Calling all the diamond experts: Cavity on a diamond - durability concern?

[blingblingdiamond]

Hi All,

I am looking at a SI1 diamond that has features and a cavity. I was advised by IDJ to stay away from this diamond as it will be cloudy and it has cavity. I know I should trust them but it is one of the best diamonds that falls within the budget if it is not posing a durability/light performance issue. JA told me that this diamond is eye clean and the cavity wont pose a durability concern as it is at the pavilion side (JA representative said it is not close to the girdle) and its not big enough to pose an issue. What do you guys think? Is it something I need to worry about?

And - what do you guys think about the lighting performance by looking at the IS? Thank you in advance!

 

[Snowdrop13]

The GIA cert says "additional clouds not shown" which may explain IDJ's comments. Also all the inclusions looks as if they're under the table? The cavity would put me off, I'm afraid.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I refer a cavity in my tooth then on my diamond...

 

[diagem]

Hi All,

I am looking at a SI1 diamond that has features and a cavity. I was advised by IDJ to stay away from this diamond as it will be cloudy and it has cavity. I know I should trust them but it is one of the best diamonds that falls within the budget if it is not posing a durability/light performance issue. JA told me that this diamond is eye clean and the cavity wont pose a durability concern as it is at the pavilion side (JA representative said it is not close to the girdle) and its not big enough to pose an issue. What do you guys think? Is it something I need to worry about?

And - what do you guys think about the lighting performance by looking at the IS? Thank you in advance!

According to the plot it seems like a small natural was left in the cutting process, GIA chose to call it a cavity, I believe they could have called it an indented natural as well. Based on the GIA position on the plot I don't see any durability issues at all. But most importantly I don't understand (or maybe I do) why IDJ would advice this Diamond would be "cloudy"? The main cloud is actually pointed out on the plot.

I would suggest listening to the person who has the Diamond at hand.....

 

[blingblingdiamond]

The GIA cert says "additional clouds not shown" which may explain IDJ's comments. Also all the inclusions looks as if they're under the table? The cavity would put me off, I'm afraid.

This diamond is in overseas... JA confirmed it's eye clean by looking at the video.... If there wasn't a cavity, do you think it's a Decent diamond base on the IS image?

 

[blingblingdiamond]

I refer a cavity in my tooth then on my diamond...

I wish it would be just like a cavity in a tooth.... then I could have it filled what do you think about this diamond?

 

[blingblingdiamond]

According to the plot it seems like a small natural was left in the cutting process, GIA chose to call it a cavity, I believe they could have called it an indented natural as well. Based on the GIA position on the plot I don't see any durability issues at all. But most importantly I don't understand (or maybe I do) why IDJ would advice this Diamond would be "cloudy"? The main cloud is actually pointed out on the plot.

I would suggest listening to the person who has the Diamond at hand.....

Unfortunately this diamond is at overseas so JA cannot physically inspect this for me. They make judgments base on the video on their website. The GIA report says additional cloud not shown. Do you think it might imply this diamond would be cloudy? Will the feathers on the edge pose a durability issue?
Last but not least, any opinion on the light performance, brillance, or fire of this diamond? Thanks.

 

[diagem]

I cant comment specifically on other vendors Diamond. But since GIA called the SI1 grade based on specific factors first being feather then a marked cloud so i assume the additional clouds comment is the least affecting inclusion. As far as feathers on the edge. Again based on not seeing the Diamond most feathers are not a durability issue IMO.

Good luck.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

The strong blue fluorescence can sometimes cause cloudiness when the diamond is exposed to strong UV light such as direct sunlight. That, in combination with the clouds both plotted and not shown , could be what the other jeweler was referring to.
I wouldn't be concerned with durability. GIA will take that into account in assigning the clarity grade and if it was a concern would probably have received an SI2, or more likely an Imperfect grade.

 

[ringo865]

If you can order it and have the gemologist at JA (or yukitiel) look at it before they ship to you. You have 30 day returns from both vendors, I believe. Take a look

 

[blingblingdiamond]

Hi Everyone, I placed and order on the diamond (https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3071055) and planning to decide after seeing it in person. I have my eyes on another diamond just in case that one doesnt work out. https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...-f-color-i1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-2177882 The representatives told me it might be cloudy though. I know I have to be really lucky to get an I1 diamond that is eye clean. With the price, carat, and color, it would be really awesome if it is eye clean and not cloudy. Do you guys think the twinning wisps will affect the light performance? and do you guys think it will look cloudy?

Thanks!

 

[valeria101]

Since clouds are not the main inclusion responsible for the I1 GIA grade, I do not expect this one to be cloudy throughout. You would see grade-setting I1 clouds WWW.

I only see what you see ...


___
Disclaimer: I have been looking for D-E, SI2-I1 with grade-setting clouds - because I rather enjoy these rarities.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

You mentioned that this diamond will not look cloudy throughout. So do You Think There Might Be So Clouds Visible And Interfere Light Performance?

 

[valeria101]

do You Think There Might Be So Clouds Visible And Interfere Light Performance?

Do I think there might be visible coulds in the SI ?

Almost NO.

Let me explain the 'almost',

The report - is telling me that those clouds are faint indeed: "Some clarity characteristics are not plotted on the GIA reports if they are widespread or faint, or they are not needed to support the clarity grade" - says, GIA WWW

The video - shows little clouds hanging on the whisps; else, no clouds obvious on their own throughout the stone, as expected from the wording of the report.

Optimistically, I would tend to say that what I see in the impressivly clear video is the whole truth: the clouds mentioned in the comment are the ones I am seeing & no more.

Could there be something else ... Yes: Fog WWW - in GIA's words, both 'widespread' and 'faint'. Keeping in mind that what is visible in the video is enough to 'support the clarity grade', and explain the comment on the report... well, I am expecting no fog.

I cannot know why you were told that this stone could be 'cloudy'. Perhaps ... they did not even refer to the respective clarity characteristic ('cloud'), but the overall appearance of a diamond with inclusions which all do play with light.

The above-mentioned 'play with light' brings me to your second question: does any of this interfere with "Light Performance". Of course. So does colour (the J grade of your other stone). The question is, which is nicer !

You will find dozens of J diamonds talked about around here, some quite large (the larger the stone, the more obvious everything gets) - all well loved. Not so many I1-s of any colour. It simply is not common to find I1 -s with clarity characteristics as reliably unobstructive as the faint tint of the J grade; I'd say you have found one !

Wild guess: you will see one or other of the plotted inclusions in the I1. The J tint ... may well take comparing with another diamond to see.

It goes without saying: there is oodles of 'Light Performance' to begin with, for either the faint tint or clarity characteristics to interfere with !

Just a thought ...


____
Fine print: GIA clarity grading is not done via video.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

Thanks Valeria101, I really appreciate your thought/opinion. I reserved both of the diamonds.... JA GG team sent me an email today telling me I1 one is not as good (saying this I1 stone wont be eye clean):
"I was also informed that you'd like to see an idealscope image for diamond 2177882. I've attached that diamond's idealscope image to this email for you. It indicates strong light performance. However, its I1 clarity does not match up with the conversations we've previously had regarding cloudiness. While this is a cleaner I1, I1 diamonds are not eye clean. Additionally, once you get to the SI2 clarity, notes that mention unplotted clouds and twinning wisps indicate that the diamond is likely to be slightly cloudy. Diamond 3071055 is by far the best of the diamonds you've mentioned. If you have any questions, let me know."

Here is the IS, do you know if the white stuff is the twinning wisps?

 

[valeria101]

Here is the IS, do you know if the white stuff is the twinning wisps?

Some of them are.

See what I mean ? - [GIA inclusion types ilustrated]

The comment from the JA GG seems precisely professional. I would defer to them, since my taste is so very far from practical !

If there is anything left to talk about here, they'd be personal considerations:

For once, OK, I1 inclusions can always be seen - most are so obvious that one cannot sincerely overlook them - and that threshold of sincerity is not a matter of gemology.

JA GG's guess that J is more likely to be overlooked than I1 seems conservatively right; if they pulled pictures of poetically fogey forest (as I have), I'd call it something other than 'right'.



____

The JA videos expose many clarity characteristics - quite a pleasure, on my side. The comment that cloudy diamonds are common sounds interesting for the likes of yours truly, who do like to see them & hardly ever do ...

 

[Niel]

Would you consider something use? Maybe something other than round?