davidelevi

A-List Jeweler
  • Content Count

    8533
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

582 Excellent

4 Followers

About davidelevi

  • Rank
    Ideal Diamond

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK

Recent Profile Visitors

12135 profile views
  1. davidelevi

    Should I be concerned

    The potential replacement seems to have two broken points - unless it's just the photos. May be worth asking before you start the exchange.
  2. davidelevi

    Should I be concerned

    That is a huge knot - the whole crystal twinning is visible. And you have another significant feather located towards the sharpest tip of the kite (left in your picture - the feather seems to go nearly across the whole tip), which frankly would worry me more than the first one... On the other hand, this has been cut and polished, so setting should be a walk in the park - until it isn't. Unfortunately, the only sensible advice is the one you have given yourself: go and see the setter (not just the jeweller - unless the jeweller is also going to set the stone). FWIW, it is a very cool stone (in my opinion), but not one that I would like to set in a ring - not just for the risk of breakage. The one that is already set (last photo) seems to have a much better polish. When you are looking at exchanging, are the possible "exchangees" something that you have already seen? I don't think there are that many diamond kites flying around...
  3. davidelevi

    Narrowed My Search to 4 Diamonds - Thoughts Appreciated

    Significantly more useful than a diamond in most circumstances. And it carries you, rather than the other way around.
  4. davidelevi

    Question regarding clarity on a lab-grown diamond

    Hi @madisonsmith, welcome to DiamondReview! I hope you don't mind a question: what is your relationship with the site you linked in your post? Do you work there?
  5. davidelevi

    Narrowed My Search to 4 Diamonds - Thoughts Appreciated

    Hi Jonathan, Welcome to DiamondReview! To your questions: 1. It really depends on what your priorities are. Especially in a fairly large stone, J may be a fairly visible tint. I would pretty much immediately discard the 3.01 because apart from bragging rights it's no larger than the others (and in fact visibly smaller than the 2.70. A cut grade of "Good" is not good... 2. Depth and table are far less important than crown and pavilion angles in assessing cut; it may be faster for you to give us the GIA report numbers, so we can see all of the info available on them, rather than pestering you for "and what about this?" Also, note that GIA does not use the word "Ideal" anywhere in its reports; this is vendor marketing... (and FWIW, none of the 4 strike me as likely paragons of cut from the information available) 3. A local jeweller is very unlikely to "save you money". First of all, practically everybody has access to Rapnet; Blue Nile (which I guess is where you found these 4) uses wholesalers that advertise their stones on Rapnet too. Secondly a local jeweller will have higher overheads than a pure internet-based broker like Blue Nile. What the local jeweller CAN do - and it's extremely valuable - is to get stones for you to see and evaluate, and provide advice based on his/her expertise (unlike BN, which has frankly got little expertise in assessing diamonds; their business model is predicated on diamonds being totally commoditised). 4. That is much more likely - and in fact is the great advantage of dealing with smaller/more service-oriented outfits. Which incidentally can be truly local or still be internet-based/remote dealing, but they can get the stones in, shoot comparative videos and photos and give you advice based on seeing the diamonds, rather than leaving you to make up your own mind on inadequate and difficult-to-compare information or third-hand reports of "the wholesaler said to the gemmologist that the diamond is eye-clean"
  6. davidelevi

    Diamond choices

    ... and those between very good and excellent cut (especially considering the standards may well be very different)
  7. davidelevi

    Si2 diamond

    Hi Steph, welcome to Diamond Review! It is quite normal for an SI2 diamond to have inclusions that are visible without magnification. As to price, without knowing a lot more it's very difficult to give even a rough opinion. To start with, "it cost 13,500" in what unit of currency? USD? CAD? EUR? GBP? SGD? Where was it purchased? (a known luxury retailer like Cartier or Tiffany will have prices that are significantly higher than a "common" high street jeweller, and that in turn will be more expensive than an internet-based dealer) Did the centre diamond come with a lab report? By which lab? What else did the lab say - precise weight and colour? Fluorescence? Finish (symmetry and polish)? A stone weighing 0.98 ct is going to be priced significantly less than one that is 1.02 ct, but both could be described as "a 1 carat stone" (they shouldn't, but that's another matter). Is the cut a proprietary cut, or was it just defined as "cushion"? What about the ring? Does it have a brand name? In which material is it?
  8. davidelevi

    Is A Cavity In Diamond Acceptable?

    Sorry for the slow answer; I think I'm 4 or 5 hours ahead of you, and I went to sleep before you responded (I guess you are from Quebec?) Bear in mind that a "real" answer to most of these questions requires actually seeing the stone, however we have some indirect clues: 1. It's likely to be very small. I could not see it on the plot, until I realised that what I thought was another "indented natural" sign was actually the cavity with a single cross-hatch line. A GIA plot is not technically "to scale", but they do try to represent relative sizes. 2. Observed clarity: considering location, and the fact that GIA placed it fourth on its list of characteristics, I think it's very unlikely you'd see it without a loupe; depending on the setting and how high the stone seat comes, you may not be able to see it at all once it's set. 3. Integrity - see my answer to the first post on this thread. Honestly - don't worry. 4. It's on the pavilion (bottom) of the diamond. It's protected by a mm of the hardest natural substance known... Also, unless you have a 5 (or more) prong setting it won't work mechanically to have a prong there: you need one (or 2) on the point, and 2 behind the bulge for the stone to sit securely; the cavity is in front of the bulge. Extra pairs of prongs can be set more or less where one likes, but unless you like the look there is really no reason to have them - the stone is big enough to "carry" them visually, but it is overkill mechanically if the seat is fashioned properly. I'd worry more about protecting the point of the stone!
  9. davidelevi

    Is A Cavity In Diamond Acceptable?

    It's very close to the girdle...but below it, so I wouldn't worry about covering it with a prong - it will be hidden by the rest of the diamond. Most likely it would be not in a good place for a prong anyway, unless you have a setting with at least 5 prongs (it is a large stone!)
  10. davidelevi

    Is A Cavity In Diamond Acceptable?

    Hi André! The GIA site seems to be down. I'll keep checking and hopefully at some point before Monday it will be up.
  11. davidelevi

    Thoughts please

    You'll end up with a Type IIa - D if you continue this way... 😁 I realise that it is difficult with lockdown only about being released, but the only way to solve this is for you to see things; photos and videos only go so far. A really well cut I will look very white, in isolation
  12. davidelevi

    Thoughts please

    I find it less attractive (in the video and on paper) than the I-colour you were looking at a couple of days ago. YMMV.
  13. davidelevi

    PLEASE HELP!! Final choice!!!!!

    You are very welcome! Good luck with the choice, and congratulations for what will ensue!
  14. davidelevi

    PLEASE HELP!! Final choice!!!!!

    Couple of points - I think I have already given you feedback on all of these stones, so I'm not going to repeat this, but I'll focus on a couple of technical aspects: 1. Cut grades No such thing. That's Blue Nile's marketing categorisation which means "I want to sell you this diamond". If what you are using to determine "AGS" cut grades are the plots on the HCA app, then these are no longer relevant; AGS have changed their grading system at least twice since those tables were published, and the current AGS grading system is quite different from having a single set of parameters and measuring "distance" from those. 2. Clarity and effect on transparency No they would not. There are (relatively rare) SI2 diamonds where the clarity grading is due to clouds or wisps - not simply "there is a cloud in this diamond" - where the overall transparency of the stone is compromised. The call on transparency is one you need to make with your own eyes (or at the very least photos and video) - no lab grades it, even in the extreme case of (I1), I2 or I3 diamonds, where the inclusions are deemed so prominent that they may affect transparency and brilliance - note the "may" rather than "do". And I have seen plenty of I1 diamonds where the inclusions do not affect transparency or brilliance, even though they are obvious to see, at times even with the naked eye. 3. Colour grading I think what we are seeing is not so much a change in background, but in camera equipment and (especially) white balance setting. Which is why judging colour from photos is generally a thankless task, and judging colour from photos taken by unknown photographers using unknown equipment set up in an unknown environment and configured with unknown settings and post-processing is an impossible task. It is so variable on the individual observing and the circumstances that it is impossible to answer this in a certain way. Generally speaking, J-K is where people start noticing warmth in a significant way. However, a really well cut J-colour diamond can still look white "on its own", and platinum is more forgiving in this respect than rhodium (but less forgiving than unplated white gold). It all depends on what you want to "buy insurance for". Of these 3, ignoring price, my recommendation is to go with the 1.06 I. It's better cut than the other 2, it is clearly the least tinted and even though the inclusions may be easier to see they are not (to my eye and in as far as it can be seen in the video) unpleasant even though the main one is reflected 8 times! Whether the extra cash outlay is burdensome, only you can judge.
  15. davidelevi

    SI1 diamonds, surface graining and cloud comments

    The general amount of "stuff". Twinning wisps are wispy, but when there's a lot of them there is potential to see something from an angle or another. In particular, I thought the wisp that ends on the facet at 10 o'clock (or its reflection at 4 o'clock - or is it the original? This is why a video is not good...) was quite visible - then again, it's 20-25x and the stone is loose. Once set, everything will be less visible (usually).