How would you rate the milkiness in this VS flo diamond

[zz00ter]

I finally got a chance to take a picture of the diamond with VS Fluorescence.

What are your thoughts on the milkiness of the diamond?



Indoors there is no milkiness

 

[Gypsy]

It might not be milky at all.

 

[zz00ter]

What would you call the "fogginess" that is the result of the fluorescence?

 

[ecf8503]

I don't know that it actually is foggy - it just looks blue to me. I have one w/ SB that I think does turn a bit hazy, and it doesn't look like that.

But more importantly - does it bother you?

 

[zz00ter]

Can someone post a picture with a diamond that is actually milky due to fluorescence? I have not been able to find one in order to benchmark what I see in the diamond that I bought.

What bothers me is what the GF will think when I give it to her.
Will she think I bought a defective diamond?

 

[Ashleigh]

I don't see milkiness in both photos. Can you ask the vendor selling to you to see if there's milkiness?

 

[liaerfbv]

Here's a collage of VSBF I saved from another thread. To my eye, bottom right is hazy. However, there's no benchmark because everyone's eye is different. What might look hazy to me looks fine to you. If you are concerned, buy it and evaluate it with your own eyes or try to find a vendor who can evaluate a stone for you. BGD has a line of Blues that I would not hesitate to buy.

 

[CharmyPoo]

I took those photos and the diamonds were not hazy in real life.

 

[zz00ter]

Katie Homuth at Brian Gavin says that the diamond in the picture above is definitely hazy.
Unfortunately she could not provide any pictures of their VS Blue diamonds in sunlight

I wish there were more reference pictures for VS fluorescence diamonds in sunlight.


Here is another thread about fluorescence with pictures
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-flourescence

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/thoughts-on-this-stone-with-very-strong-blue-fluorescence.90655/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/thoughts-on-this-stone-with-very-strong-blue-fluorescence.90655/[/URL]

 

[D&T]

I wished I would have taken a picture of my sister's first RB with that Haziness look. What I remember is think of drinking a glass of milk, and afterwards, you pour water into that same glass. Basically that's what it looked like to me and the only way I could describe it. I could hardly see the facet pattern because it was just so milky


ETA: I found a couple of picture that I would call a bit hazy...

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think you are just seeing fluorescence. Do you like it? I think it is beautiful and wish my current stone had it!

 

[LLJsmom]

Search threads for fluorescence. You will see lots of PSers with stones that have fluorescence and you can compare.

 

[zz00ter]

New image of diamond with flash lighting.
Does not look crystal clear to me

 

[arkieb1]

You need to take it to a shop that has hearts and arrows round brilliants that are top cuts with no flouro. Now put this next to it. You will soon see if it impacts on it or not. I actually disagree with everyone else I think it does look milky, but it's difficult to know how badly it impacts the stone unless you put it next to a stone without it. I saw a perfectly cut H & A RB once that had it and it was like it was straining to sparkle, best way I can describe it. The one I saw had a top cut, so it wasn't ugly, and if you had no point of reference it would just have the same amount of fire and brilliance as a badly cut diamond. When you put it next to a well cut diamond you could clearly see that it lacked brilliance by comparison and had a sort of sheen which made it seem like it was trying to sparkle but somehow couldn't do it properly.

 

[evergreen]

I think it's AWESOME -- remember, that same diamond without VSBF would probably look pretty dark in direct sunlight. Instead, you get a glowing bluish light coming from the diamond! Full disclosure: my e-ring has SBF, I LOVE fluorescence, and I would opt for VSBF in a heartbeat if all I noticed about it (as far as "haziness") was a little cast in direct sunlight -- which is basically terrible for showing off most diamonds anyway.

Before it got its forever setting, this is my diamond in direct San Diego sunlight. Yup, it's blue, yup, it's not as crystal-clear as it is indoors (i.e., the contrast zones aren't as sharply demarcated) but I think that's in no small part due to the fact that the "black" is also glowing blue! It ONLY does this in direct sunlight, not in fluorescent lights or any other normal every-day lighting situation. You must've picked that diamond for a reason (discounted price because of the VSBF, maybe?) -- is this rarely-seen behavioral quirk worth changing it out?

 

[liaerfbv]

New image of diamond with flash lighting.
Does not look crystal clear to me

This may be a mind clean issue for you more than anything. If you're concerned about the flour, maybe look at other stones with no flour.

 

[zz00ter]

I bought the diamond primarily due to the VS Fluorescence which I thought would be cool.
The price discount was an added bonus.

I bought it because the sales person at Ritani said that there were no adverse fluorescence effects.
But I am seeing effects and am still debating if the ring is a keeper as I have 30 days to return the diamond.

I am now trying to benchmark this diamond against others to determine how bad the whitishness is.
... and how often it will be visible

 

[kenny]

I bought the diamond primarily due to the VS Fluorescence which I thought would be cool.
The price discount was an added bonus.

There is no 'discount' for fluorescent diamonds.
A discount is a lower price for the same thing.
A fluorescing diamond is not the same thing as a diamond with no florescence.
They are two different things.
These two different things have two different prices.

The market has established that highly-fluorescing diamonds are just worth less, just like a J is worth less than an I.
A diamond graded J is not the same as one graded I either.

There's nothing wrong with a J or a diamond with lots of florescence … but they each sell for what they're worth not at a discount.

 

[kenny]

zz00tter, even after 6 weeks posting on PS you are still posting about your attempts to outsmart the system and buy a high-end diamond that's priced like a low-end one.

A zillion people have come here, learned, and bought their dream diamond that they are happy with.
You're never going to get something for nothing, if it sounds too good to be true, etc. etc. etc.

Perhaps you should just find a great diamond and pay what it's worth.
Surely, by now you know what it is, which vendors offer it, and what it costs.

 

[zz00ter]

Every diamond is a set of compromises.

I am trying to find the best balance for a set amount of money.

Unlike some folks here I do not have a $20k budget

 

[kenny]

Every diamond is a set of compromises.

I am trying to find the best balance for a set amount of money.

Unlike some folks here I do not have a $20k budget

Yes, everyone with budgets from $100 to $1,000,000 wants more than they can afford.
I certainly do.

The difference is almost everyone else accepts the PS education on the best value and compromise possible for their budget.
Then they buy that.
This usually takes a week or two for D-Z diamonds.

 

[zz00ter]

Fluorescence effects is one of the least benchmarked characteristics.
I would like to know how this diamond benchmarks
- lets say on a scale of 1-10 for milkiness how would this compare.

I have researched but I can't find anything.

I hope I am not offending anyone by talking about this?
Maybe this indicates that there is a need for some sort of a guide for this.

Even Gavin Diamonds does not want to provide a photo of one of their Blue diamonds in sunlight.
I wonder why.

 

[pyramid]

The benchmark is on the strength of fluorescence I would say according to diamond lab reports:

negligible

Slight

Medium

Very Strong


Have heard the term milky and oily but that is layman's terms I think.

 

[pyramid]

When buying a diamond the best balance for your money is a personal choice:

All attributes on a diamond have already been judged to have a price.

Some here who have been a long time will tell you to put the four c's in order, most will put Cut, Colour, Clarity and Carat weight, But not all people will. Fluorescence is another thing you can compromise on or not.

 

[zz00ter]

Thanks everyone

If any professional can put together a set of pictures that should faint milkiness
to strong milkiness/oiliness that would be a great resource I think.

 

[arkieb1]

Fluorescence effects is one of the least benchmarked characteristics.
I would like to know how this diamond benchmarks
- lets say on a scale of 1-10 for milkiness how would this compare.

I have researched but I can't find anything.

I hope I am not offending anyone by talking about this?
Maybe this indicates that there is a need for some sort of a guide for this.

Even Gavin Diamonds does not want to provide a photo of one of their Blue diamonds in sunlight.
I wonder why.

I don't think that is true. My mother who lives in another state from me so I can't go and take a pic of it for you at the moment has a stone with blue fluorescence and it's stunning. It is either a very cool pure ice colour (so colourless) or it has a beautiful blue glow about it and it is never ever milky, oily or dull to look at in ANY lighting situation including sunlight.... I suspect Brian Gavin's line of Blues would be the same they are handpicked because the blue fluorescence either adds something unique to the stone or compliments the diamond. In some diamonds blue fluorescence can make them face up more white. It lifts and helps to negate the underlying body tint or hues.

In a small number of diamonds which are and should be cheaper it does impact on them making them milky, oily or hazy to look at. The triple ex H & A one I saw wasn't specifically really frosty looking under shop lighting (although I admit I did not see it outside in sunlight) but it just didn't have the same amount of fire and sparkle that other comparable well cut stones had.

You are making the assumption that all diamonds are negatively impacted by fluorescence, the simple answer is some are and some are not. Many are very cool to look at with it, some are very slumpy with it, most are somewhere in between.

I still suspect if the stone you bought was a bargain and was cheaper it IS negatively impacted by it. It is obviously bothering you to a point where you don't want to live with it. The best way to gauge how bad it is, is by comparing it to a top cut stone that doesn't have it in a range of lighting conditions, if it looks like smuck by comparison, you will clearly notice it. What I mean specifically by this is in inside lighting in bright shop lighting if your stone looks normal, put it next to a top cut one with no fluorescence, now look closely is yours way less bright and sparkly than the other stone. Take them out in the sunlight or to a window with sunlight, if yours is clearly dull or milky or seems to have a flat sheen to it to look at and has way less to no fire and sparkle then it is obviously impacting on it. If it doesn't look too bad by comparison then it's time to stop worrying about it or take the stone back and purchase a different one.

 

[LLJsmom]

I really think it's a matter of personal preference. Do you like it in the sunlight? Nevermind if it's hazy or milky, or not. If you don't, just return it. I get the feeling that you're not loving it. And if you don't love it, don't keep it, regardless of how much you are spending. At least I wouldn't.

My stone has medium blue fluor. I really like the blue fluor I see. I feel like I'm looking into clear blue water. But my honest opinion is that I don't prefer the way your stone looks, just judging by the picture. It doesn't mean that there is milkiness caused by fluoresence. I'm not qualified to judge that. I just don't like grayish, hazy feel I get. But I can see the cutting of the stone and the faceting is really pretty.

Isn't there a thread where lots of people have posted pics of their fluorescent stones?

Here is mine in bright sunlight. Medium blue fluor per GIA.



On an overcast day



I know. My pants are purple so that may cause an even bluer cast.



And if I buy another stone, I may look for no fluor, just to change it up a little. Preference I guess.

 

[Karl_K]

Thanks everyone

If any professional can put together a set of pictures that should faint milkiness
to strong milkiness/oiliness that would be a great resource I think.

Impossible because it does not show up in photos the way it does to the eye.
I tried with a milky stone and the none milky stone looked worse most of the time in the picture when to the eye the milky stone was milky and the other clear.
A lot of people mistake facet glare for milkiness looking at pictures.

 

[Karl_K]

Even Gavin Diamonds does not want to provide a photo of one of their Blue diamonds in sunlight.
I wonder why.

Because it would not show you what you would see with your eyes.
It is not something that can be judged or even reliably seen in photos.
It is something you have to take the vendors opinion on until you see it yourself.
I am not supposed to make pro vendor comments but ...
I would trust Brian's word and opinion if its an issue or not.

 

[Karl_K]

I finally got a chance to take a picture of the diamond with VS Fluorescence.

What are your thoughts on the milkiness of the diamond?

The diamond is out of focus in this picture.
The camera focused on the band, see the S shape is sharp, that is where the camera focused and the top of the stone is blurry because of the DOF(depth of field) of the lens and the focus point.
This is another reason why photos are unreliable in showing milkiness.