Concerned about feather on girdle. Help please!

[peanutandfranklin]

Hello everyone!

With the help of pricescope community, I bought an ACA diamond with wf's elegant solitaire setting last week. The ring is being made by wf right now. Last night I was bored and looked at the AGS certificate of the diamond I purchased. And I realized that the primary inclusion is feather on the girdle, which makes me a bit nervous because I remember reading somewhere saying feather on girdle can make the diamond chip easier. Is this a valid concern?

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3970272.htm

 

[Lorelei]

Hello everyone!

With the help of pricescope community, I bought an ACA diamond with wf's elegant solitaire setting last week. The ring is being made by wf right now. Last night I was bored and looked at the AGS certificate of the diamond I purchased. And I realized that the primary inclusion is feather on the girdle, which makes me a bit nervous because I remember reading somewhere saying feather on girdle can make the diamond chip easier. Is this a valid concern?

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3970272.htm

Hi Peanut,

Let me ease your concerns! Firstly, WF would never allow a stone with ANY potential durability issue to represent their ACA brand or offer a solid upgrade on it. Secondly, a reliably graded SI1 ( GIA or AGS) is not normally going to have any durability issues. Thirdly, even Internally Flawless diamonds can chip and I've heard of diamonds chipping actually nowhere near any feather inclusions, that those have stayed intact!

So don't worry, be happy! You've bought a fantastic stone from an excellent vendor with no more chance of chipping or damage than any other stone. Having said that, regardless of the clarity, insurance is always prudent because although damage is rare, it can happen. Case in point, many years ago here a poster hit her diamond on a shopping cart and it fractured in two. So enjoy and wear with care and insure against such scenarios.

I hope this helps!

 

[peanutandfranklin]

Hi Peanut,

Let me ease your concerns! Firstly, WF would never allow a stone with ANY potential durability issue to represent their ACA brand or offer a solid upgrade on it. Secondly, a reliably graded SI1 ( GIA or AGS) is not normally going to have any durability issues. Thirdly, even Internally Flawless diamonds can chip and I've heard of diamonds chipping actually nowhere near any feather inclusions, that those have stayed intact!

So don't worry, be happy! You've bought a fantastic stone from an excellent vendor with no more chance of chipping or damage than any other stone. Having said that, regardless of the clarity, insurance is always prudent because although damage is rare, it can happen. Case in point, many years ago here a poster hit her diamond on a shopping cart and it fractured in two. So enjoy and wear with care and insure against such scenarios.

I hope this helps!

Your reply is very helpful Lorelei! thank you very much!

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi peanutandfranklin,
As a trade member I can't comment specifically on any diamond.
As a general note:
In my experience, a feather ( in any location) as grade setting inclusion on an SI1 on an RBC is never a durability concern. I've never seen one that is.
Desirability is a different question: Oddly enough, in some cases an SI1 sized feather can be easily visible- yet in other cases, I've seen stones with SI1 sized feather where you needed to look really closely- with a ten power loupe to find it.
In such cases, a feather is the best possible imperfection. In my experience, that would be a likely reason to find such a stone offered as a branded diamond from a reputable dealer. I love to buy them when we find them.
Unfortunately, reading online, you might get put off feathers. A shame, because avoiding feathers might mean a consumer misses the best stone.

 

[bmfang]

Feathers on the girdle are a good type of inclusion to have. They’ve passed durability test when the stone has been cut and out on the girdle, they allow you to prong over them so that a viewer of the ring would not even notice that the stone has a feather inclusion. Much better than having a crystal in my books!

 

[Aino]

Feathers on the girdle are a good type of inclusion to have. They’ve passed durability test when the stone has been cut and out on the girdle, they allow you to prong over them so that a viewer of the ring would not even notice that the stone has a feather inclusion. Much better than having a crystal in my books!

This is interesting. Why is it safe to prong feathers? I would think from an engineer perspective that it's better to have the feather visible and avoid concentrating the stresses on the feather through the prong. Also I tend to hit my prongs more often than I do any uncovered part of the stone so the likelihood of me hitting the feather through the prong is larger than if it I had it just visible. But perhaps that's because my stone is tiny and thus very "prongy"

 

[bmfang]

This is interesting. Why is it safe to prong feathers? I would think from an engineer perspective that it's better to have the feather visible and avoid concentrating the stresses on the feather through the prong. Also I tend to hit my prongs more often than I do any uncovered part of the stone so the likelihood of me hitting the feather through the prong is larger than if it I had it just visible. But perhaps that's because my stone is tiny and thus very "prongy"

If the feather extends to the surface of the stone, I would not be pronging over it. For the reasons you have mentioned above. However most feathers are buried in the body of the stone. I would be more concerned pronging over a cavity or a knot instead.

 

[Aino]

If the feather extends to the surface of the stone, I would not be pronging over it. For the reasons you have mentioned above. However most feathers are buried in the body of the stone. I would be more concerned pronging over a cavity or a knot instead.

Thanks for the explanation! Are all diamond setters aware of the prong positioning with respect to various inclusions or would it be best practice to talk to them about it? Also aren't girdle feathers like the one depicted in OPs GIA cert often extending to the surface as it is drawn to the very end ? Especially in thin girdles there's not much diamond body for the feather to disappear in.

 

[bmfang]

Keep in mind, I am but a layperson in the world of jewellery. I am more than happy to be corrected by a member from the trade who knows far more than I do and who would have far more experience with the setting of stones.

 

[KingKuda]

If the feather extends to the surface of the stone, I would not be pronging over it. For the reasons you have mentioned above. However most feathers are buried in the body of the stone. I would be more concerned pronging over a cavity or a knot instead.

I actually think this is incorrect. Topics on this matter before suggest that all feathers reach the surface and if they don't, then they aren't a feather.

 

[Aino]

Keep in mind, I am but a layperson in the world of jewellery. I am more than happy to be corrected by a member from the trade who knows far more than I do and who would have far more experience with the setting of stones.

Sure, same here Just curious about this topic of inclusions and pronging (once considered an OEC with a large girdle feather and without a cert was too scared to buy it), sorry for the thread hijacking!

 

[bmfang]

I actually think this is incorrect. Topics on this matter before suggest that all feathers reach the surface and if they don't, then they aren't a feather.

Curiously interested in your reasons why. The world of diamonds for me is a continual process of learning and correcting incorrect assumptions and views I hold.

 

[Tanalasta_01]

That's a really nice stone.

It's an ACA branded stone. You can redirect your question at your whiteflash rep but I'm well informed that WF never allow an ACA stone to be branded as such if the inclusions were to affect durability.

And it's WF who are setting the stone. So don't worry, be happy. Be very happy. That's a really stunning diamond!

 

[KingKuda]

Curiously interested in your reasons why. The world of diamonds for me is a continual process of learning and correcting incorrect assumptions and views I hold.

Give this thread a read.

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...ay-nice-feathers-and-cavities-clarity.210537/

 

[bmfang]

A very interesting old discussion on this topic. Thanks for the link. The trade members seem to not have a concurring opinion on this issue back then based on my reading of that thread.

I get the concern mentioned in there about a feather that extends out to the girdle, but to my (simple) mind, if that feather happens to be on a cleavage plane out on the girdle that has survived the bruting, cutting and polishing process, one would expect durability to be a non-concern.

Most of the grading reports I have looked at over the last year which have feathers and needles in them look to be well in the body of the stone with others being out near the girdle. If it was an open feather/needle that breached the surface, that would give me more concern than one which has some diamond material above it and is slightly below the surface.

Cavities and knots are the types of inclusions that I would worry more about.

 

[KingKuda]

What worries you so much about cavities and knots?

 

[Lorelei]

As far back as I can remember, feathers have often been covered with a prong and to the best of my knowledge have been fine but we don't normally see many I grades here where it's ' possible' there might be the odd durability issue depending on the inclusion, not usually the case with SI or higher. In the hazy recesses of my memory, I seem to recall some saying that a prong over a feather can offer extra protection but this would be open to interpretation and personal experience of the setter I would think.

Personally, I wouldn't be concerned with a grade making feather especially from a branded stone sold by one of the vendors here and even with a non branded if they gave it their blessing. I think it's prudent to not to expect a problem with a feather rather than to expect one.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I read through the thread from a few years ago- if I didn't know what I know it would have confused me further.

In any event.....remember, each diamond is an individual. SO in each case, the best setters will consider a whole host of factors when placing prongs.

Are all diamond setters aware....snip

Unfortunately, many diamond setters are.......hacks. Like any other field, the cream of the crop is heads and shoulders above the run of the mill.....

 

[EvaEvans]

I would avoid SI1 clarity especially with feather as primary inclusion and feather on the girdle, regardless what many people here say.

 

[YoLaL]

Base on my knowdlege feathers (cracks/fractures) I'm not infavour once located near the girdle/touching because wear and tear it may be prone to being damaged ..(just saying) We all know diamond is the hardest but is not tough enough. Can ask the vendor to take closer look and take a photo of the feather under 40x or 50x magnification before they will set it. " It's better to see than to believe "

 

[KingKuda]

I would avoid SI1 clarity especially with feather as primary inclusion and feather on the girdle, regardless what many people here say.

This is so so so wrong.

 

[rockysalamander]

I think there is not a lot of consensus because the answer is "it all depends" in terms of prong placement if we are talking about SI1 and above.

You have to look a the actual feather and every other inclusion, girdle thickness, facet placement, chips (often found in vintage stones or resets), number of prongs, type of prongs, facet pattern (and probably 100 other things I'm not thinking of). Each feather is its own shape and occurs along differing axis that intersect with any one of the facets. A setter has to consider the sum total all of the setting issues to best decide on the prong placement. Do you cover the black inclusion or rotate to cover the feather? There is a chip on this side to cover with a prong, that precludes placement on a feather. Its an art and I don't think there are sweeping generalities that apply. I agree with others that some of the "art" seems to have been lost, but that is why I'm highly selective on who sets my stones.

I don't recall my dad or grandmother ever finding more chips near or at feathers more so than other locations. You chip a diamond where you hit it hard enough in just the right angle to chip it.

 

[bmfang]

What worries you so much about cavities and knots?

Cavities are magnets for trapping dirt and oils. Also by virtue of there being no material underneath the top surface of the cavity, if a cavity exists on a girdle, it is more susceptible to further damage if hit at the right angle (whether a prong covers it or otherwise. You then have a chip on your hands then.

A knot by definition is a white or transparent crystal that extends to the surface of the diamond after it has been cut. If that knot is near the girdle and the crystal falls out, you then have a cavity. See above.

In terms of inclusions, I generally prefer to see the following in a stone (no particular order):
Twinning wisp (provided it doesn’t impact on transparency and light performance)
Needles
Feathers
Crystals (white more so than black, but I’d love to see a stone for sale that has say a garnet or peridot embedded within, that would be very cool in my books)
Pinpoints (provided you don’t get a cloud of them that impact on transparency and light performance)
Clouds (see above on pinpoints)
Naturals/indented naturals

Of course, the less of these the better, but if they are present and the stone is eyeclean, woohoo.

 

[Lorelei]

I would avoid SI1 clarity especially with feather as primary inclusion and feather on the girdle, regardless what many people here say.

Absolutely fine if that's your preference, however others have different experiences and beliefs, all to be respected.