Is a 0.7 HCA too low?

[lhf2005]

I've been searching for a while for the right stone for my girlfriend's e-ring, and I think I've found it.

I've been looking for an Ideal Cut diamond, with a preference of size over color and clarity.

Since it's Blue Nile, I'm okay with not being able to see this stone until I order it. Otherwise, everything seems to match my criteria, and the price is great. The 55% Table, and the Strong Blue florescence are both added bonuses on the diamond.

http://www.bluenile.com/round-diamond-1-carat-ideal-cut-i-color-si2-clarity_LD02980645

My only concern is that 0.7 HCA score might be too low.

What do you guys think?

 

[pomellina]

I think all diamonds under 2 have to be evaluated on an individual basis but I don't see why there's any cause for concern with 0.7. As far as I understand it, as long as the diamond is under 2 the precise score does not matter.

From Whiteflash: "The actual number is meaningless... HCA provides a yes or no. It places a diamond in or out of the top 5%. Any further discussion regarding character is best done with an expert who has the actual diamond in-hand."

For full disclosure, my engagement ring is a 0.6 on the HCA and from the Blue Nile Signature range. I'm hoping that it will arrive on Thursday so I'll happily post photos to show you what a low HCA diamond looks like. I would've thought there's a thread on here somewhere of posters' diamonds and HCA scores already, actually...

You can always return the diamond if it's not what you want.

Have you checked that diamond is eye clean? I'm not sure if this is important to you or not.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

An HCA of .7 should be fine. I had one that scored a .50 and it sparkled like crazy. I loved it except I discovered that I prefer slightly larger tables (closer to 56-57%), but that is just personal preference.

 

[yssie]

No red flags re. proportions.

It is often said on here that one should beware strong fluorescence, and have the stone vetted to confirm there's no haziness/cloudiness because of the fluorescence. I have tried and failed to find any reason to believe that fluorescence by itself can create haziness/cloudiness in any strength...

However, your stone is an SI2. The grade-making inclusions are twinning wisps, which can be more problematic than other types of inclusions wrt interference with light paths. Additional wisps and surface graining is not shown. I personally would want a trusted party to confirm that there is no haziness or cloudiness due to any odd interactions of inclusions PLUS SBF.

 

[lhf2005]

Thanks for the help. I'm willing to sacrifice that it's SI2 for the cut, size, and price. It hadn't occurred to me that certain inclusions might negatively affect the light paths and reduce the sparkliness.

Once I get the stone, I'm definitely going to get it examined by a local third party, to make sure that it is truly eye-clean (by definition, SI-2 should be eye-clean, but I know that's not always the case), and that there's no haziness or cloudiness.

 

[yssie]

Thanks for the help. I'm willing to sacrifice that it's SI2 for the cut, size, and price. It hadn't occurred to me that certain inclusions might negatively affect the light paths and reduce the sparkliness.

Once I get the stone, I'm definitely going to get it examined by a local third party, to make sure that it is truly eye-clean (by definition, SI-2 should be eye-clean, but I know that's not always the case), and that there's no haziness or cloudiness.

No.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/[/URL]
And the continuation of the above w/ David's insight: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-it-true-that-princesscut-diamonds-are-graded-from-top-not.169988/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-it-true-that-princesscut-diamonds-are-graded-from-top-not.169988/[/URL]

(Read both).

 

[lhf2005]

No.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/[/URL]
And the continuation of the above w/ David's insight: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-it-true-that-princesscut-diamonds-are-graded-from-top-not.169988/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-it-true-that-princesscut-diamonds-are-graded-from-top-not.169988/[/URL]

(Read both).

Ah, thanks for the enlightenment.

I assumed that SI meant only visible under a loupe at 10X magnification, and not visible to the naked eye, but clearly I misunderstood. (although based on those threads, I'm not the only one).

 

[yssie]

No.

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/[/URL]
And the continuation of the above w/ David's insight: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-it-true-that-princesscut-diamonds-are-graded-from-top-not.169988/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-it-true-that-princesscut-diamonds-are-graded-from-top-not.169988/[/URL]

(Read both).

Ah, thanks for the enlightenment.

I assumed that SI meant only visible under a loupe at 10X magnification, and not visible to the naked eye, but clearly I misunderstood. (although based on those threads, I'm not the only one).

Yes - clarity grading still confuses me as well! It seems pretty straightforward until you start nitpicking, and then the "well, it depends" begins... The problem IMO is human intervention - objectivity and objective quantification are admirable goals, but the moment you introduce people you derail any hope of achieving them!
Same issue with colour grading. Industry norms (with a few notable exceptions) seem to lag well behind the available technology.