SI1 Pics

[kevinraja]

I went and looked at a SI1 Emerald cut stone today. Even though the stone looked clean looking thru the table straight up, one were able to notice the crystal at about 30% off straight-up. The crystal is sitting just off the table underneath. Even though I can locate it fairly easily when I stare at it knowing where to find, a casual look at the stone didn''t reveal the crystal. I don''t know what to take home from this. It would be helpful if someone posts some pics, idealscopes, or other images of SI1 stones, especially emerald or ascher.

It was a 1.71 carat G SI1 with 63.3 depth and 61 table, with a nice spread 8.35x6.11x3.87. The interesting thing is that the stone was advertised online for $8500, but when I went to store I was told that the stone''s price is 10885, and that they would give 10% discount which would bring the price to about 9800. When I told that about their website price, they said they will honor it. I know the stone is damn cheap for the price. The only thing that I am not sure about is the clarity, which I am having problem understanding. Pics would help here.

Thanks.

 

[pqcollectibles]

I don''t have any pics for you. Maybe other''s will post pics. Just some thoughts for you.

Not all SI stones are totally eyeclean. Especially when you are talking about a more "transparent" style of cut like an emerald or an asscher.
Some people would jump right on that stone. Several folks here have picked up "bargain" I1''s because the one grade definining inclusion is masked by the cut or can be hidden by a prong. One PS regular has an I1 RB diamond very similar to what you are describing. The inclusion is just under the table. Face on, the inclusion is not visible. You have to know where to look and hold the diamond just right to see it. Many folks enjoy the pricing and think of the inclusion as their stone''s birthmark. They always know they got the right one back from the jeweler.

Sounds like you could get an otherwise fabulous stone at a fantastic price. It''s not like anyone carries a loupe with them to thoroughly examine the diamond when they see the ring. So, you''ll have to decide your own personal comfort level regarding the inclusion. If it''s going to bother you to death, then continue your search. If you can enjoy the crystal as just one part of the natural beauty of the diamond, then go for it and laugh all the way to the bank.

 

[kevinraja]

Thank you so much for your comments PQ. You are absolutely correct. When I start to think of the inclusion as a birthmark of the stone, I feel a lot less worrisome than otherwise. After your comments, I really feel good. Based on the numbers, it fits 1A cut, except that I have asked for a sarin to know the crown%. I really like the stone, my girlfried liked it as well. I couldn''t find a similar G SI1 for the same price anywhere else. The price is awesome. But before thinking about buyin the stone, I am going to use an ideal-scope to see what it looks like.

When I was staring at that stone today, along with J VVS1 with med blue flour, the J stone was more sparkly in spite of its 68 depth. I wonder why. My stone of interest was sparkly as well, but the J was way too sparklier. I think I mean scintillation here

 

[Regular Guy]

Kevinraja,

1) This is Charleston Alexander, right?

2) Sounds like knowing the price of options for listed diamonds you are interested in -- in advance of showing up -- is sort of critical to optimizing on their pricing; can you conclude anything else about that?

3) In your second post you say: "except that I have asked for a sarin to know the crown%..." Not sure what you mean. Did you get the sarin while you were there? I understand they have that apparatus there. Does that seem to be the case? If so, and they didn''t do it on the spot, can you guess why not?

Thanks for pioneering for us in DC.

 

[pqcollectibles]

Could be a function of the cut. But,.......... I wonder if it could be the med flour working a bit of magic too. Years ago, my sister had a great diamond. It was F color with med blue flour. A blue white as it was called then. Those were highly sought after befor flour became a dirty word in the diamond biz. That diamond had the most fabulous sparks and fire, and just seemed to shimmer all the time.

We always wondered if it was the flour that produced that.

The ring was from a broken engagement so she eventually sold it.

 

[kevinraja]

Some inclusion pics first INCLUSIONS

Hi Regular Guy,

1) This is Charleston Alexander, right?

Yes it is CA

2) Sounds like knowing the price of options for listed diamonds you are interested in -- in advance of showing up -- is sort of critical to optimizing on their pricing; can you conclude anything else about that?

Their diamonds are little pricy. But the stone I was considering is really cheap. I couldn't find a matching priced stone on the internet for those speciications.

3) In your second post you say: "except that I have asked for a sarin to know the crown%..." Not sure what you mean. Did you get the sarin while you were there? I understand they have that apparatus there. Does that seem to be the case? If so, and they didn't do it on the spot, can you guess why not?

They do have Sarin machine. They did try to get a report on that. But the numbers were either huge or negative They told me that they are having some problems with Sarin for fancy shapes. They said that they will have to get a software update/check-up. They told me that they will call me to inform me of its proper working. Dianne who was showing me the stone was nice, she told me that she would give me a call once they have the sarin. I was at CA for the second time, the first time I spoke to Cassy. She was great in educating me. Their sales talk was polished with a subtle push assuming that we are actually going to buy from them. Maybe that is how sales people talk. They do not provide idealscope or brilliance-scope images. But they did suggest me to get appraised from Martin Fuller who resides in McLean (or Falls church?). I don't like the idea of getting appraised by a local appraiser who happens to know CA, because they might have some hidden agenda to be soft on appraisal

I am planning to visit Washington Diamond today. Lets see how that goes

 

[windowshopper]

kevinraja

i had sarin (s) done on my EC and each one was different. Ive been told that they are very faulty for all fancies but particularly for step cuts. about the pricing--We know that EC are less per carat than rounds of similar overall quality.................dont know if that is at work

 

[kevinraja]

Windowshopper,
Yes EC have small price/carat compared to RB. But my comparison was EC with EC.

 

[pqcollectibles]

But they did suggest me to get appraised from Martin Fuller who resides in McLean (or Falls church?). I don''t like the idea of getting appraised by a local appraiser who happens to know CA, because they might have some hidden agenda to be soft on appraisal

You don''t have to worry about Martin Fuller. They have recommended a top notch appraiser to you. He''s on the PS Approved Appraisers list and several people have used his services. Martin is highly respected among members of his profession. While their sales pitch may have seemed a bit pushy, referring clients to Martin Fuller for evaluation is a good sign.

You are on the right track to go back and look at both diamonds with your Ideal Scope. That will give you a much better idea of the quality of the makes of both diamonds.

 

[windowshopper]

just checking.... wonder why?

 

[valeria101]

The description sounds like SI to me... there would have been more to talk about if SI2 instead of SI1.

When you say "looked" does that imply a loupe between you and diamond ?

If the inclusion does not show without magnification and seriously focused staring into the stone, I would call that a lucky SI.

You may find a clean SI step cut, but then, all inclusions would need to be located near the corners (well under the crown steps) and have no reflections around the stone either. There may be such a stone out there, but... is it worth to keep looking ? The one you have found sounds like a good deal, IMO.

Just for ref, there are a dozen or so magnified photos of step cut SIs HERE (almost all listings have one). A couple more are SI asschers in WF's expert selection - that's where the SI2 below comes from:

 

[kevinraja]

Valeria,
Thanks so much for the links and comments. I was not able to see the inclusion thru' the table upright (just like the photoshots) with the naked eye, even at about 10 inches. I can see the crystal only when I look at an angle of say 30 degrees. the crystal is sitting just off the table beneath is in the pavilion. Sometimes i felt like I saw reflections, but I am not sure. When I looked through a 10x loupe, again I can't see anything face-up, but can see only at an angle. The GIA clarity picture is HERE. You can see that the crystal is just off the table. What do you think?

 

[kevinraja]

Hi all,
After a long search, I found a stone with SI1 clarity whose inclusion looks very similar to what I saw with my stone. The only difference is that I was able to see the inclusion only at an angle which is unlike the upright picture here. The inclusion in my stone of interest is almost at the same spot, with size almost the same.

So what do you all think about the inclusion. Is it BAD?

 

[pqcollectibles]

The pic you posted would bother me. I don''t mind inclusions if they don''t show, are masked by the cut, or can be hidden by the mounting. So, if the inclusions in the stone you''re considering don''t show like the pic you posted, it would be a different story.

You might want to think in terms of how the diamond/ring i''s going to be viewed. Your gal is going to hold out her hand and gaze at it. She''s going to roll it on her finger while she stares down at it. She''s going to hold out her hand to other people to look at. etc. Take that type of viewing into consideration.

Also take your own piece of mind into consideration. If this going to bug the heck out of you mentally, you don''t need the hassle factor.

 

[valeria101]

Bad ? If you consider them unbearable... then I guess they are bad from your point of view. And that''s all that matters, since these are going to be your diamonds. For what IMO is worth, it''s not the respective spec that makes a diamond less of a gem

The inclusions placed on the long side of the EC show a bit more - the only ''hiding places'' there are the corners. Feather-like inclusion perpendicular to the table and/or placed close to the pavilion are also pretty well hidden. But this is the most step facets can do. If yours is a relatively narrow EC, the short facets also make hiding spots for inclusions. Anything under the table is left in the open though - quite literally. Clouds and twinning are somewhat excused from scrutiny, IMO... Anyway, words are not very useful - seeing diamonds is.

The pictures (this one on the thread and the clarity plot on the other) show about the same situation: a "solid" inclusion (meaning a spec, crystal or something - not a translucent cloud or grain line) placed on the long facets and /or under table. I would expect to see something there, as you say. If this is ok or not - it remains a matter of personal opinion (yours, of course).

Hope the 0.2 worth helps.

 

[kevinraja]

I totally agree with you PQ. But my girlfriend saw the stone. It bothers her a little, but I educated her on clarity and that it is not a big deal. The most important, she wants a "BIG" stone. So she didn''t care much about what we saw in the store. It bothered me a little in the beginning, but after reading that I should look at it as if it were a unique birthmark. NO mistake, for that price, the stone is heck of a deal considering that it has ideal cut proportions according to gemappriasers.com table.