Diamond advice needed please!

[ajginlove2012]

Hi All

I have been looking around for a diamond for a long time now to use in an engagement ring for my girlfriend of 9 years. I am excited as I think I have found something that will be perfect regarding what we want and our budget, but I would love some expert opinions.

The main diamond I have been looking at is as follows:

Cut: Excellent
Polish: Excellent
Symmetry: Very Good
Depth (%): 60.9
Table (%): 57.00
Flourescence: Medium
Measurements (mm): 5.77-5.81x3.52
Certified by: GIA
Shape: Round
Carat: 0.720
Colour: H
Clarity: SI1
Inclusions: Twinning Wisp, Feather

I ran its numbers through the HCA and it received a 0.8 Excellent score.
I also put it through the AGA/NAJA Cut Class Diamond Grading Screening Tool and it's total grade was 1A ( you can see the full results below if needed.)

My main concerns would be in the fact that it has medium blue flourescence, however I am comforted in hearing that this can in fact improve the colour of a H diamond. Is this assumption safe? My other concern lies in the types of inclusions. Would the Twinning Wisp or Feather pose any serious risk to the durability of the diamond? I would also like to know if the Symmetry grading of Very Good is likely to lower it's performance or integrity greatly?
Other than that the price seems right and it seems to be ticking all the right boxes for me so far but I would greatly value and appreciate any advice or information anyone can give.

Many thanks in advance!


(AGA/NAJA Cut Class Diamond Grading Screening Tool Results)
Length:5.77
Width:5.81
Depth:3.52
Total Depth:60.79%
Table percent:57
Crown height:15
Girdle (from):Thin
Girdle (to):Medium
Polish:Excellent / Very Good
Symmetry:Excellent / Very Good
Crown angle:35
Pavilion depth:43

Tab Percent: 1A
Crown Angle: 1B
Crown Height: 1A
Pavilion Depth: 1A
Girdle: 1A
Depth: 1A
Polish: 1A
Symmetry: 1A
TotalGrade: 1A

 

[stone-cold11]

Post the GIA report number?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The diamond sounds fine! What is the pavilion angle? I don't think we can comment on the feather unless we see where it is. Have you asked the vendor about it? I doubt it would be a risk in an SI1, and twining wisps are often invisible to the eye, which is good.

Your girl has been patient to wait for 9 years!!!

 

[ajginlove2012]

Hey Guys, thanks for your quick replies!
The GIA report number is 2131931232.
Here's a link to the report: https://myapps.gia.edu/ReportCheckPortal/getReportData.do?&reportno=2131931232&weight=.72

Pavillion angle is 40.6 but all info should now be on the GIA link.Thanks for the info about the feather regarding SI1, I will have to contact the vendor tomorrow to find out about its positioning.

She has certainly been very patient waiting 9 years but we started dating young and have been busy being students so it's all just taken time. We are so excited to take this next step together though!

Thanks again!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The medium blue is a plus as far as I am concerned because it is mostly invisible and may take a couple percent off the price. It is a neat feature if you ever happen to go where there are black lights, though!

Have you seen this stone? I'd like to see the magnified image, if possible. I prefer Excellent for symmetry and this one gets very good. I guess it depends on how much lower the price is compared to one that gets 3 excellents.

 

[stone-cold11]

Numbers looks promising.

Feather is not a problem, GIA will always list it first if it is as significant as other inclusions, so with listed 2nd, it is at worst a VS2 feather, not likely to be a problem even if it is a SI1.

 

[ajginlove2012]

Hello again!
Thank you so much for your informed answers! I have held the diamond for the time being as I feel it is probably "the one", but I would also really appreciate some opinions on another diamond.

It is also a H SI1,
Cut: Excellent
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Depth (%): 62.9
Table (%): 56.00
Flourescence: none
Measurements (mm): 5.62-5.65x3.55
Certified by: GIA
Shape: Round
Carat: 0.70
Colour: H
Clarity: SI1
Inclusions: Cloud, Feather
GIA report number: 1136764117

It receives an HCA score of 1.4 Excellent.
Through the AGA/NAJA Cut Class Diamond Grading Screening Tool and it's total grade was 3A ( full results are below)

This diamond is approximately an extra $300 than the other and I just don't see where the extra cost is coming from. Overall the diamonds appear comparable and while I am aware that the HCA and AGA/NAJA tools are to be used primarily for screening diamonds rather than selecting, with such big differences between the scores of the diamonds I am feeling a little confused. Obviously I am happy to spend the extra few hundred dollars on the diamond if it is much better, but at this point I feel I would only be paying for the diamond to have no flourescence, which as covered before wouldn't seem to be that big of a deal and would possibly be a plus with regards to an H colour diamond. Other than that it has very good polish vs the other diamonds excellent, and excellent symmetry vs the other diamonds very good. Is a cloud a better inclusion to have vs a twinning wisp? Would this diamond be likely to perform better in other ways? Perhaps I am missing something?
I suppose I am just wanted to be confident in my decision for the other diamond to perform well and do what a good diamond should do.
Sorry to ask so many questions, it's just that my girl has waited a long time for this, as have I, and I want everything to be perfect.
Thank you so much again for your time and for being so generous with your knowledge!


AGA/NAJA Cut Class Diamond Grading Screening Tool Results:

Length:5.62
Width:5.65
Depth:3.55
Total Depth:63%
Table percent:56
Crown height:16
Girdle (from):Medium
Girdle (to):Slightly thick
Polish:Excellent / Very Good
Symmetry:Excellent / Very Good
Crown angle:35.5
Pavilion depth:40.6

Tab Percent: 1A
Crown Angle: 2A
Crown Height: 1A
Pavilion Depth: 3B
Girdle: 1A
Depth: 2A
Polish: 1A
Symmetry: 1A
TotalGrade: 3A

 

[GalaxyGirl]

What vendor are you going through? Are you able to view actual photos or get Idealscope images of these stones?

As you previously noted, the tools you are using are not meant for selection, but only to narrow your field of consideration. In the HCA in particular, a lower score within the range of 0-2 does not mean "better". Well-scoring stones (scoring < 2) can have different makes which may be noticeable to some people. Many people prefer the look of stones that score higher, in the 1-2 range, to those that score under 1. This is just a personal preference. One is not "better" than the other and your preferences may be for the opposite, or the difference may not be perceivable to you.

On the AGA/NAJA Cut Screening Tool, you input the pavilion angle rather than the pavilion depth, so the actual grade should be 2A.

I think it's easy for people to get hung up on these numbers, wanting the "best" score on everything, but remember, these are evaluations of angles only, and there is a small margin of error/rounding that takes place on the report measurements. More needs to be taken into account before you finalize a purchase.

Viewing the GIA reports for both stones, it looks as though they both have Excellent polish and Very Good symmetry. The price difference is likely coming from the Medium Blue fluorescence on stone #1, as you assumed, as stones with fluorescence will cost less than comparable stones without it.

As for the inclusions, twinning wisps are usually not noticeable. Feathers could be noticeable, or not, depending on where they are and how large they are. Extremely large feathers, especially those near the girdle breaking the surface of the stone, can be a durability risk, particularly during setting. Clouds are more likely than the others to be discernable in SI stones, all other things being equal, and again, depending on how large they are and where they are located. If large enough/dense enough, they could also alter the performance of the stone. On stone #2, the cloud being listed first means that is the grade making inclusion. Meaning, the feather could theoretically be a VS2 feather, but the cloud is an SI1 cloud.

You really need a photo or expert opinion on the inclusions. The cloud could be so small it is difficult to find, or it could span most of the stone. A clarity grade only tells you how easily seen the inclusion is under magnification, but nothing of its size, placement or impact on performance. As with the cut reports, the grades on paper aren't enough. You need some data on the actual stone. Ideally you would have a microscopic image of the stone or a clarity plot showing you where the inclusions are located and how many there are. Ask your vendor whether the stones are eye clean and whether there is a durability risk involved for any of the inclusions. Make sure you specify your requirements for "eye clean" as different vendors have different interpretations. Ask what your vendor's definition is and decide what is important to you. If you want it imperceivable at a very short distance (<12 inches), realize this is not the definition of "eye clean" most vendors will give you by default. Also take into account that what is visible to someone with training and experience in looking for inclusions may not be noticeable to you. Your vendor should be able to give you a good opinion.

If it were me, I would want an image of the actual stone showing the inclusions, how the facets line up/what the patterning is, and an Idealscope image (or some similar report) showing light return/leakage. You may not care about the pattern of the stone, as this will not be noticeable to most people in most situations, but the Idealscope image will give you an idea on how your stone is likely to perform. You will need to decide whether you are willing to purchase without additional data if the vendor is not able to supply it. Many stones are "virtual" stones and not in the possession of the company selling them.

Don't forget to consider the seller's return and upgrade policies, especially since it sounds like you're buying this stone sight unseen. You want options if it doesn't sing to you when you get it home.