A-List Jeweler
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

558 Excellent


About davidelevi

  • Rank
    Ideal Diamond

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

9658 profile views
  1. davidelevi


    Glad it ended well. I hope you will enjoy your new ring (and "old" stone) despite the shaky start.
  2. davidelevi


    Nothing to add technically; their explanation is total bovine excrement. I just hope they can reverse whatever they have done, and they haven't burned the diamond while setting it. If you can, ask them to put it on precision scales (to the hundredths of a carat) BEFORE they do anything else to it. Then repeat once it has been "cleaned". This way you will know if they have repolished it (which I suspect is what they are going to do, unless they attempted to switch the stone, which is unlikely but possible)
  3. davidelevi

    Bought from oldtreasures333

    None of which is a certain indication of the description being incorrect. If you are unhappy with the item return it - the seller (at least on eBay) seems to offer 30 days unconditional returns, so regardless of whether the item has been described incorrectly or only - ahem - enthusiastically marketed, use that policy to your advantage.
  4. davidelevi

    I need

    There is no way anyone can ID a stone via a photograph; I would take any such ID - no matter who offers it - with a huge pinch of salt. Take it to a gemmologist, and they should be able to confirm (or not) very quickly. As a DIY alternative, if you have a precision scale (precision depending on the size of the stone, but at least 1% of its weight, ideally 0.1%), you can rig up something like this: http://balances.com/acculab/density+determination/specific+gravity.html though much less refined, and this will give you an indication of specific gravity thus confirming/denying the hypothesis.
  5. davidelevi

    What do you think of this diamond?

    The stone was (likely) not positioned correctly within the viewer. It's a matter of fractions of a millimetre, so the jury is always out on whether this is intentional (to produce a "better" image") or accidental, but regardless of intention it makes the images far less useful. Good point. They call it an arrow view - and there is clearly a "hearts" view - but if it is such, it is definitely taken incorrectly and it ends up looking like an idealscope (without the same information being conveyed, because the viewer's construction is different). The "hearts" view seems to have been taken correctly, and it looks nice - which is generally a good sign for what the diamond actually looks like.
  6. davidelevi

    What do you think of this diamond?

    It looks and reads fine; the ASET (and IS) images have been taken incorrectly. The price is on average aligned with the US-based online market. What gives you pause?
  7. Same observations/conclusions as the above. A couple of additional points: 1. There's other (minor-ish) things going on in addition to the pavilion angle. #1 and #3 have the same angles, but there's a diameter difference of 0.1 mm; which is not huge or even visible unless the stones are next to each other, but it is there. #1 just "reads" like a stone that has been cut to hit the 2 carat mark; the other two less so. The price also reflects that. 2. Any differences in pavilion angle will be negated by a stone not kept clean. It's no more difficult to keep a 41.0° clean than a 41.4°, but what I'm trying to say is that the difference - visible as it may be between two clean, loose stones observed with care - may well disappear in normal life when they are separated, set in a ring on a moving hand, and with a smear of soap on the pavilion because she has just washed her hands. 3. If - as you seem to imply - you have seen the stones, then your observations, feelings and preferences overcome (sorry, can't quite bring myself to say t***p) whatever "expertise-based" opinions we can come up with. There is more to a diamond than just a lab report numbers, and there is more to your eye and brain than the ability to discriminate a steeper pavilion.
  8. davidelevi

    Please help to review

    Let me start from the easy question: WF is perfectly legitimate, and they have a very good reputation. Is that diamond a good choice? Well, there is nothing to reproach in terms of cut, clarity or colour; presumably the price is fine since you picked it. What I don't know is whether it's worth for you to pay the premium for a D/VVS1 or whether you'd be better off with a (say) H/VS2 that will look visually identical but could be larger or cheaper.
  9. davidelevi

    Are these diamonds?

    Let me be clearer, since British understatement doesn't seem to work: ID from photos is not possible. The rocks unfortunately neither confirm nor deny, but rock ID from photos is not any easier than crystal ID: the yellow/green stuff could be some olivine-carrying rock - which would be good - but then again it might not. The darker stuff seems bituminous and/or iron oxide rich from the photo, both of which would rule out diamond; again it might not be - having it in hand (and under a loupe) would solve the problem in a moment; via a single, context-less photo it is pointless. Take the crystals and the rocks to someone who can see them. FWIW, my bet is that you have found quartz and calcite, given the pitting, the discoloured "skin", the crystal habit and the appearance of fractures visible in some photos, but I may well be wrong.
  10. davidelevi

    Are these diamonds?

    They could be. They could be not. Identification from photographs is a thankless task and far from foolproof, especially without any context (where did you find them, what were the rocks nearby, what size are the crystals, ...). Take them to a gemologist and you'll have your answer, most likely for free.
  11. davidelevi

    GIA Ex vs HCA - Help Ease My Mind!! (or not)

    The key thing to remember is that the HCA is a subjective score, reflecting the preferences of a small group of people. Have you seen the diamond, rather than just the report? If so and you like it (and you like it more than your current diamond - larger size and everything else considered), all is well and the HCA can be forgotten. Garry Holloway isn't offering to buy your diamond, and you don't want to sell it to him anyway.
  12. davidelevi

    Help selecting a diamond, down to 2!

    It looks nice on paper and in the reflector images; the video is a bit meaningless, but I assume it's a show of goodwill from a remote merchant. It is a reasonable price. As long as you have some form of return/refund if you really don't like it, I would say that you have a winner! If it's a totally final sale, then be really sure that it's what you (she) want(s).
  13. davidelevi

    Diamond Clouds.

    On paper, proportion-wise I'd much rather have the 1.51: I like high crowns and small tables. The 1.40 is - for me - far less attractive. (on paper!) However, if you have seen both and they seem to you very similar, I'd go with the 1.40 given the not insignificant price difference.
  14. davidelevi

    crown and pavilion misalignment?

    You are taking pretty good photos!
  15. davidelevi

    Bought Engagement Ring With Knot Help!(Si1)

    Yes. The only one that matters: (BTW: a knot graded SI1 by GIA is fine; by definition, SI inclusions are not detrimental to integrity or durability of the stone in the opinion of the GIA grading panel, otherwise they would have called it I1. The knot has gone through polishing without falling out, experiencing temperatures and pressures that will never be experienced again unless the stone is re-cut).