Thoughts on this specific GIA report

[kBY]

I'm looking at a few diamonds and possibly going with this one. Could someone take a look and see what it normally means when an H, VSI, 1.34ct loose diamond has comments: Clouds are not shown. "Pinpoints are not shown." And if the cut looks okay to maximize sparkle.

The diamond sparkled with flashes of fire, looked great in different lighting inside the jewelry store and by the sunlight through the window. But I'm just worried with those additional comments.

 

[tyty333]

Hi @kBY

Normally pinpoints and clouds would not be considered a problem in a VS1 stone. We would really need to see upclose
videos to be sure though.

Unfortunately, this stone is not well cut. You may be losing diameter because it's deep and the crown/pavilion angles are not
a good combination.

Do you have a link to this stone where we can see a video? If so, please post.

 

[kBY]

I unfortunately do not have a video. I was debating between two. Would this one be a better choice with cut?

 

[tyty333]

Can I ask why you are buying without images/pictures? Are you working with a jeweler that can't get
pictures? We (Pricescopers) usually never buy without images.

What pairs best for crown and pavilion angle are low crown/high pavilion or, vice versa, high crown low pavilion.

Crown range 34-35 degrees
Pavilion range 40.6 - 41 degrees

With the high pavilions you have above (for both stones) you need a lower crown (34ish).

 

[freddyboston]

hard to tell how well cut or how much "clouds" etc... affect clarity without images/video

do you have the GIA report number for the 1.29 (it has better proportions (but not ideal) between the 2 choices) ? We can find images from report # usually

this site has images/video of the 1.34

Florinus.lt

 

[kBY]

Can I ask why you are buying without images/pictures? Are you working with a jeweler that can't get
pictures? We (Pricescopers) usually never buy without images.

What pairs best for crown and pavilion angle are low crown/high pavilion or, vice versa, high crown low pavilion.

Crown range 34-35 degrees
Pavilion range 40.6 - 41 degrees

With the high pavilions you have above (for both stones) you need a lower crown (34ish).

I went directly to the store. So I'm looking at the stone inside the store and asked for GIA reports so I could come here and ask about the specs to see thoughts in cut and that comment section piece.

 

[kBY]

hard to tell how well cut or how much "clouds" etc... affect clarity without images/video

I don't have videos and didn't take pictures while at the store. I'll probably go back and see it again before having it be set to make sure there's enough and that the diamond doesn't look cloudy (if I go withh the one starting cloud first). I mainly was curious if on paper, the cut/angles looked good since I do get confused with the report saying "Excellent" for cut and what that truly means.

 

[kBY]

hard to tell how well cut or how much "clouds" etc... affect clarity without images/video

do you have the GIA report number for the 1.29 (it has better proportions (but not ideal) between the 2 choices) ? We can find images from report # usually

this site has images/video of the 1.34

Florinus.lt

Gia #5126114927

 

[kBY]

hard to tell how well cut or how much "clouds" etc... affect clarity without images/video

do you have the GIA report number for the 1.29 (it has better proportions (but not ideal) between the 2 choices) ? We can find images from report # usually

this site has images/video of the 1.34

Florinus.lt

And thanks for providing this video! It does show more that the naked eye can't see.

Please let me. Me know if your able to find video on the 1.29 as well

 

[freddyboston]

And thanks for providing this video! It does show more that the naked eye can't see.

Please let me. Me know if your able to find video on the 1.29 as well

unfortunately not - it has a 2011 report date so it's not out there. Might be an in house owned by the jeweler.... (might be pre-owned /exchange if someone upgraded)

the 1.29 has better proportions/potential between the 2 of them.... if it looks nice and especially if you can negotiate a good price for it....

 

[freddyboston]

the 1.29's Table/Crown/Pav proportions are just a touch off from ideal range.....

 

[kBY]

the 1.29's Table/Crown/Pav proportions are just a touch off from ideal range.....

Are you able to take a quick peek at this stone as well and let me know your thoughts? It's G color. I'm going back this morning to look at these three and compare them.

 

[kBY]

the 1.29's Table/Crown/Pav proportions are just a touch off from ideal range.....

I will more than likely go with this one, assuming when I look at the stone and it's not cloudy. thanks so much for providing this information.

 

[freddyboston]

Are you able to take a quick peek at this stone as well and let me know your thoughts? It's G color. I'm going back this morning to look at these three and compare them.

# 3 1.21 G has the best proportions on paper of all 3 of them but the cut execution not too great..

used to be on JA @ $8k

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.21-carat-g-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-16364316?a_aid=62a7e6735d587

 

[kBY]

# 3 1.21 G has the best proportions on paper of all 3 of them but the cut execution not too great..

used to be on JA @ $8k

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/1.21-carat-g-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-16364316?a_aid=62a7e6735d587

Just curious on what you meant by cut execution since I'm not as familiar with diamonds. Are you able to elaborate a bit on this comment?

#3 does sparkled way more than the other two. I'll be going with this #3 stone, but with that comment on three, I just wanted to see if that was something that would make it better to stick with the 1.29.

 

[freddyboston]

i only meant #3 was bit off precision wise ... obstruction 3o'clock and misalignment of the arrow tips v arrows 12/6....most off the shelf non branded cut (ie not Whitefish etc..) diamonds have similar small issues....

since you have all 3 to look at in person best to go with what looks most appealing to you..... #3 G color w 58/35/40.8 is great combo

 

[kBY]

i only meant #3 was bit off precision wise ... obstruction 3o'clock and misalignment of the arrow tips v arrows 12/6....most off the shelf non branded cut (ie not Whitefish etc..) diamonds have similar small issues....

since you have all 3 to look at in person best to go with what looks most appealing to you..... #3 G color w 58/35/40.8 is great combo

I have a quick follow-up on this. Would the slight misalignment affect the amount of sparkle/fire of a diamond in general or does it vary from diamond to diamond.

 

[freddyboston]

probably yes but depending on the stone whether it's noticeable or if a precision cut is worth the upcharge is another thing.... Most naturals are cut to preserve weight so you will see various effects...

Some people want a precision ie "WFlash" cut and willing to spend a bit more or drop down in size or they buy same size but "lower" color / clarity to hit the budget.

End of the day you need balance your priorities...

 

[kBY]

probably yes but depending on the stone whether it's noticeable or if a precision cut is worth the upcharge is another thing.... Most naturals are cut to preserve weight so you will see various effects...

Some people want a precision ie "WFlash" cut and willing to spend a bit more or drop down in size or they buy same size but "lower" color / clarity to hit the budget.

End of the day you need balance your priorities...

Thanks so much for all your thoughts on my questions so far. I couldn't make a decision yes, but was thinking to maybe stay away from H color because I my diamond I'll be exchanging was a G, SI1.

I will be looking at these two stones with GIA #s as shown below sometime this week and will be making a final decisions between these two. Is there one you would recommend over the other. I'm always unsure about what I should pay close attention to when looking at the clarity characteristic and comments section. One has twinning wisp listed first and the other listed Cloud first.

GIA # 1485856405
G color, 1.30ct
HCA Score of 1.2

GIA # 7508616052
G color, 1.36ct
HCA Score of 1.9

 

[freddyboston]

i found the 1.3 but not the other one ... is that GIA# for the 1.36 correct ?

Loupe360

loupe360.com

 

[kBY]

i found the 1.3 but not the other one ... is that GIA# for the 1.36 correct ?

Loupe360

loupe360.com

Here is the 1.36: 7508615052
Sorry, I was typing on my phone earlier so added an extra "6" in there.

I wanted insights on the two and what I should really be paying attention to other than the difference in sparkle when I do see the diamonds in person in a day or two when it arrives

 

[freddyboston]

the 1.36

Loupe360

loupe360.com

 

[lovedogs]

the 1.36

Loupe360

loupe360.com

this one looks cloudier/granier

 

[freddyboston]

1.3 is classic TIC proportions vs Firey 1.36 so you will be able see the diff / determine what "type you prefer"
1.3 maybe has slight obstruction issues from 2-4 o'clock but not big problem
1.3 in the video looks more colorless G / much cleaner crystal

1.36 seems hazy with yellower tint in the spin video ~ ( wisps / graining might be the cause) - 58 table is bit big for my tastes - i would pass on it

 

[kBY]

this one looks cloudier/granier

I agree.

 

[kBY]

1.3 is classic TIC proportions vs Firey 1.36 so you will be able see the diff / determine what "type you prefer"
1.3 maybe has slight obstruction issues from 2-4 o'clock but not big problem
1.3 in the video looks more colorless G / much cleaner crystal

1.36 seems hazy with yellower tint in the spin video ~ ( wisps / graining might be the cause) - 58 table is bit big for my tastes - i would pass on it

Thanks for the 360 loupe picture. I appreciate it!

The 1.36 looked more yellow to me as well. Good thing you notice that, which confirms what I am seeing. This was a very good example to see GIA graded G colors for comparison.

I definitely prefer a more colorless G so will probably go with the 1.3ct if everything else looks ok. I was only worry about this one since it stated "Cloud" as the leading clarify characteristic and comments section. Was afraid that might make the diamond cloudy/hazy on a VS2.

I am very curious to see the difference as you mentioned because the HCA reports noted one as "..within TIC range" and the other "..within FIC range". I'll probably do more research on that to have a better understanding between the two.

 

[sledge]

Remember color grades are subjective so you can have high, mid and low ranges of a color. In this case a low G may look more similar to H where a high G could look more similar to an F. Women normally have higher visual acuity to see minor shade differences then men. Also remember that color is neither good or bad. The industry has tried to tell us that less is better. Many buyers like some warmth. Cultural preferences & beliefs come into play as well.

Normally clouds on a VS2 are okay but need to be verified with your eyes, or a trusted vendor. The one you want to avoid is a grading report with a clean plot and that nasty note that reads “clarity based on clouds not shown”. Those are problematic. Also, clouds and wisps can be an issue in combo with fluorescence but not always.

Firey stones will typically have smaller tables with higher crowns with lower pavilions (35-36 / 40.6). Tolkowsky ideal will be 55-57 tables with 34.5/40.8 combo for more balanced color (fire) and white light return. Firey can look dark in select lighting conditions where Tolk doesn’t have quite that affect. When comparing stones in person it’s good to look in a variety of lighting conditions and not just under their high dollar spot lighting that makes frozen spit look good. Go to a back room with normal office lighting. Look outside in normal daylight conditions.

Lastly keep in mind, to produce maximum fire a few things need to occur.

1. You need basic angles that are complimentary.

2. Inclusions have to be reasonably clean so they don’t provide “hurdles” to the light path that bounces in and out of a diamond.

3. Assuming you have the first two, then precision cutting is what gives it that extra zing. This where hearts & arrows diamonds shine. It’s like having a balanced & blueprinted engine for maximum horsepower, or running upgraded internals & fuel systems so you can run a supercharger or turbocharger. The danger here is the grading report only tells a portion of the story. I’ve seen 34.5/40.8 stones with 56-57 tables that were trash because of poor cutting. Buy an ASET or ideal scope and take with you when shopping to help confirm.

 

[freddyboston]

...... Also remember that color is neither good or bad. The industry has tried to tell us that less is better. Many buyers like some warmth. Cultural preferences & beliefs come into play as well.

Amen to this - there are fantastic warm color natural diamonds J K L M etc...out there @ great discounts. With so many D,E,F color Synth / Labs flooding the market a natural with a touch of warmth might not be such a bad thing...

 

[kBY]

Remember color grades are subjective so you can have high, mid and low ranges of a color. In this case a low G may look more similar to H where a high G could look more similar to an F. Women normally have higher visual acuity to see minor shade differences then men. Also remember that color is neither good or bad. The industry has tried to tell us that less is better. Many buyers like some warmth. Cultural preferences & beliefs come into play as well.

Normally clouds on a VS2 are okay but need to be verified with your eyes, or a trusted vendor. The one you want to avoid is a grading report with a clean plot and that nasty note that reads “clarity based on clouds not shown”. Those are problematic. Also, clouds and wisps can be an issue in combo with fluorescence but not always.

Firey stones will typically have smaller tables with higher crowns with lower pavilions (35-36 / 40.6). Tolkowsky ideal will be 55-57 tables with 34.5/40.8 combo for more balanced color (fire) and white light return. Firey can look dark in select lighting conditions where Tolk doesn’t have quite that affect. When comparing stones in person it’s good to look in a variety of lighting conditions and not just under their high dollar spot lighting that makes frozen spit look good. Go to a back room with normal office lighting. Look outside in normal daylight conditions.

Lastly keep in mind, to produce maximum fire a few things need to occur.

1. You need basic angles that are complimentary.

2. Inclusions have to be reasonably clean so they don’t provide “hurdles” to the light path that bounces in and out of a diamond.

3. Assuming you have the first two, then precision cutting is what gives it that extra zing. This where hearts & arrows diamonds shine. It’s like having a balanced & blueprinted engine for maximum horsepower, or running upgraded internals & fuel systems so you can run a supercharger or turbocharger. The danger here is the grading report only tells a portion of the story. I’ve seen 34.5/40.8 stones with 56-57 tables that were trash because of poor cutting. Buy an ASET or ideal scope and take with you when shopping to help confirm.

Thanks for the thorough explanation. A light definitely lit up with the #3 comment regarding how to produce maximum fire. I initially thought that cut should be fine as long as angles are okay on GIA reports. Great info! I'll have to look closely at both diamonds to compare.

There's so much about diamonds that I haven't thought of and continue to learn from this site. I very much appreciate your insights and freddyboston's who been chugging along with me on this little journey of mine.