Do you consider this Eye Clean?

[focalmatic]

By your eyes - would you pull the trigger on this diamond? The large inclusion scares me a quite a bit.
GOG considers it eye clean however

http://www.goodoldgold.com/0_84ct_h_si2_h%26a.htm

 

[pons]

by the number of posts, you can see that i am a beginner.

at this magnification, i can definitely see a rather large inclusion. I bet from 2 feet away you may not see it, but if you look closely you could tell. who knows, just my opinion. personally i woulnd''t pull the trigger just b/c it''s a h&A

 

[strmrdr]

They have seen the diamond so they can say better than we can.
They have a good return policy if you need it.

Its in a good place for it to be hidden.
My guess is that it is indeed eyeclean looking at the darkfield and the actual photos.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/31/2005 12:49:50 AM
Author: pons
by the number of posts, you can see that i am a beginner.


at this magnification, i can definitely see a rather large inclusion. I bet from 2 feet away you may not see it, but if you look closely you could tell. who knows, just my opinion. personally i woulnd't pull the trigger just b/c it's a h&A

Welcome to PS!

Iv seen ones that were twice that bad that were totaly eyeclean.
placement, type and color of the inclusions make a huge difference.

 

[BSHAW]

Have you spoken with someone at GOG or are you just going by the words ''eye clean SI2'' on that page. If you spoke with someone there and they said it is eye clean I would trust that enough to make the purchase. They do have a good return policy so there is no reason for them to mislead you knowing that you could send it right back. But it also is up to your preference and how sensative you are to inclusions, if you think it might bother you why risk it? Keep looking and you may find something else you prefer.

 

[LadyluvsLuxury]

I agree with the other posters. Someone at GOG who has seen the stone can give you a much better verfication of the stone being eye-clean than the image could show. Just make sure you understand what their definition of eye clean is....and of course they have an excellent return policy if it did not meet your expectations...goodluck!

 

[Mara]

Also, when you ask about it being eye clean, ask more than just that. Ask about where you can see the inclusion under regular viewing? How many inches or feet. Is it a white or black inclusion? Is it obscured by sparkle, aligned along a facet or where is it located, VISUALLY if they can give you a better description. Lastly, ask if inclusions are visible from the side views, aka from the pavilion....from experience on here sometimes people do not ask that and then are disappointed when a diamond comes and you can see something in the pavilion. Technically eye-clean is mostly face up grading but for most consumers they do not want to see anything from any angle.

Also, ask them to take some natural shots of the diamond, maybe that will help you with visualizing the inclusion and if you can or cannot see it. An SI2 could be a great deal but you have to know as much as possible about it first. Good luck!

 

[pahoyafan]

Good points Mara. I am worried about the SI1 that I have on hold. The setting I ordered is a floating setting, so the diamond will be visible on the sides. I''m going to call Leslie from WF after New Years and see if she could look at the stone and answer some questions for me (white or black, eye clean from the side, etc).

http://www.whiteflash.com/diamonds/diamond_details.aspx?idno=1583712

 

[blodthecat]

I think you are going to find that this is definitely eye clean. Take comfort also in knowing that they have a very good returns policy.

If GOG say it is eye clean, then I am sure it is.

P.S. Remember the magnificant is huge.

Blod

 

[Shay37]

I could be wrong, but a while back there was a diamond in question from GOG that I was iffy about because of the inclusions. I said that the reflectors scare me without anything else being written about it. Jonathan asked me if it was because I feared it would not be eyeclean. I said, yes. I suggested that on stones with really terrible plots that it might be a good idea to put a note that the stone is eyeclean if it in fact is. This way people don''t have to wonder and call and ask. I don''t know for sure that this is in response to my comments to Jonathan, but I think that it might be. It just shows that they are really responsive to ideas and willing to give you that info on the site.

If anything, I would think they would err on the side of caution with that definition "eyeclean." I don''t think it''s a typo. They put that there for a reason. Just my .02.

shay

 

[focalmatic]

Heres a reply when I specifically asked for input on the diamond:

I ran an Isee2 report on the .84 and it scored a 9.5…by industry standards this stone is eye clean….from 18 inches away. The inclusion is black and can be seen from the side. The biggest issue is that the inclusion is reflecting and showing up in the middle of the diamond. That I could see all the way up to a foot away pretty easily.

 

[jennyt]

I have a SI1 that is eye-clean but that does have an inclusion that''s pretty visible if you were to look closely. The good news? No one other than you is going to be putting the diamond right up to his or her eye.

Seriously, given that the stone has a ton of sparkle, this will likely not be a big issue. I kinda like my inclusion since I''m the only one who can spot it and it helps me identify my stone as my own.

 

[Mara]

Since you are putting it in a floating setting, I would not get a stone that has an inclusion that can be seen from the side or that one that is black and large. That''s just me...but my husband has a tension set diamond and part of what we love about it and the setting is that the diamond is entirely eye-clean and it is viewable from all angles...so I''d pass on a stone that is 18"away eye-clean and find one that is eye-clean a little closer as well.

 

[Hest88]

I agree with Mara. Personally, I can handle large clear inclusions much better than I can handle smaller black carbon spots.