Si2 stone with clouds. Was it a good deal?

[disco diamond]

Hi all! I bought my diamond from a brick and mortar over 10 years ago. It is a round cut (I was told it was a star 129,but have no documentation on that), 1.013 carat F/SI2 ideal cut 0. It is ags certified with comments of having a medium blue fluorescence, with comments: 'The clarity grade of this diamond is partly based on clouds not shown. Surface graining is not shown'. It scored very high for white light, high-very high for colored light, and high in scintillation on the gemex report.

I love my diamond, but I do remember seeing one or two clouds when we looked under the microscope. I compared it to many other diamonds, narrowed it down to two, and eventually went with this one. I've always just kind of acknowledged that it was possibly slightly cloudy or milky in certain angles, especially if dirty, and it never really bothered me, but I really had nothing to compare it to.

Recently, I bought a cz ring to wear due to frequent hand sanitizing at work. When compared to the cz, my stone is very comparable in almost every way, but I had always thought it was possibly cloudy? I dug in some more and only now have been reading up on all the warning signs of SI2 diamonds with comments about clarity grade being based on clouds, and seeing that most recommend to stay away from those due to cloudiness or light performance issues.

I am wondering if you guys can give me your opinion on whether I bought a decent stone or not and mostly whether it is considered cloudy or milky. I can't give information on the clouds i saw because it was over a decade ago, and I barely remember, but I can share pictures of the ring.




Here is the ring


Cz ring is at the top,my ring on bottom

Thanks for any input!

 

[gm89uk]

The warning is primarily for internet shoppers, they can be very milky indeed. If you are happy with the inclusions in person, it's a none issue

 

[disco diamond]

When I bought this ring 14 years ago, I had very little experience and knowledge. I was somehow under the impression that clouds were normal/acceptable, a non issue for some reason. If I had known then what I know now, and how important clarity is versus color, I probably would have passed on this stone due to the clouds I recall the jeweler showing me.

The stone fit my budget in terms of carat size, budget, and especially because I loved the cut, which for some reason, I had been led to believe was a star 129, but I see no documentation for that (I'll ask for confirmation at my next inspection) . I definitely overpaid for the stone by at least $1,000-1,500. It had a fantastic gemex report, so I had never considered I could be buying a milky or cloudy stone. The store lights made everything look fantastic! And like I said, the ideal cut of this stone really set it apart from the other available stones in my budget and desired carat size.

I always noticed the blue fluorescence in daylight, and a slightly milky hue from that, but now that I have the cz to compare it to, I see that even a flawless, colorless cz can look milky at angles, which gives me hope and faith that a reputable family owned jeweler would not carry or sell a cloudy stone.

I guess my question is whether a stone can be considered to be cloudy with the cut quality and high light return from the reports my stone received. I could always upgrade, but I'm not dissatisfied enough with the stone yet. I just want peace of mind now, that I did not in fact buy a cloudy stone. I understand it's difficult to judge just from online pictures of phone quality and from gemstone reports, but I am just hoping someone might have some experience or input,given that the stone performed well in light return despite the fact that it is an si2 clarity with clouds not shown.

I also learned that cloudiness is especially a concern if the plot was clean. In my laymen opinion, my plot does not look clean, but I am untrained with little experience. Any input would be appreciated.

 

[Karl_K]

The report says round brilliant so its not a star 129.
Without looking at it in person it is hard to make a call on if it appears cloudy or not based on random pictures.
You have loved it for 14 years so my advise is just continue to love it.
If it were really bad you would know it by now.

 

[MakingTheGrade]

I have a diamond that is SI1 based on clouds, that was described as “ideal” cut but given that it’s a fancy gray diamond, the gia report didn’t have the usual info on angles.

loose diamonds, fancy color, gray, round cut, 3.11 carat si1 clarity sku 8508692

8508692 - This Round Cut 3.11 Carat GRAY Color SI1 Clarity has a diamond grading report from GIA

www.jamesallen.com

I don’t notice any cloudiness except on certain sunny days when the angle is just right and then it does look stormy but 1) I kind of Iike that and 2) it’s so infrequent as to not matter. I’ve only ever gotten compliments on it.

I think most people warn against it because there can be a lot of variance in cloudiness which you won’t be able to tell based on videos and photos (in my case they would have needed to show me a video in sunlight) And returning diamonds can be a stressful and expensive thing!

I wouldn’t hesitate about your stone being mind clean if you’ve loved how it looks. Just consider it a good deal! I certainly wouldn’t have been able to afford mine if not for the “clouds”.

 

[Lookinagain]

The report says round brilliant so its not a star 129.
Without looking at it in person it is hard to make a call on if it appears cloudy or not based on random pictures.
You have loved it for 14 years so my advise is just continue to love it.
If it were really bad you would know it by now.

I agree with this. You don't say what you will do if someone tells you it is a "cloudy" stone. Would you get sell it and buy another? If not, then I honestly don't know what either a yes or no answer as to whether it's cloudy or not, will get you. If it is cloudy and you would then upgrade, that's a different story, but you say you aren't dissatisfied enough to do that. So as @Karl_K says, you've been happy for years, why search for information that might change that?

 

[DejaWiz]

If you have any doubts about your diamond, still, after all these years, then my advice would be to find a local jeweler that has a similar size/diameter AGS000 diamond on-hand with the same (or better) color, at least VS clarity, no grade-setting clouds or twinning wisps, and with negligible fluorescence so that you can compare them side by side in a variety of lighting conditions.
That will tell you all you need to know.

 

[musicloveranthony]

If you have any doubts about your diamond, still, after all these years, then my advice would be to find a local jeweler that has a similar size/diameter AGS000 diamond on-hand with the same (or better) color, at least VS clarity, no grade-setting clouds or twinning wisps, and with negligible fluorescence so that you can compare them side by side in a variety of lighting conditions.
That will tell you all you need to know.

That's a great suggestion

 

[disco diamond]

Thanks everyone! That's a great idea, DejaWiz!

If my stone is cloudy, I'd indeed upgrade it. I bought it from Arthur's Jewelers in Roseville, MN and they have a great diamond upgrade policy. I'm just a little disappointed that this whole time, I had thought this was a star 129! And then on top of that, to understand now that the stone may have haziness or cloudiness also. I had wanted this as my forever ring. At the time I purchased it, I was just proud of the shine, but if my stone has notably compromised clarity due to the clouds I saw, I'd definitely be motivated to upgrade to the biggest my setting can accommodate, and definitely a clearer stone. Thanks for all your input. At the end of the day, I still love it. I'm going to start looking into Arthur's inventory and prices and compare the next time I go in. Thanks again!

 

[disco diamond]

Does anyone happen to know if a cloudy stone cam have high to very high light return though?

 

[DejaWiz]

Does anyone happen to know if a cloudy stone cam have high to very high light return though?

Eh, with diamonds almost anything is a possibility but probability favors that clarity-setting clouds will have some degree of impact on transparency and light return...one thing most PS'ers urge to shoppers is always avoid diamonds that have "clarity based on clouds not shown" (or similar wording) on the grading report.

 

[musicloveranthony]

From the pictures it doesn't look notably milky. From the light return reports it doesn't look to have any issues. Might be worth bringing in to the store and asking them to see one of the best stones they have and compare the two.

 

[disco diamond]

I'm definitely going to have to do that, @musicloveranthony. I know my stone is not going to be flawless, being an SI2, but I just want to be sure it's not notably hazy compared to non cloud inclusions. I think I need that for extra peace of mind, now that I've gone digging lol. I checked the online inventory at Arthur's and they don't have much. Hopefully they have more in store, but if my stone is only a bit hazy, I can live with that. Ive only ever received compliments, and it's shinier than the average stones I've seen on my friends, but I've never done a close up look or comparison, so just feel a little uneasy now. Thanks for the feedback!

 

[DejaWiz]

I've only ever received compliments, and it's shinier than the average stones I've seen on my friends, but I've never done a close up look or comparison, so just feel a little uneasy now.

Your diamond has beautiful proportions and angles: 40.8/35.2/55.7 combo with a nice tall 15.7 crown height - great example of the power of AGS Ideal cut quality!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

It's the fluorescence combined with SI2 clouds that would likely make it look hazy. However, how often are you looking at your stone in UV lighting? Your setting won't take a stone much bigger than the one you have, and upgrading clarity alone will cost you a good bit of money, and most of the time, you won't see a difference! It's great that you chose a well cut stone in the first place!

 

[disco diamond]

Your diamond has beautiful proportions and angles: 40.8/35.2/55.7 combo with a nice tall 15.7 crown height - great example of the power of AGS Ideal cut quality!

Thank you. Definitely what I do love about it, and why I hope the clarity isn't as compromised as I fear by those darn clouds. It is a little hazy, but also super sparkly so it's definitely a toss up for now. I'm not experienced. It is a little more hazy on the edges than my cz, but it's also taller so I wonder if that's why.

 

[disco diamond]

It's the fluorescence combined with SI2 clouds that would likely make it look hazy. However, how often are you looking at your stone in UV lighting? Your setting won't take a stone much bigger than the one you have, and upgrading clarity alone will cost you a good bit of money, and most of the time, you won't see a difference! It's great that you chose a well cut stone in the first place!

That's very true. Thank you for the reminder. One can sometimes get a little fanatic, thinking about specs and the perfect diamond. I agree that I might miss this stone, and the better clarity might be negligible. I won't stress too much about it for now.

 

[jp201845]

Your diamond has beautiful proportions and angles: 40.8/35.2/55.7 combo with a nice tall 15.7 crown height - great example of the power of AGS Ideal cut quality!

I would rather have a 40.6 Pavillion angle with a 35 plus crown. There is a very good thread by @sledge that explains in detail why a 34.5/40.8 combo could possibly be a dud without advanced images but that was a GIA graded report which is very broad. The stone in question in this thread has an AGS report which is alot safer.

Why Advanced Images Matter...A Bad 34.5/40.8...

I'm just as guilty as anyone. Helping someone find a stone and run across one with that 34.5/40.8 combo. You smile. You then run through the rest of the proportions.... 57 table, 61.7 depth, 75 LGF's, 50 stars and medium-slightly thick girdle....check, check, check,check and check You...

www.pricescope.com

 

[DejaWiz]

I would rather have a 40.6 Pavillion angle with a 35 plus crown. There is a very good thread by @sledge that explains in detail why a 34.5/40.8 combo could possibly be a dud without advanced images but that was a GIA graded report which is very broad. The stone in question in this thread has an AGS report which is alot safer.

Why Advanced Images Matter...A Bad 34.5/40.8...

I'm just as guilty as anyone. Helping someone find a stone and run across one with that 34.5/40.8 combo. You smile. You then run through the rest of the proportions.... 57 table, 61.7 depth, 75 LGF's, 50 stars and medium-slightly thick girdle....check, check, check,check and check You...

www.pricescope.com

Sledge's point was that ANY diamond (regardless of angles) *could* be a dud, so always ask for advanced images.
It's not specifically the 40.8/34.5 angles...those are smack-dab within excellent/ideal grade from any trustworthy grading lab and probably one of the safest combos. The diamond that he found to make that thread about was a very rare exception that ended up being a dud.

 

[ringo865]

The clouds only partially contributed to the clarity grade. Perhaps there were too many small clouds to plot, at any rate, it appears from mere photos that the clouds are NOT the grade setting inclusion, merely contributed to them. So… when looking at the pics with the CZ, you can immediately tell that the diamond is better cut than the CZ and that makes it *to me* look better by miles. Like DS said above though, perhaps when the fluorescence is activated, you “may” be able to see more signs of the clouds (milky, hazy, oily), but in real life, who is sitting under bright UV light anyway.

I’d say, keep that sucker clean and enjoy your ring. It is lovely.

eta, my brother got my SIL’s ring at Arthurs in Roseville. And in the olden/golden days loved to eat at “old Mexico” but will now settle for Keys when I’m in the area ;0