Are these I1? Or did my diamonds get switched?

[allowingtoo]

Are these an I1? They came with a mini EGL that stated they were I1. I am horrified at the HUGE carbon spots on them. Sorry about the picture - I don't have Macro and this is taken with a magnifying glass.

Stone 32947510D
Weight 1.50 CT
Shape ROUND BRILLIANT
Color G-H
Clarity I1
Measurements 0 x 0 x 0 mm
Depth N/A
Table N/A
Crown N/A
Pavilion N/A
Crown Angle N/A
Pavilion Angle N/A
Girdle N/A
Polish GOOD
Symmetry GOOD
Fluorescence N/A
Culet N/A
Cut Grade N/A
Comments
UGS Appraisal Value 6,000.

 

[denverappraiser]

I’m not surprised that EGL would call those I-1’s. Why do you suspect the stones may have been switched?

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[waterlilly]

I1 means 1 naked eye visible flaw, while 12&3 indicate several flaws, is that correct?

Are there several flaws visible to the naked eye, not just in this magnified photo?

 

[allowingtoo]

well I can see the spots without my *readers* that I usually use for reading fine print.

The EGL number is on the post of the earrings. I just thought that I1 would not be so glaring in carbon spots like this. To me they are huge.

Yes these are the only flaws. Otherwise they look great. Just those 3 carbon spots.

 

[waterlilly]

I only have experience from owning/shopping for my own diamonds, not in the business at all. But, I would expect just this in an "I" rated stone, it is the lowest rating a diamond can have clarity wise...1,2 or 3 - they are going to have big 'ol visible blemishes.

 

[denverappraiser]

Quoting from GIA:
Included (I1, I2, and I3) - Inclusions are obvious under 10× magnification and may affect transparency and brilliance.

They teach that the dividing line between I1 and I2 is whether the inclusions substantially affect the beauty or durability of the stone. It's not a matter of counting the inclusions. ‘Substantially’ is left undefined.

EGL does not use the same clarity grading scale as GIA. Ask them what they mean by their various grades if you're going to rely on their grading opinions.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

 

[ct-appr]

Adding to Neil''s comments: As you go from I2 to I3, the stone has durability issues. For example: a surface reaching crack that extends half way through the stone.

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 10/29/2009 3:45:53 PM
Author: denverappraiser
Quoting from GIA:
Included (I1, I2, and I3) - Inclusions are obvious under 10× magnification and may affect transparency and brilliance.

They teach that the dividing line between I1 and I2 is whether the inclusions substantially affect the beauty or durability of the stone. It''s not a matter of counting the inclusions. ‘Substantially’ is left undefined.

EGL does not use the same clarity grading scale as GIA. Ask them what they mean by their various grades if you''re going to rely on their grading opinions.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver

Yup.

 

[allowingtoo]

ok thanks. I just thought that since the stones themselves were not engraved - just the post(s) that there could be a possibility that the stones could have been switched.

I just can''t imagine *anyone* saying these are worth $6,000. I''ve never seen such an obvious or prominent carbon spot. That one goes all the way across the surface of the diamond (in the first pic)

To me I''d think it was more of an I3.

 

[waterlilly]

But I think - as Neil said - these spots are not affecting the durability of the stone. Once durability is compromised the ratings goes into the 2-3 range.

6k? Silly - who on earth said that?!

 

[allowingtoo]

UGS for EGL appraised them at $6,000. I still think these are NOT the stones that were graded by the EGL.

That's such a horrible picture of them but in person the Carbon spot that runs across the top looks MUCH worse than the Carbon spot(s) on the other earring - even though in the picture it doesn't look that bad.

 

[ms.halo]

Can you return these? It sounds like you''re unhappy with them, so perhaps you should exchange or get your money back.

 

[tyty333]

Yes, return if possible (you definitly arent happy). If you cant return then you could take them to an
unbiased apprasier to make sure they are the same stones as in the EGL reports.

Here is where you can find unbiased appraisers...tell them you just want to verify that they are the
same stones as in the reports.

https://www.pricescope.com/appr_list.aspx

 

[waterlilly]

After looking at that picture for all of 5 seconds, it is easy to say that those two stones are simply mirror images of each other, not two individual stones.

either there is fine print somewhere saying that the picture is not the actual stones or you got ripped off. Either way - I1 rating is not incorrect for the ones you showed us.

 

[sonnyjane]

Date: 10/30/2009 3:38:01 PM
Author: waterlilly
After looking at that picture for all of 5 seconds, it is easy to say that those two stones are simply mirror images of each other, not two individual stones.


either there is fine print somewhere saying that the picture is not the actual stones or you got ripped off. Either way - I1 rating is not incorrect for the ones you showed us.

Good eye! I caught that too. Looks like they just flipped the image. OP, if there is no fine print saying that the earrings pictured are not the actual earrings, this is a big ''ol scam. If possible to return them I would.

 

[lucyandroger]

Date: 10/30/2009 3:48:17 PM
Author: sonnyjane

Date: 10/30/2009 3:38:01 PM
Author: waterlilly
After looking at that picture for all of 5 seconds, it is easy to say that those two stones are simply mirror images of each other, not two individual stones.


either there is fine print somewhere saying that the picture is not the actual stones or you got ripped off. Either way - I1 rating is not incorrect for the ones you showed us.

Good eye! I caught that too. Looks like they just flipped the image. OP, if there is no fine print saying that the earrings pictured are not the actual earrings, this is a big 'ol scam. If possible to return them I would.

I can see even from this photo of the report that on the bottom left hand corner it says, "Photograph Approximate."

 

[waterlilly]

Date: 10/30/2009 3:59:18 PM
Author: lucyandroger

Date: 10/30/2009 3:48:17 PM

Author: sonnyjane

Date: 10/30/2009 3:38:01 PM

Author: waterlilly

After looking at that picture for all of 5 seconds, it is easy to say that those two stones are simply mirror images of each other, not two individual stones.



either there is fine print somewhere saying that the picture is not the actual stones or you got ripped off. Either way - I1 rating is not incorrect for the ones you showed us.

Good eye! I caught that too. Looks like they just flipped the image. OP, if there is no fine print saying that the earrings pictured are not the actual earrings, this is a big ''ol scam. If possible to return them I would.

I can see even from this photo of the report that on the bottom left hand corner it says, ''Photograph Approximate.''

There you go then!

So, I guess the final answer is - NO, your stones are NOT the ones in the picture, however, YES they are I1 and they were not switched since the ones pictured were not the ones you were buying to begin with.

I hope you did not pay any where near 6k for them