Small cut/chip on diamond girdle - do not see it on the GIA report

[DoodlesLife]

I want to thank everyone who participates in this forum - I learned more than I would've ever imagined about diamonds! This is my first post so please let me know if I am not posting it to the right thread.

After searching and researching yellow diamonds for months, it seemed like I found the one - GIA report 2175225056. I know may not be perfect, but the price was reasonable and it's everything I was looking for, so I decided to purchase it.

Report:

GIA - Report Check

www.gia.edu

I received the ring today, and it is gourgeous. However, after a loupe examination, I found a small cut/chip on the side of the stone, which I can feel with my nails. I reached out to the jeweler, and they are telling me that it is an open feather, so nothing to worry about. Here's the problem: maybe I am not correct, but it was my understanding that GIA grades feathers as feathers if they don’t break to the surface, and if the feather is open to the surface, then it would be graded as cavity/etc. and marked green. I don’t see any of that on the GIA report - all the feathers are red.

Am I wrong? Can feathers break to the surface although they are red on the report?

I absolutely love the ring, so I really don't want to return it. But I am worried about the structural integrity of the stone.


Here's the photo of the chip:

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yes, feathers can break the surface and are graded as feathers. The very thick to extremely thick girdle will make the stone face up smaller for it's weight.

 

[yssie]

I have most definitely seen GIA plot feathers that reach the surface in red. I own such a stone, in fact, and my appraiser - who is very well-respected here on PS - confirmed this was what I was seeing when I purchased.
It was the right stone for the right project for me, I wouldn't recommend such a stone to anyone else outside of extremely exceptional circumstances!

The thing about GIA grading is... It's done by humans, and those humans are located all around the world. And feathers are particularly gnarly to grade. In general - don't expect 100% adherence 100% of the time to the letter of the GIA law (if you can even find the letter of the GIA law).

 

[DoodlesLife]

Yes, feathers can break the surface and are graded as feathers. The very thick to extremely thick girdle will make the stone face up smaller for it's weight.

Thanks so much. I'm not worried about how big it looks - my budget was for 1 carat, so anything over was a bonus

 

[DoodlesLife]

I have most definitely seen GIA plot feathers that reach the surface in red. I own such a stone, in fact, and my appraiser - who is very well-respected here on PS - confirmed this was what I was seeing when I purchased.
It was the right stone for the right project for me, I wouldn't recommend such a stone to anyone else outside of extremely exceptional circumstances!

The thing about GIA grading is... It's done by humans, and those humans are located all around the world. And feathers are particularly gnarly to grade. In general - don't expect 100% adherence 100% of the time to the letter of the GIA law (if you can even find the letter of the GIA law).

Ok so I'm glad the jeweler knows what he is talking about. Are you saying that this inclusion is something I should be worried about?

 

[yssie]

Can I ask where you got the stone? Have you seen it in different lighting environments?

I read Fancy Grayish Greenish Yellow with medium blue fluorescence and my first thought is that you'll want to get trusted eyes on this stone before your return period is up, to make sure it doesn't go "swampy" in sunlight.

I personally would never purchase or recommend a stone with a surface-breaking inclusion for a regular-wear ring, crown or pavilion. There are always other options. For earrings, or for a pendant, the calculus is different - those pieces don't see the sort of wear and tear that a ring (that will be worn often) does.

 

[DoodlesLife]

Can I ask where you got the stone? Have you seen it in different lighting environments?

I read Fancy Grayish Greenish Yellow with medium blue fluorescence and my first thought is that you'll want to get trusted eyes on this stone before your return period is up, to make sure it doesn't go "swampy" in sunlight.

I personally would never purchase or recommend a stone with a surface-breaking inclusion for a regular-wear ring, crown or pavilion. There are so many other options. For earrings, or for a pendant, the calculus is different - those pieces don't see the sort of wear and tear that a ring (that will be worn often) does.

I got it from rockher.com website. It was delivered this morning, and it was as sparkly in the sunlight as it is right now under the electric light. I'll definitely take a closer look tomorrow.

Thank you for the advice, I'll search for a certified jeweler around me and will ask what they think of it. I didn't think these inclusions were large enough for me to worry about, but again, I didn't realize they would be on the surface.

 

[yssie]

I'll search for a certified jeweler around me and will ask what they think of it

If you go to a jeweller who sells stones - they're incentivized to encourage you to return this one and sell you one of their own stones, yes? This will not be objective.

Search for an independent appraiser in your area.

Appraisers Archive

If you're looking for a trustworthy jeweler then you've found the right place. We have compiled a comprehensive lists of jewelers all over the world.

www.pricescope.com

 

[DoodlesLife]

If you go to a jeweller who sells stones - they're incentivized to encourage you to return this one and sell you one of their own stones, yes? This will not be objective.

Search for an independent appraiser in your area.

Appraisers Archive

If you're looking for a trustworthy jeweler then you've found the right place. We have compiled a comprehensive lists of jewelers all over the world.

www.pricescope.com

Haha that’s a great point. I won’t do that then

 

[marymm]

I would consider that diamond to be at great risk of further damage with just ordinary wear. Although it seems like a great deal price-wise, it is priced that way because it is a dicey diamond. [This is my opinion]

 

[ringo865]

Can you post a pic of the GIA document?

 

[John Pollard]

Here's a link to the grading report.

First of all - what a unique stone. I immediately want to see it!

I absolutely love the ring, so I really don't want to return it. But I am worried about the structural integrity of the stone.

That comment in red is very important to me.

The thing about GIA grading is... It's done by humans, and those humans are located all around the world. And feathers are particularly gnarly to grade. In general - don't expect 100% adherence 100% of the time to the letter of the GIA law (if you can even find the letter of the GIA law).

100% and 100% - and while I am inclined to agree that surface-breakers should be carefully considered in daily-wear pieces, the grader made a 'statement' by naming the Twinning Wisp as the grade-setting characteristic. In essence, the feather/s are considered less influential. Just be sure to insure the ring - even the most flawless diamond can chip or break if struck the wrong way. #cleavageplanes #mothernature

Thanks so much. I'm not worried about how big it looks - my budget was for 1 carat, so anything over was a bonus

Okay. That informs my only "cup half empty" statement. At 6.25 mm average spread this little sparkler faces up with the physical spread of a well-cut 0.90 carat round brilliant. So while "1.50+" carats might sound nice to say, it should be kept in context.

I read Fancy Grayish Greenish Yellow with medium blue fluorescence and my first thought is that you'll want to get trusted eyes on this stone before your return period is up, to make sure it doesn't go "swampy" in sunlight.

It sounds like you've checked it out - but @yssie makes a great point. The UV in sunlight will activate the blue fluorescence present - and you do need to see how that impacts both the coloration and transparency of the diamond material. Man, do I want to see it in person.

I also see this comment: <<Additional twinning wisps, clouds and surface graining are not shown.>> The good news is that "not shown" is supposed to mean they are non-factors. With that said, many experts have been disappointed in GIA SI (and even VS) grading where the diamond has this comment but the transparency is compromised to some degree.

Therefore...

Search for an independent appraiser in your area.

I agree. This is a unique case. I'd absolutely be interested in what an independent expert, who doesn't sell diamonds, has to say.

Considering that you (a) love the ring (b) accept the weight/size discrepancy and (c) it passes your sniff tests - it may not be necessary, but you might be interested in what you'd learn.

 

[Demon]

I would love to see more pictures of it, too.

 

[Lakefront]

GIA does grade feathers that break the surface but what you have is a chip that occurred at the feather. This would not have been graded strictly as a feather. From a single photo, it looks to be damage that occurred after the diamond was graded.
Depending on the other inclusions and the general clarity, that chip may become the grade setter and lower your clarity grade.
Keep it if you love it. Just know that further damage can occur at that chip AND that you may have a lower clarity stone than you paid for. Good luck!

 

[Lakefront]

Looking at the cert, this chip won’t lower your overall clarity. The certificate is pretty old (2015) so I’d bet a lot that that chip occurred since that time. You can have it recerted, as you might want to do to keep things updated (for insurance etc), but it probably won’t change the grade. Your jeweler is definitely trying to sell you a chipped stone, so just know that going in.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Firstly, please folks, don't recommend people look at diamonds in sunlight. Diamonds do strange things in strong direct sunlight.
Do it for fun, but never for analysis.
Secondly, you can feel things with your finger nail that are sometimes too small to see with a loupe.
Thirdly, in that halo setting the stone is reasonably well protected and the girdle is substantial and not likely to suffer any damage.

 

[John Pollard]

Firstly, please folks, don't recommend people look at diamonds in sunlight. Diamonds do strange things in strong direct sunlight.
Do it for fun, but never for analysis.
Secondly, you can feel things with your finger nail that are sometimes too small to see with a loupe.
Thirdly, in that halo setting the stone is reasonably well protected and the girdle is substantial and not likely to suffer any damage.

I generally agree with all of that.

To me the sunlight view is always key however - not for analysis per se, but because I live in Texas and my wife (and I) are obsessed with various “sun sparkle” we get to see, whether outside by the swimming pool (amazing) walking under trees in the park (filtered light show) and -gasp- when she is driving … I have told her to stop that, but #distracting

I’d also caution the OP from taking anything being said as “gospel” without verification. The physical spread factor I mentioned is simple math. It’s reliable data. Beyond that there’s a lot of speculation - some of it stated as fact. Remember we are a bunch of folks who are making interpretations from a photo and your descriptions.

 

[yssie]

Firstly, please folks, don't recommend people look at diamonds in sunlight. Diamonds do strange things in strong direct sunlight.
Do it for fun, but never for analysis.
Secondly, you can feel things with your finger nail that are sometimes too small to see with a loupe.
Thirdly, in that halo setting the stone is reasonably well protected and the girdle is substantial and not likely to suffer any damage.

A diamond with this colour profile, a new buyer will definitely want trusted eyes on this thing in every lighting environment one might encounter. For analysis, not just for fun.

If you can feel it, it’s there, and something else - lotion, hair, the edge of a nail file, dirt - can get in too. There are just too many diamonds out there for me to actively recommend settling for buying one with surface-breaching inclusions. Outside of exceptional circumstances. If you create your own chips over decades of use, well, that’s on you, at least you started with a clean slate and gave yourself the opportunity to not damage your stone.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I generally agree with all of that.
To me the sunlight view is always key however - not for analysis per se, but because I live in Texas and my wife (and I) are obsessed with various “sun sparkle” we get to see, Great - that is for fun whether outside by the swimming pool (amazing) walking under trees in the park (filtered light show) The very best and better still on a cloudy day because there seems to be more point light sources and -gasp- when she is driving Again - for fun - and even better in an aeroplane - never understood why - but the sparkles on the walls and ceiling!!!… I have told her to stop that, but #distracting

Thanks John,
Not for analysis is the key here.
The best cut colorless diamonds look dark in strong direct sunlight.
It causes a lot of confusion to new diamond owners.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I say look at diamonds - especially coloured diamonds - in every lighting condition available. Because you’re going to be seeing your diamond in every lighting condition out there so you’d better not hate it in certain lighting types! A diamond with this colour profile, especially… You definitely want trusted eyes on this thing in every lighting environment you might encounter.

This works for a diamond with this cut because it is not cut for maximum brilliance Yssie.
But for 90% of the well cut diamonds folk around here end up buying it is very very bad advice and I would love everyone who offers help here to understand it.
For example most of the blue effect tahe people see in their fluorescent diamonds in sunlight is the blue sky.
Here is a link to my old article:

SOME GOOD DIAMONDS LOOK DARK IN SUNLIGHT

Some good white diamonds look dark in direct sunlight. Yellow diamonds look great in sunlight but white diamonds look best in shaded lighting.

www.hollowaydiamonds.com.au

 

[yssie]

This works for a diamond with this cut because it is not cut for maximum brilliance Yssie.
But for 90% of the well cut diamonds folk around here end up buying it is very very bad advice and I would love everyone who offers help here to understand it.
For example most of the blue effect tahe people see in their fluorescent diamonds in sunlight is the blue sky.
Here is a link to my old article:

SOME GOOD DIAMONDS LOOK DARK IN SUNLIGHT

Some good white diamonds look dark in direct sunlight. Yellow diamonds look great in sunlight but white diamonds look best in shaded lighting.

www.hollowaydiamonds.com.au

Agree

 

[DoodlesLife]

Wow thank you all for your input! I didn't get a single email about this so replying just now.

100% and 100% - and while I am inclined to agree that surface-breakers should be carefully considered in daily-wear pieces, the grader made a 'statement' by naming the Twinning Wisp as the grade-setting characteristic. In essence, the feather/s are considered less influential. Just be sure to insure the ring - even the most flawless diamond can chip or break if struck the wrong way. #cleavageplanes #mothernature

This is what I am most likely going to do. It puts my mind at ease and if it breaks, at minimum I'd get my money back.

Okay. That informs my only "cup half empty" statement. At 6.25 mm average spread this little sparkler faces up with the physical spread of a well-cut 0.90 carat round brilliant. So while "1.50+" carats might sound nice to say, it should be kept in context.

The recipient does not like round or princess cut (or oval, or pear, or marquise, or emerald...), and mentioned that cushion is preferred. Wasn't much of a choice, was it

I agree. This is a unique case. I'd absolutely be interested in what an independent expert, who doesn't sell diamonds, has to say.

I found an independent appraiser (a certified gemologist) who lives 30 min away from me, and was going to call her today. I'm very curious myself.

Your jeweler is definitely trying to sell you a chipped stone, so just know that going in.

That is what I am afraid of, so hopefully paying an appraiser to look at this will clear this one out. It is located exactly where a feather is shown on the grading report (even the smaller feathers next to it and underneath it check out). Very confusing.

Thirdly, in that halo setting the stone is reasonably well protected and the girdle is substantial and not likely to suffer any damage.

This is music to my ears it is also set in a yellow gold basket, which seems to be adding not just to color intensity but also some additional protection.


And FINALLY, here's the star of the show. I might be a little biased because I like the ring, but I'm yet to see a situation when it doesn't sparkle. In the sunlight I see some sparkles as blue, but in my opinion it only adds to the diamond (a sparkle nonetheless!). The feather is also completely invisible to the naked eye (i.e. my eye, which I wouldn't trust since my eyesight is not 100%). I was only able to see it because of a loupe.
My hands are much bigger, but wanted to show it with the wedding band - the ring was custom-made to fit it.

 

[denverappraiser]

That's a feather. Feathers, by definition, always reach the surface. Purely internal things like that are called crystals on the plotting diagrams. Feathers are plotted in red.

 

[Demon]

Wow thank you all for your input! I didn't get a single email about this so replying just now.



This is what I am most likely going to do. It puts my mind at ease and if it breaks, at minimum I'd get my money back.



The recipient does not like round or princess cut (or oval, or pear, or marquise, or emerald...), and mentioned that cushion is preferred. Wasn't much of a choice, was it



I found an independent appraiser (a certified gemologist) who lives 30 min away from me, and was going to call her today. I'm very curious myself.




That is what I am afraid of, so hopefully paying an appraiser to look at this will clear this one out. It is located exactly where a feather is shown on the grading report (even the smaller feathers next to it and underneath it check out). Very confusing.



This is music to my ears it is also set in a yellow gold basket, which seems to be adding not just to color intensity but also some additional protection.


And FINALLY, here's the star of the show. I might be a little biased because I like the ring, but I'm yet to see a situation when it doesn't sparkle. In the sunlight I see some sparkles as blue, but in my opinion it only adds to the diamond (a sparkle nonetheless!). The feather is also completely invisible to the naked eye (i.e. my eye, which I wouldn't trust since my eyesight is not 100%). I was only able to see it because of a loupe.
My hands are much bigger, but wanted to show it with the wedding band - the ring was custom-made to fit it.

Love it!!

 

[Wink]

I was just coming to say that feathers, by definition, reach the surface. As frequently happens, Neil beat me to it.

Most importantly, I want to say I absolutely love the ring. What a beauty.

Wink

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Plus two - when there is a green and red that means a chunk is missing at the surface. Your stone does not have the green.

 

[DoodlesLife]

Thank you for clearing up what feathers mean - very good to know for the future

I just got back from the appraiser, and while she said it is slightly weird that GIA marked it that way, the feather is exactly where it is supposed to be and there's no indication that there was anything done by the jeweler. Great news to me!

She also said she wouldn't worry about it integrity-wise, but it is a good idea to get the insurance nonetheless. The report should be ready by next week.

Overall it was definitely worth the trip - thank you all for advising me to do that!

 

[John Pollard]

I just got back from the appraiser, and while she said it is slightly weird that GIA marked it that way, the feather is exactly where it is supposed to be and there's no indication that there was anything done by the jeweler. Great news to me!

Great news, indeed! And I wholeheartedly agree on securing jewelry-specific insurance for any diamond that's worn regularly.

Overall it was definitely worth the trip - thank you all for advising me to do that!

Kudos to you for making the effort. Also worth noting - while there's no better online resource than PriceScope - certain Qs are better resolved with in-person assessment - no matter how much we may try to scratch and sniff our computer monitors.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Thank you for clearing up what feathers mean - very good to know for the future

I just got back from the appraiser, and while she said it is slightly weird that GIA marked it that way, the feather is exactly where it is supposed to be and there's no indication that there was anything done by the jeweler. Great news to me!

She also said she wouldn't worry about it integrity-wise, but it is a good idea to get the insurance nonetheless. The report should be ready by next week.

Overall it was definitely worth the trip - thank you all for advising me to do that!

if you were happy with your appraiser - is he she they on this list?

Appraisers Archive

If you're looking for a trustworthy jeweler then you've found the right place. We have compiled a comprehensive lists of jewelers all over the world.

www.pricescope.com

If any one has good or bad experiences with appraisers let Admin know or post here as they are vital folk and the range of skills can be excellent or bad, just like diamonds!

 

[DoodlesLife]

Great news, indeed! And I wholeheartedly agree on securing jewelry-specific insurance for any diamond that's worn regularly.


Kudos to you for making the effort. Also worth noting - while there's no better online resource than PriceScope - certain Qs are better resolved with in-person assessment - no matter how much we may try to scratch and sniff our computer monitors.

This reminded me of an April fools joke Google pulled off a few years ago - telling people to sniff their monitor, and they made it look so official!