do you/can you love inclusions?

[kenny]

I love my AGS-graded E VVS1 ACA.

It has one single pinpoint near the girdle so I can identify it, but otherwise it's spotless.
This is the perfect clarity for me ... mind clean.
I don't mind that I could have bought a much larger stone for the same budget.
It wouldn't be mind clean to me.

That said I have some colored diamonds with low clarity.
I don't mind it in FCDs since the color takes priority and certain colors are very rare.
In rare colors I'm lucky to have found any specimen I could afford.

kenny, I have a question for you
Since FCD have body color because of vapors of other elements (as far as I understood, and please correct me if I am wrong), are they also often more included than clear stones? I am thinking about vapor + proximity of other elements might encourage the formation of other crystals and minerals

In naturally colored diamonds the color is the result of various things.
Boron 'contamination' causes blue, nitrogen in yellow, crystal lattice deformation in pink and browns (probably) and exposure to radioactivity causes green.

None of these color-causes is an inclusion.
I can not say authoritatively whether colored diamonds are less or more 'included' than D-Z diamonds.
I can say that inclusions affect the value of FCDs proportionally less than they do with D-Z diamonds.
Many FCDs costing hundreds of thousands of dollars are heavily included.
The most picky collector must care less about inclusions because of the rarity of FCDs, especially certain colors.

I have no clue whether any of these color-causing 'contaminants' encourage the development of inclusions.
I have read quite a lot about FCDs and have not encountered that theory, but perhaps I will in the future.

ETA: In green diamonds radiation results in not only in the green color, which usually is only near the skin of the diamond and appears blotchy but occasionally extends deeply into the diamond and appears even, but also in brown radiation stains that are left unpolished on the skin of the diamond (naturals).
I have seen GIA reports indicating the clarity grade was set as a result of these stains. (no other inclusions)
These stains are not polished off because it is where GIA looks to determine whether the radiation happened in the earth or in a lab.

 

[kenny]

Here are some of the brown radiation stains in naturals (part of the original skin of the rough diamond) that the cutters left on my Green diamond.
I guess I love these inclusions since GIA uses them to verify the origin of green is the earth, not treatment in a lab.
Maybe I should hate them because they drove up the price 100 to 200 times.



GIA: O.26 ct Natural Fancy Intense Green, VS2.

 

[heididdl]

IF or internally flawless diamonds are rare. Most stones have inclusions. The inclusions give each stone their identity. So in the question do we like stones with inclusions. Well unless you are beyonce or deeppocketed you will mostly likely have a stone with at least one inclusion. Yes there are those in PS that prefer eye clean stones and PS that also prefer the warmer colors K L M N. But again each stone has its own individual makeup.

Only you can determine if this stone works for you. We can give you our opinions and I happen to agree with DS that I would probably pass on this. I would prefer to have a smaller stone that is truly eye clean and have a excellent cut. I would rather wait and save my $$$$$ until i can get something that I really Love.

It is really upto you. The diamonds I have all have inclusions. I love my diamonds so much that I actually like their inclusions and only I and my loupe know where they are. No one is going to ask me where my inclusions are (of course unless I show them here and ask for help in finding them) but this is a very different situation.

 

[kenny]

Well unless you are beyonce or deeppocketed you will mostly likely have a stone with at least one inclusion.

I have a D IF round with super duper cut that only cost a few hundred bucks.
Oh, but it's only 0.22 ct.

 

[heididdl]

Very funny........Yes there are PS that have IF....but in general we look for overall rounded stones C, C, C......and there is always compromise unless you are J-Z .....lol

 

[kenny]

 

[John P]

John, thank you for taking the time to share this piece of history with us. Very interesting info.

I'm glad you enjoyed the history. I do think, for the consuming-public, that the diamond industry steers buyers in a definite direction as it relates to clarity.

Now I recall we had a conversation on Antwerp a while ago. If you are based there or in proximity, I think we might need to meet

I'm based in the USA, but I visit our Antwerp HQ several times per year.

If you find me on my personal Facebook page you'll know when and where I'm going to be...it has been my distinct pleasure to meet and hang out with many cool PS regulars, at home and abroad, who see I'm spending time in their general vicinity and contact me to share a coffee - or something stronger - and of course some cool discussion.

 

[heididdl]

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&biw=1366&bih=667&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=diamonds+with+interesting+inclusions&oq=diamonds+with+interesting+inclusions&gs_l=img.3...35217.39017.0.40042.22.20.2.0.0.0.134.1324.19j1.20.0...0.0...1c.1.7.img.zgQ4I5VaUZA#imgrc=dVBv0nwPt1bQ2M%3A%3BqUwZjpyFweTsoM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.pricescope.com%252Ffiles%252Fimages%252FC0108496-Diamond_with_garnet_inclusion-SPL.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.pricescope.com%252Fforum%252Fdiamond-research%252Fwhere-to-look-for-diamonds-with-inclusions-t169328.html%3B530%3B393

cool inclusion

 

[John P]

IF or internally flawless diamonds are rare. Most stones have inclusions.

Actually I've never seen a diamond with no inclusions: Our "Flawless" label is based on 10X magnification. But all one needs to do is zoom in at increased magnification, and some wonderful and compelling natural characteristics will make themselves known.

In economic terms I wonder: Should a diamond with no visible inclusions at 20X magnification cost twice as much as an ordinary "Flawless" with nothing visible at the standard 10X mag?

 

[marcy]

I am enjoying this discussion and reading all the links. I think an inclusion makes a diamond or gem interesting. I had an EC that had a little needle in it that I could only see in sunlight. A friend of our used to study rocks and crystals under a microscope and had one that had a little inclusion that looked like a Christmas tree. I think seeing a piece of a garnet in diamond would be cool.

DH is actually very picky about inclusions. He thinks I would start obsessing and want to upgrade (I would do that without inclusions ) but I don't have very good vision so I doubt I would see most inclusions naked eye other than a black carbon spot. Now a poor cut; that is easy to see.

marcy, wow, a Christmas tree!! how romantic!!

lol, upgrade comes along anyways, doesn't it?

what is a jewel jet? I suspect I need one of those.. mmh..

Biancofiore, it was a perfect little clip art style of a Christmas tree. I bet they showed us that 15 years ago and I have never forgot it. I see someone has answered you jewel jet question.

 

[marcy]

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&biw=1366&bih=667&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=diamonds+with+interesting+inclusions&oq=diamonds+with+interesting+inclusions&gs_l=img.3...35217.39017.0.40042.22.20.2.0.0.0.134.1324.19j1.20.0...0.0...1c.1.7.img.zgQ4I5VaUZA#imgrc=dVBv0nwPt1bQ2M%3A%3BqUwZjpyFweTsoM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.pricescope.com%252Ffiles%252Fimages%252FC0108496-Diamond_with_garnet_inclusion-SPL.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.pricescope.com%252Fforum%252Fdiamond-research%252Fwhere-to-look-for-diamonds-with-inclusions-t169328.html%3B530%3B393

cool inclusion

They is a cool inclusion. I am going to go look through the rest of those images. Thanks!

 

[pandabee]

Very cool image of the diamond with a garnet inclusion! Kenny that was helpful information on colored diamonds (and a very intelligent question on biancofiore's part and of course your green diamond is sooo beautifully colored!!!!

This is such a fun thread with some good conversation...glad to see one like this here to help further the education and geekiness of us diamond afficionados!!

 

[SB621]

I have an I1 diamond with a rather large inclusion that I had set by SK. Honestly it doesn't bother me at all. I had been looking for a lower colored OEC for a 3 stone ring and this one popped up. The inclusion is towards the girdle so you can't see it from the top down as it blends in with the O/P coloring. So obvisouly I don't mind inclusions as long as they aren't glarying/ screaming at you. I guess you can say different strokes for different folks as I know some would never buy an I1 dimond.

JbEG shows the inclusion really well:
http://jewelsbyericagrace.smugmug.com/SOLD-ITEMS-1/SOLD-Items/208ct-Old-European-Cut-Diamond/21026570_cJ5Vhd#!i=1671571851&k=pSmzkfT

Sarah, thank you for your contribution: it helps a lot. Not only your ring is ultra-beautiful, but I do not find the inclusion distracting or disturbing at all. Is it more evident in direct stong sunlight, or do you feel it has some significant impact on performance?

Given your experience, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the diamond I posted and how you think it would compare to yours (much worse, quite similar etc.). I am planning to go see it myself in a few weeks, but I would still like expert feedback

Actually becasue of how SK placed the prong and side stones you pretty much can only see it when you are looking at eye level at an angle over the sidestone (if that makes sense). So not it is not evident at all. I do have another I1 diamond that belonged to my DH's family and was given to me when I got married. It is .69cts I believe and I wore it for a few years in a pendant. You can see the inclusions from about 3-5 inches away, but no one ever said anything to me about it. I'm actually right now having it reset into a tacori ring I won off ebay as I have stopped wearing it as a necklace.

For my .69ct I do think it impacts performance and I'm sure it does with my 2.08ct too, but honestly I didn't buy/ recieve this for ideal performance. They were side projects for jewelry pieces I wanted. I wanted a 3 stone OEC ring in the lower range. I could have gotten a much nicer stone but it would have been smaller and I probably wouldn't have had the budget to have it hand forged setting made. So I make allowances for certain things. For me sometimes SI2 or I1's can work great for projects you just have to have your expectations set with what it is going to be.

Based of a quick look at your diamond I would pretty much put it on par with my .69ct diamond. I think I posted a few pictures in this thread.
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/forum/rockytalky/a-fun-reset-tacori-sapphire-set-for-heirloom-diamond-t186575.html']https://www.pricescope.com/forum/rockytalky/a-fun-reset-tacori-sapphire-set-for-heirloom-diamond-t186575.html[/URL]

 

[Winks_Elf]

Small inclusions (as long as they're not black glop) don't bother me. As a matter of fact, I prefer my diamond to have a little "birthmark" I can see with my loupe. I love all different colors, but typically prefer the I-M range. I adore fluorescence. The big deal breaker for me is an indented natural or chips on the girdle. If there's an indented natural it would irk the heck out of me, and I'd be rubbing it with my fingernail constantly.

 

[dianabarbara]

Here are some of the brown radiation stains in naturals (part of the original skin of the rough diamond) that the cutters left on my Green diamond.
I guess I love these inclusions since GIA uses them to verify the origin of green is the earth, not treatment in a lab.
Maybe I should hate them because they drove up the price 100 to 200 times.



GIA: O.26 ct Natural Fancy Intense Green, VS2.

Kenny, I had no idea green diamonds were so cool until I saw this. Awesome!!

Thank you for explaining and posting these pics

 

[dianabarbara]

IF or internally flawless diamonds are rare. Most stones have inclusions. The inclusions give each stone their identity. So in the question do we like stones with inclusions. Well unless you are beyonce or deeppocketed you will mostly likely have a stone with at least one inclusion. Yes there are those in PS that prefer eye clean stones and PS that also prefer the warmer colors K L M N. But again each stone has its own individual makeup.

Only you can determine if this stone works for you. We can give you our opinions and I happen to agree with DS that I would probably pass on this. I would prefer to have a smaller stone that is truly eye clean and have a excellent cut. I would rather wait and save my $$$$$ until i can get something that I really Love.

It is really upto you. The diamonds I have all have inclusions. I love my diamonds so much that I actually like their inclusions and only I and my loupe know where they are. No one is going to ask me where my inclusions are (of course unless I show them here and ask for help in finding them) but this is a very different situation.

Heididdl, thank you for your feedback! if I am not satisfied with the stone, I will surely pass and wait until something else comes by. But I do not want to spend more on this project, as we have other plans in mind aside of jewelry (house!, travels, etc.)

 

[dianabarbara]

John, thank you for taking the time to share this piece of history with us. Very interesting info.

I'm glad you enjoyed the history. I do think, for the consuming-public, that the diamond industry steers buyers in a definite direction as it relates to clarity.

Now I recall we had a conversation on Antwerp a while ago. If you are based there or in proximity, I think we might need to meet

I'm based in the USA, but I visit our Antwerp HQ several times per year.

If you find me on my personal Facebook page you'll know when and where I'm going to be...it has been my distinct pleasure to meet and hang out with many cool PS regulars, at home and abroad, who see I'm spending time in their general vicinity and contact me to share a coffee - or something stronger - and of course some cool discussion.

John, I would love that! Very sweet of you

 

[dianabarbara]

marcy, pandabee - thank you

sarahbear - SK always sounds just fantastic! I am really happy it worked out so well, and the ring looks just fantastic
I hear you on not wanting to invest too much in a stone for a side project. Same applies here. And I have to say your ring looks great!

Also thank you for sharing pictures of your heriloom stone. this is another useful comparison. have you set it already?

 

[dianabarbara]

Small inclusions (as long as they're not black glop) don't bother me. As a matter of fact, I prefer my diamond to have a little "birthmark" I can see with my loupe. I love all different colors, but typically prefer the I-M range. I adore fluorescence. The big deal breaker for me is an indented natural or chips on the girdle. If there's an indented natural it would irk the heck out of me, and I'd be rubbing it with my fingernail constantly.

I can understand that.

 

[SB621]

marcy, pandabee - thank you

sarahbear - SK always sounds just fantastic! I am really happy it worked out so well, and the ring looks just fantastic
I hear you on not wanting to invest too much in a stone for a side project. Same applies here. And I have to say your ring looks great!

Also thank you for sharing pictures of your heriloom stone. this is another useful comparison. have you set it already?

It actaully completed over the weekend and should be here on Tuesday or Wednesday. I will post in SMTB when I get it

 

[dianabarbara]

marcy, pandabee - thank you

sarahbear - SK always sounds just fantastic! I am really happy it worked out so well, and the ring looks just fantastic
I hear you on not wanting to invest too much in a stone for a side project. Same applies here. And I have to say your ring looks great!

Also thank you for sharing pictures of your heriloom stone. this is another useful comparison. have you set it already?

It actually completed over the weekend and should be here on Tuesday or Wednesday. I will post in SMTB when I get it

Sarah - awesome!! I can't wait to see it finished

so I've visited the seller and got a very positive impression of the stone. it is very very lively in person and I do not feel like the inclusion affect performance in a visible way - at least not to me
the facets looked crispy,the inclusion under the table was barely visible to the naked eye -you would literally have to stare at the stone -and the white lines along the table were really from the plastic case!!

I was so excited that I forgot to take pics until a few moments from the departure of the train, and ended up not having one that is representative of the stone. I feel like I should be thrown in a sea of sharks for this PS crime so I thought I'd post at least the bad pic I have.

Please notice: the stone is not by any means dark in real life. I think all this black is a reflection of my hair and my phone, and maybe even the interior of the car.

 

[dianabarbara]

p.s. - pic above was taken with the stone still inside the plastic case!

 

[megumic]

I have an inclusion on my 2.7 carat cushion and I can see it with my naked eye, but nobody else notices. I actually prefer it b/c then I know it's MY diamond. It's an identifying characteristic and I like being able to know it's mine within a moments look. I don't often leave it to be cleaned or prongs to be tightened, but if I do, I know it's mine.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I have had many different feelings about inclusions. Now I am of the mind that if I can't see it, I don't care.

Here are some neat macro pictures of my old cut's grade making inclusion, a white feather on the junction between a bezel facet and upper girdle facet. It is disguised and I can't find it even with a loupe.

Can you see it?




Highlighted.

 

[dianabarbara]

meguimic, it's good not to need to worry all the time about stone substitution

Dreamer, that stone always looks just fantastic! the inclusions are so so tiny and well hidden I cannot imagine anyone seeing them in real life and without a loupe

 

[beacherbeacher]

I have an inclusion on my 2.7 carat cushion and I can see it with my naked eye, but nobody else notices. I actually prefer it b/c then I know it's MY diamond. It's an identifying characteristic and I like being able to know it's mine within a moments look. I don't often leave it to be cleaned or prongs to be tightened, but if I do, I know it's mine.

My sentiments exactly. I have an eyeclean SI2, and while I know where the inclusion (a white feather) is located, I sometimes have a hard time finding it (has to be the exact right light/right location). But it is nice when it comes back from the jeweler and I can look at it and go, "yes, there you are. you're mine. hello."

...Isn't there something about looking for a flaw---look hard enough and you're going to find it (naked eye, our loupe etc)? I'd rather not scope out something to label as a "defect" but rather embrace a particular "characteristic" of it. I do know of people who want a "mind clean" stone, and that's ok too, everybody has their taste and I wholly realize that. It's just a personal preference for me that I prefer to look at it as part of its organic self, rather than an imperfection.

Unless it's a huge black spot on the table. That would certainly bother me.

 

[LibbyLA]

The big deal breaker for me is an indented natural or chips on the girdle. If there's an indented natural it would irk the heck out of me, and I'd be rubbing it with my fingernail constantly.

The grade-setting inclusion on my SI2 oval is an indented natural on one end that's covered by a prong. Good luck finding it with a loupe or your fingernail. Besides, I try not to touch the stones in my rings at all to cut down on the glop that gets on them.

liz

 

[glitzandglamour]

I love crystal inclusions, especially garnets! I wouldn't want anything worse then an SI1 (depending on the crystals location) in a ring, but I love the fact it could have a beautiful identifying feature.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Since I got intot he hobby of buying old cuts "blind", with no information about clarity and usually little information about the condition of the stone, I have become much more blase about inclusions and even small girdle chips. I have found that when I dont know where the inclusions are, I cannot find them with my eyes or loupe very easily in 99% of cases. I have actually owned a couple OECs that were likely SI2 or I1 clarity and looked terrible in 40x macro, but in person I could not see a thing! So, ignorance is bliss.