Do you think this stone will have a fish eye?

[ryan62]

My girlfriend loves a band at bn so I'm going against better judgment and buying in the dark. Do the proportions look good on this stone or should I keep looking? Is it shallow?
http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD05864480

Gia vs1, .92 carat, 3x's, 59.3% depth 59% table, crown angle 32%, pavilion angle 41% 6.37-6.38 x 3.78mm



Thanks everyone

 

[gr8leo87]

Can't comment on specific stones but fisheyes usually start in diamonds with table bigger than 62%. Also diamond with fisheye/nailheads don't usually make it to the excellent cut grade.

 

[RockBrat]

It won't be a fish eye but it might look like an eye and there's no way to know without seeing it in person. When you get it you'll want to tilt the stone back and forth and rock it while looking at it. What you could see is a circle of light leakage around the stone that will be much darker than the rest of the stone. It would look like a donut or an eye.

 

[gr8leo87]

A 59 table will not have fish eye or any other eye. Especially with that pav angle.

 

[marymm]

If you run the HCA tool - http://www.pricescope.com/tools/hca - on this BN diamond, it returns a total score of "1.1-Excellent within BIC range" - based on the numbers, the diamond should be a very bright and brilliant stone.



And here's a good link that gives more info on BIC diamonds http://www.diamond-cut.com.au/23_bicfic.htm

Unless your GF has expressed a preference for fire (colored light return) over brilliance (white light return), I think this BN diamond is worth checking out. And BN has a solid return policy, so no worries there.


eta: and, no, there is zero likelihood this stone will have a fish-eye. Here's a link with a bit more info on fish-eyes - http://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-cut-fish-eye-effect

 

[ryan62]

Thanks to everyone for the replies, I feel better about buying it now. I just noticed the size of the diamond was large compared to others in this category and didn't know if it would be overly shallow.

 

[RockBrat]

A 59 table will not have fish eye or any other eye. Especially with that pav angle.

Im not sure this is entirely true. I just looked at one over the weekend with almost those exact same numbers and it did exactly what I posted. There was a large ring of light leakage. And it got an excellent grade on the HCA.

OP, you really might want to tilt the stone and check it when you get it just to be sure.

 

[ryan62]

I will When I get it. I had bn reach out to the owner to make sure it's available. They think the whole process will take 6weeks because her ring finger is a 4 and they only have the setting in a 4.5.

 

[gr8leo87]

A 59 table will not have fish eye or any other eye. Especially with that pav angle.

Im not sure this is entirely true. I just looked at one over the weekend with almost those exact same numbers and it did exactly what I posted. There was a large ring of light leakage. And it got an excellent grade on the HCA.

OP, you really might want to tilt the stone and check it when you get it just to be sure.

Light leakage is not fish eye.

Fish eye is reflection of girdle under the table and it only happens with shallow stones and large tables. OP's stone got neither of this

 

[gr8leo87]

A 59 table will not have fish eye or any other eye. Especially with that pav angle.

Im not sure this is entirely true. I just looked at one over the weekend with almost those exact same numbers and it did exactly what I posted. There was a large ring of light leakage. And it got an excellent grade on the HCA.

OP, you really might want to tilt the stone and check it when you get it just to be sure.

On tilting the stone you will see girdle reflection (under the loupe) and the phenomenon is consistent with every diamond.

Cheers

 

[RockBrat]

A 59 table will not have fish eye or any other eye. Especially with that pav angle.

Im not sure this is entirely true. I just looked at one over the weekend with almost those exact same numbers and it did exactly what I posted. There was a large ring of light leakage. And it got an excellent grade on the HCA.

OP, you really might want to tilt the stone and check it when you get it just to be sure.

Light leakage is not fish eye.

Fish eye is reflection of girdle under the table and it only happens with shallow stones and large tables. OP's stone got neither of this

I said it wouldn't be a fish eye but it could look like an eye as in human eye. There is a huge difference. Imagine a human eye, white, and then you have the iris which is a dark round circle and then a pupil in this case more white. And when you posted "any other eye" I assumed you were responding to what I said. What I saw in a diamond with these proportions was a huge amount of light leak, not a table, girdle or other reflection. That is what a diamond of those proportions can look like, I've seen it. It's possible you haven't seen it but the OP deserves to hear all input to help him be an informed consumer.

 

[ryan62]

So do these proportions generally have a lot of light leakage?

 

[RockBrat]

In my personal experience, it's about a 50/50 chance of light leak in a stone with a 59ish depth and 59 table or a 60 ish depth with a 60 table. I do not know though why some do and some don't or how the other numbers come into play. It could just be the difference between say 59.2 depth and 59.4 depth in conjunction with certain crown and pavilion angles. I am fascinated with stones of these proportions as there have been claims in the past that these are some of the most beautiful and so I study them. They can be incredibly beautiful diamonds but also can have problems with light leakage. If you end up with one with light leakage it should be noticeable if you tilt and rock the stone back and forth. You'll see a very dark ring with no sparkle. I have deduced from studying diamonds of these proportions that it's safest to choose a minimum 33° crown angle in a 59/59 or 60/60 stone but I'm sure many people will contradict that opinion. I do think it's a good stone to take a chance on as it could be incredibly beautiful!

 

[ryan62]

Damn I was trying to avoid having to have to do a return. If I asked them to do that before it was set how would I ask that question? Just like you described tilt it back and forth and look for a dark circle?