Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

About to buy - gimme your input plz on this 2ct RB!

P

partners

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
66
Long time lurker, first time posted and am in the market for an e-ring.
Wanted something around 2ct or so, H/Si1

I have the following stone on hold from a local jeweler for a day or so and I need your help in evaluating it.

It is an AGS 000, but the HCA is only 2.8. It is 2.010 carat and an H/Si1.

Actual report and ASET is here from AGS: http://www.agslab.com/pdf_sync_reports/104054978004-PLDQR.PDF

Vendor states it is eye clean.

I have also attached a pic of the actual diamond.

Questions:

1. What are your thoughts on this stone?
2. What is the brown blob at 1'o clock as seen on the AGS certificate ASET?
3. Why is the report from 2011? Could it be pre-owned and being sold as new?
4. What is a fair price for this stone?
5. Why is the HCA so low if it is AGS 000?

Please help as I cannot put a hold on this stone for long. Thanks!!!

_162.jpeg
 
I can try and answer questions 2 and 5. I believe the brown blob is light leakage. And as far as I understand an AGS 000 trumps the HCA score. I believe you don't have to worry about the HCA score when you have an AGS 000. I'm sure the diamond experts will be along shortly to answer all your questions.
 
1. Not the cleanest SI1. Lots of stuff under the table, but the photo actually doesn't look bad.
2. You can ignore HCA with AGS 0. It has confirmed ideal light performance. HCA only predicts it.
3. That blob you see is actually grey, indicating possible light leakage. Could be a distorted scan pickup or the inclusions are causing
something wonky with the light in that area of the stone.
4. Hard to say on the report. Could have just been sitting for a while. 2ct stones don't move as fast and this one has inclusions like twining
whisps that many would shy away from.
 
Would really appreciate more input from the experts plz!!!
 
It looks eye clean. There might be a small black something at around 7 o'clock on that photo but the arrow is masking it there making it hard to tell. Otherwise I don't see anything.



Information about twinning wisps [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/twinning-wisp-surface-graining.113984/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/twinning-wisp-surface-graining.113984/[/URL] Experts say probably not an issue. My own feeling is that it would only be an issue if it were graded I1--which would suggest a durability problem in an otherwise completely diamond like that.

Only the very experienced Prosumer PSers can really evaluate leakage looking at a photo like that. Frankly, if it got AGS 000, I wouldn't worry about it.

Fair price can be found using the diamond search tool on the front page. It lists similar diamonds between $19.8K to $24.1K. Low 20's is probably a fair deal.
 
Thanks for the reply.

Are the twinning wisps under the table a deal-breaker?

Is this a dud or can I find better in a similar price range?

More opinions please!
 
What is the price?

The picture looks good and it is an AGS 0... and not the worst AGS 0 ASET report I've seen.
 
JulieN|1392258154|3614051 said:
What is the price?

The picture looks good and it is an AGS 0... and not the worst AGS 0 ASET report I've seen.
Click to expand...

20K.

Should I buy or can I do better?

Also, if I buy, should I get it appraised in the money back period? Appraisal is like $300-400.
 
Bump for help.
 
krisjon|1392189643|3613427 said:
1. Not the cleanest SI1. Lots of stuff under the table, but the photo actually doesn't look bad.
2. You can ignore HCA with AGS 0. It has confirmed ideal light performance. HCA only predicts it.
3. That blob you see is actually grey, indicating possible light leakage. Could be a distorted scan pickup or the inclusions are causing
something wonky with the light in that area of the stone.
4. Hard to say on the report. Could have just been sitting for a while. 2ct stones don't move as fast and this one has inclusions like twining
whisps that many would shy away from.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with parts of this post.

1. Clarity is graded by five characteristics (listed in no order of importance):
- nature of the inclusion(s),
- size of the inclusion(s),
- relief - how visible the inclusion is against the background. This can be problematic IRL because a black inclusion will blend against a black arrow (pavilion main) that is obstructing because incident light is blocked at close range, but may become more noticeable when the source of obstruction is removed and the background is silvery/grey...
-location - under-table vs. near the girdle. The inclusion plot doesn't tell you how *deep* into the stone an inclusion is, but this can affect both visibility and light return in lower clarities (since more light paths cross the deeper interior of the stone than the girdle edge or right near the table/crown surface)
-number of inclusion(s)
The plot doesn't tell you anything about visibility of the inclusions, and the photo doesn't tell you anything about effects of inclusions on light return. Garry, Karl, and other professionals advise having a trusted pair of eyes inspect an SI whose grade-setting inclusions are wisps or clouds. Personally I think it's always worth having a trusted pair of eyes inspect any stone, and I also think it's always worth having the stone shipped out loose to see in-person before having it set, but I think negative reviews of reputably-graded SIs are the exceptions rather than the rule.
More on clarity grading here: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/[/URL]

2. HCA doesn't predict light performance, it just tells you if a stone is "likely" worth further investigation". AGS0 does mean "ideal light performance" - by AGSL's definition of "idea" which is not necessarily the PS party definition! If a consumer abides by the PS party definition of "excellent light return" then AGS0 doesn't make it a 'choose blindly' situation like with WF's ACAs or BGD's/GOG's/Infinity/Canera's Signatures... you still have to do your due diligence. Fortunately those unfortunate AGS0s are VERY few and far between! I completely agree that HCA is irrelevant with this stone, though.

3. Distorted scans are definitely one of the problems with putting absolute trust in those simulation prints - the princesses tend to be worse, from what I've seen. The only inclusions the scan will pick up are large surface-breaching inclusions like extra facets, though, as only the exterior surface of the stone is modelled and the AGSL cut grade (and the simulated light performance image) does not consider the effects of internal inclusions and/or body colour on light return.

4. Ditto - it's an expensive stone. "Old" stones are re-sold all the time - this isn't an indication of a negligent or dishonest seller. It does, however, mean that you should seriously consider having the stone (independently!) appraised loose to confirm that it's still in exactly the condition represented by the report - that poor setting jobs and wear and tear haven't left any marks in the intervening years.

The stone MGR linked is the cream of the crop by PS standards (and any other standard that prioritises optical symmetry (H&A) and lots of light return). Stones from the ACA line also come with generous trade-in/upgrade/buyback policies. For 2k more it'd a no-brainer for me, personally :sun:
 
partners|1392263986|3614118 said:
JulieN|1392258154|3614051 said:
What is the price?

The picture looks good and it is an AGS 0... and not the worst AGS 0 ASET report I've seen.
Click to expand...

20K.

Should I buy or can I do better?

Also, if I buy, should I get it appraised in the money back period? Appraisal is like $300-400.
Click to expand...
$300 for an appraisal??.. :eek: Rip off!
 
Yssie|1392314063|3614465 said:
krisjon|1392189643|3613427 said:
1. Not the cleanest SI1. Lots of stuff under the table, but the photo actually doesn't look bad.
2. You can ignore HCA with AGS 0. It has confirmed ideal light performance. HCA only predicts it.
3. That blob you see is actually grey, indicating possible light leakage. Could be a distorted scan pickup or the inclusions are causing
something wonky with the light in that area of the stone.
4. Hard to say on the report. Could have just been sitting for a while. 2ct stones don't move as fast and this one has inclusions like twining
whisps that many would shy away from.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with parts of this post.

1. Clarity is graded by five characteristics (listed in no order of importance):
- nature of the inclusion(s),
- size of the inclusion(s),
- relief - how visible the inclusion is against the background. This can be problematic IRL because a black inclusion will blend against a black arrow (pavilion main) that is obstructing because incident light is blocked at close range, but may become more noticeable when the source of obstruction is removed and the background is silvery/grey...
-location - under-table vs. near the girdle. The inclusion plot doesn't tell you how *deep* into the stone an inclusion is, but this can affect both visibility and light return in lower clarities (since more light paths cross the deeper interior of the stone than the girdle edge or right near the table/crown surface)
-number of inclusion(s)
The plot doesn't tell you anything about visibility of the inclusions, and the photo doesn't tell you anything about effects of inclusions on light return. Garry, Karl, and other professionals advise having a trusted pair of eyes inspect an SI whose grade-setting inclusions are wisps or clouds. Personally I think it's always worth having a trusted pair of eyes inspect any stone, and I also think it's always worth having the stone shipped out loose to see in-person before having it set, but I think negative reviews of reputably-graded SIs are the exceptions rather than the rule.
More on clarity grading here: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/clarity-grading-question.154174/[/URL]

2. HCA doesn't predict light performance, it just tells you if a stone is "likely" worth further investigation". AGS0 does mean "ideal light performance" - by AGSL's definition of "idea" which is not necessarily the PS party definition! If a consumer abides by the PS party definition of "excellent light return" then AGS0 doesn't make it a 'choose blindly' situation like with WF's ACAs or BGD's/GOG's/Infinity/Canera's Signatures... you still have to do your due diligence. Fortunately those unfortunate AGS0s are VERY few and far between! I completely agree that HCA is irrelevant with this stone, though.

3. Distorted scans are definitely one of the problems with putting absolute trust in those simulation prints - the princesses tend to be worse, from what I've seen. The only inclusions the scan will pick up are large surface-breaching inclusions like extra facets, though, as only the exterior surface of the stone is modelled and the AGSL cut grade (and the simulated light performance image) does not consider the effects of internal inclusions and/or body colour on light return.

4. Ditto - it's an expensive stone. "Old" stones are re-sold all the time - this isn't an indication of a negligent or dishonest seller. It does, however, mean that you should seriously consider having the stone (independently!) appraised loose to confirm that it's still in exactly the condition represented by the report - that poor setting jobs and wear and tear haven't left any marks in the intervening years.

The stone MGR linked is the cream of the crop by PS standards (and any other standard that prioritises optical symmetry (H&A) and lots of light return). Stones from the ACA line also come with generous trade-in/upgrade/buyback policies. For 2k more it'd a no-brainer for me, personally :sun:
Click to expand...


Thanks for the detailed reply.

Very useful.

The alternative diamond MGR posted is about 4k more.

The vendor states that this stone I'm interested in is eye clean.

Is it worth the 4k additional premium?

Also, I can have this stone appraised by an appraiser David Wolff for about 400.

Would that be recommended ?
 
More advice plz!
 
The stone I linked is about $2927 more than your $20 stone. For me and my money, it would be worth the peace of mind on cut quality and the fact that it can be traded in or up. This stone has been through many rigors concerning cut quality so for me, it would be a no brainer as well to inquire about the stone. It would be a beauty!!
 
MissGotRocks|1392342445|3614905 said:
The stone I linked is about $2927 more than your $20 stone. For me and my money, it would be worth the peace of mind on cut quality and the fact that it can be traded in or up. This stone has been through many rigors concerning cut quality so for me, it would be a no brainer as well to inquire about the stone. It would be a beauty!!
Click to expand...

I hear ya, but the 3K is 15% more for a diamond that is more or less the same as my original...

I haven't heard anything negative about my original yet, but I would love more expert input!
 
Bump for help
 
The stone you linked is probably a very nice stone. It is an AGS0 so that says quite a bit. However, you could be assured that the cut quality on the WF stone is much tighter. Your stone has a 41.1 pavilion angle, a 58.5 table - neither of which you'd find in a super ideal cut stone. I realize the WF stone is more but as with most things, you get what you pay for. At this point, the only way you could ever be completely sure is to compare both of these stones side by side for personal preference. I'm not trying to persuade or dissuade you - only pointing out differences that to me would make a difference. These nuances may not matter to you at all or you might think that the stone you posted is beautiful. Let the one that speaks to you and your criteria be the one you choose - personal preference at this point I think!
 
partners|1392348650|3614986 said:
MissGotRocks|1392342445|3614905 said:
The stone I linked is about $2927 more than your $20 stone. For me and my money, it would be worth the peace of mind on cut quality and the fact that it can be traded in or up. This stone has been through many rigors concerning cut quality so for me, it would be a no brainer as well to inquire about the stone. It would be a beauty!!
Click to expand...

I hear ya, but the 3K is 15% more for a diamond that is more or less the same as my original...

I haven't heard anything negative about my original yet, but I would love more expert input!
Click to expand...

Your original stone looks good, you said a local vendor, have you looked at the stone, the vendor says eye clean, does that mean by your standards.

It is an Ideal cut, the ASET on the lab report is a computer generated scan and the inclusions in the stone are not part of that scan...in other words you could (maybe very slim chance) have a Ideal light performance grade, but in real life those inclusions could effect that performance.

If you can see the stone with your eyes and compare with other Ideal cuts.
 
I would pass on your original because that table is pretty large--larger than I'd be comfortable with and possibly a significant loss of fire/colored light return vs white light return--and that's kind of a busy plot of inclusions. If YOU have seen it in person and are happy with it's clarity and how it looks in person that's what you need to be concerned with. But I don't usually take a vendors word for eye clean on an SI unless they know my definition of eye clean and we "jive" on that definition.

As to your comment about your current stone vs that Whiteflash stone that MGR recommended: they're not "pretty much the same." There's a SIGNIFICANT difference in cut quality between the two which is reflected in the price difference.
 
Thanks guys.

I went today and saw the stone in person - I was not able to see any inclusions or anything with my eye. However, when I looked at the stone under a 10x loupe it did seem hazy and I could pick out the stuff seen on the plot. Looked awesome though hahah

I realize the WF is a higher cut, but it is out of my price range. My budget is 20k and that is max I want to spend on the stone. With my criteria of 2ct, and h color and with cut being king, I have not seen anything better.

Is my stone the best 2ct I can get for 20k? Or is it a good compromise?!

Appreciate all the help!
 
Bumping for more input.
 
I advise to use the search function on the front page of pricescope.com . You'll be able to see if there is literally anything that meets your criteria. Best bet is from James Allen or Blue Nile. James Allen will give information that PSers will be able to advise on. Blue Nile is barebones information, but you will likely be able to make a fair bet if you stay VS2 or higher.
 
teobdl|1392496904|3615976 said:
I advise to use the search function on the front page of pricescope.com . You'll be able to see if there is literally anything that meets your criteria. Best bet is from James Allen or Blue Nile. James Allen will give information that PSers will be able to advise on. Blue Nile is barebones information, but you will likely be able to make a fair bet if you stay VS2 or higher.
Click to expand...

Thanks.
Very few stones fit the bill :cry:

I went to the vendor and pressed a little to see if he had anything to compare b/c I was not happy with the clarity and all the wisps/other stuff under the table He came up with two alternatives that are in his virtual selection. Will send me the actual pics of these stones soon.


Alternative 1 - 2.00-Ct H/VS2-clarity - eyeclean
Depth :61.3%
Table :57%
Crown-34.5%
Pavilion-40.6%
Polish:Excellent
Symmetry:Excellent
Girdle:Medium to Slightly Thick
Culet:None
Fluorescence:Strong
Measurements: 8.09 x 8.07 x 4.96 mm
HCA - 0.8
Price is same - can get idealscope/asets/etc. but he would have to send it out and that would be extra couple hundred
Personal Concerns - not many, except maybe the strong blue fluorescence, however, that is personal preference really. No light performance images, but HCA is below 1. Also. a VS2 so clarity is better compared to the original AGS000 and is more likely to be eye clean. Does have some crystals under the table though....





Alternative 2 - 2.04-Carat H/SI1- eyeclean
Depth: 60.7%
Table: 57%
Crown-33.5%
Pavilion-40.8%
Polish:Excellent
Symmetry:Excellent
Girdle:Thin to Medium
Culet:None
Fluorescence:Medium
Measurements: 8.17 x 8.22 x 4.98 mm
HCA - 0.9
Price is about 1500 cheaper - can get idealscope/asets/etc. but he would have to send it out and that would be extra couple hundred
Personal Concerns - lots of crystals in the stone - not sure if this is really a better stone than the original AGS 000 in terms of clarity with all the twinning wisps under the table, BUT it is 1500 cheaper and HCA is under and may be a better value overall....








How do these two compare to my original that was presented by this vendor?

Would any of these be pursuing further as opposed to the original and spending some to get more info about light return etc?

I realize GIA does not have all the characteristics of an AGSL report, but I am sure some sort of deduction can be made from these numbers by the experts.

2ct_h_vs2_-_inclusion_plot.jpg

2ct_h_si1_-_inclusion_plot.jpg
 
Help a partner out!

Another question I was curious about was the difference in color from H to an I. Is there a significant difference? I realize it depends on one's color sensitivity, but in general, is it discernible to the untrained eye?

I ask b/c the pricepoint changes significantly between a H vs I and I am debating if I should just drop the color to get a higher carat or a VS2....
 
partners|1392571867|3616358 said:
Help a partner out!

Another question I was curious about was the difference in color from H to an I. Is there a significant difference? I realize it depends on one's color sensitivity, but in general, is it discernible to the untrained eye?

I ask b/c the pricepoint changes significantly between a H vs I and I am debating if I should just drop the color to get a higher carat or a VS2....
Click to expand...
The difference would only be noticeable side by side really and if at all on it's own, from the side view, and face down--which you won't see a lot of since it's set. If you're willing to consider a stone with a little fluorescence that also might help the pricepoint.
 
You can definitely notice tint on a side view of many I color stones. Go to JamesAllen.com, and rotate a bunch of I's around. You'll see variation not only in magnitute of shade but also differences in hue in I. As you get lower into the colors (D-->Z), the variation within a color designation gets bigger.

What this means for you is that not I's are created equally, and if you want to be sure you'll be comfortable with an I, you need to see that specific stone. That said, I think most would be comfortable with an I. If you don't want to risk it, get an H.
 
Thanks. I was opting for the H to be safe. Furthermore, I read that AGSL is more lax with their color grading, so an I may even more tint.


I have attached a magnified pic of the 2ct h/vs2.
What do you guys think about this as compared to the original AGSL?

Vendor states its eye clean from 6-8 inches away from the table view. In addition to this confirmed eye clean status, there are no colored inclusions, clouds have no effect on brilliance, there are no effects due to fluorescence and it is a very shiny stone.


What are all those black specs/dots I see on the stone? They are not seen on the inclusion plot in the other post....

2_ct_h-vs2.jpg
 
No, AGSL is not softer in grading color, in fact the color will look whiter in an Ideal cut diamond.

See the stone in person, know what your comfort level is always the best way...seeing the stone on a web page is not a good way to see true color, color is graded under controlled lighting at a lab, in real life you are wearing your diamond...it is in a setting, it is exposed to all light conditions, etc.

I am ok with a I color and even J color as long as they are Ideal cuts, and there is good value in searching these colors.
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top