Beautiful diamonds, but a lot of feathers on the report!

[dumbo]

I am still looking, saw this AGS ideal with a great idealscope. However, there are a ton of feathers on the report, and they are visible (I am assured eye-clean). I can see the feathers in the close-up pics.

Is this something that should concern me?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

All I can tell you is that if this was for me, I would 1000 times rather have a much cleaner SI 1 or VS2 2.0 ct stone over that one. I can't deal with the clarity plot. It just has too many inclusions for me regardless of whether it is eyeclean or not. The pavilion appears to have a cavity and an indented natural, and it is the worst pavilion inclusion plot I have seen on an SI2. Did you specifically ask if it was eyeclean from the side? And to actually answer your question, I would not buy an SI2 diamond with feathers (cracks) as the primary inclusion.

But, if the recipient's #1 criteria is to have the largest possible well cut stone and doesn't care so much about color and clarity, you may have a winner. You might want to set it in a halo, though, so that the pavilion can't be seen.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Both of these I'd much rather have:

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3172001.htm

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3318260.htm

 

[SparklySoprano]

Don't settle. I would keep looking. You'll find one you love!

 

[dumbo]

OK, thanks. Appreciate the links! If only they weren't $3-4k more than I can spend Maybe I can put it off for 6 months and keep saving!

I did get that antique cushion in, very nice, but not really for us. RB it is!

 

[Dancing Fire]

The clarity map looks pretty bad...

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi dumbo,
One of the interesting things about this forum is how people's taste gets transferred to others that may not even share the same preferences.
For example, I love SI2 diamonds. I don't really care what the plot looks like if the diamond looks okay. As you have noticed you can buy a lot more diamond for the same money if you go to SI2 clarity. You won't be carrying around the AGS report with you The diamond will speak for itself. Also, the size that you have picked, in a stone cut like this in J SI2 clarity won't be easily duplicated.
So I'd be more interested in the diamonds actual physical characteristics rather than the plot on the report. In many cases the plot looks a lot worse that the diamond in real life.

 

[WinkHPD]

On my monitor that I am using today I can not see the grading report sufficiently to comment on the report.

However in your picture, it appears that the inclusions are for the most part transparent and may very well be eye clean. Only you will be able to determine that by looking at the diamond. What may be eye clean for others may not be eye clean to you.

Secondly, if you are working with a vendor with a good trade up policy you will be able to enjoy your ring while you are saving up and then have your candy too when you have the money to buy what you really want.

Most importantly, you must see the diamond for yourself to answer how YOU feel about the diamond. You may love it or hate it when you see it, but you can never know unless you do see it.

Just my thoughts on a cold Sunday morning.

Wink

 

[SparklySoprano]

I would like to piggyback off of rockdiamond's and wink's comments. And I don't mean to contradict my earlier comment. That was made as I sensed the OP was not happy. I don't thnk a purchase of this type should be made with too many doubts or the "what ifs" may creep in later.

However, I have a SI2 Diamond myself and am very happy with it. It was appraised independently within the return period, which helped confirm my decision. I also used the HCA advisor during the weeding through process. Have you done that? In any case, I do agree with Rockdiamond that SI2 stones can be fabulous choices. If no one can see the flaws and you are fine with what can be seen magnified, maybe go for it. Make sure you have a return/inspection period though. I'm extremely happy with my SI2 stone.

You may wish to read a post about feathers that was popular a week ago on rockytalk. I would link it here, but I'm challenged as the how. Sorry!

Good luck with your search!

 

[dumbo]

Thanks everyone! The vendor (JA) confirmed it was eye clean, and picked it as best out of 3 I had them look at. I didn't really pay much attention to the lab report, as they had confirmed as such, but then I saw the many feathers and became concerned. It is fairly aggressively priced, but I can land a cleaner non AGS-ideal in the same size and price range if I hunt around.

The inclusions don't necessarily concern me personally: I was worried more about the integrity of the feathers. And, from what it looked like, the JA warranty policy seemed to cover settings, not actual diamonds.

My main concern was the structural integrity. Eye clean is all I care about. As much as I would love the WF diamonds posted above, we are talking a $5,000 premium for a better clarity grade; not only is it not in the cards, I she would rather us take a trip to Europe with that extra $5000.

For example, something like this, same size, but no inclusion issues:

http://www.b2cjewels.com/dd-6285771-2.20-carat-Round-diamond-J-color-VS2-clarity.aspx

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R236-4V59XQ

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R229-ND637K

Of course, with the first one I posted, I have the assurance of knowing the light plot, AGS ideal, while the others from Enchanted I need to do my legwork (order, buy an idealscope, and if I don't like them, have the hassle of sending everything back and pushing back the date a few more weeks).

 

[dumbo]

I would like to piggyback off of rockdiamond's and wink's comments. And I don't mean to contradict my earlier comment. That was made as I sensed the OP was not happy. I don't thnk a purchase of this type should be made with too many doubts or the "what ifs" may creep in later.

However, I have a SI2 Diamond myself and am very happy with it. It was appraised independently within the return period, which helped confirm my decision. I also used the HCA advisor during the weeding through process. Have you done that? In any case, I do agree with Rockdiamond that SI2 stones can be fabulous choices. If no one can see the flaws and you are fine with what can be seen magnified, maybe go for it. Make sure you have a return/inspection period though. I'm extremely happy with my SI2 stone.

You may wish to read a post about feathers that was popular a week ago on rockytalk. I would link it here, but I'm challenged as the how. Sorry!

Good luck with your search!

I will look for it!

No, not unhappy, was actually about to put it on hold, but then saw the actual report (feathers) and had pause. As long as they don't crack!

 

[enbcfsobe]

what about sending it to an independent appraiser for an assessment of whether the inclusions are likely to affect durability? also, i think insurance, rather than a warranty, is what would cover damage to a diamond after it is sold, unless the damage was the result of a workmanship defect. i would presume at this price range that you will get it insured? this would also be a good reason for an independent appraisal before the stone is set.

 

[dumbo]

what about sending it to an independent appraiser for an assessment of whether the inclusions are likely to affect durability? also, i think insurance, rather than a warranty, is what would cover damage to a diamond after it is sold, unless the damage was the result of a workmanship defect. i would presume at this price range that you will get it insured? this would also be a good reason for an independent appraisal before the stone is set.

That is an option! Hadn't thought of that. I could buy the stone and setting, but not set, then appraised locally and set locally? Probably a good idea!

Here is the diamond in question: the feathers (cracks) are clearly visible. I am only concerned if they should be worthy of concern. Obviously if I can live with them, it is a nice performing diamond.

http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut/2.27-carat-j-color-si2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-284082

 

[SparklySoprano]

[https://www.pricescope.com/forum/r...url] Here is the link to post I referred to.

 

[enbcfsobe]

That is an option! Hadn't thought of that. I could buy the stone and setting, but not set, then appraised locally and set locally? Probably a good idea!

You can also have JA send it directly to an appraiser unset and then the appraiser sends it back to JA for setting. This is what I would do if I was buying the setting for JA. I think the warranty from JA is prob void if you have someone else set it, but I haven't read it so I'm not sure.

ETA: if you use an independent appraiser who is local to you, you can go and look at the stone unset while it is being appraised. that way you can see if the inclusions bug you in person.

 

[pyramid]

A lot of what you see is twinning and not feathers. Twinning is not a preferable inclusion though.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I am sorry, I thought that was a WF grading report originally posted. That's why I posted other WF stones.

I think that stone looks bad in the video. And yes, I am giving you my honest opinion that I think you can do much better than this diamond.

This looks good and would probably be my choice (they have great prices at this time):

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/Round/GIA-Certified-2-21-Carat-J-Color-VS2-Clarity-Diamond-PWXYWL

This one has potential, but no idealscope image and you cannot know if the fluorescence has any negative effect. Still SBF is desirable to me in a J color stone.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R236-4V59XQ

 

[WinkHPD]

A lot of what you see is twinning and not feathers. Twinning is not a preferable inclusion though.

Why?

Personally I LOVE twinning wisps as inclusions. They are very often not visible to the eye and lower the price of the diamond dramatically? Thus I am curious as to why you say they are not a preferable inclusion?

Wink

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Oh, and you need to have insurance on any diamond ring that you buy to insure it for every kind of damage or loss.

If the JA stone orginally posted was your best option, that would be a different story. But you can get a well cut stone just about the same size with SI1 or VS2 clarity for around the same price. So in that case, I cannot imagine not choosing a cleaner stone. I also think that stone's light performance could be affected by all the inclusions.

 

[dumbo]

I am sorry, I thought that was a WF grading report originally posted. That's why I posted other WF stones.

I think that stone looks bad in the video. And yes, I am giving you my honest opinion that I think you can do much better than this diamond.

This looks good and would probably be my choice (they have great prices at this time):

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/Round/GIA-Certified-2-21-Carat-J-Color-VS2-Clarity-Diamond-PWXYWL

This one has potential, but no idealscope image and you cannot know if the fluorescence has any negative effect. Still SBF is desirable to me in a J color stone.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R236-4V59XQ

I loved the first one you posted! Inquired about the second, they are going to get back to me. Idealscope isn't an option, only an inspection; is that good enough? I assume a trained gemologist would know the performance of a stone, or at the very least, compare it to a known ideal cut?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I am sorry, I thought that was a WF grading report originally posted. That's why I posted other WF stones.

I think that stone looks bad in the video. And yes, I am giving you my honest opinion that I think you can do much better than this diamond.

This looks good and would probably be my choice (they have great prices at this time):

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/Round/GIA-Certified-2-21-Carat-J-Color-VS2-Clarity-Diamond-PWXYWL

This one has potential, but no idealscope image and you cannot know if the fluorescence has any negative effect. Still SBF is desirable to me in a J color stone.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R236-4V59XQ

I loved the first one you posted! Inquired about the second, they are going to get back to me. Idealscope isn't an option, only an inspection; is that good enough? I assume a trained gemologist would know the performance of a stone, or at the very least, compare it to a known ideal cut?

A lot of their stones are located in places like India, so they pretty much only have the info posted on the site or whatever they can ask the cutter. I personally would go with the top stone I posted as it looks to be a great stone with the least risk. I think the second one is likely a nice stone. I might take the risk on it. Like Wink, I am not opposed to twining wisps in SI1 or higher especially. The main reason to choose the bottom one is if size is of great importance because it is 8.5mm versus 8.3mm on the first one.

 

[WhiteRock]

A lot of what you see is twinning and not feathers. Twinning is not a preferable inclusion though.

Why?

Personally I LOVE twinning wisps as inclusions. They are very often not visible to the eye and lower the price of the diamond dramatically? Thus I am curious as to why you say they are not a preferable inclusion?

Wink

Hi Wink

Why do twinning wisps discount the diamond?

Also twinning wisps (spreaded) and Feathers (spreaded) at Si2 as grade setting inclusions would be preferable as they tend to be eye clean over say crystal (eye clean issues) or clouds (transparency issues).

Unless it's a relatively large open feather at girdle with thin or medium thickness there shouldn't be durability issues.

 

[Dancing Fire]

This looks good and would probably be my choice (they have great prices at this time):

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/Round/GIA-Certified-2-21-Carat-J-Color-VS2-Clarity-Diamond-PWXYWL

This one has potential, but no idealscope image and you cannot know if the fluorescence has any negative effect. Still SBF is desirable to me in a J color stone.

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R236-4V59XQ

#1 is a much safer bet...

 

[pyramid]

Wink

I will look for it but believe it was a post from Dave Atlas which said they were not good to have - twinning wisps.

 

[WinkHPD]

Wink

I will look for it but believe it was a post from Dave Atlas which said they were not good to have - twinning wisps.

David has been a friend of mine for many years and I have great respect for him. I have not specifically talked with him about this, but if he believes this then that will become the basis for another interesting discussion. I always find discussing disagreements to be more interesting than 100% agreement with one another on everything.

That is one of the benefits of being friends. Discussing things, occasionally even arguing about them, and still being friends no matter the outcome of the discussion.

Wink

 

[kelmel]

It took approximately 6-7 months for us to find our diamond. I would encourage you not to make a rushed decision. I am not a fan of feathers at all; however, that is just my opinion. I learned you have to accept what you are willing to live with. It took us so long because cut was extremely important to us. I had a very strict range that I went by. In the end, our patience paid off. Good luck!

BTW - My diamond is 2.10 ct. We could have purchased a much larger diamond; however, cut and clarity were much more important to me. It is a personal preference. I have friends with 3 cts., but my diamond has more fire and brilliance. It can end up being a trade off.

It is also helpful to know the diamond should be viewed in different types of lighting. An inclusion you thought was "eye clean" can end up showing up depending on the lighting. I know this from personal experience.