Deciding on the clarity. How fine is enough for you??

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 6/11/2004 11:20:57 AM searcher wrote:

----------------
On 6/11/2004 8:59:12 AM valeria101 wrote:




Clarity grading is not a science, unless the definition changed yesterday

. Garding results are not repeatable...
----------------

That's not true. Grading results from the reputable labs are repeatable within a grade or two almost all the time. There is extensive formal training involved in becoming a grader.
----------------

I think the point Val was trying to make is that grading is a *subjective* science.....meaning it's based on an individual's interpretation. My stone is a perfect example.....it's graded SI2, but four other trained and extremely qualified people have commented it should have been an SI1.

Yes, there is training involved in becoming a grader, but the performance of grading relies on *individual* judgment calls....that's not quite a science, and that's the point Val was making. Something inherently repeatable is 2+2=4. That will always produce the same result. Not so with clarity grading.

One final thought....you say "Grading results from the reputable labs are repeatable within a grade or two almost all the time". Within a grade or two????? That's hardly narrowing the field. Within a grade or two UP or DOWN from a G, VS2 means a stone could be an E, F, G, H, or I stone with VVS2, VS1, VS2, SI1, or SI2 by your definition. I'm sure you're aware of what a HUGE price swing it is in that range. To me, that doesn't qualify as definitive.

 

[Hest88]

----------------
I think cut fanatics are looking for a way around market economics and they've hit on cut as this mystical phenomenon where the proper alignment of every last angle and facet will cause light to behave in a way that will dazzle everyone who sees their clumpy yellow rocks.
----------------

Hm. Sorry, but I don't remember anyone saying people should search for a yellow piece of spit that happens to be a H&A. What we're trying to say is that cut really does hide body color---I've seen it with my own eyes. AND that if you're on a budget and are trying to maximize your purchase, it's silly to sacrifice something you CAN see for something you can't. Thus, for many people, going down to an SI is well-justified if they want a larger, better cut, and/or whiter stone.

 

[researcher]

Well said, Hest88! I couldn't have said it better myself

 

[canuk-gal]

Hi ya'll:

Although we've "heard" about price increases for sometime, as of late there has been some renewed discussion on this board about limited supplies and weekly elevated costs. Given these variables, I wondered if this thread might be revisited to discuss whether those who are presently searching for a diamond have changed their specifications to include clarites below their original parameters. I know I have.

cheers

Sharon

 

[ame]

I figure those who "overbuy" and go for FL, IF, VVS st ones are doing so because they have the extra money to do so and prefer to spend it on a diamond of stellar clarity as opposed to a home, a car or food in some cases. They probably retain their worth better over time and can be hocked in the need for food.

OUtside of celebrities who feel its necesary to overspend and flash their rings around, I really think its overkill. VS stones have the look of FL but aren't as overpriced. They are also more widely available.

I don't feel buying an SI is settling or just accepting it. I buy SIs because no one can tell, not even me, that it's a flawed stone unless they whip out a loupe and check it out, who does that? Why overspend on something that no one can see? You can get a better cut, a better color and a bigger stone and not sacrifice the beauty of the stone by going down on clarity.

Aside from that, it adds character and a sort of security level that other stones won't have. I can tell you where my flaws are, though Ill admit it took me a while to find them. If I need to take this in for cleaning or work, I can tell its my stone right off the bat without needing to whip out my loupe.

 

[Jennifer5973]

I was always "sold" on the values that were attainable on clean SI1s... I admit it, cut and size are most important to me, followed by color and lastly, clarity, because almost NO ONE sees anything unless it is a bad stone to begin with (infamous frozen spit). And a good cut makes it almost impossible to see most inclusions in SI stones.

I had an eye clean SI1 that was Ideal cut and I loved it. it had somethng in the table but I could only see it with a loupe--the cut was so good, even if you tilted the thing 4 inches away from your face you couldn't see anything.

I just traded that in for an SI2 Ideal--that is actually cleaner on "paper" than the SI1 in my opinion (and my jeweler's). When he frst said "I have a great stone for you....a little bigger than you want but a fabulous stone...SI2," I was like no way! But I was curious...and he took it out.

I saw the diamond first before the cert. I saw nothng. I louped it (mostly to see the cut) and saw nothng. I said "I want it" and then looked at the cert...and saw the one thin red line.... And I said "Stop!" It has one--one--inclusion...a tiny feather than runs parallel to a facet on the side of the table (but does not enter the table, nor break the surface/hit girdle) But then I louped it again, and after several seconds of tilting, I saw it. No loupe, I have to look for a while and then I think I see it becasueI know it's there.

I showed a friend the day after I picked it up, a friend with a VS1 Emerald cut, 2 ct, lots of planes. And she had the ring in her hands up to the flourescent office lights, tilting, examining--borderline rudely! I KNEW she was looking for a flaw. Her first comment after her "evaluation" was NOT "it is so big" or "It is so white" or it is so sparkly (it is all of those things

) but "It is so clear--what grade is this? Flawless?????"

Interesting point Wink makes about "papers."

That's my story on clarity.

 

[quaeritur]

First off, assume all the following applies only to top-cut quality RB stones...

I guess I might love a D/FL-IF stone, if money weren't the object, simply because it seems like it's the most perfect possible stone.

Otherwise, the lower the clarity, the better, because to me it represents a great value. I love colorless stones, so size and clarity are the factors I would adjust. I own two SI1s with another on the way. I would happily purchase an I1 if the inclusions were not displeasing to my eye. I wouldn't want a big black blob centered under the table, but other feathers, clouds, crystals might be fine depending on location/size/quantity. The only reason I was determined to find an SI1 for my RHR is that it's a tension setting, and that was the lowest clarity I could go with. I'd never buy a VVS stone, unless it were a different cut style, like a step cut.

If I were a guy, shopping for an engagement ring diamond, then I might consider a VS2, tops. Only because I can fairly easily see the black inclusion in my .50 SI1 e-ring stone, and while I don't mind, some girls might. Then again, it's not a top cut...

Anything truly eye-clean is great. Even if not completely eye-clean, if the inclusions don't look ugly to me, I'd take in a heartbeat!

 

[Jennifer5973]

----------------
On 8/20/2004 7:29:06 PM quaeritur wrote:


I guess I might love a D/FL-IF stone, if money weren't the object, simply because it seems like it's the most perfect possible stone.
-------------------------------------------------------------


Interesting, q, that my was first thought--If I won the lotto (btw, our neighbor did last week --6.2 millon

), I'd go D, IF all the way. but then I thought, what a waste! Maybe I'd go VS1, F...maybe E because I am sensitive to color. But even if you have a gazillion dollars, why "waste" money????

 

[quaeritur]

I hope you're good friends with that neighbor!

. I agree with you about "wasting" money. And I really don't think I'd do it, assuming I had won the lotto. My point was mostly that I can kind of see a reason for a D/IF... or rather, more of a reason for a D/IF (pursuit of perfection, yadda yadda) than I could ever see for a VVS. Again, step cuts excluded. For me personally, because I don't mind inclusions, VVS would be the silliest choice, but because I do appreciate the concept of perfection, maaaaaaybe a D/IF.

By the way, have I mentioned that your new rock rocks?!

<--that's the green of envy!

 

[Jennifer5973]

Thanks, q!

That means a lot--I know you have a discerning eye.

hey--D, IF is a dream but when I really thought about it, I probably wouldn't go that far. And it's funny--I hate to say it but all most pple seem to care about is size "How big is it????" When I tell people it is an ideal cut, they glaze over...then I say "that's why it sparkles so much." And they are still stupified.

The 2 ct Emerald friend I have is pretty with it but most other people are just size obsessed.

PS Funny how I am identifying my friend by their ering specs "my 2 ct emerald friend, my 2 ct RB Tiff setting friend, ..."

 

[quaeritur]

I know what you mean about size getting noticed! And it amazes me how people overlook quality in favor of size (too bad more people don't have YOUR discerning eye!!!) It's really a US phenomenon though...I was raised much of my life outside the US, and big diamonds really aren't the thing in most other places I've been. I guess that's why I prefer smaller ones... when I've tried on larger stones, they look too strange on my hand. But then... when we visit my in-laws in TX, I do feel a little "small"... well, everything is bigger there, right?!

I do like large stones on other people though -yours looks perfect on your hand! (Oh, and matchy poochy was definitely the right choice, love the set!!!)

In any case, I figure that with my color tastes, it's a darn good thing I don't want size too!!!

 

[Dancing Fire]

even if i had alot of $$$s the best i would go is G VS1 rb top ideal cut h&a.,this combo will look like D-IF to me.

 

[Jennifer5973]

Hey, q.... Don't mess with TEXAS.

hee hee hee

Thanks for the compliments...my 7.5 finger NEEDED a 3 ct!

Seriously, it is soooo sad..it is such a nice size rock and my little snausage digits still shrink it a bit!

ok, ok--before people yell at me "My hand are purty (as they say in Texas)...my hands are purty..."

Funny aside: I had a client in Texas we flew up here to present marketing concepts to...When the driver picked him up at the airport, he insisted they stop at the first diner in they could find on the way. He LOVED tailor ham (pork roll) and apparently, they do not have this in Texas. He flew to NJ/NY whenever he could, for ANY reason, to eat tailor pork roll. Go figure.

 

[jesrush]

One unexpected benefit of lower clarity stones is the identification factor. There's nothing like the peace of mind that comes from finding your telltale inclusion under the loupe after that yearly checkup trip to the jewelers.

Nothing else can really provide that assurance... laser inscriptions on stones a few years old are too hard to see under 10X, gemprint can't be verified at home, and trying to measure dimensions at the mm level is nightmarish...

-J

 

[quaeritur]

----------------
On 8/20/2004 10:51:06 PM Jennifer5973 wrote:

Hey, q.... Don't mess with TEXAS.

hee hee hee

Thanks for the compliments...my 7.5 finger NEEDED a 3 ct!

Seriously, it is soooo sad..it is such a nice size rock and my little snausage digits still shrink it a bit!

ok, ok--before people yell at me 'My hand are purty (as they say in Texas)...my hands are purty...'

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

Hey now y'all... I kin mess with Texas... I was born in Dallas!!!

So proportionally, with a size 5 finger, what's the top size diamond I should be planning for?

 

[Todd07]

I'll provide the viewpoint of the diamond novice guy buying his engagement ring

Why would someone select flawless, IF or VVS?
- Some guys are either perfectionist engineering types or don't want to risk making a mistake and sending the wrong signal. Better the stone is near perfect, even if small.




Why does a person want a VS stone and not IF, VVS, or a lower grade?
- Increased knowledge about the impact of the 4Cs on beauty and pressure to get a bigger stone convinces guys to comprimise a bit on clarity




Why are so many willing to accept SI stones? How do people feel about "eye-clean" issues?
- One goup of guys will buy what their local Mall B&M recommends. They are buying SI1-I2 out of ignorance. Another group like myself have educated themselves and understand their e-ring is not an investment and they are being a bit foolish by paying for a spec that doesn't add beauty to their e-ring (thank you PS for your superb tutorial and Forum!).




there are many I1 and I2 clarity diamonds sold to very contented consumers. Are they just uninformed, or are there other reasons for their decision to buy at the bottom?


- I think guys will buy an I1-2 e-ring either out of ignorance or because it was a joint decision with their wife to be.




The novice point of view

 

[valeria101]

To me, those grades are simply "name calling"

If I were a diamond I would feal bad about them...

"Eye clean" (taking my sight into consideration) is what I am usually looking for when shopping gems. The ocasional inclusion not aparent to casual viewing but to very close scrutiny (like the mark of the SI2 mentioned above) is a bonus to me - just good to remind me that I would not gladly wear a man-made chunk, even if perfect

All in all, this description seems to cover most of the diamond clarity grades from IF to I1. So, I have no preference for a certain name on paper - just an image of what a nice gem should look like in my mind

The same goes for color, size, shape and cut - I just need to know what I like first and then figure out the right price based on reliable grading. Pricescope has been great school so far.

Why look at paper first ?

 

[strmrdr]

To me eyeclean is eyeclean I want the clarity level that gives me that at the lowest price.
That comes out to usualy si1-si2 in an RB and vs in asschers.

By eyeclean I mean the inclusion isnt visible looking closely at a few inches from the top and not visible from the sides when set and on the finger.
invisible inclusions at 12 inches but visible closer does not make it eyeclean in my opinion.

 

[Jennifer5973]

Size 5? gee... that GREAT 1.52 I had would be a monster...2 cts would be planet q!

It is so true, though--you can see it in the pictures...the smaller the digit, the bigger bang for the size you get from the rock.

No one will go into the finger lipo business with me though...

Val, Of all the things in the universe that Emerald friend could have said, commenting on that stone's cleanness still has me walking on air.

I am silently smug

--I got a 3 ct rock "SI2" (if it was SI1, it would have been financially challenging...at that size the price jumps are substantial for each grade of color and clarity) that looks flawless under examination in office lighting 2 inches away from an experienced diamond viewing eye that was looking for inclusions. The nature of the inclusion and cut are what make it--you can't see anything but flashes and sparkles.

 

[glitterata]

----------------
On 6/10/2004 3:07:13 PM oldminer wrote:


Why do some people want a flawless stone?

Why would someone else select flawless, IF or VVS?

Why does a person want a VS stone and not IF, VVS, or a lower grade?

Why are so many willing to accept SI stones? How do people feel about 'eye-clean' issues?

Although we don't discuss it much on Pricescope, there are many I1 and I2 clarity diamonds sold to very contented consumers. Are they just uninformed, or are there other reasons for their decision to buy at the bottom?


Just some food for fresh thoughts!!! What do the Pricescope particpants think on these matters?

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

Am I alone in wanting a stone that's NOT eye clean? I think I might be on this board.

To many people, a diamond is a personal expression of love and commitment to marriage and a social expression of status. They avoid visible inclusions because don't want their spouse to think their love is "flawed," and they don't want other people who see the ring in question to think they're cheap or poor. Although love behind the gift may be sincere and personal, much of the specifics of this attitude come from the great job Debeers did with its advertizing to create exactly those beliefs.

But in my social circle, there aren't a lot of diamonds. Few of my friends bought into the Debeers-backed tradition of engagement rings. Many are starving artists, anti-capitalists, or gay and therefore not allowed to get married. Of my married friends, many wear plain gold or even silver bands, or nothing at all. One friend's husband inherited a diamond ring and instead of giving it to her as an engagement ring--they had never had one--he sold it (with her complete support) to fund an arts project. My mother never had an engagement ring. Neither did my mother-in-law. And my husband didn't give me an engagement ring, either. I do have my grandmother's engagement ring, which I wear on my right hand. My friends think of my love for jewelry (particularly Victorian jewelry, the weirder the better) as an eccentricity.

Because I don't have to worry about what a diamond symbolizes and what it communicates socially in my circle, I can choose what pleases my eye best. I've found that that's a beautifully cut, fairly colorless stone with an interesting, visible inclusion. My ideal diamond would be G color or higher, amazingly cut, with a crystal inclusion that showed how diamonds grow--an octohedron, perhaps. Or maybe a big garnet in the middle of the table. Or a natural with lots of perfect trigons. Or all of the above. I would want something geologically fascinating.

 

[elmo65]

Dave,

I can tell you that I was just in a jewelry store yesterday and was discussing the Hearts on Fire with her. She bought a 4.5 carat SI2 (not HOF)with average color and said her co-workers tried to get her to go up in quality. She went for size. We were talking about a 2.0 carat HOF E SI1. She says if she had to do it over again she would be willing to give up those other 2.5 carats to get the better stone. She said that she is reluctant to hold her hand up to friends to show her ring because you can see the inclusions. She would go for quality.

I would take a SI1 if it is eye clean and spend my money on the other 3 c's!

 

[yowahking]

A little twist to this thread, cert shopping. Sometimes a stone gets sent to a lab and the dealer is not happy with the grade, he tries another lab, if it gets a better grade, it is on the market as the new grade. Doesn't mean that the newe grade was right or wrong, sometimes stones are very much in the middle range of a grade. That it where it helps to have a great appraiser in your roledex to help you with knowing that the stone is a strong SI2 like one guy had, or a weak H color which should then be sold more to the I color price. On some sizes the price is minimal, on some on color grade could mean $$$$$$. I1 stones are the best selling grade in our country for many reasons. If you shop in a store that sells only I1, I2, I3, then the I1's look pretty good. If you are on a budget, the price jump to SI2 is big. Most of us are content to marry someone who is not being recruited for the next magazine cover and has a butt, or gut, or nose that is a little too big, therefore a flaw in the diamond sometimes is ok to them. Sometimes it is really about size. I have a hair dresser client that was so pissed off that her husband went and got her a "perfect" little nothing of a diamond. Turned out to be a very nice stone but she wanted to impress her friends with a one ct, not a D, VS1, AGS 000 stone, 1/2ct. I would gladly take her stone on trade for a middle of the road 1ct, but she is afraid to rock the boat with him. If walmart is the #1 jeweler in the US, there is something appealing to a lot of people about I1 and I2 stones. I am as guilty as most about pushing people to at least stay SI2 or above and I color and above and at least an average cut. Sometimes it is just not what someone wants. On the other hand I has an engineer customer who got all the specs of the perfect diamond and came in with a list, found him a stone that hit everything but my table was 57, still had the 000 cert, fantastic stone, beat the price of his source, but lost it to a 56 table and he paid $1000 more to get it. 10 years ago I was upset by that. Now it is part of the information era. Information sometimes closes minds to letting your eyes see.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 8/21/2004 9:04:23 AM Jennifer5973 wrote:

Size 5? gee... that GREAT 1.52 I had would be a monster...2 cts would be planet q!

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

Well

... see below:

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 8/21/2004 10:58:48 AM elmo65 wrote:

Dave,

She says if she had to do it over again she would be willing to give up those other 2.5 carats to get the better stone.
----------------

Well.. this is just telling me that while IFs are all alike in terms of clarity, SI2 are quite different. I would still get those four carats in SI2, just look for a cleaner Si1.

Wanting a clean stone doe snot automatcally mean "get a higher clarity grade". It is all about one's expectations and patience for shopping, I would think.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 8/21/2004 12:34:42 PM yowahking wrote:



I1 stones are the best selling grade in our country for many reasons. If you shop in a store that sells only I1, I2, I3, then the I1's look pretty good. ----------------

And then... there is that SI3 grade right? How do those fit in? One doesn't hear much about it around here. How do those stones compare to the average GIA's I1?

 

[Jennifer5973]

----------------
On 8/22/2004 7:10:02 AM valeria101 wrote:

Wanting a clean stone doe snot automatcally mean 'get a higher clarity grade'. It is all about one's expectations and patience for shopping, I would think.

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

I think this is so true. It may take time but truly clean Si1 & 2s ARE out there. Look at Patty's I1--in a well cut stone, nothing is vsible in most conditions. I bet 99.9999999% of pple who see Patty's I1 don't see anything but a super sparkly diamond. In my case, the jeweler thinks my SI2 was conservative; hence, I got "lucky." There are SI1s that are conservative and might have paased as VS2s somewhere else. That's the thrill of it for many people. If high clarity is something most people can't "see" in normal circumstances, why pay for it when a better cut, higher color or bigger size are all more discernable with the naked eye? That why SI stones can be a tremendous bargain if you want the biggest you can get on a budget. Spend that $$$ on cut and size and a decent color and you can usually get what you want.

That's just my opinion. If money were no object, I'd move up to VS maybe just for the convenience of it but not more that that.

Note: My friend with the beautiful 2 ct VS1 (GIA) Emerald showed me her one inclusion--it is amazing...In an RB you'd never see this but b/c it is step cut, if you tilt it just so and look deep within the stone, you see a tiny hairline...Now that I know it is there when i am up very close to her ring (in meetings sitting next to her), I can see it sometimes. (I am not sure what it is--not a feather--it is a very very thin dark gray "line" of sorts) BUT, it is still an exquisite stone. Yet, that inclusion is as visible as the one in my SI2 --if you know it is there and in the right light, tilting it just so, you can see it. But imagine the price difference between VS1 and SI2 at 3 cts in an RB??? I couldn't have afforded that stone at VS1 at this time but I have an end result that is no less "eye clean." Interesting.

PS Great visual, Ana!!! You sre so creative at finding and creating the illustrative collages! See...Size of digit IS a factor in how big a stone will look. Interesting...

 

[valeria101]

Thanks !

many ring designs cannot be sized down allot ... so I need to think about those proportions. A small collection (probably about 1GB on my poor computer

) of pictures like this helps.

You must hae seen that "What will make you happy" thread on the Book forum. This thread should be in there, don't you think ?

 

[Lynn B]

----------------
On 8/22/2004 7:12:03 AM valeria101 wrote:

----------------
And then... there is that SI3 grade right? How do those fit in? One doesn't hear much about it around here. How do those stones compare to the average GIA's I1?

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

I read somewhere that SI3's were essentially I1's with a "good PR agent"!!!!

Lynn

 

[treysar]

I think that when it comes to diamonds, everyone wants something different. some people want a big rock, regardles of quality. Some people want a flawless rock, regardless of size. Some people want right in the middle - a nice size diamond while not sacrificing quality. It really pepends on the person, I think it also depends on one's social circle, i.e., "So-and-so has a 1 ct, so I NEEEEEEEEED a 1.50!" and then POOF! There goes quality.

I prefer eye clean, regardless of "title".

 

[sparker]

----------------
On 6/10/2004 6:58:35 PM Patty wrote:

I have a SuperbCert I1 stone. At certain angles, I can see the inclusion...a crystal under the table. I love that this diamond was so inexpensive and all most people will ever see is a beautiful stone.

I think it's all about the cut. If it sparkles like the dickens, no one will notice a 'flaw.'

If I had a completely unlimited budget for diamonds, the highest clarity I would go would be MAYBE a VS stone. For me it's much more about the value than the cost. I love getting a good value for my dollar and with an I1, you can get a much bigger size for your money.

Even so, my husband still thinks that spending $7000 on a ring is a LOT. I keep reminding him of all the money I saved him by getting an I1 stone. He says, 'Yeah, but $7000 still isn't cheap!'----------------

Hi,

I have to agree with this post. I got a beautiful 1.01 ct. E si2 with a little bit of fluorescence that sparkles like mad. I also had a budget. There is no way I could have gotton such a nicely cut diamond with the color if I didn't give a little on the clarity and the fluorescence thingy. Yes, I know fluorescence does not help an E colored stone, however, in this case there is no distraction from its beauty either. And the si2 is eye-clean. Oh, it has a H&A cut. All this priced at 4500.