Clarity, cut, and eye-clean

[diamond_quester]

I saw a beautiful Flanders diamond and might be buying that one. I think it''s eye-clean despite a huge inclusion in the center that is very clear in the microscope (SI2).

Do certain types of cuts (e.g. RB vs Flanders vs Cushion) hide inclusions a lot better than others?

Does a good cut also hide inclusions? I was surprised that the relatively poor clarity didn''t detract from the brilliance of the stone. I''ve compared it to other Flanders and ideal-cut RB diamonds side by side, and this was one of the sparkliest.

I would love to love this diamond, but the microscope image cast doubts in my mind about my ability to judge it. Any reassurance (or the opposite) would be appreciated. (I have other options with higher clarity, but this is one of the best and such a good price.) Thanks!

 

[Slykat12]

Diamonds are not meant to be looked at under a microscope unless your appraisor is to look for things such as integrity issues. Even diamonds graded as flawless would under a scope look scary.

Diamonds are graded at 10x magnification for a reason . I believe the scope is much more powerful than that. If the stone is eyeclean to you then it sounds like a winner. You seem to allready love it.

I have read here several times that certain cut styles hide inclusions more. A brillaint cut would hide a flaw more than a step cut. That all makes good sense.

Also a well cut stone would probably do the same-This I am guessing as it seems logical.

 

[jaz464]

You (or your GF) will not be wearing a ring with a microscope perched over it. What you see with your eyes and possibly a loupe is all that matters. Ever try looking at your reflection in one of those ultra-strong magnifying mirrors? Yikes!

 

[diamond_quester]

Thanks Kimberley!

I guess I was just surprised that SI2 stone could match/outperform VS1 and VVS stones by eye.

Compared to our other top choice, it is: equally brilliant, better color, SI2 vs VS1 (big price difference there), almost 20 points smaller (bigger price difference there) yet doesn't look like it (better size/spread?). So I just need to make sure it's really eye-clean...

Seems too good to be real?

jazmine - I'm the gf

 

[solange]

My SI 2 stone has many inclusions visible with a ten power loupe. However, the stone is perfectly eye clean and I cannot find the inclusions without a loupe although I know where they are.
If you say the stone is very lively, then obviously the inclusion is not affecting the appearance of the stone.

However, I am not an expert and perhaps it would be more appropriate for someone with more expertise to reply as to whether you should buy this stone.

 

[Lorelei]

I am not an expert either, but this I do know. Cut makes all the difference and is what makes a diamond beautiful above clarity and colour. I am not too familiar with the Flanders Cut, but your own eyes are the best tool you have and a great cut may help hide inclusions. Sounds like it could be a great diamond, an SI2 can be a terrific choice if it has a beautiful cut and is eyeclean.

I think you are seeing the difference cut makes by saying you are amazed that an SI2 can out perform a higher clarity, this is cut in action!