Any way to ensure that an SI1 will be eyeclean?

[peonygirl]

After reading WF's definition of eyeclean (which I posted at the bottom of this thread), my boyfriend became very concerned that he would end up getting a diamond in which I would be able to see inclusions. I have terrific vision (better than 20/20) and I will probably end up scrutinizing the diamond up close in different lights. He's leaning towards gettting a VI2 now, but with the size diamond we are thinking of getting (1-1.2 carats) that would be a mark-up of $1500! I would rather he saved the extra cash because I don't care about getting a mind-clean stone, so I told him I'd post on here to ask if there was any way to ensure (obviously not 100%, but pretty close to it) that an SI1 we got from WF would be eyeclean in the strictest sense. Does anyone know whether the largest maginification WF gives would be representative of how the eyeclean the diamond is? I can usually see inclusions in about 3/4 of those, but for the 1/4 in which I can't see anything, does that mean it would definitely be eyeclean? I guess we have three options:

1) Getting a VS2. I've heard that not all of those are necessarily eyeclean either which potentially presents another problem.

2) Asking the people at WF for a very, very conservative guess of whether a diamond will be eyeclean.

3) Having a few diamonds sent to an appraiser near us and having my boyfriend and the appraiser look at them very carefully. I think my boyfriend would rather just buy from someone locally than do this because of the additional hassle.


Thanks so much for your help!!



"Our definition of eye-clean: No inclusions visible face-up at a distance of 8-10 inches in natural lighting to a person with 20/20 vision. Distance, lighting and human vision all influence judgment. Since there is no official definition for eye-clean so we developed one in order to communicate meaningfully with our customers. 10 inches is the ‘distance of most distinct vision’ as defined by the AGS, so this is a logical standard and a practical baseline. There are very clean SI diamonds. Still, for those with ‘radar’ vision or strong clarity worries we encourage a grade of VS2 or above to ensure that they are receiving a ‘mind clean’ diamond. (-df)"

 

[appletini]

WF will tell you where and what kind of inclusions are in the stone, in order to help you make the best decision. The SI1 that I chose is eye clean...the only time I see the inclusion is in the gigantic magnified pictures on WFs website. Its right in the middle, so it blends in with the arrows.

 

[Mara]

peony, i could have sworn that others have asked this exact same question before, did you try searching about eye-clean in the archives?

anyway, i can offer my own experience based on dealing with whiteflash.

brian knows i am a total stickler when it comes to eye-clean. i not only ask about eye-clean in the typical manner aka face up looking into the table of the stone, but from all angles. i want to make sure you can''t see a thing from all sides of that stone. for me that''s eye-clean. for example, in discussions recently re: a stone, he told me that the main inclusion is a white feather that parallels a main facet, i wouldn''t see it from 25cm but i would maybe see it from 8cm. now i don''t even know how far cm''s are but it sounds like unless i looked for it, it would not be visible. from other angles it sounds clean as well, though i am going to confirm that again.

i know that some other vendors do not really give that super thorough examination when looking for eye-clean because the technical term is really just face up looking into the table, not from every little angle scrutiny. but that''s MY definition of eye-clean personally.

so i would not shy away from SI''s because they can be a great deal, but i would ensure that whoever you work with, that they understand your requirements for eye-clean and that they can accommodate you. to be honest i don''t know that anyone GUARANTEES that you will find something eye-clean because everyone''s ideas of visibility are different, but having worked with WF before i know that they understand what i require and that they can meet those needs with making me comfortable before the purchase.

if you are unsure, i''d have your top contender shipped to the local appraiser and look at it there. it really isn''t a hassle and if you want to buy online, stick with that. we were thinking of buying online then went offline for ''ease'' and then later regretted it as we didn''t have the same offline selection as we did online. just make sure you do something you will not regret.

 

[MissAva]

This is my stone at 40x magnification, and is a an SI1 which my SO purchased from WhiteFlash. I have not seen it yet (the setting is being made) but I was not able to see the flaws in the picture until I had looked at the GIA plot. And Jeffrey and are comforted by the 10 day inspection period where we can take it anywhere we like and look at it in any lighting situation we can come up with. If there is one which you are fond of then I would ask them to ship it to you.

 

[laney]

Call and ask.

But I can GUARANTEE you that you are going to look at it closer than 8-10 inches. That''s pretty far away. Not for others of course but YOU.

I''d revamp that definition to about 3-4 inches. If your fiance is worried about it I can assure you when that stone arrives he''s gonna put it right up to his eyes and look at it up close. And when it''s on your finger - you will do the same thing.

That being said, I now have had 2 SI2 stones. And no one has EVER seen the inclusions with the naked eye (other than me). Most of my friends don''t know that much about diamonds. And the ones that do.. or let''s say "think" they do - have less than what they think they have on their fingers.. did that makes sense?

A SI stone from WF - with them looking at it to tell you will be FINE. I''m sure. I''m VERY VERY happy with my stones and you probably would have been scared off by the enlarged images.

I guess I want to say - have the RIGHT expecations of an SI. They are SI for a reason and I own good SI''s and I''ve also seen BAD Si''s. But don''t think when you put it at 3 inches away that you won''t be able to pick out the inclusion. 10 inches is VERY reasonable. But measure 10 inches first!

 

[MissAva]

Thread about SI Diamonds Hope this helps!

 

[peonygirl]

laney, 8-10 inches is WF''s definition not mine. Mine would be like 1 inch away, hehe.

 

[laney]

Date: 12/8/2005 1:26:43 PM
Author: peonygirl
laney, 8-10 inches is WF''s definition not mine. Mine would be like 1 inch away, hehe.

see! I knew it! I did the same thing.

In fact, when I got my last SI2 stone set, I wanted the setter to cover the inclusion with a prong. He didn''t. And of course I noticed immediately. But I left it be. And you know what.. after 4 months.. i find myself not looking 3 inches away anymore and happy that I got a larger size!

You''ll be fine. Really. I just don''t want you to be upset when they say eye clean and you look up close!

 

[cinnabar]

Some SI1 stones get their grade because of one relatively large booger, while others have lots and lots of tiny boogers. Would you rather have a largeish but innocuous "flaw", maybe a white feather than can be hidden by a prong, or would you be happier with a busy clarity map but one which has nothing that stands out?

I wanted mind-clean, because I knew I''d obsess about looking for anything bigger than an atom, so I had to go for VS2 (and even then I made sure I went for the more-but-tinier inclusions than any single one that I *might* be able to see).

I''m short sighted, so the rule about inclusions getting less easy to see as you get older doesn''t work on me

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 12/8/2005 1:21:03 PM
Author: laney
Call and ask.

But I can GUARANTEE you that you are going to look at it closer than 8-10 inches. That's pretty far away. Not for others of course but YOU.

I'd revamp that definition to about 3-4 inches.

Actually, I disagree with this information.....having just tried it recently myself.

In order for your eye to focus in sharp enough detail to see "into" the diamond with the naked eye, it needs to be about 7l5-8 inches away from your eye. If you try to move it closer, everything goes out of focus.

At 4 inches, it's not possible to see into the diamond. All you see is a blur.

 

[Mara]

Date: 12/8/2005 2:02:17 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 12/8/2005 1:21:03 PM
Author: laney
Call and ask.

But I can GUARANTEE you that you are going to look at it closer than 8-10 inches. That''s pretty far away. Not for others of course but YOU.

I''d revamp that definition to about 3-4 inches.

Actually, I disagree with this information.....having just tried it recently myself.

In order for your eye to focus in sharp enough detail to see ''into'' the diamond with the naked eye, it needs to be about 7l5-8 inches away from your eye. If you try to move it closer, everything goes out of focus.

At 4 inches, it''s not possible to see into the diamond. All you see is a blur.

I can see my inclusion from about 6" but yes 4" is WAY too close to your eye. Measure it and try it. And in reality I don''t see it but close up I can. Even sometimes under a loupe I can''t see it but when it''s tilted the right way close to my eye I can see it. I don''t mind it, regular viewing doesn''t show it and it kind of marks my stone as mine.

I actually mostly look at my ring or stone from about 1 foot away. And I can''t see anything then either.

It actually always kind of bothered me when I couldn''t ever find anything in my old stones. It''s kind of like...hmm is it REALLY there? hehee.

 

[cinnabar]

I''m REALLY short sighted (-7, according to my prescription) and I can see that close (ie 4"). In fact, without glasses, I NEED to be that close to see. At 8 inches, with uncorrected vision, now that''s a blur. We''re all as different as diamonds are

 

[peonygirl]

I just measured with another ring I have, and while I can see clearly at 4'''', any closer does make it blurry. Interesting stuff!

 

[icekid]

Is there any way that you can have the stone shipped to you to check it out before having it set? That would probably be your best bet if you''re really concerned about being able to see ANY inclusion at all.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 12/8/2005 1:21:03 PM
Author: laney
Call and ask.

But I can GUARANTEE you that you are going to look at it closer than 8-10 inches. That's pretty far away. Not for others of course but YOU.

I'd revamp that definition to about 3-4 inches. If your fiance is worried about it I can assure you when that stone arrives he's gonna put it right up to his eyes and look at it up close. And when it's on your finger - you will do the same thing.

That being said, I now have had 2 SI2 stones. And no one has EVER seen the inclusions with the naked eye (other than me). Most of my friends don't know that much about diamonds. And the ones that do.. or let's say 'think' they do - have less than what they think they have on their fingers.. did that makes sense?

A SI stone from WF - with them looking at it to tell you will be FINE. I'm sure. I'm VERY VERY happy with my stones and you probably would have been scared off by the enlarged images.

I guess I want to say - have the RIGHT expecations of an SI. They are SI for a reason and I own good SI's and I've also seen BAD Si's. But don't think when you put it at 3 inches away that you won't be able to pick out the inclusion. 10 inches is VERY reasonable. But measure 10 inches first!

Excellent input Laney.

I thought I would explain the reason we have a baseline of 10". That closely approximates 25cm, which represents the near point of accomodation for the average person. In keeping with that, the American Gem Society selected 25cm as their "distance of most distinct vision," so we use that distance as well.

Your eyes are able to focus closer than that when you are young (or if you are nearsighted), but the near point recedes with age, reaching 10 inches for most by age 40 and receding beyond for many - possibly causing farsighted condition.

That's why it's logical for people to debate how close the 'eye-clean' judgment should be made. Depending on the person the distinctness of focus varies dramatically. Other factors to consider are lighting environment, specific vision of the viewer (20/15-20/20/-20/30), length of time spent examining the diamond, whether you have seen the inclusion plot, and (oh yes) how clean the diamond is!

Every SI diamond will vary. That is why SOME definition is crucial between internet buyers and seller. It provides a working baseline for understanding. With that understood, asking 'is there anything visible from 3 inches' is perfectly acceptable.

 

[TexasLawyer]

The only way to know for sure is to see the stone yourself and see if it looks good to you. The next best thing is to ask your sales representative for a truthful assessment.

I purchased an SI2 stone and it faces up 100% eye-clean. It saved me enough money to where I was able to go one color grade better.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Good general prosobia discussion folks.
As we age we get more money to buy diamonds and our ability to see inclusions 9by focussing from 3-6 inches) drops off.
At 70 I1 or I2 will be the way to go

Seriously though - when looking at a plot on cert - try to find a stone that has 2, 3 or several smaller points scattered around the stone and you will not be able to see any single one.
If there is one major grade maker it will be far more easily seen.
Also do not believe that inclusions in the table are worse than those in the crown area. The graders already weight for that.

 

[cinnabar]

When a diamond is called "eye-clean, face up", does that mean I still might see a huge feather from the side?

I wanted a colourless diamond because I was really picky about being able to see colour from the side; face up wasn''t good enough for me, I wanted to be able to see absolutely no tint from any angle. So I think I''d be just as unhappy if I could peer at my diamond sideways and see a glob of something.

An SI2 was recommended to someone in another thread, and when I looked at the GIA plot it looked really nice from the top (obviously eye-clean, couple of small things) but the bottom view showed two huge feathers. I presume that this would be more of an issue for someone wanting to set the stone in prongs (eg a peg head) and less so for someone who planned to cover the pavilion more (eg with a basket, or even a bezel).

If a customer asks "is it eye-clean?", do vendors always assume that it''s only face-up that matters? Does the customer have the onus to specify if they don''t want to see anything from any angle at all?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Date: 12/9/2005 2:05:33 PM
Author: cinnabar
When a diamond is called ''eye-clean, face up'', does that mean I still might see a huge feather from the side?

I wanted a colourless diamond because I was really picky about being able to see colour from the side; face up wasn''t good enough for me, I wanted to be able to see absolutely no tint from any angle. So I think I''d be just as unhappy if I could peer at my diamond sideways and see a glob of something.

An SI2 was recommended to someone in another thread, and when I looked at the GIA plot it looked really nice from the top (obviously eye-clean, couple of small things) but the bottom view showed two huge feathers. I presume that this would be more of an issue for someone wanting to set the stone in prongs (eg a peg head) and less so for someone who planned to cover the pavilion more (eg with a basket, or even a bezel).

If a customer asks ''is it eye-clean?'', do vendors always assume that it''s only face-up that matters? Does the customer have the onus to specify if they don''t want to see anything from any angle at all?

yes - face up is all that counts unless you say otherwise.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/9/2005 2:05:33 PM
Author: cinnabar


If a customer asks ''is it eye-clean?'', do vendors always assume that it''s only face-up that matters? Does the customer have the onus to specify if they don''t want to see anything from any angle at all?

You might be offered something VS.

And this may not be too helpful, because chances are some SIs would also qualify. IMO, the catch is not to obsess about them - if you''d then want not to see anything under 10x... or just have nightmares about the spec that you know of but can''t see without turning the ring upside down under a jeweler''s loupe - that it is just not worth it.

Besides you will not see the diamond at all angles ever - not after it is set.


I don''t think anyone assumes anything about ''eye clean'' - it is something to ask about.

 

[elepri]

If a customer asks ''is it eye-clean?'', do vendors always assume that it''s only face-up that matters? Does the customer have the onus to specify if they don''t want to see anything from any angle at all?

I would specify. I have an SI1 stone and when buying I did ask if the inclusions were visible from any angle upon the closest inspection. I did manage to find a SI1 stone with absolutely no visible inclusions, not just face-up, so they''re definitely out there. Also, if the inclusion is on the side, you can just have it covered by a prong. My stone has one of those and once it was set, i can''t find it even with a loupe after many hours of staring at it.