Bruise inclusion

[bright ice]

Can someone please explain exactly what a bruise inclusion is?

I'm not worried regarding clarity (VVS), just curious as to what they are and what causes them?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Bruise
A tiny area of impact accompanied by very small, root-link feathers; typically occurs at a facet junction.

http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-inclusions-defined

Good question! I had to look it up!

 

[bright ice]

Thanks DS! I suppose they are of no concern?

 

[gr8leo87]

Bruise is basically just what it sounds. Sort of another diamond punched a diamond - that results in microscopic level fractures (root like feathers). Usually they occur at junction because those are more susceptible as they are raised areas.

 

[gr8leo87]

Also bruise is a blemish and not an inclusion. Blemishes don't form part of the inclusion grade - they form part of the polish grade. Unless that blemish is an indented natural which is then considered an inclusion.

 

[MollyMalone]

Also bruise is a blemish and not an inclusion. Blemishes don't form part of the inclusion grade - they form part of the polish grade. Unless that blemish is an indented natural which is then considered an inclusion.

Perhaps you work from different definitions, but bruises are not deemed blemishes by GIA:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-blemishes-defined

Rather, as seen in this link diamondseeker supplied up-thread yesterday,
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-inclusions-defined
GIA categorizes bruises (more descriptively a/k/a percussion marks) as inclusions that stand apart from indented naturals, which GIA also plots differently than bruises:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2015/gia-diamond-grading-reports-understanding-diamond-clarity-plotting-diagram

 

[gr8leo87]

Also bruise is a blemish and not an inclusion. Blemishes don't form part of the inclusion grade - they form part of the polish grade. Unless that blemish is an indented natural which is then considered an inclusion.

Perhaps you work from different definitions, but bruises are not deemed blemishes by GIA:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-blemishes-defined

Rather, as seen in this link diamondseeker supplied up-thread yesterday,
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-inclusions-defined
GIA categorizes bruises (more descriptively a/k/a percussion marks) as inclusions that stand apart from indented naturals, which GIA also plots differently than bruises:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2015/gia-diamond-grading-reports-understanding-diamond-clarity-plotting-diagram

No I don't work from different definitions. How many times have you seen my definition different from what it actually is?

That's right a bruise is a surface reaching inclusion and not a blemish. Correction acknowledged. Thank you very much.

 

[gr8leo87]

I had mixed up bruise with Abrasion. My apologies.

 

[gr8leo87]

Also bruise is a blemish and not an inclusion. Blemishes don't form part of the inclusion grade - they form part of the polish grade. Unless that blemish is an indented natural which is then considered an inclusion.

Perhaps you work from different definitions, but bruises are not deemed blemishes by GIA:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-blemishes-defined

Rather, as seen in this link diamondseeker supplied up-thread yesterday,
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-inclusions-defined
GIA categorizes bruises (more descriptively a/k/a percussion marks) as inclusions that stand apart from indented naturals, which GIA also plots differently than bruises:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2015/gia-diamond-grading-reports-understanding-diamond-clarity-plotting-diagram

Also I never said indented natural was a bruise.

What I said and meant indented type of natural (natural is a blemish) is considered an inclusion.

 

[PS34one]

Also bruise is a blemish and not an inclusion. Blemishes don't form part of the inclusion grade - they form part of the polish grade. Unless that blemish is an indented natural which is then considered an inclusion.

Perhaps you work from different definitions, but bruises are not deemed blemishes by GIA:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-blemishes-defined

Rather, as seen in this link diamondseeker supplied up-thread yesterday,
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-inclusions-defined
GIA categorizes bruises (more descriptively a/k/a percussion marks) as inclusions that stand apart from indented naturals, which GIA also plots differently than bruises:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2015/gia-diamond-grading-reports-understanding-diamond-clarity-plotting-diagram

No I don't work from different definitions. How many times have you seen my definition different from what it actually is?

That's right a bruise is a surface reaching inclusion and not a blemish. Correction acknowledged. Thank you very much.

Great info. Just to clarify further why a bruise can be so tricky, technically a bruise on a high clarity is a little bit like a large nick. The size determines weather or not it is a blemish/polish feature (nick), or a clarity characteristic (bruise). If you see Bruise on something above a VS1 its so minor it was just barely larger than a nick but large enough to justify being called a clarity characteristic.

 

[gr8leo87]

Also bruise is a blemish and not an inclusion. Blemishes don't form part of the inclusion grade - they form part of the polish grade. Unless that blemish is an indented natural which is then considered an inclusion.

Perhaps you work from different definitions, but bruises are not deemed blemishes by GIA:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-blemishes-defined

Rather, as seen in this link diamondseeker supplied up-thread yesterday,
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2013/diamond-inclusions-defined
GIA categorizes bruises (more descriptively a/k/a percussion marks) as inclusions that stand apart from indented naturals, which GIA also plots differently than bruises:
http://4csblog.gia.edu/2015/gia-diamond-grading-reports-understanding-diamond-clarity-plotting-diagram

No I don't work from different definitions. How many times have you seen my definition different from what it actually is?

That's right a bruise is a surface reaching inclusion and not a blemish. Correction acknowledged. Thank you very much.

Great info. Just to clarify further why a bruise can be so tricky, technically a bruise on a high clarity is a little bit like a large nick. The size determines weather or not it is a blemish/polish feature (nick), or a clarity characteristic (bruise). If you see Bruise on something above a VS1 its so minor it was just barely larger than a nick but large enough to justify being called a clarity characteristic.

I would suppose what would set bruise apart from a nick is the surface breach. If it actually creates feathers and penetrate into a diamond it would have to be an inclusion no matter how small that might be. Please correct me.

 

[MollyMalone]

That's been my understanding as well, gr8leo87: that it warrants being labeled a bruise (and therefore an inclusion) if there are, borrowing GIA's descriptor, "very small, root-like feathers" below the surface. Similar to the crackles produced by a stone that happens to hit your car windshield just right, so to speak.

 

[gr8leo87]

That's been my understanding as well, gr8leo87: that it warrants being labeled a bruise (and therefore an inclusion) if there are, borrowing GIA's descriptor, "very small, root-like feathers" below the surface. Similar to the crackles produced by a stone that happens to hit your car windshield just right, so to speak.

Absolutely.

 

[PS34one]

Its more of a size issue, especially considering a VVS. They are both on the surface, a nick at 60x magnification looks like a bruise but that's ridiculous. A row of nicks creates abrasion. Its that fine fine line of "when is this big enough to be more than a blemish?" dilemma. I'm guessing there are not really any other characteristics if they plotted a bruise on a VVS. Otherwise it would not matter. I think more commonly a bruise is a larger inclusion plotted on lower clarity's, like you said when it got punched. haha
Like the OP stated, I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[bright ice]

Thanks for the input. So, they should be of no concern then as my main question?

 

[gr8leo87]

Thanks for the input. So, they should be of no concern then as my main question?

Hey you already said in your original post that you weren't worried about it - and that you just needed to know what is.

At VVS you are not to worry!