Got Diamond Questions?
Our community of diamond experts are here to provide answers
Sign in to follow this  
Deucer

Considering This 1.50Ct. Gia/ Si1 / G Round Brilliant

Recommended Posts

On hold at James Allen (wierdly it comes up in searches as availble at two other sites):

 

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/G-SI1-Very-Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1539328.asp

 

I made a +/- list to let you know what I like and don't like:

 

Pluses:

No dark inclusions under the table

HCA 1.0 (even though it's only a GIA VG). I know this site doesn't put a ton of weight into HCA, but good to know...

G Color

Decent spread for a 1.5

Flourescence is a plus for me :)

I can order it now and still be able to return it within the 60 day window (I'm proposing on Feb. 18th)

 

 

Minuses:

Lighter inclusion under the table could affect light performance

Lots of wisps (possible structural issue?)

Dark inclusions on the edge of the stone

Strong Flourescence could be an issue (waiting on a comment from the JA gemologist)

 

Any thoughts or comments would be greatly appreciated!

 

Edit: Forgot to post the price - $8,400.00.

Edited by Deucer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On an SI1 you are not going to have any inclusion affecting light performance. Same for twinning wisps and structural issues; the stone has survived cutting, which means a lot more pressure and heat that it's ever going to meet in its "ordinary life" unless you take a mallet and start hitting it.

 

I'm not sure that there are no "dark" inclusions under the table. The one photo on the JA site shows one wisp quite clearly, and it may be more or less visible in reality than it is in the photo. Similarly for the "dark" inclusions closer to the girdle: you may find they are far less visible than they seem.

 

HCA and cut grade: GIA downgrades it due to a shallow pavilion. The HCA likes the steep crown/shallow pavilion combination. The question is what do you like, not what GIA or Garry Holloway like. BTW, not to contradict you, but a 7.30 mm diameter is average for a 1.50.

 

Timing: 60 days is plenty, but bear in mind that if you want a custom setting made it will take a couple of weeks, and with February 14th approaching people's workload will increase.

 

Fluorescence: it may be an issue. The clue is in the price; it's significantly lower than I would expect it to be if fluorescence were not causing transparency problems. It's the cheapest 1.50-1.55 G/SI1 stone out of 600 or so on the Diamond Finder, and the other ones at the bottom of the price range also have very strong or strong fluorescence (or clearly have cut quality issues).

 

The fact that the stone shows "available" on another two sites is not weird at all - you didn't tell them that you want the stone, and neither JA nor the other two vendors actually have or own it. In fact it is possible that someone else may purchase it outright from one of the other vendors - even though it is unlikely, since JA should have told the owners to hold it for them.

Edited by davidelevi

Davide - Specialised Consumer Information and Assistance,
Diamonds by Lauren (http://www.diamondsbylauren.com)
davide@diamondsbylauren.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On an SI1 you are not going to have any inclusion affecting light performance. Same for twinning wisps and structural issues; the stone has survived cutting, which means a lot more pressure and heat that it's ever going to meet in its "ordinary life" unless you take a mallet and start hitting it.

 

I'm not sure that there are no "dark" inclusions under the table. The one photo on the JA site shows one wisp quite clearly, and it may be more or less visible in reality than it is in the photo. Similarly for the "dark" inclusions closer to the girdle: you may find they are far less visible than they seem.

 

HCA and cut grade: GIA downgrades it due to a shallow pavilion. The HCA likes the steep crown/shallow pavilion combination. The question is what do you like, not what GIA or Garry Holloway like. BTW, not to contradict you, but a 7.30 mm diameter is average for a 1.50.

 

Timing: 60 days is plenty, but bear in mind that if you want a custom setting made it will take a couple of weeks, and with February 14th approaching people's workload will increase.

 

Fluorescence: it may be an issue. The clue is in the price; it's significantly lower than I would expect it to be if fluorescence were not causing transparency problems. It's the cheapest 1.50-1.55 G/SI1 stone out of 600 or so on the Diamond Finder, and the other ones at the bottom of the price range also have very strong or strong fluorescence (or clearly have cut quality issues).

 

The fact that the stone shows "available" on another two sites is not weird at all - you didn't tell them that you want the stone, and neither JA nor the other two vendors actually have or own it. In fact it is possible that someone else may purchase it outright from one of the other vendors - even though it is unlikely, since JA should have told the owners to hold it for them.

 

Thanks very much for the detailed response!

 

As a complete newebie ot this, I have no idea what I like as far as cut. As an expert, what does the steep crown/shallow pavilion mean to you? How will a Gary Holloway preferred (for lack of a better term) and GIA excellent cuts?

 

Also, if JA ends up telling me that there are no issues with transparency, would this be worth having shipped out for evaluation?

 

The diamond is going in the simplest setting possible, so setting lead time shouldn't be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This GIA article is a good basic reading on what constitutes cut "quality" and how the various parameters interact: http://www.gia.edu/diamondcut/pdf/cut_fall2004.pdf

 

If you are interested in the HCA (and in why I think it's not the bees' knees that others are convinced it is), here is the description of how the HCA was developed: http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/02_introduction.htm (start here, and work your way down the links on the left pane), and here is what in my view is the best reasoned critique of the HCA: http://www.goodoldgold.com/Technologies/AConsumersGuidetotheHCA/

 

Once you have an understanding of how these two cut grading systems work, go out and look at diamonds. I think the most common mistake people make when buying a diamond (or many other things: cars and sound/video systems are other good examples) is not to test the main thing for which they are buying the item. A diamond is bought because it looks nice, and "looking nice" is in the eye of the beholder.

 

If you prefer diamonds that are very bright, with relatively little contrast and a medium amount of fire ("Garry Holloway" preferences), then go for that; if you like more those that are less bright, with more contrast and a lot of fire ("Antique" look - my preference), then go for those, but the only way you can tell is by seeing both and making your mind up.

 

Assuming JA tells you it's OK, is it worth having the diamond shipped out? Perhaps. It could be an unspotted bargain, but I'd be surprised if it were. The fact that you are not unduly worried about fluorescence is a significant plus on your side; you can get a 10-20% discount and a better looking stone.


Davide - Specialised Consumer Information and Assistance,
Diamonds by Lauren (http://www.diamondsbylauren.com)
davide@diamondsbylauren.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On hold at James Allen (wierdly it comes up in searches as availble at two other sites):

 

http://www.jamesalle...ond-1539328.asp

 

I made a +/- list to let you know what I like and don't like:

 

Pluses:

No dark inclusions under the table

HCA 1.0 (even though it's only a GIA VG). I know this site doesn't put a ton of weight into HCA, but good to know...

G Color

Decent spread for a 1.5

Flourescence is a plus for me :)

I can order it now and still be able to return it within the 60 day window (I'm proposing on Feb. 18th)

 

 

Minuses:

Lighter inclusion under the table could affect light performance

Lots of wisps (possible structural issue?)

Dark inclusions on the edge of the stone

Strong Flourescence could be an issue (waiting on a comment from the JA gemologist)

 

Any thoughts or comments would be greatly appreciated!

 

Edit: Forgot to post the price - $8,400.00.

 

 

I try to stay closer to the 7.5 mm range on my carat and a half or you might as well purchase a 1.40 ct. range and take advantage of the price break. The stone above has quite a bit in it for an SI1. Lots of twinning wisps along with dark inclusions that may show to the eye. Also it is only a very good cut grade. I woud opt for an excellent cut grade versus very good.


Jan

For those that want to know the truth about diamonds, just ask.

 

dbof.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This GIA article is a good basic reading on what constitutes cut "quality" and how the various parameters interact: http://www.gia.edu/d...ut_fall2004.pdf

 

If you are interested in the HCA (and in why I think it's not the bees' knees that others are convinced it is), here is the description of how the HCA was developed: http://www.diamond-c...ntroduction.htm (start here, and work your way down the links on the left pane), and here is what in my view is the best reasoned critique of the HCA: http://www.goodoldgo...sGuidetotheHCA/

 

Once you have an understanding of how these two cut grading systems work, go out and look at diamonds. I think the most common mistake people make when buying a diamond (or many other things: cars and sound/video systems are other good examples) is not to test the main thing for which they are buying the item. A diamond is bought because it looks nice, and "looking nice" is in the eye of the beholder.

 

If you prefer diamonds that are very bright, with relatively little contrast and a medium amount of fire ("Garry Holloway" preferences), then go for that; if you like more those that are less bright, with more contrast and a lot of fire ("Antique" look - my preference), then go for those, but the only way you can tell is by seeing both and making your mind up.

 

Assuming JA tells you it's OK, is it worth having the diamond shipped out? Perhaps. It could be an unspotted bargain, but I'd be surprised if it were. The fact that you are not unduly worried about fluorescence is a significant plus on your side; you can get a 10-20% discount and a better looking stone.

 

Thanks for the descriptions. I've read through the GOG description before, but it's a lot of info for someone new to process.

 

Here's what JA has to say about the stone:

 

"Thank you for your patience while waiting for the gemologist inspection and idealscope image of diamond 1539328 (1.50crt G SI1). The gemologist confirmed that it has great fire, brilliance, and scintillation and appears perfectly white in color. The diamond will face eye clean to most people; as only a trained/skilled eye will be able pick up any haziness caused by the twinning wisps. Lastly, its fluorescence gives the diamond a blue tint and a slight haze when in direct sunlight. While this probably won't appear offensive to some people, the gemologist feels that you will want to pursue other options since fluorescence is a concern of yours."

 

The gemologist interpreted my inquiry regarding the flourescence as being worried about the normal affects, when I was really just trying to ask if the stone was "overblue". It sounds like they are just describing a strongly flourescent stone.

 

Final thoughts? From the comments above this looks like a pass... but I'm still considering it.

Edited by Deucer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know.... one man's slight haze is another's impenetrable fog. Not sure if this helps, but this is what a (much larger, and differently cut) stone with mild overblueness looks like:

 

r2823c.jpg

 

more photos: http://www.diamondsb...purple-platinum

 

A strong fluoro without overblue looks like this - this is a J colour stone normally:

 

r3656handa.jpg

 

If you think you won't mind the "holy smoke" effect, then try. Some people like it (including the guy who bought the first stone above).

Edited by davidelevi

Davide - Specialised Consumer Information and Assistance,
Diamonds by Lauren (http://www.diamondsbylauren.com)
davide@diamondsbylauren.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this