Can an IF stone have more flaws than a VS?

[Dilbert]

I am not too sure how claity is graded. Assuming there is a fixed 10x - 20x magnification to view the stone under. Is it possible for an IF stone to have more numerous flaws at 100x or 1000x magnification than a VS stone with just one relatively larger flaw that gave it the VS grade?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Yes

 

[squarediamondlove]

I am not an expert on this so I am not sure if this actually happens, but theoretically I think that sounds correct to me. I think FL only means that it is FL under 10X so under a different magnification, the flaws may be visible. There may be a sitation where there are 2 diamonds, one that is of VS clarity and consits of only one "inclusion" and the other is graded as FL but has multiple but extremely small inclusions that do not appear until one magnifies to say 100X.

I know for example an Si1 stone can have visible inclusions and another Si1 stone may not have visible inclusions (without magnification), yet they are both graded as Si1. The difference is that one may have smaller but neumerouse inclusions, while another has a few but larger inclusions that are more visible. I''m not sure what the criteria is for grading, but I guess one can say that stones in a given clarity grade are not created equal. I know my fiance looked at VVS1 stones where he was able to detect inclusions with a loop, but could not detect inclusions with my VVS2 stone, even though it is of lower clarity grade.

 

[valeria101]

''Flaws'' findable under 1000x but not 30 or so... what could that be? Graining, and clouds are visible under usual magnification, and enough of that without any other inclusions can make any clarity grade from IF (a bit of surface graining allowed as much as I know) to something translucent off the scale. Perhaps the features of those individual pointillist inclusions are not visible, but a thick load of them is, and will affect clarity grades conventionally established at 10x. I would imagine that such discrete inclusions at very low density so that they are completely oblivious at 30X would never add up enough to compensate a couple of VS sized inclusions.

Sounds like science fiction, doesn''t it?

It is the first time I hear the question

You may hear a popular legend that some diamonds are more ''clear'' than others regardless of inclusions. Since I am not so inclined to nit picking and never been shown a poignant example, I can''t quite tell what is that all about. Probably there is some truth in there, the sort of those that become obvious only with allot experience. Allegedly, modern clarity grading doesn''t account for that. Feel free to take it from here - it should be fun

Interesting philosophical question. Glad you asked & curious about expert answers as well!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 4/3/2006 8:10:47 AM
Author: Garry H (Cut Nut)
Yes

One intriguing syllable!

What would those look like? Something graded IF with what inside ?

 

[Dilbert]

I was just curious about whether the IF or FL grading had any real merit. 10x to 20x is hardly anything compared to the magnification needed to examine the diamond at the atomic level. Only then would you know exactly how flawed a diamond really is. Either the stone has eye visible flaws or it doesnt, unless you can guarantee to the atomic level the number of flaws present. Anything else is simply a marketing tool?

So if the FL / IF grading is only credible to 10x to 20x magnification it is practically a worthless grading then?