Jump to content

Too much light leakage and indented natural?


Recommended Posts

Hi All,

New to the forum and diamond buying. Wanted to get your thoughts on purchasing this D-color VVS2 diamond. It has a few naturals and indented naturals. Would this be a cause for concern in terms of integrity/durability or anything else (thinking I can cover it with the setting using a prong or is this a bad idea)?

Diamond has an HCA score of 0.7 (I would be using it for an engagement ring). Price is 18K - would this be a good deal?


Carat: 1.7

Color/Clarity: D/VVS2

Depth: 61.4%

Table: 57%

Crown: 34


Flour: Medium



ASET Image_18288890.JPG

Idealscope Image_18288890-1.JPG


Real Image_18288890.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing in a VVS2 is a concern in terms of durability, integrity or visibility to the naked eye.

The cut is not super - you can see that quite a few of the upper girdle facets "leak" (at 11-12 o'clock in the images, and less at 6 o'clock) - but the vendor isn't trying to be coy about it: all the photos are oriented in the same way and the leak is visible. The crown at 11 o'clock is also a bit distorted, probably there was a big inclusion there.

It's a "cheap" stone for a 1.70 D/VVS2, partly because of the cut and partly because of the fluorescence - if you like it and you want D/VVS2, it sounds like a reasonable price.

If you haven't seen it and/or you are looking for D/VVS2 because you think other stones would look coloured and/or with visible inclusions, I would at least look for comparables, and if you haven't seen a G/VS2 I would look at that first... ideally face-to-face with a D/VVS2

Edited by davidelevi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the helpful insights! I am actually interested in round stones that are VS1 and E in color. This particular stone happened to be in the same price range. That makes sense that the cut wouldn't be as great (was wondering why a VVS2 would be so cheap).

Do you have any recommendations for a stone that is 1.7ct or bigger at VS1 E color (budget 17.5K)? I don't mind medium fluorescence as long it the stone does not look cloudy/milky.


Do you think this stone would be better:



Edited by Juken
Additional comments
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here's my opinion:

1. The cut is already a GIA excellent. It's already better than half of all the diamonds cut out there. 

2. Now within the GIA excellents this stone have superior proportions. It's already better than 75% diamonds out there with it's closer to tolkowsky proportions.

3. The stone shows superior faceting, with only one of mishappened pavillion facet.reflectingn at 11 o clock mark, with over all superior under the table light reflection. 

4. At about 10,600 per carat for a D VVS2 I can't help but say it's not bad actually. Price wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Juken said:

the cut wouldn't be as great (was wondering why a VVS2 would be so cheap).

The cut is good - just not super. Fluorescence of any type on a D will depress price - unreasonably in my view, but generally if you argue with the market you lose the argument. Count it as a bonus if you don't mind it.

BTW - medium fluorescence will not cause haze or other effects on transparency.

7 hours ago, Juken said:

Do you think this stone would be better

No idea. Unfortunately JA has acquired the bad habit of not publishing lab report proportions data, and they don't provide reflector images unless one asks, so the only thing to go by is the video. In which it looks OK, but then so would the D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...