A-List Jeweler
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by davidelevi

  1. davidelevi

    Inclusions below the center

    The answer to the second question is: if it is visible under 10x magnification through the table ("top") of the diamond, then it will be considered in the clarity grade; how "deep" (near the culet) the inclusion is, is irrelevant. Whether it affects the grade is a different matter: the grade may be determined by another characteristic (e.g. a small cloud near the culet in a diamond that has a big feather across the crown). The short answer to the first question is no. A big, black crystal right next to the culet will look rather horrible, and a thick cloud in the same place may make a diamond look dull. The key here is to bear in mind that (at least in theory) inclusions graded "below" I1 (on the GIA scale) should not have any material effect on transparency and brilliance; in practice some SI2 with a lot of diffused clouds or twinning wisps may be rather hazy and dull. And some SI1 (and rare VS2) highly contrasting inclusions will not look particularly nice to the naked eye - even though transparency and brilliance will be unaffected.
  2. davidelevi

    Natural Or Lab-Grown? Pls Help To Choose

    With even more respect... but are you connected to either Tiffany or the other store? If you are a genuine consumer, I think the community here would be delighted to hear about your experience at either place, posted in the appropriate forum, in your own thread and not as a response to a 4 year-old thread that the OP has not been following since October 2016. Posting links like this runs the risk of not being taken seriously, or even moderated.
  3. davidelevi

    Help??! Downgraded Diamond

    Um, with all due respect - this is a nearly 4 years old thread... BTW - welcome to Diamond Review!
  4. davidelevi

    My new engagement ring :)

    Yes, it was a link to a retailer's home page. When her (?) text implied it would be a personal photo. If the site weren't getting this sort of spam more regularly, I'd be more inclined to believe in an error - but from a one-time poster that doesn't even come back... it's pretty definitive proof.
  5. davidelevi

    FS: Double Diamond Eternity band

    To save any readers time in converting: UK N - O = US size 7 - 7½; 54 - 55.5 mm circumference Best of luck with the sale; it's a very nice design!
  6. davidelevi

    Which one should I pick?

    Well, rule of thumb says +10% per colour grade G-J, +10% per clarity grade within VS: G to I is +2 colour grades, VS2 to VS1 is -1 colour grade, which gives (more or less) a + 10% on grading. Add on another 10% as a premium for "Black" and the price is quite internally consistent. It doesn't help much with the decision, but at least it can be explained. 😉
  7. davidelevi

    Which one should I pick?

    Hi Zoe, welcome to Diamond Review! I'm not sure I can be of much help - both diamonds are very nice, and you are aware of the trade off with the colour; any cut differences are so minute that they will be completely invisible once the stone is set. Ultimately, I think, it comes down to what you would do with the "saved" USD 730 (and any taxes on top) otherwise, and this is not something anyone else can know or tell you.
  8. davidelevi


    Welcome to Diamond Review, Renato! Please take a minute to read the forum rules https://www.diamondreview.com/misc/forumrules especially re: self-advertising. The link used to be on every page, but it got lost in a software upgrade... sorry!
  9. davidelevi

    ASET Images - Which image looks like the better stone?

    I would not be concerned about the blue; the stone does not seem to be overly dark at any point, and contrast is required to make the stone look nice and sparkly. On the other hand, it also has a fairly flat crown, which is not to my personal taste... Once again - you have seen this. If you like it, then it's right.
  10. davidelevi

    ASET Images - Which image looks like the better stone?

    Assuming they are representative of what the stones look like (i.e. they have been taken competently and in a very similar way), the first one looks much better (alternating "cornices" of contrast and direct brightness) for my taste. The second one is not bad, but it's likely to be less bright and contrasted and possibly with a bit of windowing (see-through - which will look dark once the stone is set and on a finger). All of this said, if you have seen them and you like one better than the other, go with that rather than any ASET!
  11. davidelevi

    AIG labs trustworty? anyone has experience?

    Well... couple of observations: 1. The vast majority of diamonds are sold with no lab report at all. At best a description from the seller which may or may not contain any details beyond weight, and if it contains anything else it may or may not be accurate. 2. The three vendors you have linked have in total ~130 items for sale (some of which are not accompanied by a lab report). But let's assume they all are, and all the reports are AIG. There's another 2,800 auctions for diamond ("diamant") on Catawiki. Let's say that 90% of these are "AIG" - total "AIG stones" advertised: 2,650. The three retailers have a total of 1,150 reviews - or ~10 for each advertised piece. Multiply that total by 10, and we arrive at 26,500 "AIG" stones ever marketed via Catawiki. Here is the link to the round diamonds advertised by half a dozen diamond retailers on this website: https://www.diamondreview.com/diamonds?sortOrder=price&sortDesc=1&fShape=Rnd&fCaratLo=0.01&fCaratHi=200.00&fColorLo=D&fColorHi=Z&fClarityLo=FL&fClarityHi=I3&fCutLo=&fCutHi=poor&fDepthLo=0.0&fDepthHi=100.0&fTableLo=0.0&fTableHi=100.0&fSymLo=&fSymHi=poor&fPolLo=&fPolHi=poor&fCulLo=&fCulHi=vlarge&fFlrLo=&fFlrHi=vstrong&fPriceLo=0&fPriceHi=1000000000&adv=1 There's 409,000 round diamonds advertised; plus another ~160,000 in shapes that are not round; I'll use "round only" in the next paragraphs. Some diamonds are advertised by more than one retailer, so let's take away 10% of the count for duplication. Total "unique" stones advertised: 368,000. Of which 98% have a GIA or AGS report; that's 360,000 stones. There are more out there... and these are the ones for sale, not the ones sold. Some of the advertisers here, like Blue Nile, have sold literally millions of diamonds over the last 20 years, most of them with a GIA report. Note that the largest lab in terms of volume of reports is probably IGI, and - because of the market that these advertisers cover - IGI stones are a small minority of those advertised here. Might is not equal to right - the only point I'm trying to make is that your sample is a bit biased and AIG is a relative minnow compared to GIA, IGI and HRD (which are the truly "big guys" in diamond gem labs). For whatever reason, some people on Catawiki sell AIG diamonds; whether that's because the buyers don't know, don't care, or trust the sellers, I have no idea. But given the relative volumes, it's not particularly surprising that there isn't that much feedback on AIG. All this said, totally agree that the more info there is out there, the better!
  12. davidelevi

    AIG labs trustworty? anyone has experience?

    Hi Olivier, welcome to Diamond Review! A couple of old threads mentioning AIG... https://www.diamondreview.com/forum/topic/4577-first-time-robbins-bros-aig-cert-scary/?tab=comments#comment-18786 https://www.diamondreview.com/forum/topic/11287-some-diamonds-expert-please-help-me-thank-you/?tab=comments#comment-60473 where you will see that the opinion is basically as follows (and I hope that Neil @denverappraiser will forgive me if I borrow from him): 1. Anyone can set up a gem lab. No qualifications or expertise are required. 2. This means that the default answer to "can I trust this lab?" is no - they need to earn your trust either via their reputation or your direct experience with them. 3. AIG is not well known, and I assume you have not dealt with them. Be careful! Bear in mind that the report that a diamond is marketed with is not a random choice by the seller; it is a very definite marketing tactic.
  13. 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.
  14. 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...
  15. 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.
  16. 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?
  17. 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"
  18. davidelevi

    Diamond choices

    ... and those between very good and excellent cut (especially considering the standards may well be very different)
  19. 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?
  20. 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!
  21. 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!)
  22. 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.
  23. 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
  24. 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.
  25. davidelevi

    PLEASE HELP!! Final choice!!!!!

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