C is for Colour

[chrono]

I''ve been pondering this for the past few months: Are my eyes playing tricks on me or can I really see the difference in colour?

My EC is an E. Icy cool white.
Jubilee is a J. Nice and white too but sometimes looks tinted.

However, I can clearly see the colour difference between the 2 stones. I thought well cut rounds (and Jubes) will hide the body colour well. If so, then are my eyes playing tricks on me? Is it all in my head?

 

[strmrdr]

Keep in mind that diamonds are much more affected by the color of their surroundings and the lighting present than a slight tint.
If your not comparing them under the same conditions then there is no valid comparison.

That said a j stones is still a j stone and the big problem I have with the whole cut will cover it thing is that there has to be enough light present to cover it.
It doesnt work all the time.
On the other side of the coin h and i and some js look plenty white to most people.

 

[chrono]

I guess that makes sense. I am comparing both stones under the same conditions.

E EC: icy white all the time. Indoors or outdoors. Sunny or cloudy.
J Jubilee: Cool white outdoors. Tinted indoors.

So this means that indoors (with insufficient lighting), there isn''t enough light for the sparkle and cut to hide the body colour of the J?

 

[pqcollectibles]

I would think anyone would see a difference between an E and a J when 2 diamonds of the same style cut are side by side. You might actually see color and you might just see a difference in warmth. But you are comparing 2 totally different cuts here and the style of the cut factors in there as well.

An EC is a transparent cut. Viewers look thru the stone. The Jube has body that will hold and show color. The style of cut factors in there as well. When I was shopping, one diamond broker showed me a "well cut" princess diamond side by side with and Ideal round. Both were I color. The round looked fabulous and white where the princess showed color.

 

[Patty]

How many of us now have the "C is for Cookie" song going through our heads?

 

[chrono]

Patty,
I''m afraid I''ve never heard of that song. Care to share that with me?

 

[valeria101]

The way you describe the color difference (aparent when conditions get just right... under some scrutiny and by comparison side by side) doesn''t make it sound stryking. Between E and J the price difference is quite a bit and there are four color grades inbetween as well.

One color grade difference remains "philosophical" to me... four not quite:there''s something there allright, just subtle

For all purposes, those are still "white" to me. Did they really claim cut obviates color all the way ???

I do remember some branded cut adds saying "out cut hides one / two color grades" or such, but never the claim to bleach diamonds. Not yet, at least.

That''s left for HPHT, not cut alone.

 

[Patty]

"C" Is For Cookie
as sung by Cookie Monster (Frank Oz) (duh!)
written by Joe Raposo
[Now what starts with the letter C?
Cookie starts with C
Let''s think of other things
That starts with C
Oh, who cares about the other things?]
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me
Oh, cookie, cookie, cookie starts with C
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me
Oh, cookie, cookie, cookie starts with C
[Hey you know what?
A round cookie with one bite out of it
Looks like a C
A round donut with one bite out of it
Also looks like a C
But it is not as good as a cookie
Oh and the moon sometimes looks like a C
But you can''t eat that, so ... ]
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me, yeah!
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me
C is for cookie, that''s good enough for me
Oh, cookie, cookie, cookie starts with C, yeah!
Cookie, cookie, cookie starts with C, oh boy!
Cookie, cookie, cookie starts with C!
(Cookie Monster eats the cookie)
Umm-umm-umm-umm-umm

 

[belle]

Date: 2/23/2005 10:20:13 AM
Author: Patty
How many of us now have the ''C is for Cookie'' song going through our heads?

well i do NOW!!! thanks patty

c is for cookie, it''s good enough for me.... c is for cookie, it''s good enough for me
cookie cookie cookie starts with c

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/23/2005 9:30:10 AM
Author: Chrono
I guess that makes sense. I am comparing both stones under the same conditions.

E EC: icy white all the time. Indoors or outdoors. Sunny or cloudy.
J Jubilee: Cool white outdoors. Tinted indoors.

So this means that indoors (with insufficient lighting), there isn''t enough light for the sparkle and cut to hide the body colour of the J?

yep

 

[KBerly]

patty, you just made me crack up....memories, haha

 

[lmurden]

Chrono, maybe your J is a low J and that''s why the tint is more noticeable compared to others who own ideal/well cut Js.

 

[Patty]

Date: 2/23/2005 11

7:15 AM
Author: KBerly
patty, you just made me crack up....memories, haha

Chrono, I''m not surprised that you can see the difference between an E and a J. Yes, a well cut J will face up whiter than a poorly cut J, but it will never be as white as an E. And you can always see the color more through the side of the stone. I think what you are seeing is to be expected.

 

[chrono]

Well, of course I expected to see the difference between the E and J but I never expected the tint to be so pronounced. And the comparison is between mounted stones, face up only. My H RB pendant (SC) is as icy as my E.

 

[Kaleigh]

Patty,
OMG, I''m sitting here with a fever of 101, and I just can''t get that song out of my head. I love seasame street.

 

[Todd07]

Chrono,
Of course there is a noticable difference between the E & J. The question revolves around is it worth a 70% premium for the same size, or would you find the J that is >50% bigger makes a more beautiful ring

Emerald, 2A Cut, 1.0-1.5 Carats
E VS1 - $5.5k/carat
J VS1 - $3.1k/carat
The E costs 77% more

Round, 2A Cut, 1.0-1.5 Carats
E VS2 - $7.1k/carat
J VS2 - $4.2k/carat
The E costs 69% more

I personally felt a larger well cut J was a better investment.

 

[noobie]

Date: 2/23/2005 12:26:16 PM
Author: Chrono
Well, of course I expected to see the difference between the E and J but I never expected the tint to be so pronounced. And the comparison is between mounted stones, face up only. My H RB pendant (SC) is as icy as my E.

I believe we have similar vision when it comes to diamond color. I''ve bought E, G, H and J stones. I sent the J stone back. Although it was not yellow and was very well cut, it just appeared warm and tinted, a character I don''t personally care for as much. I don''t see the same thing in the H stone. Although this was not scientific by any means, it was enough for me to set my personal cut off at H and look at I''s on a case by case basis.

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 2/23/2005 12:26:16 PM
Author: Chrono
Well, of course I expected to see the difference between the E and J but I never expected the tint to be so pronounced. And the comparison is between mounted stones, face up only. My H RB pendant (SC) is as icy as my E.

Face up is not a valid way to grade diamonds the way gemologists and dealers grade color.

A stone can only be graded properly face DOWN. I admit that this is sort of useless because consumers look at the stone in a face up position. But due to other factors face up, a stone may look better or worse or the same as its assigned color grade.

Fancy shaped stones are graded differently than rounds. Fancy shapes need to be examoned and graded diagonally

Color vision of an indivual''s eyes also play a big part in this.

The face up appearance, while an issue for consumers, can vary a lot. Looking at the stone face up should affect the appearance for a consumer, but it is NOT an accurate way to grade a diamond''s color.

RockDoc

 

[lmurden]

Rockdoc whose talking about grading a diamond face up? No one as far as I am concerned. I certainly don't believe that most people compare diamonds loose or face down! The bottom line is that I have seen an E color leo diamond that was set and compared it to my I color diamond and I nor the sales woman could not see the difference. Although I am sure that under different light condition I probably would be able to see the difference. I really think it is up to the individual eyes and if the diamond was graded properly and cut well.

 

[pqcollectibles]

Date: 2/24/2005 12:40

9 PM
Author: RockDoc

Date: 2/23/2005 12:26:16 PM
Author: Chrono
Well, of course I expected to see the difference between the E and J but I never expected the tint to be so pronounced. And the comparison is between mounted stones, face up only. My H RB pendant (SC) is as icy as my E.

Face up is not a valid way to grade diamonds the way gemologists and dealers grade color.

A stone can only be graded properly face DOWN. I admit that this is sort of useless because consumers look at the stone in a face up position. But due to other factors face up, a stone may look better or worse or the same as its assigned color grade.

Fancy shaped stones are graded differently than rounds. Fancy shapes need to be examoned and graded diagonally

Color vision of an indivual''s eyes also play a big part in this.

The face up appearance, while an issue for consumers, can vary a lot. Looking at the stone face up should affect the appearance for a consumer, but it is NOT an accurate way to grade a diamond''s color.

RockDoc

I, for one, am glad you chimed in, Rock Doc. I was beginning to think I was the only one who realized this was an apples and oranges and grapes comparison. 3 different color diamonds that are 3 different cut shapes is not a valid comparison, IMHO. If the comparison was all comparably cut, similar carat weight RB''s, or all EC''s, or all Jubilees, that would be one thing. The comparison here is among different cuts with a variety of unknown variables.

And as Rock Doc points out, cut can make or break the actual color grade. My J is fabulous. I know people on this Forum that haven''t seen it might be skeptical, but it is. My diamond fools jewelers. You should see their faces when they hear it''s a J. Rhino and I chatted about how this is possible. Due to his research, Rhino believes my J is bright and white as a result of the Cut producing Contrast that allows my diamond to visually "fool" the eye thru performance. That''s a case of the diamond appearing much better than the actual color grade. Another Ideal, super douper louper J with different facets cut may not "face up" as well as mine does.

I emailed Rhino about one of his responses on the Forum regarding Contrast. I''ll copy a bit of that email here for folks to read:

PQ said: The whole contrast thing explains why my J diamond is so white looking, I think. Brian said this diamond had more contrast than the other H, I''s, and another J he was looking at when we were chatting.

Rhino responded: "I hear ya. While I value the input of one like Brian (and our clients, me), we demonstrate this via Isee2 (the computerized 3rd party). I’m sure your stone would fair well but yes … that is why your J stone is *bright* in suffuse conditions. I just got an email from a lady on the forum who purchased an ideal cut from an online vendor that had great B’scope results but she claimed the diamond looks dark. She may have gotten one with pavilion angles on the shallow side or a “shallow/shallow” combo that does well in direct light but not in diffuse light.

[PQ] Also, could the minor facets alignment and contrast be the reason why other J''s look like J''s while mine fools jewelers into thinking it''s a higher color stone??

[Rhino] My answer would be it’s primarily the majors contributing to the factor of making your stone look more colorless as opposed to the minors.