Opinions on this diamond

[clueless_dude]

My girl wants a big rock so I gotta go low in color and clarity. the strong blue fluor supposedly can make it whiter and they say it doesn't cause any haziness. Should be eye clean but the feather has me a bit concerned since you can see it in the ASET and IS images. Even then I think I can live with it. HCA score is 0.7 so it should be nice. Thoughts?

Here's the GIA cert-
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?pagename=GST%2FDispatcher&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&c=Page&cid=1355954554547&reportno=2175135837


Image-
Looks kinda blueish to me so maybe that's the fluor?


H&A-
I deleted the arrow pic since i can only attach 4 images. And I don't really care about H&A pattern


Idealscope-


ASET-
Can see the feather is green. Is that bad?

 

[D_]

Looks good.
You may want to check if your definition of eye clean and theirs align (eye clean from the top, from certain angle, from the side, at what viewing distance etc.)
Looks like it is though.
We need to be aware of the fact that this pictured is magnified by, say, around 20x so what you think you can see now may not be visible at all in its real size.
And is she OK with a J colour?

 

[solgen]

I think I've seen this diamond posted before. It looks like it could potentially have an overblue effect IMO.

The feather does cause a degradation in light performance and it could be noticeable if you're moving the ring around.

The vg for polish is likely the result of the knot but I could be wrong.

I think it's worth buying to see what it looks like IRL. Maybe you can post some pics when you get it.

 

[ecf8503]

I think it looks nice. And the fluor may not be an issue - ask the gemologist to check it in various lighting conditions, as you can't say anything based on pics since much is dependent on photography setup and post processing. I'll bet that feather disappears into the crown facets, but do ask what "eye-clean" means - top down only? from the sides? at what distance?

 

[D_]

I think I've seen this diamond posted before. It looks like it could potentially have an overblue effect IMO.

So... since "they say it doesn't cause any haziness", does that mean they could have not been forthcoming about it?
Sounds quite unlikely.
But if there is any reason to doubt the vendor at all, we can trust but verify... how do we verify before getting the diamond itself?

 

[solgen]

I personally think the blue tint makes it look a little hazy because of reduced transparency. Hazy, oily, opaque effects of strong fluorescence are different but since they are such a rare occurrence I haven't seen one.


You could ask for a pic in outdoor sunlight to see the degree of blue but even that may not suffice. You really have to see the stone in person to decide if it is for you so you need a vendor with a good return policy. Unfortunately if you're overseas then that can complicate matters so you might be better off avoiding strong fluorescent stones.

 

[ecf8503]

I respectfully disagree - fluor is a fun effect, but you have to know what to expect from it.

According to a study by the GIA, fewer than 0.2% of the fluorescent diamonds submitted to GIA will exhibit oiliness / haziness.

I have a D color w strong blue fluor, and I love it. It is not an effect that is visible all the time, though - only when there is sufficient UV light to activate the phenomenon (i.e. direct sun and "black lights"). Does it look "blue" in the sun? Sure - but then again the sky is blue too, so some of that is just reflection. But can I see the fluor? Yes. Is it detrimental? Not in my opinion.

The down side to a fluor stone is that they trade at a discounted price due to just this kind of misperception. That will affect the price you can get for it if you try to sell it later. So as long as the vendor has a good trade-up policy, you should be "safe" in the future if you decide to upgrade.

My personal take on this stone is that it is likely just fine. The vendor is well versed in taking good pictures, and obviously appreciates the value of light performance images. Therefore I put a bit more trust in their opinions than I would the corner guy who just wants to sell you something an has never heard of reflector images and ideal cuts. I think if they say there are no ill effects of the fluor I would tend to believe them. But if you are concerned, ask them to take some pics outside in the sun - keeping in mind that capturing fluor in an outdoor pic is not always easy.

 

[solgen]

Fluor is a fun effect and I do like it but sometimes you have to be cautious.

Here's the blue effect coming out that IMO diminishes transparency a little bit.


In lighting that doesn't activate fluor.




It's not terrible or anything but is something to consider.

 

[ecf8503]

mine looks exactly like that!

Did we lose the OP?

 

[Sphene]

Yep think u did - I love Floro real nice in sunshine

 

[clueless_dude]

Nope. I'm still here. The J color should be fine. I was going to go with a platinum setting but some say the J color will stand out more and some say it stands out less. Not sure which is true. Also I'm considering a halo so as long as it faces up white then I don't think there's much issue with the J color.

The fluorescence is a bit concerning. In sunlight the blue does seem to reduce transparency. They cannot take outdoor pics so I don't know if there will be any haziness. It's eye clean from 6-8" from a top down view. I'm not sure if from the side or if you are tilting the stone back and forth if the feather becomes noticeable.


But it looks like someone else already bought it so I'll move on to something else. The discussion regarding fluorescence is still pertinent though as I'm considering it in other diamonds.

 

[gr8leo87]

At J color is a hit or a miss type. If its set in a setting with whiter side stones the J's color will pop out. If its set in a setting with lower colored side stones it will blend. If its set in a yellow gold setting it will appear to be whiter. If it's set in a setting with no side stones it will appear what it is.

All the best.

 

[Sphene]

Did I miss what your budget is?

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Nope. I'm still here. The J color should be fine. I was going to go with a platinum setting but some say the J color will stand out more and some say it stands out less. Not sure which is true. Also I'm considering a halo so as long as it faces up white then I don't think there's much issue with the J color.

The fluorescence is a bit concerning. In sunlight the blue does seem to reduce transparency. They cannot take outdoor pics so I don't know if there will be any haziness. It's eye clean from 6-8" from a top down view. I'm not sure if from the side or if you are tilting the stone back and forth if the feather becomes noticeable.


But it looks like someone else already bought it so I'll move on to something else. The discussion regarding fluorescence is still pertinent though as I'm considering it in other diamonds.

Here's an overview of fluoro issues including some of the points touched on so far in this thread. It will help you determine if fluoro is right for you.
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-flourescence

Fluorescence is frequently accompanied by clarity features such as twinning wisps and graining that can themselves sometimes cause transparency deficits, especially in the Si grades.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I think I've seen this diamond posted before. It looks like it could potentially have an overblue effect IMO.

The feather does cause a degradation in light performance and it could be noticeable if you're moving the ring around.

The vg for polish is likely the result of the knot but I could be wrong.

I think it's worth buying to see what it looks like IRL. Maybe you can post some pics when you get it.

Yes, the knot could have prevented a mirror finish, and the surface graining is a possible cause as well.

 

[pinkgem2522]

I love that diamond! It would be a great choice for your girlfriend!

 

[D_]

Fluorescence is frequently accompanied by clarity features such as twinning wisps and graining that can themselves sometimes cause transparency deficits, especially in the Si grades.

Hi Bryan,
I thought fluorescence and clarity features are independent of one another?
As in, the likelihood of a diamond having clarity features that can cause transparency deficits will be higher as one goes down the clarity grade SI1 < SI2 < I1 etc. regardless of whether the diamond has fluorescence or not, right?
And I'm thinking the chance of an SI diamond having fluorescence will be the same as that of diamonds with higher clarity grade.

OP, whenever possible, it's a good idea to put a diamond you have your eyes on on reserve. Lotsa lurkers here

 

[D_]

I love that diamond! It would be a great choice for your girlfriend!

Psst, don't make him sad

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Fluorescence is frequently accompanied by clarity features such as twinning wisps and graining that can themselves sometimes cause transparency deficits, especially in the Si grades.

Hi Bryan,
I thought fluorescence and clarity features are independent of one another?
As in, the likelihood of a diamond having clarity features that can cause transparency deficits will be higher as one goes down the clarity grade SI1 < SI2 < I1 etc. regardless of whether the diamond has fluorescence or not, right?
And I'm thinking the chance of an SI diamond having fluorescence will be the same as that of diamonds with higher clarity grade.

OP, whenever possible, it's a good idea to put a diamond you have your eyes on on reserve. Lotsa lurkers here

Yes, indeed. They are independent aspects. My point is that if there is photographic or visual evidence of some transparency deficit, it could be unrelated to fluorescence.

It is a bit contrary to common belief, but there is some reason to suspect that transparency deficits related to fluorescence are not a simple yes/no proposition but rather a matter of degree. The fluorescent stones that I have seen that had transparency issues tended to be those that also had internal characteristics such as twinning, graining and clouds. And most of those were in the Si range. So, from my experience it could be that a combination of clarity aspects and fluorescence tend to accentuate each other in terms of haziness.

It should be pointed out that under almost all indoor real world viewing environments, even those containing a UV light source, there is insufficient intensity to activate the fluoro effect. So, even if a diamond has a transparency deficit due exclusively to fluorescence, it will rarely present itself except in sunlight.

 

[clueless_dude]

So what about this one? 1.5ct F SI1 for $5500. Even better price so I had to put it on hold. HCA isn't good at 3.6 and if the pav angle was 40.6 it would get a 1.8. Maybe it can be recut? It's also a little deep but really it doesn't face up much smaller than the last one.




ROUND BRILLIANT

Measurements 7.28 - 7.31 x 4.57 mm
Carat Weight 1.50 carat
Color Grade F
Clarity Grade SI1
Cut Grade Excellent
PROPORTIONS

Depth 62.6 %
Table 56 %
Crown Angle 36.0°
Crown Height 16.0%
Pavilion Angle 40.8°
Pavilion Depth 43.0%
Star Length 50%
Lower Half 80%
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted, 3.5%
Culet None

FINISH

Polish Excellent
Symmetry Excellent
FLUORESCENCE

Fluorescence Faint
CLARITY CHARACTERISTICS

Clarity Characteristics Twinning Wisp, Knot, Feather, Crystal, Cloud, Cavity, Needle, Indented Natural

 

[D_]

Any chance they can provide you with the IS & ASET images like with the previous diamond?

 

[Texas Leaguer]

So what about this one? 1.5ct F SI1 for $5500. Even better price so I had to put it on hold. HCA isn't good at 3.6 and if the pav angle was 40.6 it would get a 1.8. Maybe it can be recut? It's also a little deep but really it doesn't face up much smaller than the last one.




ROUND BRILLIANT

Measurements 7.28 - 7.31 x 4.57 mm
Carat Weight 1.50 carat
Color Grade F
Clarity Grade SI1
Cut Grade Excellent
PROPORTIONS

Depth 62.6 %
Table 56 %
Crown Angle 36.0°
Crown Height 16.0%
Pavilion Angle 40.8°
Pavilion Depth 43.0%
Star Length 50%
Lower Half 80%
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted, 3.5%
Culet None

FINISH

Polish Excellent
Symmetry Excellent
FLUORESCENCE

Fluorescence Faint
CLARITY CHARACTERISTICS

Clarity Characteristics Twinning Wisp, Knot, Feather, Crystal, Cloud, Cavity, Needle, Indented Natural

It's a big improvement in some important respects. You have alleviated any potential issues with strong fluoro and you have vaulted into the colorless range. You have a Triple Ex report which has become a baseline standard for a well cut stone.

Having said that, if cut quality is a high priority you should try to get some additional information.

 

[WinkHPD]

So what about this one? 1.5ct F SI1 for $5500. Even better price so I had to put it on hold. HCA isn't good at 3.6 and if the pav angle was 40.6 it would get a 1.8. Maybe it can be recut? It's also a little deep but really it doesn't face up much smaller than the last one.




ROUND BRILLIANT

Measurements 7.28 - 7.31 x 4.57 mm
Carat Weight 1.50 carat
Color Grade F
Clarity Grade SI1
Cut Grade Excellent
PROPORTIONS

Depth 62.6 %
Table 56 %
Crown Angle 36.0°
Crown Height 16.0%
Pavilion Angle 40.8°
Pavilion Depth 43.0%
Star Length 50%
Lower Half 80%
Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick, Faceted, 3.5%
Culet None

FINISH

Polish Excellent
Symmetry Excellent
FLUORESCENCE

Fluorescence Faint
CLARITY CHARACTERISTICS

Clarity Characteristics Twinning Wisp, Knot, Feather, Crystal, Cloud, Cavity, Needle, Indented Natural

In my opinion, this is a classic example of cutting a stone to the steep deep edge of the GIA EX grade to maintain the magic 1.50 ct weight range and make more money for the cutter since it would be much smaller if it was cut for beauty rather than weight.

I suspect that if you get an Ideal-Scope and an ASET that you will see why this diamond is not the best value, even though the price is cheap compared to a properly cut diamond.

Wink

 

[Rockdiamond]

Clarity issues are totally unrelated to fluorescence. Personally I very much love some lower colors ( I-J-K) with MB, or SB as they look whiter. Not all, but some.
U-V is present in almost all room lighting- particularly lighting which is bright enough to see the color in a diamond- so some MB/SB diamonds light up indoors.

Wink is a stickler when it comes to cut.
I agree that the stone was likely tweaked to meet the 1.50 mark- but, the effects visually will likely be minor.
Bottom line is that you can save money by using the pricing particulars of the cut, or fluorescence to your advantage- either tact can yield great results.
Of course you'll find people who have different opinions.

I'd focus on finding a seller that has diamonds in hand and can give you a first hand observation.

 

[gr8leo87]

There are always all sorts of opinion but I would most certainly lean towards a better cut diamond with fluorescence over a stone with substandard cut with no fluorescence. By cut I don't mean always going for the best cur whether it be in the super ideal or the perfect 60/60 range as they both tend to come with a premium but certainly not settling for a steep/deep type to save cost. Fluorescence will be my saviour.