Studs & Clarity

[gemsandmore]

My husband has been working with his jeweler on finding me some 1.5 - 2 TCW studs. Today he showed us some J SI-3 with medium fluoresence. The colored looked great. However, they had what looked like "spit in ice" inclusions - and quite a few.

Is that clarity a big negative?

Also, they weren''t quite 1 carat each; more like .9 ct. Is it a negative that they weren''t a full carat?

 

[Kaleigh]

You mean frozen spit?? Sounds like the cut wasn't a good one. Take a look at WF's expert selection. Great cut and lots to choose from. Many people go with SI1, or SI2, but it's the cut that makes the difference. Good luck, HTH.

 

[princessv]

I concur with Kaleigh.


I adore the little puppy in your avatar btw...what kind is it? Looks like a little Shitzu? Could even be a little Lhasa?

 

[gemsandmore]

No the inclusions look more like heavy white feathers.

Princess V - The pup is a Maltipoo. Cute, huh?

 

[Sundial]

Kelly your malti-poo is adorable! If the inclusions in the stones are that obvious then they probably aren''t a good choice. I got new SI2 H studs for Christmas and they are ideal cut and eye clean. The right earrings for you are out there so don''t settle for less.

 

[strmrdr]

EGL si-3 == GIA I1 or sometimes I2
i1 sounds bad so someone got a lab to stick the si-3 grade on em.
heavy visible inclusions sounds about right.

 

[Dancing Fire]

ask your jeweler to show you some AGS or GIA stones. better yet,buy from one of the online vendors here.

 

[just_looking!]

Something of better quality although a little smaller will definitely outshine those SI3''s!!

 

[princessv]

Your pup is just sooooo adorable!!

I definitely agree get some other studs...you can always find nice eyeclean SIs!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 1/24/2006 9:27:13 PM
Author:gemsandmore
My husband has been working with his jeweler on finding me some 1.5 - 2 TCW studs. Today he showed us some J SI-3 with medium fluoresence. The colored looked great. However, they had what looked like ''spit in ice'' inclusions - and quite a few.

Is that clarity a big negative?

Also, they weren''t quite 1 carat each; more like .9 ct. Is it a negative that they weren''t a full carat?

Be careful and insist on certified diamonds. I bought some 1.5 tcw that were supposedly H and SI and they turned out to be I and I1. So as soon as I can sell them, I''ll be getting true H VS2 or SI1''s. I''m a little smarter now and understand that the AGS and GIA certifications are worth the higher price. Wish I had known about PS then!

Oh, and I think .9 is an advantage over 1 ct.! You get almost the same size without the price premium on a 1 ct. stone!

 

[gemsandmore]

Well...the story continues...and I want to thank everyone for their feedback.

We went ahead a bought the earrings, with the understanding we could return or upgrade in the future. The reason as I mentioned earlier is my husband will not pay for more insurance and we really want to put money into real estate right now. I have a beautiful E ring and now that I''m use to wearing it, I can''t stand the idea of wearing CZ''s (gosh, what an elitist). So it''s either I keep these or go without earrings for 2-3 years. It''s not worth it to go down in size as they don''t show with my dark hair down.

Anyway, I''m posting pic''s. As you can see the one stone looks a bit cloudy because of the inclusions. But are they passable in clarity?

I would love to email a jeweler directly if the pic''s on this post are too blurry.

Thoughts?

 

[gemsandmore]

Stone one...

 

[gemsandmore]

Stone two...

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Kelly,

How much are they charging for these earrings? Have you compared the prices of some of the online jewelers? Hoenstly, I''d rather have better quality .75 carat studs any day than 1 ct. poor quality ones. People probably can see that they are not good diamonds at almost a carat. There is such a wide selection once you being shopping for diamonds online, whereas a local jeweler may not really have what you want at all, or a small selection at best.

 

[gemsandmore]

diamondseeker2006 - He''s charging $3200. I''ve tried on .75 ct or 1.5 tcw and they just don''t show up. I''d rather go without than spend the money on something that doesn''t show.

 

[Kaleigh]

The bigger they are the more people will be able to see the inclusions.

 

[fisiogrl]

One of them really does look better than the other - but photos aren''t the best judge. Are you happy with them? If so, great.

I would pass them over to get some great cut J-K stones, in the SI 1 or 2 catagory. Probably not much of a loss of size either, for that price. Especially, if you get a vendor with an upgrade policy - that you can move up later.

 

[gemsandmore]

Thanks for the compliments on the pup. Actually, my sister is getting a Maltipoo - not my dog but I love the picture which I believe she got off a website.

kaleigh - Yes, the size in an issue with SI-3's as inclusions are more visable. That was the big dilema.
fisiogrl- I'd go down to 1.5 tcw but they just don't show up. I'd rather give up for now and go with large white gold hoops - something that shows up against black hair.

Anyway, this afternoon I wore earrings into two jewelry stores. Neither could see the inclusions. I was happy about that. I think I'm ultra-sensitive. My E ring SI-1 is EYE CLEAN, and I mean it has one tiny dot, I'm spoiled with it's wonderful clarity.

For now I'm leaning on keeping them. Thanks for your help. Like everyone else I've learned so much from this site.