“Clarity grade is based on clouds that are not shown” WHAT DOES THIS SENTENCE MEAN?

[-Asscher-]

Let us know what you think when you've spent some time with the stone and if you'd like to double check with an appraiser before you make up your mind, we might be able to suggest one in your area.

But how fun, enjoy!

Okay will do!
Here is a quick shot.

 

[Lorelei]

It's lovely!

 

[sledge]

Wow, looks gorgeous and clear to me.

Probably the background, but this is a D right? Looks like it has a little color to me.

 

[Lorelei]

Wow, looks gorgeous and clear to me.

Probably the background, but this is a D right? Looks like it has a little color to me.

You're right Sledge, it'll be reflecting the colours around it.

 

[-Asscher-]

@sledge, @Lorelei ,
Yes, on picture looks yellowish.
I took the pictures in my badroom same like my other asscher too and both looks yellow to me.
Need better camera! My cell not so good with taking a pictures

 

[Lorelei]

@sledge, @Lorelei ,
Yes, on picture looks yellowish.
I took the pictures in my badroom same like my other asscher too and both looks yellow to me.
Need better camera! My cell not so good with taking a pictures

I think cellphones take pretty rubbish photos in my experience, you did well there.

 

[-Asscher-]

I think cell's take pretty rubbish photos in my experience, you did well there.

I got an old iPhone 6 Plus
Need a new one to take a pic of my new asscher

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

If the stone is a "genuine" SI1, i.e. it has a serious inclusion or inclusions that make it at least a low VS2, then the clouds may be not causing dullness.
But if the clouds are the main grade maker, even in a VS2, it will be dull. Not might be. Will be.
GIA should stop helping trade people sell crappy diamonds.
Dealers use the initial 'no M' to refer to identify diamonds are not milky

 

[blueMA]

If the stone is a "genuine" SI1, i.e. it has a serious inclusion or inclusions that make it at least a low VS2, then the clouds may be not causing dullness.
But if the clouds are the main grade maker, even in a VS2, it will be dull. Not might be. Will be.
GIA should stop helping trade people sell crappy diamonds.
Dealers use the initial 'no M' to refer to identify diamonds are not milky

Disturbing. How far down the supply chain are BGM mentioned/noted? It seems not all trade people are aware until they themselves get a hold of a stone.

 

[-Asscher-]

If the stone is a "genuine" SI1, i.e. it has a serious inclusion or inclusions that make it at least a low VS2, then the clouds may be not causing dullness.
But if the clouds are the main grade maker, even in a VS2, it will be dull. Not might be. Will be.
GIA should stop helping trade people sell crappy diamonds.
Dealers use the initial 'no M' to refer to identify diamonds are not milky

The plot on the GIA cert only have ( one ) very small inclusion so I quess the cloud is the main grade maker.
Early today I took it the get an appriaiser and she said the cloud is on the side. Can’t see it from the top and bottom even with loupe or microscope.
And no sign of hazy or milky.

 

[Rockdiamond]

If the stone is a "genuine" SI1, i.e. it has a serious inclusion or inclusions that make it at least a low VS2, then the clouds may be not causing dullness.
But if the clouds are the main grade maker, even in a VS2, it will be dull. Not might be. Will be.
GIA should stop helping trade people sell crappy diamonds.
Dealers use the initial 'no M' to refer to identify diamonds are not milky

Hi Garry!
I have to disagree.
VS2 sized clouds are very unlikely to cause any dullness which is visible to the naked eye.
Even SI sized clouds generally pose no transparency issue which is visible naked eye.

We've had some sweet VS and SI stones with grade setting clouds.....with no transparency issues...
I'm not saying they can't cause an issue- but you're saying they will definitely cause an issue- and our experience is that's not the case.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Hi Garry!
I have to disagree.
VS2 sized clouds are very unlikely to cause any dullness which is visible to the naked eye.
Even SI sized clouds generally pose no transparency issue which is visible naked eye.

We've had some sweet VS and SI stones with grade setting clouds.....with no transparency issues...
I'm not saying they can't cause an issue- but you're saying they will definitely cause an issue- and our experience is that's not the case.

You are so wrong David, I see them all the time. This supplier has dropped the transparency grade. If you are familiar with their images you would note dulling - and the clouds are not even the only grade making stuff.
The manufacturers mostly use HRD microscopes and they probably also see a lot more than with a GIA scope.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Compare

 

[Lorelei]

Thanks for the input guys - so what's the best way to proceed with grade making clouds in even VS2, advise that there might be an issue please?

 

[Rockdiamond]

Garry – all due respect, but because you see something all the time, does not mean that every single stone fits that same description. Just like the fact that I don’t see VS or SI sized clouds causing transparency issues frequently doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. Also, the photos don’t really show your point.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Thanks for the input guys - so what's the best way to proceed with grade making clouds in even VS2, advise that there might be an issue please?

Great question Lorelei
That's why these discussions are important.
Clearly, Garry and I have different takes on this. There can be many reasons for the difference- we see different goods.
In any event, it's in the consumer's best interest to use a vendor that will be able to give them first hand observations.
The alternative is to simply avoid any stone that has a grade setting cloud.
In which case, you may very well eliminate the very best candidate.
If you're looking for a 1.00ct G/VS2 "regular" Triple EX round brilliant, there's a gazillion to choose from, so one could simply eliminate all stones with such a comment on the GIA
But what if it's a 2.50ct Oval, with the perfect shape- or any number of rare size/shape combos.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Garry – all due respect, but because you see something all the time, does not mean that every single stone fits that same description. Just like the fact that I don’t see VS or SI sized clouds causing transparency issues frequently doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. Also, the photos don’t really show your point.

David, to put this to rest and test my own theory I have spent over an hour going through one of my suppliers stones. They use ViBox.
I looked at 134 stones 0.50ct to 2.90ct D to H VS2 non fluorescent.
16 stones had Clouds as the only or major grade maker. 8 were obviously cloudy in images and videos, 8 appeared to have full brilliance.
in addition 5 stones appeared cloudy but had Clouds as the second grade.
So in conclusion, 9.7% of those VS2 diamonds, in my opinion, had reduced brilliance based on imagery that I am very experienced in using.
I advise against buying diamonds with Clouds as the major grade maker.
Lawyers may consider GIA's use of clouds to be the basis of a class action.
i think GIA should add a notation along the lines of "This diamond may have reduced brilliance and fire"

 

[JoJa12345]

Are you referring only to GIA graded stones or would this also apply to AGS graded stones?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Are you referring only to GIA graded stones or would this also apply to AGS graded stones?

I don't know. Too few for me to see to make a judgement

 

[Rockdiamond]

Garry- we basically agree.
You are making a blanket statement against stones with grade setting clouds.
If a consumer needs ( or feels the need to) buy from a seller who is not looking at the diamond, I would agree- skip any stones with grade setting clouds in VS or SI goods.
But we could extend that to ALL SI goods, if one needs to buy blind (from a virtual diamond seller) .
If someone is looking at actual diamonds, I take an entirely different position.
Even based on your testing, not all such stones have issues. Based on your testing, you found 50% of these stones had issues.
I also have a lot of experience with ViBox- however, I would not feel comfortable making such assessments based on VIBox imagery. Maybe you have a great degree of confidence based on more experience.
But I did a different sort of test- using actual diamonds that we own. It's time-consuming to go over many stones/certs- but the first stone that we own that has grade setting clouds ( it's an SI1) has ZERO transparency issues.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Garry- we basically agree.
You are making a blanket statement against stones with grade setting clouds.
If a consumer needs ( or feels the need to) buy from a seller who is not looking at the diamond, I would agree- skip any stones with grade setting clouds in VS or SI goods.
But we could extend that to ALL SI goods, if one needs to buy blind (from a virtual diamond seller) .
If someone is looking at actual diamonds, I take an entirely different position.
Even based on your testing, not all such stones have issues. Based on your testing, you found 50% of these stones had issues. 50% is enough to say this is a rejection method David.
I also have a lot of experience with ViBox- however, I would not feel comfortable making such assessments based on VIBox imagery. Maybe you have a great degree of confidence based on more experience. remember I was part of th team that developed ViBox David, and I buy over $1M of loose diamonds from suppliers who use it each year. Unlike you I do not live in a diamond trading town.
But I did a different sort of test- using actual diamonds that we own. It's time-consuming to go over many stones/certs- but the first stone that we own that has grade setting clouds ( it's an SI1) has ZERO transparency issues.I see the clouds in the images and videos David, it really is easier than actually looking at stones.

 

[John P]

I don't have the detailed overview @Garry H (Cut Nut) has offered. But in general terms, and corroborated by colleagues in centers of rough trading, gem-quality crystals have become less clean in recent years.

This is partly due to long-standing mines reaching their limits and partly due to dirtier sources passing rough through India and China. It has impacted the entire industry, especially downstream as clarity grading is limited to 10X magnification. Persistent issues that exist beyond 10X can impact optics without appearing on laboratory reports. The frequency of hazy / sleepy diamonds on the market has increased, to the point where major B2B trading sites have added the option for suppliers to declare ‘No BGM’ (brown/green/milky) on diamonds they offer.

I observed the above in a thread from a few weeks ago, which details our own experience juxtaposing gem quality and grading standards over time. Our team has something of a reverse vantage point, handling diamonds in their native state first, and seeing how the different labs judge them long after we've selected, purchased and worked them to finish.
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...uper-ideal-diamond.174235/page-2#post-4323297

 

[Dancing Fire]

I advise against buying diamonds with Clouds as the major grade maker.

i think GIA should add a notation along the lines of "This diamond may have reduced brilliance and fire"

Garry
Would that include stones with "clouds" on the second line of the lab report?
Yup, I notice nowadays I see more and more with the term " additional clouds not shown or clouds not shown" on the lab reports.

 

[blueMA]

in addition 5 stones appeared cloudy but had Clouds as the second grade.

Yes @Dancing Fire

 

[Rockdiamond]

Garry- we are in total agreement.
If one has to buy blind, eliminate stones with cloud setting grades- as well as all SI goods.
To me, the massive shame would be if dealers buying actual diamonds ( not paper) need to reject stones based on the fact that buyers who can't see the stones need to over-reject.
That would be the tail wagging the dog.

As far as the Vibox- maybe if I was looking at the actual rotating video, I'd have an easier time seeing the dullness you see in the stills.

John- although we do see hazy stones, I have not noticed a large increase in dull stones overall. This could easily be due to different markets we operate in.
With reference to sites adding BGM- that could also be due to consumer demand- Rap also added an "Eye clean" checkbox as well.

For me the takeaway for consumers should be that cloud setting grades might be an issue- so if the seller is not in possession of the diamond caution is warranted.
But a dealer who is looking at the diamond may indeed suggest such a stone because the presence of clouds noted by GIA as a grade setting characteristic may have no negative visual effect on a stone.
Additionally, there are many cases of SI clarity diamonds where a grade setting cloud is preferable to a crystal or other type of imperfection.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Garry
Would that include stones with "clouds" on the second line of the lab report?
Yup, I notice nowadays I see more and more with the term " additional clouds not shown or clouds not shown" on the lab reports.

Correct BlueMA.
But there is a much lower probability. If there are only 2 grade makers, higher chance than if Clouds is 2nd of 5

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Additionally, there are many cases of SI clarity diamonds where a grade setting cloud is preferable to a crystal or other type of imperfection.

Never ever for me David

 

[Dancing Fire]

Correct BlueMA.
But there is a much lower probability. If there are only 2 grade makers, higher chance than if Clouds is 2nd of 5

What if the report say...additional clouds not shown or clouds not shown" ?

 

[blueMA]

Correct BlueMA.
But there is a much lower probability. If there are only 2 grade makers, higher chance than if Clouds is 2nd of 5

Yep, after an unfortunate experience of returning a hazy VS1 stone which had "Cloud, Needle", I specifically avoided any cloud out of precaution.

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...e-sun-41-pavillion-33-5-crown-vs1-why.240310/

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I would not be too quick to castigate GIA. Lab reports were originally intended to be used in conjunction with a jeweler who could interpret what the report indicated. Reports have a specific way of communicating important aspects of the diamond that would not necessarily be understood by a consumer. Collaboration with an ethical merchant would then be key for the consumer.

In my opinion, based upon my experience:
Si with clarity based on clouds = high likelihood of significant transparency deficits - avoid if you are looking for top light performance
Si with grade setting cloud = should be checked carefully by an expert, but not an automatic problem
Vs2 with clarity based on clouds = should be checked carefully by an expert, but not an automatic problem
VS2 with grade setting cloud = rarely an issue for transparency
VS1 and above = can assume no transparency issue (@blueMA is the exception to the rule - something very weird there)
*combining any of the above with Comments indicating additional clouds, twinning wisps, graining will increase the risk of transparency issues.

Cloud inclusions are highly variable depending on number, size, location, and density. The mere presence of clouds inclusions, even when a grade setter (listed first under keys to symbols), does not necessarily mean the diamond will be cloudy.

There is excellent value to be had by careful shopping of lower clarities. But, there is also wisdom in seeking diamonds of high purity.