Jump to content

Looking For Advice On This Diamond


hellomark
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi all! I've narrowed down my diamond hunt to this one diamond and would really love to hear your opinion on it. 

 

I've managed to found a diamond that fits my budget, color and clarity requirement. On paper it seems great.

 

1 carat, F color VS1 (GIA certificate)

 

  • Total Price - around $7000
  • Cut, polish and symmetry excellent
  • Depth 62.30%
  • Table Percent 56.00%
  • Crown Angle 35.5
  • Pavilion Angle 40.6
  • Measurements  6.36 x 6.40 x 3.97
  • Fluorescence Intensity - Faint
 

Enclosed idealscope and aset images and confirmed it is eye clean.There seems to be some serious light leakage under the table of the diamond shown by the idealscope and aset images. I'm wondering how much of a concern it should be?

 

Does those light leakage make it a very average diamond or is it still of high quality?

Will it still have great brilliance?  Also for the faint fluorescence, is it acceptable? 

 

Deciding if this is a good purchase! Appreciate any help!

post-134958-0-82418100-1429587341_thumb.jpg

post-134958-0-73234400-1429587343_thumb.jpg

post-134958-0-15175700-1429587344_thumb.jpg

Edited by hellomark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you point out, it seems to exhibit some leakage and it faces up a bit small, which (probably) is why it's priced as it is: the very best cut 1 carat F/VS1 would go for a significant premium on the $7000 you are being quoted: http://www.diamondreview.com/diamonds/?sortOrder=price&sortDesc=1&fShape=Rnd&fCaratLo=1.00&fCaratHi=1.05&fColorLo=F&fColorHi=F&fClarityLo=VS1&fClarityHi=VS1&fCutLo=exc&fCutHi=exc&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&fLabGIA=1&adv=1

(note: there is one AGS-graded stone that is priced $11,868 which is not in the list here because of a quirk with the Diamond Finder - however it only strengthens the conclusion)

 

This stone sits about in the middle of the pack... of the Excellent cut stones. To me, compared to the average diamond being sold, it's still very much high quality, but it depends on your definition of "average". At any rate, you are being asked a fair price for it.

 

With a VS1 you should have no concerns whatsoever about clarity; SI1 is usually where some caution on clarity begins to be necessary (or a suspiciously low priced VS2). Faint fluorescence is also not an issue; note that GIA does not even specify the colour of the fluorescence - that's because it's so faint that it's impossible to determine with certainty.

 

In all, whether it is a good purchase still depends on what you want. If you want the ultimate in cut, I would step down on colour and clarity to about H-I/VS2-SI1 (assuming size is also important) if you need to keep budget around $7k. If you can let go of the "full carat", you can stick with F-G in colour and get a very very nice 0.9x stone for $7k or less. All this said, the F/VS1 is a perfectly acceptable trade off, and I doubt you'd see much difference in real life (i.e. set, on a moving hand and with a little bit of dirt on the pavilion).

Edited by davidelevi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks alot for the reply Davide, it was insightful and made me rethink about what are the most important criteria for the purchase. I am really trying to balance the cut, size and color given the budget, it's a difficult task! 

 

Could you elaborate on the point that the diamond faces up a bit small? Does that mean that it will look smaller than a carat? or does it mean it will look smaller compared to other diamonds with better cut? I can't quite visualize the impact.   Because i'm quite set on looking for a 1 carat diamond, i'm just wondering how the facing up a bit small affects the appearance. 

 

I guess my "average" will mean whether the leakage is considered serious in the eyes of the   knowledgeable and experts and that they would recommend there are better stones out there with this price. 

 

I suppose this diamond is of course not the cream of the crop given the price, color and clarity factors. But would you advice to go down with clarity level, say VS2/SI and get a better cut?  

 

I seem to have trouble finding a somewhat clear VS2/ SI1 F diamond with excellent cut... For example I wouldn't necessarily consider this my choice by looking at the inclusion plot : 

 

http://www.b2cjewels.com/dd-6781423-1.04-carat-Round-diamond-F-color-VS2-Clarity.aspx?sku=6781423&utm_source=diamondreview.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=diamondreview.com 

 

Or should i?

 

Another question is how does the F VS1 diamond compare with this diamond that i'm attaching the aset here?  Is there one significantly better comparing the aset or are they comparable in terms of quality?post-134958-0-15902900-1429602269_thumb.jpg

Edited by hellomark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The diamond in the link you have attached has other issues aside from a crowded plot.  With the slightly larger table (60%), shallow crown angle (33.2°) and slightly steep pav angle (41.2°), my guess would be that this stone would lack the sparkle and scintillation you are looking for in a well cut stone.

 

As for comparing ASET pictures, I think it is misleading to try to compare pictures taken by different vendors with different setups.  This pictures can be useful when comparing stones from the same vendor.  That said, you can clearly see the light leakage in your top stone as it appears in all three pictures whereas there does not appear to be any significant leakage in the Whiteflash image.

 

I hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with George. Two more points:

 

1. You cannot use the plot to determine whether the inclusions will be visible. The clarity grade is your best guide, together with the price, if you do not have access to the stone (BTW, a good vendor is generally a good guide too, as long as their business model allows them to see the stone in person; third or fourth party information is - in my opinion - not as reliable).

 

2. Diameter-wise, I'd expect a well cut 1 carat to be 6.45-6.50 mm. 6.38 is less than a hair's breadth away, and it's just about going to be visible with another stone being right next to it, however it is there and it will have an impact on price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for their opinion! It is helpful and decided to keep searching for another rock while keeping my mind on the F vs1 rock. Perhaps I'll see if another diamond that fits what I want will pop up in the inventory somewhere next week.... if not then probably I'll go for the F vs1 diamond :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks alot for the reply Davide, it was insightful and made me rethink about what are the most important criteria for the purchase. I am really trying to balance the cut, size and color given the budget, it's a difficult task! 

 

Could you elaborate on the point that the diamond faces up a bit small? Does that mean that it will look smaller than a carat? or does it mean it will look smaller compared to other diamonds with better cut? I can't quite visualize the impact.   Because i'm quite set on looking for a 1 carat diamond, i'm just wondering how the facing up a bit small affects the appearance. 

 

I guess my "average" will mean whether the leakage is considered serious in the eyes of the   knowledgeable and experts and that they would recommend there are better stones out there with this price. 

 

I suppose this diamond is of course not the cream of the crop given the price, color and clarity factors. But would you advice to go down with clarity level, say VS2/SI and get a better cut?  

 

I seem to have trouble finding a somewhat clear VS2/ SI1 F diamond with excellent cut... For example I wouldn't necessarily consider this my choice by looking at the inclusion plot : 

 

http://www.b2cjewels.com/dd-6781423-1.04-carat-Round-diamond-F-color-VS2-Clarity.aspx?sku=6781423&utm_source=diamondreview.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=diamondreview.com 

 

Or should i?

 

Another question is how does the F VS1 diamond compare with this diamond that i'm attaching the aset here?  Is there one significantly better comparing the aset or are they comparable in terms of quality?attachicon.gifthumbnail (2).jpg

 

The ASET is tough to compare here, using a black background is unfair when looking at a white background ASET. Ask the vendor for a white background ASET so you can truly compare the two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, I'm back and found two new diamonds to compare with the F vs1.

 

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R109-S83KVH

 

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R102-7XBWJ5

 

What do you guys think? Definitely better than the F?

 

Between the two G, which would you favour?

Yes, I'd say both are better cut than the F. I'd be tempted by the 1.09 - it faces up very large, and it seems very well cut. This said, since both are available through the same vendor, call Joshua (he's just answered above, making a good point about comparability of images takes using different techniques) and ask him what he thinks, and whether he can call in both stones to give you an opinion as to which one is the best.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The advantage of both stones being with the same vendor is that you can ask for pictures of one stone next to the other.  Ask them to give you an actual live shot (not the reduced light x-ray shot that shows the inclusions).  This way you may be able to see which one appeal to you more.  If you are local, here in New York, you may even be able to see them with your own eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies! The 1.09 stone is the preference too. I notice the inclusions which are pretty much at the table in the magnified picture although it is a VS2, any concerns for that?

 

The location of the inclusions makes it  noticeable quickly. In the GIA cert, a smaller crystal is within a bigger one, what is the impact of that kind of inclusion? Would it make it more obvious? And are the inclusions considered near the surface?

Edited by hellomark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No big concerns from the report... unfortunately, it doesn't tell you much about whether the inclusions are visible. In most cases, they are not, but here are linked a couple of VS2 that have (possible) naked-eye visible inclusions: http://www.diamondreview.com/forum/topic/9941-james-allen-cuts/#entry51358

 

The "smaller crystal within a larger one" is simply because they are at different depths within the stone but located one on top of the other - they may both be invisible or visible. Incidentally, in the 1.09 the "larger crystal" is actually a cloud, in the same region as 2 crystals and possibly some feathers (or elongated crystals - which however they call needles). It makes no difference in terms of durability or ease of seeing the inclusions - however you still have no information on the latter from the report.

 

Depth information is totally missing, other than - perhaps - on the feather at 12 o'clock: since a feather by definition breaks the surface and a VS2 feather is going to be quite small, then it's definitely near it.

Edited by davidelevi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see....the links provided was helpful to know, which was what i'm wondering as well - whether the inclusions of the 2 stones would have naked eye visible inclusions judging from the pictures of the real diamond on the website?

 

Seems 1.02's inclusions are more visible...right?

 

Just putting the links again for easy clicking!

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R109-S83KVH

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R102-7XBWJ5

Edited by hellomark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really no way of knowing from the info available. The photos are not particularly revealing and anyway are magnified at least 20x, which is definitely not representative of "naked eye" viewing, but I do not see any apparent inclusion in either of them. Whether that's true in reality, you need to ask someone who has the diamonds available.

Edited by davidelevi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi I'm back with 2 diamonds! After another long search for more than a month.... what do you guys think? I missed out previously on one that I liked so really don't wanna miss it this time too! Both looks pretty good to me.

 

Same price for both diamonds

1) 1.09 Ct. E-VS2 Diamond (Round)
GIA Triple excellent

Fluorescence Faint
Size 6.73 x 6.71 x 4.01 mm
Ratio 1.003
Depth 59.6%
Pavilion Depth 43.5%
Table 59.0%
Girdle Thin to Medium
Crown Height 13.5%
Crown Angle 33.0°
Pavilion Angle 41.0°

Star length 50%

Lower half 75%

post-134958-0-75941000-1433609127_thumb.jpg

post-134958-0-77006700-1433609129_thumb.jpg

2) 1.01 Ct. F-VS2 Diamond
GIA Triple Excellent

Fluorescence None
Size 6.45 x 6.47 x 3.96 mm
Ratio 1.003
Depth 61.3%
Pavilion Depth 43.0%
Table 58.0%
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick
Crown Height 14.5%
Crown Angle 34.5°
Pavilion Angle 40.8°

Star length 50%

Lower half 75%

 

post-134958-0-71026300-1433609120_thumb.jpg

post-134958-0-49063300-1433609124_thumb.jpg

the 1.09 E has a better color and bigger but the crown angle and faint fluoro gives me second thought about it. Which one is better value considering they are the same price?

Any opinion appreciated!!!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can see the difference between E and F once set and without a set of master stones for comparison, you need to apply for a grading job at one of the major diamond trading houses. Faint fluoro will have no effect whatsoever, and in any case any fluorescence will have no effect outside of an UV-rich environment (in practice: open, unscreened sunlight).

 

Given they are the same price, it comes to (observable) size vs. "cut perfection". My vote is for the latter, but there is nothing wrong whatsoever for preferring the former.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Value is a surprisingly tricky question that seems so easy. In most appraisals, the definition of value has to do with what it would cost to REPLACE an item with another of like kind and quality and in the usual and customary marketplace. In the diamond business, that replacement is going to based on the specs, primarily the famous 4C’s, and the marketplace is a specialty retail jewelry store. Using that, the first one is clearly ‘worth’ more. It’s bigger, it’s one step up in color, and it’s otherwise similar on paper. I say it’s tricky because that’s not actually the question you’re asking. You want to know which to buy, and estimated replacement cost is, at best, tangential to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow thanks alot for both quick replies!!

 

I'm definitely struggling between the two and hoping to be able to somewhat compare/distinguish them using parameter like value so that I can make a decision...but as Neil said (which i haven't thought about from that angle before), value goes much more than price. Absolutely right on the question of which one to buy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I note that there are some comments on the GIA cert.

 

There's the comment on the 1.01f gia cert "Clarity grade is based on clouds that are not shown".

Some said that this would mean the diamond to be cloudy for sure. Any danger of milkiness in this vs2 ?

 

For the 1.09e, the comment on the cert is Pinpoints are not shown. Surface graining is not shown.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clarity grade based on "things" not shown means simply that the inclusions are diffused or located in points that would give rise to confusion if someone plotted them on the 2D maps. In a VS2, there is no way the diamond is cloudy because of inclusions. In an SI2... perhaps. Unfortunately, it only decreases the probability that the diamond is not perfectly transparent; the only way of knowing that for sure is to see it.

 

Pinpoints are never an issue, and surface graining in a stone otherwise graded "excellent polish" is also not an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder if it helps, I obtained the actual diamond image of the VS2 1.01F and the 1.09E diamonds and posted it here.

 

From the ASET, the 1.01F seems to reflect light well, shouldn't that somewhat indicate that cloudiness won't be an issue and it should be transparent? Now that I have the actual diamond photo, could that give an indication? It is unlikely I can see the diamond in real life before purchase.... I'm thinking whether the 1.09 E would be a safer option considering the cloudiness issue.

 

How does the two actual diamond compare in terms of concerns on cloudiness?

post-134958-0-10561900-1433669401_thumb.jpg

post-134958-0-93927400-1433669403_thumb.jpg

Edited by hellomark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it doesn't help much, because:

 

1. Technique and background are different (starting from the DoF and the focus plane; that by itself will give a different impression of fuzziness)

2. You can't assess whether a stone is cloudy or not with one single photo regardless of who took it and using what technique unless the cloudiness is so obvious that one would not need to ask the question.

 

In terms of concerns on cloudiness they rank the same - they are graded VS2, meaning the largest inclusions are visible with difficulty by a trained grader under 10x magnification. Even if one has clouds not plotted, they are going to be pretty small or very tenuous ones.

 

You say "I'm unlikely to see the diamond before purchasing it". Why? If the vendor has a decent return policy, you'll have plenty of time to see it and have it seen by a gemologist (or meteorologist) of your choice. Only once you decide to keep the stone you have bought it; until then, you have an option to see for the price of shipping. If the vendor does not have a decent return policy, change vendor!

Edited by davidelevi
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.

Guest
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.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...