Please, Check below the diamond.

[ryanlee]

Hello

I try to buy one from the one under 4 today .

Look at the features and image , please select the best diamond.

I think that No.3 is good beacuse of ideal calculated weight(x3 fomular) and HCA grade is shown perfectly.
But I worried about "knot", inclusion.

Please, Check below the diamond.

1.
6.51-6.53 x 3.93
1.02 Ct
F/SI2/3EX/Fluorescence None
Comments: Additional twinning wisps, pinpoints and
surface graining are not shown.


2.
6.48-6.52 x 3.99
1.04 Ct
F/SI2/3EX/Fluorescence None
Comments: Clouds are not shown. Surface graining is
not shown.


3.
6.57-6.58 x 3.94
1.04 Ct
F/SI2/3EX/Fluorescence None
Comments : Pinpoints are not shown.


4.
6.51-6.53 x 3.93
1.02 Ct
F/SI2/3EX/Fluorescence None
Comments : Additional twinning wisps, pinpoints and
surface graining are not shown.

 

[kenny]

Instead of F SI2 I'd get grades that are closer like G SI1 or H VS2.

If you have gone out and actually seen F G and H GIA-graded diamonds in person and simply must have an F then so be it.
If not, go out and see these color grades for yourself and notice how expensive the Fs are.

Be sure to look only at diamonds graded by GIA or AGS, many other labs have bogus color grades.
For instance a diamond that GIA would grade G might be graded E or higher by some of the EGL labs.
That makes their diamonds seem like a bargain, until you learn their grades can be big lies.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Instead of F SI2 I'd get grades that are closer like G SI1 or H VS2.

Agreed with Kenny...an eye clean SI2 might be tough to find.

 

[tyty333]

Agree with Dancing Fire, who agrees with Kenny...drop down to a G/H SI1 which will face up very white and you wont have to worry
about knots and other "features" of SI2 stones.

Did you ask the vendors if these are all eye-clean?

 

[SirGuy]

Agreed on bumping up clarity and lowering color to stay in your budget.

It's important to consider that 1.00 carat is a sort of "magic number" with cutters. A lot of customers focus more on weight than size, and 1.00 carat sounds nicer than 0.97. What that means is that you're much more likely to find stones whose light performance was compromised to keep the weight to hit that magic mark.

The partial reports you've shown all represent stones with fairly big tables and short crowns. Is that something you personally like and selected, or does it just happen to be what you've found?

Everything is a compromise. You can easily drop color and increase clarity and get a stone that more likely doesn't have visible inclusions, or ones that affect performance. If you were open to dropping weight as well, you'd get nearly the same size and open up a lot more options.

 

[chrono]

I am very concerned whether the diamonds are eye clean. Also almost all of them are 60/60 style diamonds which have a different look compared to those with a smaller table + higher crown design.