ronk15a

A-List Member
  • Content Count

    921
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ronk15a


  1. FWIW: Out of the two I would go with the first one. The 59% over 60.1% - Will be bright (I love brightness) only second to transparency. (ice cold water)! Davide’s analogy!!  Nice one Davide…

    The 60.1% TD will allow for a nice spread without sacrificing any optics/performance.
    FWIW2: It’s also very close to a 60/60 (one of my fav’s) in regards to T&D – IMHO  *The angles work well here!

  2. Furthermore I would suspect that most if not all; highly skilled, well trained gemologists cannot tell the difference between VVS1 and VVS2 definitively using a 10x loupe only.

    Conservatively the best grade I ever give large diamonds 1+ carater and more without a microscope is VS1. Pushing it further is just soft…IMO

    FWIW: Unless it’s made by an important marker like VCA, Cartier, Tiffany, Webb, Buccellati, Heyman, etc…and the stones are “diamond melee†I can go VS/ VVS –which is standard catalog/descriptor practice.

    Regards R.K.

    • Like 1

  3. I know the OP is long gone...

     

    Generally all CE diamonds start off as SI2-I1-I2 in the hopes that the treatment either (FF or LD) will make them appear to be VS with the unaided eye. Regardless of the treatment the internal clarity issues will still be present via a 10x loupe. There is no clarity enhanced stone that would ever be considered VS after the procedure.



    Laser drilling: is commonly used to remove small dark inclusions. The laser bores a small hole into the diamond’s interior and burns away the inclusion, or creates a channel through which a bleaching agent can be introduced to improve the inclusion’s appearance.


    7.jpg


    Fracture Filling: Original Yehuda compound - Circa 1982 - Pb (lead), Bi (bismuth), B (boron), O (oxygen) and Cl (chloride) * P.S. I believe current compound: Molten Lead Glass


    8.jpg

    • Like 1