D color rating but Ver Strong Blue

[omnoir]

Will this diamond look good in most lights or is it risky? It is perfectly colorless, but I''m concerned about the Very Strong Blue Flouresence.

Carat weight: 1.06
Cut: Ideal
Color: D
Clarity: VVS2
Depth %: 62.7%
Table %: 55%
Symmetry: Very good
Polish: Very good
Girdle: Thin to medium, faceted
Culet: None
Fluorescence: Very strong blue
Measurements: 6.48x6.53x4.08 mm

 

[strmrdr]

The odds are that it wont affect it but the only real way to tell is to view it in strong sunlight.
Less than 1% will be cloudy under direct sunlight from very strong blue.


That said the diamond doesnt look very well cut and the clarity is overkill if you looking for bang for the buck.
A vs2 or si1 would look just as inclusion free and you could get a bigger diamond.
The d is also overkill but color is more a personal choice than clarity.

 

[Mara]

You'd have to see in sunlight..the chances are very slim, but I don't know too many that would highly recommend D with SB fluor.




One comment, if you are spending the moola to get D VVS2, why are you settling for VG VG in terms of polish and symm, 62.7% on depth, and getting strong blue fluor on a D?




If you really want what seems like that elusive top quality label, keep looking, up that cut quality to get something really well-cut as opposed to possibly mediocre, get EX EX or ID ID and no fluor.




My two cents...or just drop the whole lot down to something like F (still colorless) and VS (still eye-clean), up the cut quality and call it a beautiful, sparkly, amazingly clear hearts and arrows day. I would take the 2nd choice.

 

[omnoir]

I am looking for perfection to match my gal. Carat weight is not a big deal for her or me. Is this better?

Carat weight: 1.05
Color: G
Clarity: VS1
Depth %: 61.1%
Table %: 57%
Symmetry: Ideal
Polish: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to slightly thick, faceted
Culet: Pointed
Fluorescence: Negligible
Measurements: 6.54x6.59x4.01 mm

 

[Mara]

Could be...the numbers look better...get crown and pavilion angle on the stone and post ...run the info through the HCA. Can you get IdealScope, Sarin etc reports and images from the vendor? Helps to make a much more educated decision.




BTW just as an aside, notice how much bigger the 2nd stone looks in terms of diameter? That other stone looks smaller (first one) because the diamond is so deep, it's hiding carat weight. In the 2nd stone, chances are it may be cut better, allowing more of the weight to be distributed throughout the stone, and more up top where you actually can SEE it.

 

[omnoir]

Wow, I wish I had stopped here before I began shopping. Excellent advice. Thanks!

34.4 41.0 are the angles. I ran the numbers through the tool and the scores were Excellent for light return and Very Good for all others.

Color H and VS2? Will she or I notice or will the sheer brilliance of this diamond win the day?

 

[strmrdr]

Your best bet on color is too go look at some diamonds in person H-I is fine for most people.
G is a very safe bet.

eyeclean is eyeclean a lot of si1's are, and vs2 or higher by definition should be eyeclean.

So really the options are stick with a g vs2-si1 and concentrate on cut or do the extra homework and find out how H or I looks to you.
The odds are that H will be just fine.
Some people begin to see color at I but that really depends on the diamond and where in the I range it falls.

 

[Magnum]

----------------
On 4/1/2004 2:25:14 AM strmrdr wrote:

Your best bet on color is too go look at some diamonds in person H-I is fine for most people.
G is a very safe bet.

eyeclean is eyeclean a lot of si1's are, and vs2 or higher by definition should be eyeclean.

So really the options are stick with a g vs2-si1 and concentrate on cut or do the extra homework and find out how H or I looks to you.
The odds are that H will be just fine.
Some people begin to see color at I but that really depends on the diamond and where in the I range it falls.

----------------

I agree. strmrdr said it much more clearly and succintly than I could have. My advice is to look for the biggest, excellent cut stone in the lowest color that still looks white to you and the lowest clarity that is still eye-clean that fits in your budget. If you don't want to go any bigger, than still get an excellent cut stone (same note about color and clarity) and use the extra money in your budget for the honeymoon.

 

[bb1]

one other thing you probably will want to consider:

Want to stick with a GIA or AGS cert. in most instances.

 

[valeria101]

The very few stones wher fluorescence shown in any way under normal lighting (meaning any every-day light source) would be among the "very strong blue". There are very few of these. The discount on the stone is likely due to the "bad name" of fluorescence, not it's apperence. Quite a few consider the little 'secret' about their stones appealing. After all, you'd need to use UW lighting to see what this one can do

Pictures do not really work showing anything about fluorescence in normal lighting (at leats as far as I know). If you can inspect the stone before fianl purchase (B&M or retur period) why not go for it! It would make a nice deal

 

[diamondsman]

stones that have very strong blue usually are at the verge of being HAZY,Especially in the better colors ,Be very carefull.
In most cases Where I've seen these types of stones, they were hazy looking ,(with a few exceptions).
also they tend to trade these days for much less than the same stones in the same color & clarity.
If you ever want to upgrade/resell such a stone you will have a tough time.

 

[Mara]

omn...the 2nd stone has a very nice HCA score...I think the G VS1 is a nice compromise from your initial D VVS2 option. H is not for everyone, I think to go from a D to a H would be a huge jump.




Good luck!

 

[omnoir]

Mara, Here is the final decision. Thanks so much for your sober advice.


Carat weight: 1.05
Cut: Signature Round
Color: G
Clarity: VS2
Depth %: 61.4%
Table %: 56%
Symmetry: Ideal
Polish: Ideal
Girdle: Thin to slightly thick, faceted
Culet: Very small
Fluorescence: Negligible
Measurements: 6.54x6.60x4.04 mm

BTW, I found a forum with your name [and pic] on it. Wow, I didn't know you were famous!

Seriously though, I am wishing you, and yours, good Karma!

I've had a chance to read many of your posts. The thought and effort you put in--breathtaking, really.

Sharing your knowledge is a profound form of kindness, and you will be rewarded for your good deeds. I am wishing that good energy will find its way to you in large quantities.

You are a great person.

 

[Mara]

Thanks omnoir! Did you get crown and pavilion angles on that stone as well? Seems like it could be a lovely choice, just be sure to cover all the bases when researching!! Congrats.

Please post pictures!

 

[Giangi]

This one looks better! As Mara suggested, would you be able to get crown and pavilion data?

 

[omnoir]

crown angle: 34.8
pavillion angle: 41.0
culet: 0.6%

 

[mdx]

Hi Omnior
Not too long ago (now I am demonstrating my age hehe) the Blue White or Jager was the most sort after and expensive diamond available with D IF being the most desirable. The famous Jagersfontein mine produced large amounts of these beauties,
Only very few appear milky when exposed to UV.
Blue Fluorescence does not usually have any effect on transparency.
As a matter of interest 99% of diamonds have some form of fluorescence detectable under X rays.
Johan
Melbourne Diamond Exchange Ltd