Clarity's effect on "AGS0"? Help!

[FarmPal]

Hey all,

I'm picking out a diamond for my unsuspecting gf, and I've been prioritizing the cut, looking only at the diamonds that fall within the HCA's TIC range. Here's what I've been looking at:

Original (Bluenile): 0.85 carat, F, VS2
Alt #1 (Whiteflash): 0.8 carat, F, SI1
Alt #2 (Whiteflash): 0.91 carat, G, SI1

Each one has a "perfect cut", but will the SI1 clarity affect the quality of the light that gets reflected back out? From the pictures, Alt #1 looks to have (3-4?) small ovals along a line (reflections?) across the diamond, and Alt #2 has a big solid oval right in the middle of one of the "arrow shafts". I can only see them because they're magnified 40x, but will they be really obvious when looking with the naked eye, and more importantly, will it "destroy" the effects of the AGS0 cut?

Thoughts?

 

[WinkHPD]

Hey all,

I'm picking out a diamond for my unsuspecting gf, and I've been prioritizing the cut, looking only at the diamonds that fall within the HCA's TIC range. Here's what I've been looking at:

Original (Bluenile): 0.85 carat, F, VS2
Alt #1 (Whiteflash): 0.8 carat, F, SI1
Alt #2 (Whiteflash): 0.91 carat, G, SI1

Each one has a "perfect cut", but will the SI1 clarity affect the quality of the light that gets reflected back out? From the pictures, Alt #1 looks to have (3-4?) small ovals along a line (reflections?) across the diamond, and Alt #2 has a big solid oval right in the middle of one of the "arrow shafts". I can only see them because they're magnified 40x, but will they be really obvious when looking with the naked eye, and more importantly, will it "destroy" the effects of the AGS0 cut?

Thoughts?

Without commenting on any specific diamond.

Clarity has no part in determining the AGS 0 cut grade and will rarely if ever affect how the diamond looks until the inclusions become eye visible. It might be possible to prove that technically an inclusion blocks xyz percent of a percent of the light returning to the eye, but it will not normally be something that the unaided eye can visualize.

With the stones you list above, again without having seen them, there should be no issue with the clarity affecting the beauty of the diamonds. At those colors and clarities, the cutting will be the prime determinant of beauty.

Wink

 

[druidtime]

I am assuming all three of the stones are AGS 0 cut grade.

All three sight unseen, I would go with the VS2 personally.

I am sure you can contact the staff at WF and they can bring you back imagery of the diamonds to help you make a better selection. BN as far as I know cannot get imagery except for whats on the certs.

P.S. But if all three are AGS 0's, then I'm sure that all three are beautiful stones and you can't really go wrong with any of those three.

 

[yssie]

As Wink said.

I personally will skip SIs with "clarity grade due to clouds not shown" notation on the report - they're never in-house anyway so it's not worth paying to have them called in, as even if trouble free they are not mind-clean for me.

 

[Black Jade]

I have an F color SI clarity AGS 000 from Blue NIle.
This is the most beautiful stone I own. The clarity is not an issue.
Later I bought an AGS 000 SI1 from Blue Nile that I could see the flaw in it, once I got it. I telephoned them and told them about the problem and returned the stone and they found another for me, which was actually slightly more expensive and just simply switched the stone without charging the price difference. This one is a J color. I ended up selling it to somone else, not because anything was wrong with it (there wasn't) but I decided I didn't like the size for the pendant I was interested in making. The person I sold it to is someone who is very color sensitive--but she spoke to me the other day to tell me that of all her stones, this is one that gets the most admiration for its beauty.
When I switched the second stone, the sales rep looked at stones for me to pick out one that he was sure would be eyeclean by my standards. It was the day before a Jewish holiday (Rosh Hashanah, I think, maybe Yom Kippur) and I remember that there was a slight delay because he wouldn't be present the next two days to get into the vault (because of the holiday). I always hear that they are a drop shipper and I am sure this is true (and that it is the reason that their prices are more reasonable than many of the other vendors) but I know from this experience that somehow they can look at stones for you, at least sometimes, because he did for me.
This is a long way of saying that you don't have to worry about SI1 stones from Blue Nile, in my experience. They are not eye-visible, they do not create problems with the brilliancy of an AGS 000 and if by some chance you get one that has a flaw that is visible to you, they will go to great lengths to change it for one that you will like better, without a visible flaw (and the definition of SI1 is that that the flaw is visible under a loupe--but that the stone is eyeclean. It should be very little different from VS2)

 

[WinkHPD]

I am assuming all three of the stones are AGS 0 cut grade.

All three sight unseen, I would go with the VS2 personally.

I am sure you can contact the staff at WF and they can bring you back imagery of the diamonds to help you make a better selection. BN as far as I know cannot get imagery except for whats on the certs.

P.S. But if all three are AGS 0's, then I'm sure that all three are beautiful stones and you can't really go wrong with any of those three.

While this may be mostly true, what is not true is that there will be no difference between the appearance of the stones. We simply do not yet have the technology to allow us to completely show the nuances of cut on line. You must make arrangements to see the stone you are interested in, preferably more than one at a time, to know which one your eyes will love best.

I am constantly amazed that when groups of "paper equal" stones are shown to a client that they will almost always choose one immediately as their most or least favorite, and it has nothing to do with the paper if they are shown the stones simultaneously without disclosing which is which.

If a stone is chosen as least favorite then it is removed from the group and the group looked at again. If one is chosen as the favorite, then the search is over.

We can talk about cut forever and analyze this and that until the cows come home, but the eyes will make a nearly instantaneous decision on what it either likes or dislikes. It is our eyes, and our hearts, that need be listened to.

Wink

 

[yssie]

I am assuming all three of the stones are AGS 0 cut grade.

All three sight unseen, I would go with the VS2 personally.

I am sure you can contact the staff at WF and they can bring you back imagery of the diamonds to help you make a better selection. BN as far as I know cannot get imagery except for whats on the certs.

P.S. But if all three are AGS 0's, then I'm sure that all three are beautiful stones and you can't really go wrong with any of those three.

While this may be mostly true, what is not true is that there will be no difference between the appearance of the stones. We simply do not yet have the technology to allow us to completely show the nuances of cut on line. You must make arrangements to see the stone you are interested in, preferably more than one at a time, to know which one your eyes will love best.

I am constantly amazed that when groups of "paper equal" stones are shown to a client that they will almost always choose one immediately as their most or least favorite, and it has nothing to do with the paper if they are shown the stones simultaneously without disclosing which is which.

If a stone is chosen as least favorite then it is removed from the group and the group looked at again. If one is chosen as the favorite, then the search is over.

We can talk about cut forever and analyze this and that until the cows come home, but the eyes will make a nearly instantaneous decision on what it either likes or dislikes. It is our eyes, and our hearts, that need be listened to.

Wink

I too find this really fascinating. From my own personal experiences - it hardly ever is just the stone itself, any more than it's the paper! There are all sorts of things that might make a person choose a favourite, or most disliked - which set of three he/she is shown first, position on the tray, whether that person came in with a partner who voices a preference... The only way to be truly sure that the person is making a choice based on his/her opinions of only the stones is to do that blind test you describe alone, over and over and over, with the full sample, redistributed, over a variety of lighting conditions...

Of course, once can contend that given an array of known dazzlers who cares why he/she makes the choices he/she does!

 

[FarmPal]

Thanks so much for all your feedback, I actually do have pictures available from the Whiteflash website, but wasn't sure about Pricescope's policy about posting pictures or links, but here's the links:

Alt #1 (Whiteflash): 0.8 carat, F, SI1: http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2645107.htm
Alt #2 (Whiteflash): 0.91 carat, G, SI1: http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2650815.htm

The inclusions are very obvious after they've been magnified, but will I be able to see it if I'm looking at the stone when it's in front of me?
Right now I'm leaning towards the smaller diamond because the larger one has a "cloud-type" inclusion, which I'm guessing will have the largest effect?

 

[slg47]

cloud will not necessarily have largest visual effect. I would call WF and ask if these two diamonds are eye-clean (and what from distance, and from top view only or top and side). If you are concerned you could always get the diamond shipped out to you before you get it set, also.

keep in mind that the diamonds are only ~6mm so MUCH smaller than what you are seeing on the computer screen.

 

[FarmPal]

About having the right diamond just "jump out" at me, unfortunately I haven't experienced that yet. I went to look at diamonds last week, and I couldn't tell the difference between any of the diamonds I saw. Color differences were too slight, seemed to find bubbles and imperfections on ALL of them (including the VVS's, though they were probably due to bad polishing at the surface? I've worked with optically polished glass and can be really picky about that) which made me think it's normal, couldn't tell any difference between the cuts (too dim?), and even the sizes were slightly masked by the setting. I really wish my gf was helping me pick out her own ring, haha.

 

[FarmPal]

Ok, so the diamonds I was recommended weren't eye clean. I've since did a search on Whiteflash myself, and found an alternative.

1) 0.8 carat, F, SI1 (Not eye clean..): $4185
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2645107.htm
2) 0.778 ct, I (Too colored?) , VS2 (Eye clean!): $3386
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2656313.htm

I'm leaning towards 2), but I'm setting the diamond along other smaller diamonds (average H color) beside it, so I'm worried it'll look yellow in contrast. Alternatively, there's a 3rd, much more pricier option that'll look whiter in comparison to the setting:

3) 0.83 ct, G, VS1: $4646
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2645107.htm

Thoughts?

 

[stone-cold11]

I should be fine, 2 grade difference in color with side stones is usually acceptable.

This might be an alternative if eye-clean?
http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2645962.htm