I think I may have found THE diamond

[bluej422]

Hello,
I'm a newbie, but I've been trying to do my homework for my engagement ring. I think I may have the diamond, but I'd really appreciate some feedback. It's a RB H/SI2 from exceldiamonds. It's not a superbcert, but it's an Ideal AGS000 (although the cert is from early 2005) and the laser inscription says it's H&A's. I guess it's not a stone they had as part of their inhouse inventory but they have quick accesss to it-- should I be concerned by this? Does it some how indicate that the quality is not as good as one of the superbcerts?

Here's the specs.
Table: 55
Depth: 60.4
Crown % 15.5
Crown Angle: 34.6
Pavillion: 40.7
Cutlet: Pointed
Girdle: 1.0-1.3%

HCA scores is 0.9
I've also attached a copy of the Imagescope. What do you guys think? Thanks for the help!

 

[strmrdr]

looks nice to me

 

[aljdewey]

If I''m not mistaken, I believe that Excel Diamonds doesn''t really believe in the HCA, so you may want to tread lightly on that topic with them.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/24/2006 12:23:03 AM
Author:bluej422

I guess it's not a stone they had as part of their inhouse inventory but they have quick accesss to it-- should I be concerned by this?
!

No. They should ... because other sellers list the same rock and you get to choose the seller.

If you try the 'Search by cut quality' above, the same stone appears listed by GoodOldGold and I'd bet others have access to it as well. If you wanted to compare this diamond with others in a seller's stock or the price turns out better... take your pick.

The details posted sound great, as far as I can tell. What makes this an 'SI2'?

 

[bluej422]

Date: 1/24/2006 8:23:13 AM
Author: valeria101

Date: 1/24/2006 12:23:03 AM
Author:bluej422

I guess it''s not a stone they had as part of their inhouse inventory but they have quick accesss to it-- should I be concerned by this?
!

No. They should ... because other sellers list the same rock and you get to choose the seller.

If you try the ''Search by cut quality'' above, the same stone appears listed by GoodOldGold and I''d bet others have access to it as well. If you wanted to compare this diamond with others in a seller''s stock or the price turns out better... take your pick.

The details posted sound great, as far as I can tell. What makes this an ''SI2''?

Thanks guys for your help. It''s an SI2 because of two inclusions on the table. I believe they''re clear/white and Barry assured me (with the diamond in front of him) that it''s very eye clean for an SI2. The gemex/brilliancescope report as came back with very high in colored light and scintillation and high/very high in white light. Thanks again for any help!

 

[bluej422]

Here''s the Hearts and Arrows pics as well. Thanks for your help!

 

[Lynn B]

Whoaaa babeeeee! Looks like a WINNER to ME!

 

[sslkrissi]

Hello,
I just have a quick question regarding the fact that they called it in from another vendor. Are you charged a fee to do that? And, if you bought it, do they take the fee off of the purchase price? Once you had it called in, were they able to give you pictures, brilliancescope, idealscope images? Just trying to figure out what calling a stone in entails and whether it is worth it or not if the stone is not one that you are positive about wanting.

Thanks

 

[ecf8503]

Just an FYI - if this is not a "Superbcert" branded diamond, they will not allow you to trade up in the future...

 

[bluej422]

Date: 1/25/2006 2:23:02 PM
Author: sslkrissi
Hello,
I just have a quick question regarding the fact that they called it in from another vendor. Are you charged a fee to do that? And, if you bought it, do they take the fee off of the purchase price? Once you had it called in, were they able to give you pictures, brilliancescope, idealscope images? Just trying to figure out what calling a stone in entails and whether it is worth it or not if the stone is not one that you are positive about wanting.

Thanks

Hi,
They didn''t charge a fee at all, but it very well may be built into the price. And were able to get the stone almost immediately. (I''ve done this at a local jeweler too and it took much longer, but still no fee). Once they had the stone in front of them they were able to take detailed pics, and do an idealscope, etc.

Just my opinion, but I think etiquette-wise you probably shouldn''t ask about any stones you''re not serious about, since it''s not really fair to waste a vendor''s time if you''re not pretty serious. But there''s no way you could be positive about wanting a stone until you (or your trusted jeweler) has had a chance to see the stone in person and do some analysis. So find out what you can from the listing and if you''re still interested, then you''re going to need to see the stone. But we''ll let the more experienced folks weigh in on this one...

 

[sslkrissi]

I agree with you whole-heartedly about not calling one in unless you are serious about it. Thats why I have never actually called one in. But on the other hand, it would be difficult for me to say that I was serious about a stone that I have not been able to see or get a detailed anaylsis of.

Thanks for the help, and by the way, I think you picked a really nice stone!

 

[Garysax]

Whole heartedly agree with you there. They're incurring costs to make you the customer happy. It isn't fair to them to yank them around for providing such a nice service.

 

[bluej422]

OK, now that it''s time to decide I''m trying to weigh my options one more time. Anyone want to weigh in too? How you think the above specs/images compare to this stone''s specs and idealscope image. Size-wise they''re close but this second one is about $700 less. I''ve been told, this one is eye clean from a normal viewing distance. It''s from GOG, And, I do have to say that both vendors have provided wonderful service so it''s tough to make the call on that basis (huge thanks to both vendors, though).

Round Brilliant AGS000 H&A Ideal SI1/J
Table: 55.9
Depth: 60.6
Crown Angle: 34.8
Paviliion Depth: 43%
Cutlet: 0.3
Girdle: Thin to Medium
HCA: 1.2


I''m not very color-sensitive, but think I can see the difference between an H and J, especially if they''re side by side (I could on some other stones anyway), but if one of these is visibly better in brillance/fire/sparkle, I think that wins out over color for me. Anyone have any advice?

 

[sslkrissi]

They are both within ideal range, according to the HCA scores. So, if you are not color sensitive, maybe you should go with the second one b/c it is an SI1 instead of an SI2, plus it is less expensive. Many people seem to think that it is better not to go lower than an SI1. I don''t necessarily agree, so long as the SI2 is eyeclean. Have you seen the SI 2 to make sure that it is eye-clean TO YOU? The second stone that you posted gets two Highs, and one very high on the brilliianscope, so it looks like a good performer. Have you been able to see how the SI 2 performs?

I think they are both very nice stones. Maybe you should just see them both and pick which ever one you are really drawn to.

 

[sslkrissi]

Btw, I forgot to mention that if you like the J/SI1 better, but are concerned about the color, there is a thread on this forum where everyone with J color stones have posted pictures. I don''t know the name of it, but if you run a search for it, it will definately come up.

 

[msdarlinjoy]

Hi Bluej422!

I am curious ... the first light scope pic looks a tad bit different than the second one. Is it because the first diamond is what is considered a "new line" stone? I understand that the "new line" and the "?old line" have a different type of sparkle, some have different types of flashes, versus, bolder flashes ... I think. By the way ... I am not an expert!

My first instinct is to go with the SI1, even though some SI2's are considered "eye-clean" does that mean that I always have to hold the diamond so many inches away so that I don't see a piece of pepper or a chunk of salt? The fact that the second diamond is a little cheaper is a plus too.

I definately would choose the diamond that had a wonderful looking bscope. I am a very visual type person, so the bscope image helps too.

As far as the J color ... you probably have already read the post on this board, I think if it is a great cut, and the bscope is great ... you are probably not going to see much difference or any difference with the naked eye between the H & J. I just recently bought a J from Jonathan @ GOG.

Best wishes, and keep us updated.

 

[bluej422]

Date: 1/28/2006 5:48:07 PM
Author: sslkrissi
They are both within ideal range, according to the HCA scores. So, if you are not color sensitive, maybe you should go with the second one b/c it is an SI1 instead of an SI2, plus it is less expensive. Many people seem to think that it is better not to go lower than an SI1. I don''t necessarily agree, so long as the SI2 is eyeclean. Have you seen the SI 2 to make sure that it is eye-clean TO YOU? The second stone that you posted gets two Highs, and one very high on the brilliianscope, so it looks like a good performer. Have you been able to see how the SI 2 performs?

I think they are both very nice stones. Maybe you should just see them both and pick which ever one you are really drawn to.

Thanks so much for your replies. The H/SI2 has a really good brilliancescope--it''s H 3/VH 3/VH 2 so I think I might be leaning that way. I''m just not sure if those brilliancescope results are enought to justify the higher price. I haven''t been able to see it in person, but it was described to me as a very eye clean SI2 (white carbon spots in table and a feather on the bezel facet that you can''t see from 6 inches away). It''ll go to an appraiser and I''ll see it in person before it''s set but I just want to get as comfortable as I can that this is the one (short of buying them both). Thanks for the help!

 

[msdarlinjoy]

Personally, eye clean as long as my eyes and my stone are at least 6 inches apart, isn't enough for me. Once I could see it up close, I would be able to spot it even if it was 12 inches away because I would know where to look and what to look for, it would always bother me, and get on my nerves. I couldn't take it.

Also, If there was an inclusion, and it was 6 inches etc... I would only buy that stone if you could only view it from the bottom up, usually most people don't view their diamonds that way, so I might be able to live with something like that.

I think size and placement of the inclusions would depend on my answer as well.

I wonder is some of the gals here who have an SI2 would chime in ... I wonder if their inclusion is viewable from top down, or bottoms up? Or is the inclusion covered up by a prong?

Decisions, Decisions!

Good luck & best wishes!

 

[msdarlinjoy]

I went back to both vendors sites and compared all pics side by side.

I would personally go with diamond #2.

Diamond 2''s inclusions are less noticable, and they happen to be towards the side of the diamond, versus, diamond 1 runs straight thru the middle and is graded an SI2.

Diamond 2 is just slightly bigger than diamond 1, and is $700 less than diamond 1.

Diamond 2 and diamond 1 Bscopes are nearly identical! I had them up side by side, and kept going back and forth with each pic. Let me tell you after too much time spent trying to find a noticable difference, I don''t think in person, with your naked eye ... you are really going to say one diamond is deffinately more sparkley than the other.

I would go with the slightly bigger diamond, that cost $700 less, and a better grade in clarity. I personally do not think the J color is going to be a factor here comparing it to the H!

Here''s Diamond #2''s bscope: Looks great to me!

 

[sslkrissi]

I kinda agree with what Mrs Darlin Joy is saying about the brillianscopes of the two stones. I don''t think that there is much of a difference when you look at them. Stone #1 has 2 VH and 1 H, while stone #2 has 1 H, 1 H/VH (right in the middle of them) and 1 VH. So, they are almost the same. Is the slight difference in brillainscope results enough to justify the increase in cost? I don''t know, only you can be the judge of that.

Also, the fact that the inclusion on stone #2 is off to the side versus in the middle, is a factor that would weigh pretty heavily on my decision.

Did you ever find out about the trade-up policy if you buy stone #1? I think someone said earlier that you wouldn''t be able to get the full value for it b/c it is not a superbcert. Is that correct? If so, is that something that is important to you?

Good luck. You can''t go wrong b/c both of the stones are lovely. Make sure you let us all know which one you decide on!!!

 

[Lynn B]

Just wanted to mention that there are SI2 stones out there that are completely eye-clean to the naked eye at any distance. I know because I own one!

 

[sslkrissi]

Hi Lynn,
Just out of curiosity, what makes your stone an SI 2. You are right, I just looked at a picture of it on an older thread and I couldn''t see anything wrong with it. It is beautiful? Are the inclusions somewhere other than on the table? I think that may be what makes a difference with SI 2s. I was considering an E SI 2 from WF expert selection, and it too was totally eye-clean (to me at least). I think it was b/c the inclusions weren''t right in the middle.

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 1/29/2006 5:01:14 PM
Author: sslkrissi
Hi Lynn,

Just out of curiosity, what makes your stone an SI 2. You are right, I just looked at a picture of it on an older thread and I couldn''t see anything wrong with it. It is beautiful? Are the inclusions somewhere other than on the table? I think that may be what makes a difference with SI 2s. I was considering an E SI 2 from WF expert selection, and it too was totally eye-clean (to me at least). I think it was b/c the inclusions weren''t right in the middle.

Sometimes the plotting diagrams on the certs can look awfully scary

so I have found that the 40x mag photos are especially valuable. In my diamond, there are quite a few small scattered pinpoints and very small clouds. No feathers, twinning wisps, indented naturals, crystals, etc., though. All inclusions are small and only visible under a loupe. According to the plot, there are inclusions under and near the table... but I haven''t ever seen those, even with a loupe.

Is it beautiful? You tell me!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

We knew zero about diamonds 29 years ago when we got engaged. My diamond looked pretty in the store and my future husband bought it. It was not until some time later that I saw it under the 10x microscope and I could see an inclusion in the middle. I cannot see it with just my eyes. But ever since then it has bothered me and that is why I am wanting a VS now. I do think color and clarity are a very personal decision. I could go lower in color if I was going for an antique setting. But now I am so picky about clarity that I need to be sure that a VS2 is okay! I think I''d be fine with any VS1.

If this were me, I''d go for the GOG stone so that if the color does ever bother her, she can upgrade with full value (I believe). I would rule out the other because of the SI2 with middle inclusion and the fact that it apparently can''t be upgraded.

 

[msdarlinjoy]

Lynn is correct ... there are SI2's that are eyeclean.

I recently went diamond browsing ... what fun!!! I could always pic out the difference between the SI1, SI2 and the VS and better ones. I wasn't able to tell the difference between color though, at least not with much precision. They were all AGS 000 stones, nicely cut ...

I could generally say this is in the catagory of D,E,F, or this is an H,I,J etc. They all were soooo over priced!

I think it really depends on the type of inclusion, and how many inclusions there are, and where they happen to be in any diamond. I personally would not want an inclusion to be smack dab in the center, to the sides yes, or even better ... only see the inclusion from the bottoms up view. For some reason my eyes always goes directly to the center, I don't know why that is, but I fixate on the center and then I encompass the diamond as a whole. I might be strange?

I think you can make your hard earned money go alot farther by willingness to go down in clarity, and color so that you can get the size. (keeping the ideal cut as #1 priority) I am one of those that did just that. I just bought a J colored stone! Who would have ever imagined me doing that!

I think if you know what you want, and are willing to wait, and be patient, You can get an eye clean SI2!

In my earlier post ... to me eye clean means that I wont be able to see it with my own two eyeballs, to me if I have to hold it at least 6 inches away, it's not going to be eye clean to me ... but that is just me.


Anyway, I think all diamonds have different personalities, I think that someone should not rule out an SI2 just for sake well, that it is an SI2. I know that there are some ladies here that are very happy and excited about their stone,

and they happen to be SI2's. That is why I thought that some of them might chime in to say a lil' about their sparkler!

I think that there are some real great finds out there, you just have to know what you want, what your willing to live with, and be patient for the right diamond that fits the parameters you want or need to come along, and when you see it ... you can jump on it, because it will not last long!

I wonder on some of the SI2's, if the inclusions are only visable from the bottom's up view? If that is the case ... that wouldn't bother me, 'cause I am getting too old and fat to be bending over like that to view the diamond!

Also, I didn't pay attention earlier, and now I am wondering ... if someone were to buy Diamond #1 and it is not a superbcert diamond, would that person be able to upgrade in the future, or not? That is something to think about.

To everyone ... Have a wonderful week ahead!

 

[Mara]

I also have an eye-clean SI2 that is just fabulous, I have only ever been able to find a tiny tiny black thing in it and only then close up at an angle. I love it...it''s the best way to get the most for your money. I also have posted close up shots of my diamond previously.

Secondly, I''m curious on the first SC stone, you note it was not an in-house diamond, so did you have them call it in for you? It looks VERY good to be just a random virtual stone, even down to the hearts and arrows pictures!

Either diamond would be very beautiful it seems...it may just come down to basic gut instinct for you. I have a J and I adore it but it is a place where you can start to see a bit of warmth in the stone, to me it''s not a big deal at all but to some it may bother them. However we have seen alot of really darn white J''s on here so it''s very hard to say...it''s personal preference.

The J stones in Platinum thread has tons of pictures...good luck whatever you decide!

 

[bluej422]

Date: 1/29/2006 8:07:37 PM
Author: Mara
I also have an eye-clean SI2 that is just fabulous, I have only ever been able to find a tiny tiny black thing in it and only then close up at an angle. I love it...it''s the best way to get the most for your money. I also have posted close up shots of my diamond previously.

Secondly, I''m curious on the first SC stone, you note it was not an in-house diamond, so did you have them call it in for you? It looks VERY good to be just a random virtual stone, even down to the hearts and arrows pictures!

Either diamond would be very beautiful it seems...it may just come down to basic gut instinct for you. I have a J and I adore it but it is a place where you can start to see a bit of warmth in the stone, to me it''s not a big deal at all but to some it may bother them. However we have seen alot of really darn white J''s on here so it''s very hard to say...it''s personal preference.

The J stones in Platinum thread has tons of pictures...good luck whatever you decide!

Thanks so much everyone for all of your help. I''ll need to mull it all over but all of your comments have been extremely helpful. I hadn''t really given much thought to the upgrade issue--she''s got tiny size 4 fingers so I never even considered a need to upgrade from a 1.7 Carat. But that is an excellent point.

Mara, it was a diamond they called in from the manufacturer. I think it such great luck that the stone from the list of so many other ideals happened to have such great idealscope and H&As, which is part of why I can''t get it out of my head. I''ve been told that had this been part of in-house inventory as a branded H&A (like superbcert or ACA) it would have been priced differently.

Thanks everyone! I''ll keep you posted.

 

[sslkrissi]

Date: 1/29/2006 6:30:13 PM
Author: Lynn B

Date: 1/29/2006 5:01:14 PM
Author: sslkrissi
Hi Lynn,

Just out of curiosity, what makes your stone an SI 2. You are right, I just looked at a picture of it on an older thread and I couldn''t see anything wrong with it. It is beautiful? Are the inclusions somewhere other than on the table? I think that may be what makes a difference with SI 2s. I was considering an E SI 2 from WF expert selection, and it too was totally eye-clean (to me at least). I think it was b/c the inclusions weren''t right in the middle.

Sometimes the plotting diagrams on the certs can look awfully scary

so I have found that the 40x mag photos are especially valuable. In my diamond, there are quite a few small scattered pinpoints and very small clouds. No feathers, twinning wisps, indented naturals, crystals, etc., though. All inclusions are small and only visible under a loupe. According to the plot, there are inclusions under and near the table... but I haven''t ever seen those, even with a loupe.

Is it beautiful? You tell me!

Oops, Lynn...
I meant to say "It is beautiful!" Not asking if it is beautiful. I could tell from looking at it that it was!

 

[sslkrissi]

So BlueJ,
I noticed the H color stone on exceldiamonds.com is no longer there. Is that the one that you went with?

 

[bluej422]

Date: 2/6/2006 3:22:54 PM
Author: sslkrissi
So BlueJ,
I noticed the H color stone on exceldiamonds.com is no longer there. Is that the one that you went with?

Yup, that''s me. I sent it to an independent appraiser who had great things to say about the stone. Apparently its a completely eyeclean SI2 (although you can definitely see the crystals in the 40x pics I saw) and a beautiful rock with tons of fire and brilliance. It''s on its way to me and I''ll get to see it in person for the first time soon. Although, it almost wasn''t me who got it since there was apparently another interested party. Whew. I''ll fill you guys in once I get it in hand. How exciting!