Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Thoughts on this 1.14ct I SI1 RB stone

S

SweetJimmy

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
15
Hi,

Long time lurker, first time poster. Wondering if I could get your opinion on this stone. I've attached the relevant GIA stats from the lab report.

cert_image.jpg

Just in case image doesn't go through: Table (56%), Depth (62.4%), Crown Angle (36 degrees), Pavilion Angle (40.6 degrees)

hca.jpg

This is what I know...I called the dealer to have them check on the eye cleanliness of the inclusions. They said the stone was eye clean. I also punched in the depth, table, crown angle and pavilion angle stats into the HCA calculator (sweet tool BTW) and it returns a 1.8 - FIC. On the calculator it shows this stone falling withing the GIA Excellent Cut range (to be expected given the certificate and all) and it also falls into the AGS 0 Cut range.

So I'm thinking I've got myself an eye-clean GIA Ex/Ex/Ex that would also qualify as an AGS 0/0/0 with an HCA below 2 that is a FIC! From what I've read FICs are significantly more rare than TICs. Beauty wise, it would be a matter of personal taste, but BICs, TICs and FICs are the cream of the crop, so I'm quite happy with that if not extremely happy for being able to find a more rare FIC that falls in both the GIA and AGS top cut ranges.

So...my question is, am I missing anything?

No, I haven't taken delivery of the stone yet, so I haven't laid eyes on it. So there is that concern that the dealer has the eye-clean clarity wrong. But let's assume it is eye-clean for now.

Extremely Painted or Dug-out girdles would have been caught by the GIA and downgraded appropriately I believe. So I think I'm okay there.

Am I getting hosed on the crown or pavilion angles due to GIA rounding? I guess I won't know until I get a SARIN report. So let's assume angle measurement accuracy for now.

Am I getting a discount on the Fiery Ideal Cut aspect since it's not TIC? I understand spread is dinged a little due to steeper crown angles. But this stone is still a "Very Good" in terms of spread on the HCA. And it garners "Excellent" in both Light Return and Fire. Only "Very Good" in Scintillation.

Is the 62.4% Depth to deep for your liking? Maybe a little outside the very strict AGA range? Perhaps. But it still falls in the GIA and AGS top cut ranges, so I would say no big deal. You?

Price-wise, this was around $5,250 afer PS discount from dealer. But get this...paying the non-PS discounted price from dealer and using www.topcashback.com I was able to spend $5,325 and apply a 7% discount instead. So that's $4,952.25 net on the CC. Bank wire transfer would have netted another 2% or so, but I will stick with the CC purchase protection on this one.

Did I pick a winner? Can you even find anything like this today at this weight and with these stats for below $5k?

Thanks for your thoughts. Much appreciation in advance.

SJ
 
I think it looks good. The only think I'd be concerned about would be that big spot in the middle of the stone which I bet is right on top of the table. I'd make sure it's 100% eye clean.
 
Please get an Ideal Scope picture.
 
Looking into getting an IS image from dealer. Stone to arrive at dealer's office on Wednesday. Will post back once I get it.
 
Looks like a nice FIC on paper... the 36/40.6 should be a nice combo. Like the others noted, make sure you're ok with the spot on top before you pull the trigger.
 
Thanks for the comments leeac, JulieN, 04diamond<3. On paper, I'm quite pleased. Also, big thanks to the PS community. Lots of research here led me to this stone. I compared against many others but only posted this one up here for your opinion. I'm glad to see that (on paper) what I've chosen is up to your standards (pending IS image and additional inclusion assessment.)

Also, I just spoke with the rep at the dealer and they assured me that the earlier inclusion assessment from the wholesaler (i.e. it is eye-clean) is likely a true assessment (since the wholesaler would not want to tarnish their reputation by giving bad first hand reporting) but that he will check again when the stone arrives since one person's perception can be different from another's.

I will update again once I get confirmation back from the dealer from their gemologist. IS image to follow as well.

Thanks,

SJ
 
Hi again,

The dealer received the stone today from the wholesaler/supplier. They were not able to get IS images for me. Apparently, the supplier did not have an IS on them. I'm guessing this stone came from India or somewhere thereabouts. Pure speculation though. Oh well. The good news however was that they were able to take a picture of the stone. I've attached it below.

stone_image.jpg

A couple things I asked their in house gemologist (with answers):

- Is the stone eye-clean? (answer: 100% eye-clean)
- What is the yellow/brown hue in the table in the 3-6 o clock positions? (answer: lighting issue, the stone is close to colorless)

My concerns, as was all of yours, were the location and magnitude of the inclusions. After having their gemologist take another peek and agreeing on the eye-cleanliness of it, I feel much better. But of course, I'd love to hear what you all think as well. Some things I've read since we last discussed were that the cut can make a huge difference on the visibility of inclusions. In this case, I think I crushed it with the cut. So hopefully this further "dilutes" the clarity issue (if there were any, since the gemologist insists on 100% eye-cleanliness on this stone.)

Also, with SI1s, I've read that a small singular inclusion in an SI1 usually indicates that it does stand out quite a bit whereas a more spread out set of inclusions generally indicates that they are more likely to be eye-clean and that it is the amount of inclusions that is potentially impacting the clarity rating. I feel (hope perhaps?) that I fall into that second category of SI1s here. Of course I've not seen thousands of loose stones and do not have the relative knowledge and memory of what makes an eye-clean SI1.

Would love to hear your thoughts...again. Thanks in advance...again.

SJ
 
it is leakage, I assume it is not as bad as it looks. I personally do not like this angle combo with fat arrows, some people do. How much is it?

Oh, I see the price now. For 5K, it looks good.
 
Hi JulieN,

Thanks for the continued insight.

I understand that the 75% LGF is what is causing the "fat" arrows. From my research here on PS it appears that the "pros" seem to prefer an LGF% closer to 80 or so. The effect being that a brighter white is displayed in a brighter light scenario however coming with the tradeoff of less potential fire in a lower light scenario.

I've also come to understand that the 75% LGF in this stone is within a 2.5%-3.5% range of the central numbers used in the GIA and AGS grading process (https://www.pricescope.com/communit...rdle-length-affect-face-up-performance.87181/). While this stone is on the lower side of the range, it is not "extreme" right (i.e. <70% or >85%)?

I've also read that the potential difference can be described as the stone having a different flavor/personality. And thus we're talking about a matter of personal preference as well. After all, this is an FIC we're talking about here. I would almost expect the stone to lean towards having more intense fire as an FIC v. a BIC. Perhaps this FIC will live up to its HCA designation?

I was hoping that the only issues with this stone might be something minor as personal preference in regards to the LGF%. It still seems to be within a reasonable LGF% range I hope. And thanks for the confirmation on the pricing. I did not expect this to be a super-ideal-signature-hearts-and-arrows-on-fire-tolkowsky-leo-brian-gavin-blue-ACA-what-have-you diamond with premium pricing to boot. But I am quite relieved that it's just a secondary measurement that we are scrutinizing, that it's a potential matter of preference and that it looks good for the price.

I really appreciate your time and thoughts,

SJ
 
There is no one set of proportions that will be best for all environments. you might like a Tolk better in some, and the 1.14 better in others.

It's worth checking out in person if the vendor has a good return policy, check if one side (third) of the stone looks different than the other 2/3. If the action is even and symmetric about the center, then it is ok.
 
So I called my dealer and explained to him about the James Allen stone. And since they're both located in NYC, I asked them to send a runner out to get the other stone and to have their in house gemologist compare the two for me. I did manage to swipe the picture from the JA website. Any thoughts? Any ideas of what questions to ask other than for them to compare light return? I've already been told that this JA stone is 100% eye clean as well.

stone_image_-_3432219.jpg
 
well this one definitely looks better. Do you have it on hold? Did you request an idealscope? JA does that so that shouldn't be an issue. That big black dot in the middle of the first one would bother me way toooo much!
 
Well, I've got my dealer out on the streets of NYC right now to grab the stone. So I guess it is "on hold" in a sense. He's a bit less expensive than JA. And it is the exact same stone anyways. But he will probably not be able to snag an IS image unfortunately. Glad to hear that you think it looks better. The spread is better on it, so that plus the 80% LGF may make this stone seem noticeably larger...Will update once I hear back from the gemologist.
 
SweetJimmy|1359661977|3368790 said:
Well, I've got my dealer out on the streets of NYC right now to grab the stone. So I guess it is "on hold" in a sense. He's a bit less expensive than JA. And it is the exact same stone anyways. But he will probably not be able to snag an IS image unfortunately. Glad to hear that you think it looks better. The spread is better on it, so that plus the 80% LGF may make this stone seem noticeably larger...Will update once I hear back from the gemologist.
Click to expand...

Well, in case you didn't know JA gives PS members about 5.5%ish off of the diamond $$.
 
It might come down to which one is cleanest to me. The second one looks like it has a LOT black inclusions, so be SURE to have them look at both stones from the sides as well unless you are setting them in a halo. It will be hard to know which one is better without an idealscope image. These stones are going to look identical in size, so that is not going to be a deciding factor. I feel like the second one would be ruled out because of inclusions. I don't think I would have sent for that one, to be honest.
 
Thanks for the opinion DiamondSeeker. The inclusions on the side were the main reason why I went with the 1.14 over the 1.13 originally. So we were thinking alike. I will have the gemologist opinion here shortly and can update on the final decision. Thanks all!
 
I've gotten word back from the gemologist. The 1.13 is considered a "low" I color and the recommendation is to stick with the 1.14. Further, someone noted the "possibly" visible inclusions on the 1.13. While perhaps not visible to the naked eye, they did show prominently on the JA video.

I had posted a poll regarding one's personal preference between 75% and 80% LGFs in a different post and interestingly, the preference seemed to swing towards fat arrows, so 75%. While the difference can be negligible between the two due to GIA rounding as KarlK points out, the real difference between 75% and 80% to an inexperienced eye (such as mine) will likely be negligible. Further this issue also seems to be a matter of PS trends, so really this is a minor "issue" (if you can even call it that.)

Of course, this is singling out one specific data point that doesn't factor in other variables as JulieN points out. Nonetheless, I am happy to hear JulieN's point that for the pricing of the stone (despite its fat arrows combined with the angle dimensions of the stone) it looks good. I will take that opinion happily.

Therefore, the final decision is the 1.14ct FIC.

Thanks all for your input, I really appreciate it and it really helped.

SJ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top