Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

B2C Gemologist Opinions

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
Hi everyone,

I'm looking to purchase a diamond from B2C Jewels that is an SI1 clarity rating. I received an image of the diamond and it has an inclusion that seems very prominent in the magnified photo (although I really am not very knowledgeable in looking at inclusions!). I followed up with customer service on an opinion from the gemologist on whether the diamond is eye-clean or not. I received a response that it is in fact eye-clean and they do recommend the diamond over another diamond I had inquired about.

My question is, how biased/unbiased are the gemologists? It seems they are working with B2C Jewels, so I'm scared they are biased into saying the diamond is eye-clean in order to persuade me to make the purchase. Any experience with the gemologists and how impartial their opinions are?

Thanks!!
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,561
LLNN213|1455717638|3992025 said:
Hi everyone,

I'm looking to purchase a diamond from B2C Jewels that is an SI1 clarity rating. I received an image of the diamond and it has an inclusion that seems very prominent in the magnified photo (although I really am not very knowledgeable in looking at inclusions!). I followed up with customer service on an opinion from the gemologist on whether the diamond is eye-clean or not. I received a response that it is in fact eye-clean and they do recommend the diamond over another diamond I had inquired about.

My question is, how biased/unbiased are the gemologists? It seems they are working with B2C Jewels, so I'm scared they are biased into saying the diamond is eye-clean in order to persuade me to make the purchase. Any experience with the gemologists and how impartial their opinions are?

Thanks!!

Hmm. This is always a tough one! What's eyeclean to someone might not be eyeclean to you, ignoring the 'making the sale' aspect of it.

My recommendation is always to buy from a vendor with a reasonable return policy, and have the stone shipped out loose and inspect it in-person. An inclusion that is not immediately obvious to you on day one might become prominent on day three; an inclusion that is well-hidden by the sparkle and twinkle of a freshly-cleaned diamond might become prominent after a day of wear. So it's always best if you can play with 'questionable' stones for a few days, given how much you can save if it is in fact clean to you!
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
21,683
Can you post the picture just so we can have a look? What size is the stone? Where is the location of the inclusion? What is
the inclusion (black, clear or white)? That's why it would be nice to see a picture.
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
Thanks everyone!! I've attached two pictures, and below are the specs:
I specifically asked the gemologist about the inclusion (black center area) and he said it is very small and not noticeable to the naked eye.

Any opinions are apprecaited!! :)
Carat Weight:1.55
Cut:Excellent
Color:I
Clarity: SI1
Lab Name: GIACertificate
No:1213396894
Depth:61.70
Table:58.00
Polish:Excellent
Symmetry:Excellent
Girdle:MED-MED
Culet: None
Fluorescence:Strong
Ratio:0.00
Measurements:7.42x7.45x4.58

7952116_real_image.jpg
 

Attachments

Diamond_Hawk

Brilliant_Rock
Trade
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
1,221
Yssie|1455726460|3992072 said:
This is always a tough one! What's eyeclean to someone might not be eyeclean to you, ignoring the 'making the sale' aspect of it.

My recommendation is always to buy from a vendor with a reasonable return policy, and have the stone shipped out loose and inspect it in-person. An inclusion that is not immediately obvious to you on day one might become prominent on day three; an inclusion that is well-hidden by the sparkle and twinkle of a freshly-cleaned diamond might become prominent after a day of wear. So it's always best if you can play with 'questionable' stones for a few days, given how much you can save if it is in fact clean to you!
I will not speak to this specific diamond as that would violate forum rules, but Yssie does point out the differences in "eye-clean" from person to person and vendor to vendor. To help clarify (as B2C was specifically mentioned by the OP):

We define an eye-clean diamond as no inclusions seen in the face-up orientation at a distance of 25cm, under normal lighting, when viewed by a gemologist with 20/20 vision.

Although there is not an industry standard definition of an eye-clean diamond, our definition is derived from three factors: distance, lighting and vision. For a person with normal 20/20 vision, the 'near point', defined as the closest point that an item can be viewed by the eye without appearing blurry under normal lighting, is 25cm. By incorporating an expectation of 'near point' (25cm) viewing, normal lighting, and 20/20 vision our definition of 'eye-clean' gives a realistic baseline for all diamonds - whether loose or in a jewelry setting.
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,561
I'll bet that ink-splotch inclusion near the UGF meet at 5 o'clock is prong-able... if not completely prongable, on a stone of that size anything but seriously teeny tiny prongs (which I don't recommend anyway) would sit close enough to mask it (by distracting from it) pretty thoroughly! Can you ask about prongability? (is that a word?)

If you do a 4/8-prong setting you'll mask the reflections, too...
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
Thank you! Can you explain more on what you mean by prong-ability...I'm assuming you mean the prongs would cover the ink-blotch inclusions. Again, I am very new to this! I was hoping to do a a delicate pave setting, not a large, bulky setting- would that work in the same way?
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
Also, I was worried more about the dark inclusion that seems to be more toward the center of the diamond. Any thoughts on that?
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,561
Oh wow, you're right - I didn't look closely enough. Diamonds are graded face-up, and face-up at close quarters that inclusion blends nicely into the obstructed (blackened) mains below, but I completely agree and I would personally also be concerned about its real-world visibility. Please do definitely have this stone shipped loose to inspect in-person before setting!!

_963.png
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
Thank you, I was definitely going to order it as a loose diamond. Now I'm wondering if it's even worth ordering- is there a possibility it could be clean to the eye? Or would you advise to keep looking?
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
I know sometimes people post links of diamonds they recommend. Now I'm even more skeptical of the diamond I OP about!! I'm looking for a 1.5ct round diamond, I color...willing to go to SI1 to stay within the budget but really am hoping for something eye-clean with a high graded cut. The budget is below $7200 ideally, maybe a little over if something great comes along. Any suggestions from anyone?
 

Michael_E

Brilliant_Rock
Trade
Joined
Nov 19, 2003
Messages
1,290
LLNN213|1455751471|3992284 said:
Now I'm wondering if it's even worth ordering- is there a possibility it could be clean to the eye?
The image you've posted is like looking at the stone with a 13 power loupe. If you were to look at this stone at it's real life scale you'd see the attached image. I know that there are a lot of really perceptive people here, but do you really think that anyone could pick out that inclusion, face up, no magnification, at this scale? I'm thinking that this is one of those "mind clean" issues and unless the thought of that inclusion bothers you, I wouldn't worry about it. Oh, I edited this to say that it is a little easy to see....I did leave the red circle in place.

_35712.jpg
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,608
Michael_E|1455759336|3992370 said:
LLNN213|1455751471|3992284 said:
Now I'm wondering if it's even worth ordering- is there a possibility it could be clean to the eye?
The image you've posted is like looking at the stone with a 13 power loupe. If you were to look at this stone at it's real life scale you'd see the attached image. I know that there are a lot of really perceptive people here, but do you really think that anyone could pick out that inclusion, face up, no magnification, at this scale? I'm thinking that this is one of those "mind clean" issues and unless the thought of that inclusion bothers you, I wouldn't worry about it. Oh, I edited this to say that it is a little easy to see....I did leave the red circle in place.
Yep. It's going to be so hard to see, if not downright impossible. With clarity, I think a lot of PSers have mind clean issues. Small inclusions to me are cool. If I wanted perfect clarity, I could get a cubic zirconia.
 

ADN

Shiny_Rock
Trade
Joined
Nov 24, 2015
Messages
311
Michael_E|1455759336|3992370 said:
LLNN213|1455751471|3992284 said:
Now I'm wondering if it's even worth ordering- is there a possibility it could be clean to the eye?
The image you've posted is like looking at the stone with a 13 power loupe. If you were to look at this stone at it's real life scale you'd see the attached image. I know that there are a lot of really perceptive people here, but do you really think that anyone could pick out that inclusion, face up, no magnification, at this scale? I'm thinking that this is one of those "mind clean" issues and unless the thought of that inclusion bothers you, I wouldn't worry about it. Oh, I edited this to say that it is a little easy to see....I did leave the red circle in place.
:clap: - This is an excellent point which I think people tend to forget about when looking at images blown up 40x everyday...
Unfortunately Michael_E, someone is probably going to report you to the moderators for being in the trade and making sense...I mean making a comment...on a stone :lol:
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
Thank you everyone for your input. I feel much more confident about ordering the diamond and hopefully will be happy once I receive it! =)
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,561
ADN|1455771008|3992452 said:
Michael_E|1455759336|3992370 said:
LLNN213|1455751471|3992284 said:
Now I'm wondering if it's even worth ordering- is there a possibility it could be clean to the eye?
The image you've posted is like looking at the stone with a 13 power loupe. If you were to look at this stone at it's real life scale you'd see the attached image. I know that there are a lot of really perceptive people here, but do you really think that anyone could pick out that inclusion, face up, no magnification, at this scale? I'm thinking that this is one of those "mind clean" issues and unless the thought of that inclusion bothers you, I wouldn't worry about it. Oh, I edited this to say that it is a little easy to see....I did leave the red circle in place.
:clap: - This is an excellent point which I think people tend to forget about when looking at images blown up 40x everyday...
Unfortunately Michael_E, someone is probably going to report you to the moderators for being in the trade and making sense...I mean making a comment...on a stone :lol:
No, we don't tend to forget about the magnification. Some of us most certainly ARE able to see inclusions - even tiny inclusions in tiny diamonds. And a 1.5ct stone is not, as far as diamonds go, all that small.

That inclusion is nearly invisible in the photo, but tilt that stone slightly so it isn't sitting atop black mains and it'll be black on white.
Does it mean the stone isn't eyeclean, to OP's eyes? No.
Does it mean the stone might not be eyeclean, to OP's eyes? Yes.
Would it be remiss of us to fail to consider the possibility and advise inspecting in-person? Yes.
The entire concept and discussion of "eyeclean" presumes scrutiny at close range - not what a casual observer might or might not see, and under the conditions I brought up earlier - tilted diamond, dirty diamond, living with the diamond for some time - any diamond's characteristics, including inclusions, may be highlighted.

OP, I definitely think it's worth having shipped out of it checks all your other boxes, and I'm glad you've decided to do so! ::)
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
Thank you Yssie! I do appreciate hearing both sides of the argument. I guess I won't know until I have the diamond in hand, and am able to inspect myself.
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
This is so overwhelming! I just found an additional diamond, slightly smaller at 1.50 (vs OP 1.55) same SI1 grading except the GIA report shows a small 'indented natural.' The dimension are slightly smaller at 7.37*7.38*4.52 and price point is a couple hundred less as well. Any opinions on an indented natural inclusion vs a crystal inclusion? I've requested a picture of the diamond, but below is the GIA photo:
 

Attachments

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,561
LLNN213|1455811056|3992569 said:
This is so overwhelming! I just found an additional diamond, slightly smaller at 1.50 (vs OP 1.55) same SI1 grading except the GIA report shows a small 'indented natural.' The dimension are slightly smaller at 7.37*7.38*4.52 and price point is a couple hundred less as well. Any opinions on an indented natural inclusion vs a crystal inclusion? I've requested a picture of the diamond, but below is the GIA photo:
Breathe ::) We're not going to let you fall on your head w/ your search as long as you keep posting here :))

Don't bother with this latest. 41.6/32.5/59 is beyond redemption.
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
:)

What is the problem with the 41/32/59 (just for my own knowledge)?

Is there an ideal table measurement for around a 1.5-1.6cat round diamond? I've read about 'bottom heavy' diamonds, and want to make sure the diamond looks as big as possible but still has a good cut. A friend of mine has a 1.50ct with 7.67x7.78x4.36mm measurements, her diamond looks huge! I do realize that is quite a shallow cut though that would take away from the sparkle of the diamond.
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,561
The tenths of a percent are actually really important here - 41 is a hugely different discussion from 41.6.

Stones with crown, pav, and tables that are not complementary will show a "ring" of darkness under the table in still photos. In especially egregious examples that ring will be entirely see-through: you'll see what's under the diamond. This happens because the stone is letting light escape out the back of the stone instead of returning it to you face-up. The pavilion angle, crown angle, and table play huge factors in whether a stone returns light face-up. The pavilion angle reported on the GIA is the angle of the pavilion mains; there are other facets, lower girdle facets, that are even steeper than the mains, and these are usually the first to start "leaking light" in a modern RB... longer (80+) LGFs on the GIA indicate that those facets are more shallow than shorter LGFs, which can "save" an overly deep-pavilioned diamond to some extent in terms of face-up light return... But this combo (41.6/32.5/59) is, as I said, beyond redemption.

(^ is obviously the super simplified version of what's going on :)) )

[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/return-of-the-steep-deep.130752/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/return-of-the-steep-deep.130752/[/URL]
Pics of that "egregious" example above: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/got-my-idealscope-pics-of-my-steep-deep-from-freaking-out-hca-fair-thread.133845/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/got-my-idealscope-pics-of-my-steep-deep-from-freaking-out-hca-fair-thread.133845/[/URL]
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,608
When looking for a well-cut diamond, you want to look for a crown angle of around 34 to 35.5. And a pavilion angle of around 40.6 to 40.9, or possibly 41. A steeper crown is better with a shallower pavilion, and vice versa.

32.5 crown with 41.6 will be a mess. Numbers are way out of the ranges I gave you. Good luck!
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,561
Yes. More to the point - you posted a picture, which is infinitely more helpful than the GIA report (GIA rounds and averages) ::)

It's not going to be the brightest stone (see the darker areas under the table 11o'clock to 3o'clock and 6o'clock to 8o'clock), and optical symmetry looks imperfect to me.
That said, it'll probably show a lot more coloured light return face-up than a stone that didn't have those "darker" areas (I personally actively seek slightly deeper stones but I'm a bit of an oddity on PS in that regard), and if the price is good and it checks all the other boxes IMO this sort of "marginal by PS standards" stone can be very good value for money, if cut quality isn't at the top of your list of priorities...

You're having this stone shipped out - do you have a Jared or Hearts on Fire dealer nearby? If so, take this stone in, compare it to some branded stones of similar size and colour, and see what you think :))
 

LLNN213

Rough_Rock
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
21
Hmm..with all of your comments it confuses me that the GIA would rate it as excellent in Cut, Polish, and Symmetry. Do they basis their ratings off something other than the points you mentioned?

Yes I do have a Jared's nearby, I will take your suggestion and compare the diamond to others of similar characteristics!
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,608
Crown 35.5 and pav 40.8 should be safe. But always best to see in person!
 

Michael_E

Brilliant_Rock
Trade
Joined
Nov 19, 2003
Messages
1,290
LLNN213|1455822374|3992631 said:
Hmm..with all of your comments it confuses me that the GIA would rate it as excellent in Cut, Polish, and Symmetry. Do they basis their ratings off something other than the points you mentioned?
The GIA bases their ratings off of a large number of documented observations and so it is somewhat subjective in nature. It has to be though, since many people have a different perspective of what looks good to them. If you look back through the discussions about this on PS you will see that has occurred here as well and so the idea of there being "PS standards" which are somehow better than those of the GIA is somewhat subjective as well and certainly not supported by the bulk of gemologists in the world, (I can't recall anyone ever mentioning PS standards in an appraisal or anywhere else for instance).
The reason that the diamond you've shown has an "Excellent" cut rating from the GIA is because it meets their standards for an excellent cut according to their research. This also means that it is far from "beyond redemption" and may be worth taking a look at in person. In fact all of these grading scales are designed with one thing in mind, and that is to help a buyer decide whether a stone is worth looking at in person. If you get it and it looks good in person, in a variety of lighting situations, then you're good to go.
On the other hand that last cert shown has a comment indicating that the cut grade is based on cloud which is not shown. This can definitely affect the look of the stone, even more than the angles show, and so one should be aware of this if they do look at it in person.
 

gr8leo87

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Messages
381
Any black crystal inclusion is black on white when viewing diamond in real life. The black arrows aren't really black in real life they give out all sorts of colours when tilted. The only place the arrows are black is in a picture.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Lucky Alhambra Bracelet
    Lucky Alhambra Bracelet
    Handmade diamond studs
    Handmade diamond studs
    5 Diamond Misconceptions: Part 1
    5 Diamond Misconceptions: Part 1

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top