Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

2.3 I SI2 Round GIA Ex diamond - honest opinions needed!

V

vtech

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
6
First of all, I thank everyone that posts on these forums! This has been extremely useful to me in my research over the last few weeks.

I recently picked up a 2.3 carat I SI2 diamond and am looking for opinions to see if I'm getting a good value/deal or am missing something. Based on my online research I was going to go for an VS2 or better, but then after seeing a few stones in person, I am beginning to value the clarity a lot less as long as I can't see anything with the naked eye. The inclusions on this appear to be eye-clean - at least I can't see them without a loup and need to spend many seconds to find them now even after knowing where they are. They are also on the edge (none on the table), so I should be able to cover them (at least one) with a prong.

My questions are:
- From the ASET images and other information available on the link below, does this diamond look to be cut well and have good sparkle (I realize that it is a GIA excellent cut, but is it a 'good' excellent or 'bad' excellent or am I just splitting hairs at this point)?
- Based on the GIA certificate, the HCA score is 1.9, but based on the angles in the 'MegaScope' report, this is a 2.5. The only difference is that the pavilion angle on one is 41.0 vs 41.1 on the other. Is that a huge difference and if so which one should I trust?
- Do you have any thoughts on the inclusions on this stone compared to an "average" SI2 diamond out there? I haven't seen too many diamonds, so not sure if this is a relative good or bad SI2 diamond.
- I paid ~$20K for this diamond. Does that appear to be reasonable value for this stone?

Here is a link to the diamond and all the relevant information:
http://goo.gl/rvJZk

I really appreciate your help and have learned a tremendous amount over the last few weeks by browsing this website. Thanks to all those who are active on these forums!
 
It is for sure a stunner. Sarin says it a 41.0 average PA. In any case, it doesn't matter very much.
 
Well, I have a few problems with the stone you bought. It has two feathers, one on the table and one on the girdle. The one on the girdle IMO, is large and could be a problem. Also, the information on their site doesn't match the gia report and that does throw things off (as you saw from the difference in hca scores).

I found a comparable:

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/round-cut/2.27-carat-i-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-203697

It's less and james allen provides PS members with an additional discount, and it shows up very white and has faint fluorescence (which helps the stone appear whiter). To me, the inclusions on this one are placed better and there aren't any feathers near the girdle...
 
Congrats on your new stone. I'm no expert, so I can't weigh in on the inclusions. It's a very nice size. Can't wait to see what setting you pick. Your fiance will be super excited to have such a sparkly and huge rock!
 
Thanks for the responses everyone!

04Diamond<3, appreciate your feedback. I am intrigued by the stone you mentioned on James Allen and will try and follow up with them to check. The reason I liked my stone is that it was eye clean to me at least (but I am not sure if I am especially bad at seeing inclusions). The big feather inclusion you mention on the girdle is white, and while it is slightly large, it is right at the edge so not very visible/important and can partly be covered by the prong. The diamond you mentioned does have a few inclusions (some dark) that are on the table where people will usually look when they see the diamond. Now the price is obviously a separate issue, and your link is quite a bit cheaper, so that makes it compelling if it's 'eye-clean'.

Curious if others on the forum have thoughts between my diamond and the one from James Allen that 04Diamond<3 mentioned?

hearts-arrows_girl, I'm looking to put this in a tapered baguette setting. I'm currently looking at the Vatche setting. I'll definitely post pictures once I have it!

Thanks for the feedback!
 
vtech|1365538074|3423485 said:
Thanks for the responses everyone!

04Diamond<3, appreciate your feedback. I am intrigued by the stone you mentioned on James Allen and will try and follow up with them to check. The reason I liked my stone is that it was eye clean to me at least (but I am not sure if I am especially bad at seeing inclusions). The big feather inclusion you mention on the girdle is white, and while it is slightly large, it is right at the edge so not very visible/important and can partly be covered by the prong. The diamond you mentioned does have a few inclusions (some dark) that are on the table where people will usually look when they see the diamond. Now the price is obviously a separate issue, and your link is quite a bit cheaper, so that makes it compelling if it's 'eye-clean'.

Curious if others on the forum have thoughts between my diamond and the one from James Allen that 04Diamond<3 mentioned?

hearts-arrows_girl, I'm looking to put this in a tapered baguette setting. I'm currently looking at the Vatche setting. I'll definitely post pictures once I have it!

Thanks for the feedback!
Click to expand...

There are no inclusions on the table of the stone I posted. There's one off to the side, that yes is dark, but looks like it can be completely hidden by a prong (something the on staff gemologist can confirm for you).

The thing with your diamond is not that it's not eye clean (although, if it were me, if I knew where it was it'd bug me constantly as it would with many others on here), the issue is that the huge feather is on the girdle which could be a potential issue as far as the integrity of the stone. Meaning, if could cause bigger issues later on....I would put the one from JA on hold and ask for an idealscope image and ask about the discount that they give PS members.
 
04Diamond<3, your feedback has been great so far and I really appreciate it. I went to get an independent opinion on my stone from an appraiser (after your concerns) and he agreed with you also (without me mentioning it). Thanks so much! I am going to return the one I bought and am looking at a few other stones. One of them is the one you mentioned. Here are a couple of other ones and would be curious to get people's opinion on them.

Again, my criteria is as follows:
2.2 to 2.5 carats, ideal/ex ex ex cut (hopefully with an excellent HCA score), I color, and something that is eye-clean without any risk to the integrity of the stone.

Here are some option I am looking at:
http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?track=NavEngLoo#diamonds_pid=LD02902239

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?track=NavEngLoo#diamonds_pid=LD03000781

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-...-i-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-182019

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-...-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-202816 (HCA 3.3 - so not great, here's a link to Idealscope/ASET: http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10495/)

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Your feedback so far has been invaluable. Thanks!
 
There is not a thing wrong with the stone you have purchased! It is a top cut quality stone! I have a question. Did your independent opinion come from an appraiser who also sells diamonds? If so, you can take that with a grain of salt because he'd like to get your business. But if it was an independent appraiser like Neil or Dave, etc. who sells nothing, then it might be worth considering. On the GIA plot, there is one inclusion under the table and it is a cloud. There are no significant feathers. The needles are not a problem. This is a good SI2 if you find it to be eyeclean! Julie answered you above and she is far more experienced than some on this thread. You are not going to end up with the cut quality you have in that stone if you start going to virtual stones and non H&A stones. The James Allen stone is NOT the cut quality of the one you have.
 
Thanks diamondseeker2006. The person who I got it appraised from does happen to sell diamonds and was doing it to help a friend. However, he was very upfront with me about that fact, refused to charge me, AND refused to sell me diamonds going forward (even if I requested) because of this conflict. I was also able to see the feather on the crown (I was told it's a feather, not a needle) relatively easily with a naked eye under appropriate lighting at his place. That, combined with another opinion on this thread makes me want to trust him. However, he acknowledged and I agree that this is an excellent cut diamond and will be some work to find something similar.

Do you have any thoughts on these 3 diamonds below by looking at the certificate? They are all GIA ex ex ex and grade very well on HCA.

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?track=NavEngLoo#diamonds_pid=LD02902239 (Slightly more than the one I purchased, but SI1 and excellent proportions on paper)

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?track=NavEngLoo#diamonds_pid=LD03000781 (about what I purchased my diamond for, also SI2 but the big inclusions are twinning wisps which I have been told are a lot better than feathers)

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/round-cut/2.36-carat-i-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-182019 (SI2 clarity, but also seemingly a good cut)

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-diamonds/round-cut/2.21-carat-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-207520 (slightly smaller than the ones above)

Any thoughts on the ones above? I can request more details on the JamesAllen diamonds if they look interesting.

Thanks again for your help!
 
You have to scratch BN completely because they provide no information to judge cut or clarity.

On the James Allen stones, neither is as well cut as the Good Old Gold stone, first of all. I do not like the cut or inclusions in the 2.36. That one does have a very visible crystal under the table. The 2.21 is much better and a clarity grade higher. You'd need an idealscope image on that one to tell more about the cut. I personally prefer GOG because they have a far better trade in policy. Like if she decided a year from now that I color was too low, you could change it for G or H easily. Whereas with James Allen, you have to spend double to upgrade!!! Good Old Gold can call in other stones for you, and possibly including this James Allen stone. Since you were already working with them, I'd give them the chance to find you another stone if you don't want to keep this one. I have just been very pleased every time I have bought from them.
 
DS thanks for chiming in. for an S12 it is a beautiful stone....I mean it is a beautiful stone . The JA 2.36 has visible inclusions. I still like the one you already purchased.
 
I can not see any reason to worry about the GOG stone you bought.
If you read the article about eye clean diamonds in the Articles section - you will see my comments about securing feathers near the girdle.
Careful placement of prongs will protect that, and another can be positioned near the other mark and you will never ever see that either even if you are short sighted and have microscopic vision.
Its a keeper in my book.
Stop worrying.
Enjoy your diamond.
 
Thanks for the feedback Garry. Appreciate your opinion. Do you think there is a risk that the feather is near the girdle though and could it cause problems with the diamond down the road?
 
vtech|1365649595|3424512 said:
04Diamond<3, your feedback has been great so far and I really appreciate it. I went to get an independent opinion on my stone from an appraiser (after your concerns) and he agreed with you also (without me mentioning it). Thanks so much! I am going to return the one I bought and am looking at a few other stones. One of them is the one you mentioned. Here are a couple of other ones and would be curious to get people's opinion on them.

Again, my criteria is as follows:
2.2 to 2.5 carats, ideal/ex ex ex cut (hopefully with an excellent HCA score), I color, and something that is eye-clean without any risk to the integrity of the stone.

Here are some option I am looking at:
http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?track=NavEngLoo#diamonds_pid=LD02902239

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?track=NavEngLoo#diamonds_pid=LD03000781

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-...-i-color-si2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-182019

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/loose-...-i-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-202816 (HCA 3.3 - so not great, here's a link to Idealscope/ASET: http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10495/)

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Your feedback so far has been invaluable. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I would also say forget BN. Out of the two you chose form JA, the 2.37 is better because it's a cleaner stone. I'd request an idealscope image on that one.
 
vtech|1365712192|3424942 said:
Thanks for the feedback Garry. Appreciate your opinion. Do you think there is a risk that the feather is near the girdle though and could it cause problems with the diamond down the road?
Click to expand...


...not Garry, and I hope that he chimes in with a response. Just the act of cutting and polishing a diamond puts an enormous amount of strain on the stone, if the stone was going to crack or break it likely would have done so under these circumstances. It's not unheard of to hear about a a diamond chipping or cracking, however it's quite infrequent.
 
Thanks Christina! Appreciate your input. I agree with you that the odds are nothing will happen (just because the odds are always very low on these types of things). However, the feather inclusion does get right to the edge on the girdle and the article on pricescope mentions that as a risk multiple times. Does that not increase the risk substantially on this stone since that is the case and it is a relatively large feather?
 
as you already seem to have a good grasp of probability, multiplying the chances of a very rare event by 2 or 3 times still leaves you with a very rare event.

You might want to carry insurance on a 2.3 carater, anyway, regardless of the feather.
 
Not to mention, why in the world would Jonathan even stock a diamond that had durability risks?!

(Garry, I am really just posting again to say I hope we get to meet you in Las Vegas! :wavey: )
 
The GOG stone looks gorgeous.

Re: HCA -- once you have images like those provided by GOG you do not need to worry about the HCA score anymore. Images trump the HCA.

Different methods of rounding can easily result in a 41 vs. 41.1 angle difference.

Inclusions that pose a durability risk are very rare. I like a good prongable inclusion. Insure your diamond wear and enjoy.

PS: If you did not pay the "appraiser" then I would not weigh their opinion heavily because it is not offered as a full service to you. To evaluate the durabilioty risk of an inclusion requires a full evaluation. If it matters, GOG would not purchase a stone with a durability risky inclusion for their in house inventory.

I have never read about an inclusion causing damage to a diamond in all my time reading threads on PS.
 
Christina...|1365713962|3424969 said:
I agree with most of the others. The stone you purchased is beautiful and superior in my opinion to any of the other suggestions. Here is the article that I believe Garry referenced.

https://www.pricescope.com/journal/what_eye_clean_diamond

and here is another about feathers and durability

https://www.pricescope.com/journal/diamond_feather_inclusions_durability_risk


I am quite confident that if this particular feather posed any significant risk that Jon would have disclosed that to you!
Click to expand...

Thanks Christina,
The photo's I posted of how to set and protect a feather near the girdle are simple for any setter to follow (in case they do not have their brain engaged). By following that approach there is no risk at all of the stone chipping. And the reflection of the prong stops you seeing the inclusion(s). This stone has the feather and the inclusion that can be obscured in that manner.
I might add, with due respect to appraisers, I have had 36 years running a workshop and retail diamond focused business. I lecture diamond students in Australia and appraisers too. So I am not making this stuff up.
The feathers I avoid are those that run across the crown / table facets, or those that are open and can fill with gunk. GIA is super tough with girdle feathers and this means that you can have an eye clean SI2 - otherwise all 2ct plus SI2's will have other much worse consequences - mostly things that dull the stone.

And Hey Dreamer - see you in Vegas!!!!!!!!!!
 
That is great, Garry! :appl: I will look forward to that! (I wish Dreamer would come, too!)
 
diamondseeker2006|1365727024|3425123 said:
That is great, Garry! :appl: I will look forward to that! (I wish Dreamer would come, too!)
Click to expand...
Ooopppssss a daisy
Sorry - See YOU in vegas DS xox
 
vtech|1365719563|3425038 said:
Thanks Christina! Appreciate your input. I agree with you that the odds are nothing will happen (just because the odds are always very low on these types of things). However, the feather inclusion does get right to the edge on the girdle and the article on pricescope mentions that as a risk multiple times. Does that not increase the risk substantially on this stone since that is the case and it is a relatively large feather?
Click to expand...


IIRC they were discussing durability issues with feathers that are a.) surface reaching or B.) met at two points with other inclusions. Neither is the case with the GOG stone.

FWIW: The 2.27 JA stone also has feathers located at or near the girdle plotted at the 1:00 position in the face up view of the plot diagram and at the 8:00 position in the face down view as well.
 
Garry H (Cut Nut)|1365727127|3425124 said:
diamondseeker2006|1365727024|3425123 said:
That is great, Garry! :appl: I will look forward to that! (I wish Dreamer would come, too!)
Click to expand...
Ooopppssss a daisy
Sorry - See YOU in vegas DS xox
Click to expand...

No problem!!! :wavey: (Bring some idealscopes and ASETs for us to buy, Garry!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top