Urgent help needed! Just bought 1.22ct K SI1 - not eyeclean to me

[drk]

Hi everyone,

I''ve been avidly following this forum for ages to pick up tips needed for our diamond purchase. After much research, my fiance and I bought this stone from Good Old Gold last week: http://www.goodoldgold.com/1_22ct_k_si1_h&a.htm

We saw it in person when we had a long weekend in New York, and it looked great when we checked it out in the store. Rhino checked the color with his colorimeter and it measured as a high J, which was a bonus. I could have sworn we took a really close look at the stone. The visual performance was great, and I didn''t see the inclusion when I looked with my naked eye at the time, though it was really easy to find with the loupe.

We just went to pick it up at UPS today, and after a long drive home, I sat down to take a closer look and found it''s not eyeclean. I can quite clearly see the main feather looking directly down on the table of the stone. It''s even easier to see from the side. It doesn''t take more than 4 seconds for me to identify it. Rhino said part of the feather hits the surface close to the girdle in the pavilion side. He swore it won''t affect the durability of the diamond and that getting it set won''t be a problem.

We''re planning to have our stone set in a two-tone half-bezel setting. Do you guys think this will hide the inclusion sufficiently? Does anyone else have an SI1 that isn''t actually eyeclean? Does being able to see your inclusion bother you at all? I can''t decide what to think at this point. Returning the stone would be easy, but it would be quite a hassle to pick out and get another one shipped (I''m Canadian, my finace is German).

Any advice you can give me would really be appreciated! We thought we had the perfect stone, and now this!

And then of course our local jeweller refuses to take responsibility for it if it gets damaged while it''s set, and there''s no stand-alone loose diamond insurance policy to be had in Canada. With the feathers right at the edge the way they are, he recommends us using a setter he works with for complicated settings who would set the stone with the help of a microscope. This guy apparently puts some kind of fluid in the slot he has cut to fit the diamond into, and then watches for the fluid to be squeezed out as the metal is gently tapped into place to hold the stone in. Has anyone yeard of this before?

Please help! I''m not sure how bad this inclusion is or not, and if I should have this panicky feeling now that I can see the inclusion... I''m going to have it appraised by Harold Weinstein tomorrow. We''ll see if our appraiser thinks it''s an SI1 like the GIA says it is.

Thanks,
Drk

 

[glaucomflecken]

Hi!

I think the stone looks nice! But I'm not a pro and Im sure the experts here can reassure you or advise against this one. I'm sure it would be a big pain to return the stone, but one thing I have learned in my experiences is that no matter how good the setter is or how well you can hide the inclusions, durability issues aside, if it truly bothers you now it probably always will! Diamonds are not cheap, and you really should be 100% happy with what you have purchased. I have an SI1 and it is totally clean top down but I can spot the inclusion on the side ("eye clean-ness" is not graded from the side) because I know where it is and probably if I try hard enough I can find it face down too. It doesnt bother me because its small and no one really will notice it, but I also know down the road I will trade it in for something larger so its not "forever" with me.

 

[baltneu]

If YOU think is not eye clean, then, it is not eye clean! I agree with the last comment, it will always be in your mind. I bought an I/SI1 and it is eye clean! I have looked at it with the loupe and cannot even see it (I am not a jeweler).
GOG has a return policy, perhaps Jonathan can pick out another stone for you. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Dancing Fire]

my best advise when buying SI stones is don''t EVER loupe the stone first, try to find the inclusions under different light conditions with your naked eyes (top view) without knowing where the inclusions are located ,this way your mind can''t play tricks on you,if it''s eye clean then it''s eye clean.

 

[valeria101]

You are the only judge here - if some detail about that diamond bothers you, it may be best to change it asap. There is no right or wrong here... IMO.

The setting will definitely obviate inclusions further. It may be afeasible to see this stone placed into a setting without actually being set just to get an idea. Perhaps this would help with your decission - if you like the stone enough to put it through the test.

Just my 0.2, of course.

 

[codex57]

Wait a while (not too long before the return period expires) and then try and find the inclusion again. From the top! Looking from the side is cheating. If it''s still not eyeclean, go return it and get another stone.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 4/11/2005 11:39:22 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
my best advise when buying SI stones is don''t EVER loupe the stone first, try to find the inclusions under different light conditions with your naked eyes (top view) without knowing where the inclusions are located ,this way your mind can''t play tricks on you,if it''s eye clean then it''s eye clean.

Yes and no. The problem is, at SOME point during the ownership of a stone, one *will* view it through the loupe......and then if you can readily pick out the inclusion without the loupe, you can still *see* it. It may qualify as "eye-clean", but if she can see it *and* it bothers her, that''s a problem.

I''d personally rather suffer a little hassle now to get it right, so I''d give Rhino a call and see about exchanging it for something else. Yes, it''s a pain in the rear, but it''s a once in a lifetime purchase. Why not do it right? Things always go even further south when we try to shortcut around a problem.

 

[Daniela]

God, I hate it when this happens. Especially to a Canadian because it''s such a hassle to send diamonds back from here. You asked if others had similar SI-1''s. I had a not eye-clean SI-1, too, and I ended up sending it back and upgrading a few months later because it drove me batty.

The first thing you need to decide is if it actually bothers you. Right now you sound unsure. Is that because you are dreading the hassle of sending the stone back (this is why I kept my first diamond as long as I did).

Then if you''ve decided it bugs you, it needs to go back (ASAP, before the return deadline expires). This is a big purchase, and a sentimental one. You need to love it.

I''m going to offer you very important advice here: absolutely do not attempt to send the diamond back to the States from Canada. Drive it back over the border, and send it REGISTERED and INSURED through the United States Postal Service. It should take about a week for it to get to GOG.

 

[AndyRosse]

Just my two cents...

My diamond is also SI1. When the jeweler showed it to us, he said it was eye clean, but I was quickly able to find one eye visible inclusion. I really loved everything else about the stone and after some thinking, decided it was still the stone for me!! The inclusion is only visible in certain lighting situations and only if you are looking for it. I mean, I''ve never had a person come up and look at my stone and then exclaim, "What''s that?!" LOL I personally like being able to see the inclusion as it is a very quick and easy way to know that it is my diamond if I leave it anywhere. Also, it is near the side, which means if it really bothered me, I could have a prong put over it. But I like it just the way it is! But then again, that''s crazy old me!!

Now of course, there are tons of people who this would really really really bother, so you just need to decide if this is something that will haunt you for as long as you have this stone...If so, then have GOG find you another stone!

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 4/12/2005 9:24:16 AM
Author: Stretch4
Just my two cents...

My diamond is also SI1. When the jeweler showed it to us, he said it was eye clean, but I was quickly able to find one eye visible inclusion. I really loved everything else about the stone and after some thinking, decided it was still the stone for me!! The inclusion is only visible in certain lighting situations and only if you are looking for it. I mean, I''ve never had a person come up and look at my stone and then exclaim, ''What''s that?!'' LOL I personally like being able to see the inclusion as it is a very quick and easy way to know that it is my diamond if I leave it anywhere. Also, it is near the side, which means if it really bothered me, I could have a prong put over it. But I like it just the way it is! But then again, that''s crazy old me!!

Now of course, there are tons of people who this would really really really bother, so you just need to decide if this is something that will haunt you for as long as you have this stone...If so, then have GOG find you another stone!

This is precisely the way I feel about SI stones.

Does it speak to you on all other levels? Is the feather something you can live with? With me, it''s kinda a Zen thing. I like the fact that my stone is recognizable.

 

[Stephan]

I am perhaps the only crazy guy here who buys J-K-L-M-N colors in VVS clarity.
Did you look at this GOG''s J-VS2?
Good luck!

 

[Stephan]

I understand that people who need a D-E-F are looking for a nice SI1.

But if you love the warmer colors, I think it''s better to buy VVS-VS1 because the difference in price is not worth a compromise.

 

[Rhino]

Hi drk!

Have it appraised first and get the input from your local. Whatever you decide to do I''m with you 110% of the way.

Peace,

 

[strmrdr]

I dont like open feathers but if Jon doesnt think this one is a problem then Id consider it.

As far as the eyeclean issue its really up to you and your fiance if you can tolerate it.
If you cant tolerate it, Jon will take good care of you.
Please let us know how it turns out.

 

[LAJennifer]

I''ve been watching this stone for a while, and I was a bit disappointed when it disappeared off of GOG''s website last weekend. Congrats on your purchase - wether you decide to keep this one or get another one. I am curious though, how this one performed in person. Could you tell me if it is quite the "dazzler" that I thought it would be? I haven''t yet compared stones in person and am very interested in the visual aspects of the warmer colored stones as well as Hearts and Arrows. I''ll be planning a trip to GOG late this summer. Thanks.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 4/12/2005 1:37:52 PM
Author: strmrdr
I dont like open feathers but if Jon doesnt think this one is a problem then Id consider it.

Maybe I missed something here.....she said the feather comes to the edge, but she didn''t say it breaks the surface? I didn''t see where this was deemed an "open" feather.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 4/12/2005 1:45:20 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 4/12/2005 1:37:52 PM

Author: strmrdr

I dont like open feathers but if Jon doesnt think this one is a problem then Id consider it.

Maybe I missed something here.....she said the feather comes to the edge, but she didn''t say it breaks the surface? I didn''t see where this was deemed an ''open'' feather.

"Rhino said part of the feather hits the surface close to the girdle in the pavilion side"

I took that to mean it broke the surface. *shrug*

 

[drk]

Update:

Thank you so much to everyone who answered. You gave me a lot to think about and really helped me come to terms with the decision I have to make.

I had the stone appraised at Harold Weinstein this morning. Somehow I had more trouble seeing the feather from the top down in natural daylight as compared to last night under my power-saving lightbulb''s light. They confirmed it''s a very high K SI1. I told them how we were planning to set the stone and what our concerns were about visibility/durability with the primary inclusion, and Anne Neumann supposedly checked it out very carefully herself and said (exactly as Rhino did) that there should be no problems with the stone''s integrity or with having it set in a half-bezel setting locally, even if we can''t get insurance on the loose diamond to cover us in case of damage during setting. They did think it''s a feather rather than a needle as indicated on the GIA report. And the cut rated a 1+ which is the highest mark they give out. Apparently Anne said it was a gorgeous stone.

Of course then we took it to our jeweller who checked it out with his loupe and said it looks like a cleavage plane rather than a feather because it breaks the surface on the pavillion side, and that this is more dangerous. But hey, I told my independent appriaser I was very worried about the inclusion being a durability/setting issue, and they say it shouldn''t be a problem, so I think I should trust them. The setting won''t totally cover the inclusion, but will cover part of it, and I''m sure no one but me will ever notice it again. I''m not even sure if I will be able to see it once it''s set. No person casually looking at this stone would ever see it, I''m sure. My fiance certainly couldn''t see it last night in the same lighting I could see it in...

But because my fiance had set a budget of $5000, and with him being a German who insists they don''t "do" engagement rings over there and had fought the whole engagement ring thing to the very end (probably only took me whining about him not getting me to marry him without one over the last 2-3 years to get us to this point), and because everything else about the stone really spoke to us, I think we''ve decided to keep it. Trading it in for one of the other stones we looked at would mean huge shipping hassles and going well over budget, and I''m not sure that it''s worth it for something so small.

We had considered the 0.92 G VS2 as well as the 1.18 J VS2 at GOG as well, as well as a few J and I stones just over 1ct in size at Dimaond Ideals (Megan was awesome by the way, and the SI1s that we looked at were totally eyeclean to me). Somehow the slightly larger 1.22 K SI1 looked like the best option for us. All were gorgeous stones, but we decided a tinge of color was worth the increase in size over the 0.92. The K was $4822 via bank wire (so just under our budget), the biggest stone we could put in our planned 7mm half-bezel setting (since I''ll probably never get an upgrade out of him!), and to me it has a better color than the 1.18 J. Rhino''s calorimeter put it (a GIA K) at a high J while the other J (an AGS J which I''d been very taken with for its fluor and had had put aside especially for our visit to New York) got a low J. The 1.22 was visibly bigger than the 1.18 and had stellar ISEE2 and Brilliancescope results. In the store I couldn''t see the feather top-down, so I thought it was totally eyeclean. Oh well, it''s imperfect just like me!

Daniela: I had read about your shipping nightmare. I''m so glad things worked out in the end! We know that we have to make our decision by Friday specifically because that day my fiance is flying home via JFK and could pop things in the post with USPS to get them back to GOG.

Stretch4 and fire&ice: Thanks for telling me how you feel about your SI1 stones. In the light of day after a poor night''s sleep, I think this is how I feel about mine. It was just that last night I was sooo disappointed to see something in a stone I had assured myself was eyeclean in the store. I just didn''t expect to be able to see anything differently at home.

LAJennifer: This stone was *gorgeous* in person, as were all of the stones I saw at GOG. We had booked an appointment via Christen (supposedly a 1h slot), and Rhino took us through a very detailed look at the two stones we''d put on hold for a good 1.5h or so. Then when I asked if he thought there were any other good options for us in what he had in stock, he pulled out our stone. It was grey and rainy outside, but he took us to the store window anyhow to see the stones in natural light, and they all just sparkled. I personally couldn''t see much difference in the visual performance between the 3 stones we looked at. All dazzled us. We saw them under the microscope, under the analog brilliancescope, under his special light that imitates natural daylight... Rhino ran the stones in his ISEE2 machine in front of our eyes. I think the 0.92 G VS2 got a 9.5, while the 1.18 J and our stone pegged a 9.8. The mall-quality stone he showed us got somewhere in the 5s, and there was definitely a poorer visual performance on that one (Duh!). The K faced up really white, and I didn''t mind the warmer color at all. I look better in gold jewelery anyhow, and am having it set in a non-rhodium plated two-tone half bezel setting. I don''t think the K color will be at all noticeable once it''s set. I''m sure you''ll love the stones at GOG when you go there too! The only thing I regret was that we were looking at our 3 stones so intensely, we forgot to compare the H&A with Solasfera and Eightstar! Be sure to get pizza at the place next door while you''re there - it''s the best pizza I''ve had in North America so far.

I''ll post an update when things are done here. We went to our jeweller today to show him the stone and leave it for setting. The setting had just come in, and unfortunately when I tried it on, the band wasn''t an even thickness all around. It tapered slightly to the bezel, and was around 4mm thick, while we had wanted one that was 4.5 or more to minimize the gap between ering and band. Hopefully next week I''ll be able to try on attempt number two and have the stone set.

Once again, thank you all so much for your responses. It means a lot to me to have people "listening" who understand what I''m going through. Please pray that my stone makes it through the setting undamaged!

Drk
PS. Sorry I''m so wordy!

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 4/12/2005 8:21

9 AM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 4/11/2005 11:39:22 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
my best advise when buying SI stones is don''t EVER loupe the stone first, try to find the inclusions under different light conditions with your naked eyes (top view) without knowing where the inclusions are located ,this way your mind can''t play tricks on you,if it''s eye clean then it''s eye clean.

Yes and no. The problem is, at SOME point during the ownership of a stone, one *will* view it through the loupe......and then if you can readily pick out the inclusion without the loupe, you can still *see* it. It may qualify as ''eye-clean'', but if she can see it *and* it bothers her, that''s a problem.

al
i don''t mean to "loupe it" a few days later,i meant he/she should use the loupe after viewing the stone with their naked eyes .

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I take it it has not been set yet.
It is harder to see ''into'' a set diamond.
Also as your eyes and the rest of you get older you loose the ability to see so close up.

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 4/13/2005 4:22:23 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
...Also as your eyes and the rest of you get older you loose the ability to see so close up.

LOL! Ain''t THAT the truth??! They''re ALL eye-clean to me these days!

Lynn

 

[baltneu]

Hey drk

I have a different opinion than the others on this thread.

Perhaps I am reading between the lines, but in your mind and in your heart, you are "settling". I cannot understand why? I think you will always think about it, perhaps you will regret it. You have said that you have a tight budget, if that is the case why settle and second guess yourself? You can always work with GOG to find another stone that you have no hesitations about, he is very reliable, but there are other vendors on this site that can help you and may find the perfect stone for your budget, mind and heart. Just my 2 cents.

 

[moremoremore]

I dunno. I say don''t settle. Jon is a peach, so he will totally work with you to find the right one.
p.s. did you mean it came back a high J (you wrote high K)

 

[moremoremore]

oops...I misread

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 4/13/2005 6:28

5 AM
Author: Lynn B

Date: 4/13/2005 4:22:23 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
...Also as your eyes and the rest of you get older you loose the ability to see so close up.

LOL! Ain''t THAT the truth??! They''re ALL eye-clean to me these days!

Lynn

wait until they''re all LOUPE clean,that''s when you know you''re getting old.