Brick and mortar proposal with strange diamond IGL report

[ChristaDiane]

Hello,
So my fiancé and I walked into a brick & mortar store. We looked at a few diamonds and ended up at the lab grown section. The women in the store showed us a few different diamonds. I told her the only thing that really mattered to me was the diamonds cut. She then pulled out a sparkly round brilliant lab diamond to which my fiancé said, we will take it, as he got down on one knee and immediately proposed. We did not look at the lab report nor did we even know the size, but the diamond looked gorgeous. Come to find out after the purchase, and the next day when we went back for the lab report because she forgot to give it to us, that it was an IGL lab report, and the specs were good for the most part, and a 1.22 carat. I was surprised by the report, as the diamond looked beautiful with lots of fire and brilliance. I’ve done my homework on this diamond, and all is in perfect range but the pavilion angle, which is at 41.1, so it says. I have read many reviews that this is a big No No, but the diamond is absolutely gorgeous. I took it to my jeweler who thought it was a beautiful bright stone and weighed it in at 1.25 & 7mm bigger then the lab report says when we went to reset it in a diamond crown hidden halo setting, so I’m wondering if the lab report could be off on this diamond. I have read many bad reviews on IGL, but mostly that they are not strict when it comes to grading, but could this report be off ? If It had been graded by GIA, would it be a stricter report ? I just can not understand why this diamond looks and sparkles so well when I hear that the pavilion angle is not too good. Could they have been careless when grading this diamond, as they were off on it’s weight. To my eyes, it’s a brilliant little fire ball ? I’ll attach the report, and would love to hear feedback and thoughts.
Thank you in advance!

 

[MollyMalone]

Hi, @ChristaDiane

Could we back-track a bit... Does the IGL lab report elsewhere indicate that the lab report number has been inscribed on the diamond's girdle? If so, did your jeweler (the one who told you the diamond's weight is 1.25 ct, rather than 1.22 as stated on the IGL report) show you, via his microscope, that the number inscribed on the diamond's girdle is the same as the IGL lab report number?

If not, I'm thinking that it's possible that when you went back to the jeweler who sold you the stone. to get the IGL report they neglected to give you at the time of purchase, they may have mistakenly given you the wrong IGL report.

If the lab report number was not inscribed on the diamond, did your jeweler show you that the lab report's clarity plot does indeed match the number-nature of inclusions on your diamond? (Again, I'm trying to rule out the possibility that you were given the IGL report for another diamond, not the one you purchased.)

Also, is the diamond loose or did you purchase it mounted in a setting? I'm thinking it's mounted because the second pic you posted is of a complete ring. If mounted, it wouldn't be surprising that your jeweler reported a slightly different weight than what's on the report because he would have used a formula to arrive at the diamond's weight since he couldn't weigh the diamond loose on an electronic scale, i.e., the 1.25 ct weight is actually his informed estimate. (Although I would think that if he used a digital caliper to measure the stone's face-up dimensions, those would correspond to the 6.89-6.91 mm indicated on the IGL lab report and not 7 mm.)

 

[DejaWiz]

The 41.1/34.6/56.5 combo could very well be just fine. It's not overly deep at 61.7%, so it seems well-proportioned on paper.
It is possible to get accurate ASET or Ideal-Scope images while it is mounted, so you can still get peace of mind about the light performance.

 

[ChristaDiane]

Hello,
So my fiancé and I walked into a brick & mortar store. We looked at a few diamonds and ended up at the lab grown section. The women in the store showed us a few different diamonds. I told her the only thing that really mattered to me was the diamonds cut. She then pulled out a sparkly round brilliant lab diamond to which my fiancé said, we will take it, as he got down on one knee and immediately proposed. We did not look at the lab report nor did we even know the size, but the diamond looked gorgeous. Come to find out after the purchase, and the next day when we went back for the lab report because she forgot to give it to us, that it was an IGL lab report, and the specs were good for the most part, and a 1.22 carat. I was surprised by the report, as the diamond looked beautiful with lots of fire and brilliance. I’ve done my homework on this diamond, and all is in perfect range but the pavilion angle, which is at 41.1, so it says. I have read many reviews that this is a big No No, but the diamond is absolutely gorgeous. I took it to my jeweler who thought it was a beautiful bright stone and weighed it in at 1.25 & 7mm bigger then the lab report says when we went to reset it in a diamond crown hidden halo setting, so I’m wondering if the lab report could be off on this diamond. I have read many bad reviews on IGL, but mostly that they are not strict when it comes to grading, but could this report be off ? If It had been graded by GIA, would it be a stricter report ? I just can not understand why this diamond looks and sparkles so well when I hear that the pavilion angle is not too good. Could they have been careless when grading this diamond, as they were off on it’s weight. To my eyes, it’s a brilliant little fire ball ? I’ll attach the report, and would love to hear feedback and thoughts.
Thank you in advance!

Hi, @ChristaDiane

Could we back-track a bit... Does the IGL lab report elsewhere indicate that the lab report number has been inscribed on the diamond's girdle? If so, did your jeweler (the one who told you the diamond's weight is 1.25 ct, rather than 1.22 as stated on the IGL report) show you, via his microscope, that the number inscribed on the diamond's girdle is the same as the IGL lab report number?

If not, I'm thinking that it's possible that when you went back to the jeweler who sold you the stone. to get the IGL report they neglected to give you at the time of purchase, they may have mistakenly given you the wrong IGL report.

If the lab report number was not inscribed on the diamond, did your jeweler show you that the lab report's clarity plot does indeed match the number-nature of inclusions on your diamond? (Again, I'm trying to rule out the possibility that you were given the IGL report for another diamond, not the one you purchased.)

Also, is the diamond loose or did you purchase it mounted in a setting? I'm thinking it's mounted because the second pic you posted is of a complete ring. If mounted, it wouldn't be surprising that your jeweler reported a slightly different weight than what's on the report because he would have used a formula to arrive at the diamond's weight since he couldn't weigh the diamond loose on an electronic scale, i.e., the 1.25 ct weight is actually his informed estimate. (Although I would think that if he used a digital caliper to measure the stone's face-up dimensions, those would correspond to the 6.89-6.91 mm indicated on the IGL lab report and not 7 mm.

Hi, @ChristaDiane

Could we back-track a bit... Does the IGL lab report elsewhere indicate that the lab report number has been inscribed on the diamond's girdle? If so, did your jeweler (the one who told you the diamond's weight is 1.25 ct, rather than 1.22 as stated on the IGL report) show you, via his microscope, that the number inscribed on the diamond's girdle is the same as the IGL lab report number?

If not, I'm thinking that it's possible that when you went back to the jeweler who sold you the stone. to get the IGL report they neglected to give you at the time of purchase, they may have mistakenly given you the wrong IGL report.

If the lab report number was not inscribed on the diamond, did your jeweler show you that the lab report's clarity plot does indeed match the number-nature of inclusions on your diamond? (Again, I'm trying to rule out the possibility that you were given the IGL report for another diamond, not the one you purchased.)

Also, is the diamond loose or did you purchase it mounted in a setting? I'm thinking it's mounted because the second pic you posted is of a complete ring. If mounted, it wouldn't be surprising that your jeweler reported a slightly different weight than what's on the report because he would have used a formula to arrive at the diamond's weight since he couldn't weigh the diamond loose on an electronic scale, i.e., the 1.25 ct weight is actually his informed estimate. (Although I would think that if he used a digital caliper to measure the stone's face-up dimensions, those would correspond to the 6.89-6.91 mm indicated on the IGL lab report and not 7 mm.

Hi, @ChristaDiane

Could we back-track a bit... Does the IGL lab report elsewhere indicate that the lab report number has been inscribed on the diamond's girdle? If so, did your jeweler (the one who told you the diamond's weight is 1.25 ct, rather than 1.22 as stated on the IGL report) show you, via his microscope, that the number inscribed on the diamond's girdle is the same as the IGL lab report number?

If not, I'm thinking that it's possible that when you went back to the jeweler who sold you the stone. to get the IGL report they neglected to give you at the time of purchase, they may have mistakenly given you the wrong IGL report.

If the lab report number was not inscribed on the diamond, did your jeweler show you that the lab report's clarity plot does indeed match the number-nature of inclusions on your diamond? (Again, I'm trying to rule out the possibility that you were given the IGL report for another diamond, not the one you purchased.)

Also, is the diamond loose or did you purchase it mounted in a setting? I'm thinking it's mounted because the second pic you posted is of a complete ring. If mounted, it wouldn't be surprising that your jeweler reported a slightly different weight than what's on the report because he would have used a formula to arrive at the diamond's weight since he couldn't weigh the diamond loose on an electronic scale, i.e., the 1.25 ct weight is actually his informed estimate. (Although I would think that if he used a digital caliper to measure the stone's face-up dimensions, those would correspond to the 6.89-6.91 mm indicated on the IGL lab report and not 7 mm.)

@MollyMalone Hi ! So, yes the ILG lab report matches the numbers on the diamonds girdle. I found them myself, as I did think the report was for the wrong diamond. As for my jeweler weighing my stone.. she did so when putting it into my new setting. So she certainly did weigh the stone only before resetting it into its new setting. Also, the clarity report dos not mention a black carbon spot on the girdle of the diamond as well. I should have mentioned that as well. Unless that is considered a surface flaw ? I am not sure on that one, but it is not in the clarity diagram as well. Maybe I’m crazy ? Lol !

 

[ringo865]

Congratulations on your engagement! Pretty ring.

 

[ChristaDiane]

The 41.1/34.6/56.5 combo could very well be just fine. It's not overly deep at 61.7%, so it seems well-proportioned on paper.
It is possible to get accurate ASET or Ideal-Scope images while it is mounted, so you can still get peace of mind about the light performance.

The 41.1/34.6/56.5 combo could very well be just fine. It's not overly deep at 61.7%, so it seems well-proportioned on paper.
It is possible to get accurate ASET or Ideal-Scope images while it is mounted, so you can still get peace of mind about the light performance.

@DejaWiz
Thank you! Good to know it’s good on paper! As far as the ASET goes, I am not familiar with, but will definitely check into it. Again, thank you so much !

 

[ChristaDiane]

Congratulations on your engagement! Pretty ring.

@ringo865
Thank you so very much ! (:

 

[ChristaDiane]

Hi, @ChristaDiane

Could we back-track a bit... Does the IGL lab report elsewhere indicate that the lab report number has been inscribed on the diamond's girdle? If so, did your jeweler (the one who told you the diamond's weight is 1.25 ct, rather than 1.22 as stated on the IGL report) show you, via his microscope, that the number inscribed on the diamond's girdle is the same as the IGL lab report number?

If not, I'm thinking that it's possible that when you went back to the jeweler who sold you the stone. to get the IGL report they neglected to give you at the time of purchase, they may have mistakenly given you the wrong IGL report.

If the lab report number was not inscribed on the diamond, did your jeweler show you that the lab report's clarity plot does indeed match the number-nature of inclusions on your diamond? (Again, I'm trying to rule out the possibility that you were given the IGL report for another diamond, not the one you purchased.)

Also, is the diamond loose or did you purchase it mounted in a setting? I'm thinking it's mounted because the second pic you posted is of a complete ring. If mounted, it wouldn't be surprising that your jeweler reported a slightly different weight than what's on the report because he would have used a formula to arrive at the diamond's weight since he couldn't weigh the diamond loose on an electronic scale, i.e., the 1.25 ct weight is actually his informed estimate. (Although I would think that if he used a digital caliper to measure the stone's face-up dimensions, those would correspond to the 6.89-6.91 mm indicated on the IGL lab report and not 7 mm.)

@MollyMalone
When I replied to you, I did not put your name in correctly. Sorry about that.

 

[tkyasx78]

At the end of the day all that really matters is that you are happy with the ring and stone.

Having said that... I personally would be concerned that the stone you have is both a different weight and diameter than the report you have. I would start by checking the girdle for the inscription number and make sure it matches the report.

Once a stone is set they would have to remove it from the setting to have an accurate weight so you will need to hope that your diamond is inscribed with the number that matches your report.

 

[ChristaDiane]

Hi, @ChristaDiane

Could we back-track a bit... Does the IGL lab report elsewhere indicate that the lab report number has been inscribed on the diamond's girdle? If so, did your jeweler (the one who told you the diamond's weight is 1.25 ct, rather than 1.22 as stated on the IGL report) show you, via his microscope, that the number inscribed on the diamond's girdle is the same as the IGL lab report number?

If not, I'm thinking that it's possible that when you went back to the jeweler who sold you the stone. to get the IGL report they neglected to give you at the time of purchase, they may have mistakenly given you the wrong IGL report.

If the lab report number was not inscribed on the diamond, did your jeweler show you that the lab report's clarity plot does indeed match the number-nature of inclusions on your diamond? (Again, I'm trying to rule out the possibility that you were given the IGL report for another diamond, not the one you purchased.)

Also, is the diamond loose or did you purchase it mounted in a setting? I'm thinking it's mounted because the second pic you posted is of a complete ring. If mounted, it wouldn't be surprising that your jeweler reported a slightly different weight than what's on the report because he would have used a formula to arrive at the diamond's weight since he couldn't weigh the diamond loose on an electronic scale, i.e., the 1.25 ct weight is actually his informed estimate. (Although I would think that if he used a digital caliper to measure the stone's face-up dimensions, those would correspond to the 6.89-6.91 mm indicated on the IGL lab report and not 7 mm.)

At the end of the day all that really matters is that you are happy with the ring and stone.

Having said that... I personally would be concerned that the stone you have is both a different weight and diameter than the report you have. I would start by checking the girdle for the inscription number and make sure it matches the report.

Once a stone is set they would have to remove it from the setting to have an accurate weight so you will need to hope that your diamond is inscribed with the number that matches your report.

 

[ChristaDiane]

@tkyasx78
Yes, the inscribed numbers are correct as I checked them myself with my loupe. And, yes.. the diamond was taken out of it original setting by my jeweler who weighed and measured it. I have no idea why some things are not measuring up ?
Also, yes! The most important thing is that I am happy with my diamond!
Thanks (:

 

[MollyMalone]

@MollyMalone
When I replied to you, I did not put your name in correctly. Sorry about that.

No need to apologize
Well, the discrepancies between the IGL report and your report number-inscribed diamond are a puzzler, aren't they?!

If you're keen on getting an ASET scope, David Atlas, an independent appraiser-gemologist (who is also a PS Trade member who posts under @oldminer ) is the USA distributor of the ASET and the Ideal Scopes:

Uncategorized

datlas.com

Here's a page (located under the Resources tab that's at the top of every PS web page) with fundamental info about the ASET Scope:

ASET Scope

ASET is like the Ideal Scope but gives more detailed information. It is best for analyzing fancy shaped diamonds.

www.pricescope.com

Plus another informative ASET article by Bryan Boyne, the Vice-President of Whiteflash (PS Trade member @Texas Leaguer )

ASET – The Diamond Evaluation Tool

Of all the diamond instruments and analytical devices on the market today possibly the most valuable is the ASET (Angular Spectrum Evaluation Tool). It is simple in concept, easy to […]

www.pricescope.com

Maybe you could convince your jeweler to make the relatively minor investment, so she could use it as an educational tool with future customers (and thereby save you a few $ as well ).

Even if she is willing-able to offer Sarin reports, it will be easier for her customers to understand ASET images -- see this 2020 thread for an explanation of why:

Sarin vs. Ideal Scope

I was offered by my jeweler to have Sarin report done instead of IS for diamonds I am interested. I kept asking him for ideal scopes but he said he would give me a full Sarin report (he is a very credible jeweler.) My question is: can Sarin be substituted for Ideal Scope? Can it show a light...

www.pricescope.com

 

[ChristaDiane]

@MollyMalone
Yes, it is a little puzzling, and thank you for all the information you have given me. I will talk to her my jeweler and see if she will help me with that and will give her your reason why. Thank you again !!! I so appreciate you giving me your information and advise.

 

[Karl_K]

1.22 compared to 1.25 could be a scale calibration issue.
6.91 vs 7mm is also in the zone of different readings from a sarin machine vs manual measurement.
There are a bunch of different 4th string "labs" called igl.
The report number would not verify on the ones I tried.

 

[DejaWiz]

This looks to be it:

https://www.ilabsllc.com/home/report-search/?ReportN=2310644022

 

[MollyMalone]

1.22 compared to 1.25 could be a scale calibration issue.
6.91 vs 7mm is also in the zone of different readings from a sarin machine vs manual measurement.
There are a bunch of different 4th string "labs" called igl.
The report number would not verify on the ones I tried.

Thanks ever so much for the explanation re the differences in numbers, Karl!

 

[ChristaDiane]

1.22 compared to 1.25 could be a scale calibration issue.
6.91 vs 7mm is also in the zone of different readings from a sarin machine vs manual measurement.
There are a bunch of different 4th string "labs" called igl.
The report number would not verify on the ones I tried.

@Karl_K
I agree. Thanks so much!

 

[ChristaDiane]

This looks to be it:

https://www.ilabsllc.com/home/report-search/?ReportN=2310644022

@DejaWiz
That’s it !

 

[Karl_K]

This looks to be it:

https://www.ilabsllc.com/home/report-search/?ReportN=2310644022

sheesh
I click on your link and it comes up, I put in the numbers and use their search and it does not.
Thanks!

 

[ChristaDiane]

Thank you all so very much for your input! I’m going to put this to rest and enjoy my little stone. You have all been so helpful, so do know I appreciate each and every comment and wisdom you have given me. Next is to marry the man who gave it to me and enjoy it for the rest of my life. Thanks again !!