLJsmom]

Return it, IMHO. Once you see the bow tie, you cannot UN-see it KWIM? If it were me, it would always rankle me. Just be honest with yourself and don't try to rationalize it away. For me, that never worked.

 

[Siratoe]

Great feedback everyone, I appreciate your thoughts.

Because the diamond appears to be dirty, and your camera has trouble focusing on the diamond facets, it is pretty much impossible to recognize the faceting pattern from the BE video in your images.

Oh man, these pics are straight out of the box and I think I was careful of not touching the diamond. Could it be a quality issue instead of dirt?

 

[LLJsmom]

It's a very pretty ring as a whole. I can definitely see the bowtie. I would never choose an oval with such an obvious bowtie. But I think there are people who don't notice, or don't care if they do. It entirely depends on your situation.

And of course it can be dirty coming out of the box. Get some dish washing liquid and warm water. Soak for 10 minutes and brush with soft tooth brush.

 

[drk14]

brush with soft tooth brush.

To clarify: Please only use a new toothbrush that has never seen toothpaste!
Make sure to brush the pavilion (bottom half of the diamond), not just the top.

 

[drk14]

Oh man, these pics are straight out of the box and I think I was careful of not touching the diamond.

I definitely see dirt in some of the pictures you posted on imgur (e.g., https://i.imgur.com/N1DwXCO.jpg).

The second picture in your latest post (with the ring on your pinky) is a much better picture of the diamond. It shows that in normal lighting, the oval has no bowtie to speak of. The facets in the belly are quite beautiful, and probably scintillate nicely when you tilt the ring back and forth.

However, what you and others in this thread are reacting to, is something different: The top and bottom thirds of the oval (everything above and below the belly region) are full of tiny, "crushed ice" facets, while the belly region has large, chunky/crisp facets. There is an abrupt transition between the the two types of faceting, which creates a contrast that can be jarring, and is unattractive to many PS members. In some lighting conditions (such as your original pictures with strong oblique lighting), the crushed ice will light up brighter than the belly, creating a darker band in the middle that is reminiscent of a bowtie, but which is technically not a bowtie (at least not the way that I understand the word). In other lighting conditions, the belly facets will reflect more brightly than the crushed ice regions.

A true bowtie appears when the pavilion facets in the belly form an angle that is near 90°, so that a light ray reflecting off those facets will bounce straight back (make a 180° turn). As a result, the observer (you, or your camera) will always see its own reflection, which is always blocking the light and hence causing the pavilion facets to appear dark (obstructed). If you have an unfortunate combination of facet angles, then the dark reflections will persist no matter how you tilt the diamond. Because of the shape of the apposing pavilion facets viewed through the diamond table, these dark reflections resemble a bow tie. Hence the name. But this is not what is happening in your oval.

So, moving forward, in addition to looking for ovals that do not have a (true) bowtie, you should look for ovals that have a minimal amount of crushed ice, and as much chunky facet coverage as possible.

 

[whitewave]

I think it is windowing because I can see melee through the diamond. (You can see the band)

 

[drk14]

Yes, good catch, some of the belly facets under the crown appear to have significant leakage at certain angles. However, while this will negatively affect light return from the belly area to be sure, this is not the main problem at hand IMO. Nonetheless, to avoid leakage issues in future purchases, OP should request ASET imaging of candidate stones.

 

[Siratoe]

I definitely see dirt in some of the pictures you posted on imgur (e.g., https://i.imgur.com/N1DwXCO.jpg).

The second picture in your latest post (with the ring on your pinky) is a much better picture of the diamond. It shows that in normal lighting, the oval has no bowtie to speak of. The facets in the belly are quite beautiful, and probably scintillate nicely when you tilt the ring back and forth.

However, what you and others in this thread are reacting to, is something different: The top and bottom thirds of the oval (everything above and below the belly region) are full of tiny, "crushed ice" facets, while the belly region has large, chunky/crisp facets. There is an abrupt transition between the the two types of faceting, which creates a contrast that can be jarring, and is unattractive to many PS members. In some lighting conditions (such as your original pictures with strong oblique lighting), the crushed ice will light up brighter than the belly, creating a darker band in the middle that is reminiscent of a bowtie, but which is technically not a bowtie (at least not the way that I understand the word). In other lighting conditions, the belly facets will reflect more brightly than the crushed ice regions.

A true bowtie appears when the pavilion facets in the belly form an angle that is near 90°, so that a light ray reflecting off those facets will bounce straight back (make a 180° turn). As a result, the observer (you, or your camera) will always see its own reflection, which is always blocking the light and hence causing the pavilion facets to appear dark (obstructed). If you have an unfortunate combination of facet angles, then the dark reflections will persist no matter how you tilt the diamond. Because of the shape of the apposing pavilion facets viewed through the diamond table, these dark reflections resemble a bow tie. Hence the name. But this is not what is happening in your oval.

So, moving forward, in addition to looking for ovals that do not have a (true) bowtie, you should look for ovals that have a minimal amount of crushed ice, and as much chunky facet coverage as possible.

I think you hit the nail on the head. It's clear now. Thanks!

 

[valeria101]

Could it be a quality issue instead of dirt?

No idea if in the wide world beyond PS it'd count as a feature or a flaw. SPECTACULARLY obvious in your oval ! Extreme ... There is such contrast between the broad reflections off the 'bow tie' region, and the minute pinfire off the ends. Everything seems to add up to a bright stone, if rather startlingly patterned.

It is unfortunate that the presentation of the stone (video etc.) could not convey the true nature of this diamond ... Not much of a 'technical achievment', so to speak.


Do you need some technical reason for returning the ring ?

___
Footnote:
Couldn't say I am in love with your diamond at first sight, but have met a few bow-ties that I do like ... as a Harlequin pattern of reflections. This love comes from a few unusual cut models developed for colored stones ... Frankly, the oval is so strongly bow-tied, I am intrigued how they've dunnit !

 

[Tourmaline]

I'm curious as to what makes you say that this is a well cut diamond. To me, it's far too shallow, and that's why you have crushed ice at the top and bottom, and enormous windows at the sides. It is not at all pleasant to look at. It also appears to be set crookedly. I would return the whole thing and start over.

 

[drk14]

I'm curious as to what makes you say that this is a well cut diamond.

This is the vendor's claim, not OP's. Apparently, BE has some (not very meaningful) cut grading algorithm that they use for marketing their diamonds. This is BE's definition of "cut":

"The cut refers to the angles and proportions of a diamond. The cut of a diamond—its depth and width, and the uniformity of the facets—determines its beauty. The skill with which a diamond is cut determines how well it reflects and refracts light."

So it sounds like BE's proprietary cut grade is computed based on some combination of proportions and symmetry grade? The oval at hand clearly demonstrates how misleading their cut grade can be.

 

[drk14]

I think you hit the nail on the head. It's clear now. Thanks!

Glad I could help you figure out what was happening with your stone. Assuming you are going to go go ahead with a replacement, below is my mini-tutorial for evaluating oval videos online:

Here's my take. In elongated shapes (oval, pear, marquise), the reflections off the facets and virtual facets (which is a reflection of part of a facet in one or more other facets) come in two flavors: on the one hand, broad/chunky/crisp reflections that arise from larger virtual facets and have not bounced around much within the diamond, and on the other hand, crushed ice type reflections that arise from very small virtual facets and have bounced around many times within the stone before the light reaches your eye. The latter type ("crushed ice") can be attractive (featuring a large number tiny twinkles, sometimes called "pinfire" reflection) or unattractive (which we call "mush"). Some people prefer one flavor of reflection over the other, but on PS, most posters steer shoppers towards the broad/chunk/crisp facet style. In part, this is because it is almost impossible to distinguish between "pinfire" crushed ice and "mushy" crushed ice using the tools we have available online (photos, video, ASET, etc.).

Most ovals have chunky facets in the belly region (the minor axis of the ellipse), and some degree of crushed ice to either side of the belly. The juxtaposition of the two light reflection styles can be jarring, and in any case, PS mostly prefers broader facets for reasons explained above. Therefore, I try to find ovals that have as much chunky/crisp light return as possible from the areas outside the belly, making sure that these broader virtual facets are evenly distributed across the face of the diamond. The key to this is to observe the diamond in motion, as it's being tilted a small amount (say +/- 30deg) around the face-up position. Look for virtual facets that turn on and off -- i.e., alternately reflect dark and light as the stone is tilted. Pay attention to how quickly the transition from dark to light (and vice versa) is, and/or how quickly the on-off flashing is repeated. Crisp or high-frequency transitions are desirable, especially if the virtual facet in question is reasonably large. When you've identified all such areas (having crisply flashing virtual facets that aren't tiny), then consider whether these "active" areas are evenly distributed. Commonly, this type of light return is found only in the belly region, but if you look through a large number of candidate stones, you can find those that have broad/chunky flashes distributed more evenly. These are the ones I look for.

 

[Matthews1127]

I am in the boat with drk14.
First, allow me to point out that the video was recorded on white background. The video plays visual tricks by hiding the chunky faceted affect using the white background.
The stone is the same, if you slow the video down, and rotate the angles to clearly view the belly; fat, chunky facets. I believe you may have been able to see the chunkiness on black background.
There are plenty of crushed ice facets surrounding the belly, which create an affect of "leakage". I don't believe there is leakage at all...only a difference of light return due to the way in which the stone is cut.
I'm the outlier in the conversation; I actually find your diamond intriguing. I'm curious to know how your stone flashes in natural sunlight. Larger, chunky facets throw off large flashes of rainbow light. In conjunction with the crushed ice, I bet that stone is crazy bright, and the large flashes together with the tiny scintillation would lead me to believe you have quite the light show.
However, YOU must be the judge, and determine what you believe is best.
If you decide to send it back, and start over, do not accept and purchase another diamond without examining it in person. This will prevent a repeat incident. Personally, in your case, CUT must be your priority. VG isn't good enough; you need Excellent Symmetry, and Excellent Polish. Your Cut MUST BE EXCELLENT. Otherwise, you're going to continue to have issues.
I'm sorry your are so disappointed. That's so heartbreaking.

 

[Siratoe]

Thank you everyone for your feedback. I feel I have learned just as much (if not more!) than what I researched before purchasing the ring. Clearly, there are a lot more factors that I did not consider.

I am planning on returning the ring and replacing it with another lab diamond from the same company. While I do recognize there are some unique features of the oval I purchased, I can no longer unsee the "flaws".

Unfortunately, I live outside the United States and therefore previewing the diamond in person is impossible. So far I have found only one viable replacement, and in addition to requesting aset imaging for the diamond, I'd appreciate it if you guys can let me know what you think:

https://www.brilliantearth.com/lab-diamonds-search/view_detail/4545196/

Thanks!

 

[valeria101]

Would BE provide an ASET or IS shot ? The video looks as promissing as the first - no humour intended.

I can't imagine why these stones are not the finest cut ! The rough might have its own unique quirks & limitations, but still ... isn't there enough ...

 

[valeria101]

You might wish to ask for an update on this piece of old-ish news - WWW

Who knows ...

 

[Tourmaline]

I cannot believe you are willing to spend so much on a man made stone! If it were 10% the cost of a natural one, I could understand, I suppose, but this seems like quite an expense for...what it is.

 

[drk14]

So far I have found only one viable replacement, and in addition to requesting aset imaging for the diamond, I'd appreciate it if you guys can let me know what you think:

https://www.brilliantearth.com/lab-diamonds-search/view_detail/4545196/

This one is a little better than the first -- the belly facets are not static, and the crushed ice zones flanking the belly do not extend all the way to the tips (i.e., you have a few chunky facets at the tips of the ovals).

Almost all ovals have some amount of crushed ice, and it is not easy to find an oval that minimizes the impact of the crushed ice zones. In my experience, I typically have to look through videos of 20-30 candidate stones to find one that has a decent distribution of chunky facets. Apparently, BE only has a single lab-created 1.5ct+ G+ oval in inventory at <$8k (namely, the one that you have posted). This suggests that your criteria are too strict for your budget (and/or that the vendor doesn't have access to a sufficiently large inventory).

 

[Kat01]

I think you hit the nail on the head. It's clear now. Thanks!

@Matthew1127 - would that be due to the main pavilion facets? It always seems to me as if an 8(b) main pavilion facet would intensify this look?

 

[Austina]

@Kat01 this thread is nearly 5 years old.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

@Matthew1127 - would that be due to the main pavilion facets? It always seems to me as if an 8(b) main pavilion facet would intensify this look?

This is a 5 year old thread.
But FYI - there are 2 types of bow tie and both are you the observer as the cause.
Wear a white shirt and a white beard and hair and most bow ties go away so they get less of a problem as we age - see my pic hahaha.
very deep pavilions create nailhead bow ties
The other type occur across a wide range of pavilion angles when wrong combo of crown angles get together. Table size has diddly squat to do with it.