Does anyone out there LIKE inclusions?

[Indylady]

I've been poking around Ebay and noticing a lot of included, 'rock salt' diamonds being sold right and left. Other cheaply sold diamonds seem to having large amounts of florescence, a noticeable feather or large black inclusion, or less than popular coloring. At first I wondered who was buying them and what they were doing with them...but then I realized that I actually kind of liked a lot of the diamonds I was seeing. I feel like they have a 'personality' and that I'd be able to pick mine out of a crowd; the one I like in particular I'm thinking about purchasing one to have bezel set into something by an Etsy seller for an interesting piece. I probably wouldn't go for a heavily included diamond in an expensive or especially sentimental piece, but I would like to 'test drive' them so to speak in other pieces.


Anyone else out there that likes inclusions? Has anyone else felt this way? Do you have an included diamond that you love?

 

[purselover]

I have a family ring with visible inclusions that I wore as an ering while resetting another stone, and honestly I didn''t mind them at all I think it''s still a beautiful ring.

 

[LilyKat]

I don''t in general, but I remember being at a jewellers buying something else, and the owner mentioned a diamond that had a ruby inclusion (a real tiny ruby within the diamond). I thought that was pretty great.

I wouldn''t like a heavily included diamond, but one single visible speck wouldn''t be a problem - like a birthmark, an identifiable sign.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

When I was 16, my boyfriend at the time gave me a maul store heart pave ring for Christmas. Very, very cheap--$99.00 special! The diamonds were a hot mess...very clouded and you could see the black inclusions. And, as much as it now embarrasses me to admit it, I thought the cloudy ones looked like really bubbly 7-Up and I thought they were beautiful.

Now...not so much.

 

[kenny]

I think most people who say they like inclusions or low color actually just like getting a larger diamond for a given price.

Reasoning that they like/prefer inclusions or low color is a way of rationalizing their purchase, turning a negative into a positive.

I didn't say everyone.
I said most.

 

[elrohwen]

My stone has been in my FI's family for a few generations and is a gorgeous example of an OEC (with the more transitional flowery pattern). A great example except for the chip in the pavillion and a few black spots. Honestly, the inclusions don't bother me one bit and I don't even notice them 99% of the time. I even try to show them to other people and they say I'm exaggerating this giant chip because they can't see it at all

The black spots tend to blend with the facet pattern because there's so much natural contrast in the facets that you don't notice a tiny black spot unless you hold it just right and know where to look.

If I were buying another antique stone, I wouldn't hesitate to look at one with a few small inclusions as long as they weren't glaringly obvious at 12" or so. If I have to get up close and personal with the stone to see them, I don't really mind because it's the overall look of the stone and the facet pattern I'm looking at. I think it adds character to an antique stone and is something that comes with the territory (especially a few girdle chips and other signs of wear and tear).

If I were buying a new stone, especially one for an engagement ring, I would absolutely look for one that was eye clean. To me there's a big difference in what is acceptable for an antique vs. new stone. And I wouldn't buy frozen spit whether it was antique or new.

 

[zhuzhu]

I don''t like visible inclusions in diamonds, or other white stones, but I do like them in color stones. I think inclusions in nice pattern add a lot of character to color gems!

 

[Indylady]

Date: 9/1/2009 12:57:27 PM
Author: Italiahaircolor
When I was 16, my boyfriend at the time gave me a maul store heart pave ring for Christmas. Very, very cheap--$99.00 special! The diamonds were a hot mess...very clouded and you could see the black inclusions. And, as much as it now embarrasses me to admit it, I thought the cloudy ones looked like really bubbly 7-Up and I thought they were beautiful.


Now...not so much.

Italia, that is just adorable!!

 

[D&T]

its ok, as long as I can''t see it right when i look at my diamond, my first one has a cloud inclusion, rather large, I didn''t have to go searching for it, it was right smack there, my second diamond has a cloud as well, but I can''t see it with my loupe so I like it, I know that its my diamond. Really depends on the inclusion though I don''t like seeing black specs all over

 

[Indylady]

Date: 9/1/2009 1:13:23 PM
Author: kenny
I think most people who say they like inclusions or low color actually just like getting a larger diamond for a given price.


Reasoning that they like/prefer inclusions or low color is a way of rationalizing their purchase, turning a negative into a positive.


I didn''t say everyone.

I said most.

I don''t think its a ''most''. I think different people have different preferences. Sure, some like colorless or near colorless diamonds, but others like yellows, pinks, or other colors. I wouldn''t call a low color a negative; same goes for inclusions. I also wouldn''t call a larger size a positive.

However, if a person sees a diamond as a status symbol, and is trying to get the most ''status'' for his/her buck, I do think that you are correct.

 

[Indylady]

Date: 9/1/2009 1:40:15 PM
Author: D&T
its ok, as long as I can''t see it right when i look at my diamond, my first one has a cloud inclusion, rather large, I didn''t have to go searching for it, it was right smack there, my second diamond has a cloud as well, but I can''t see it with my loupe so I like it, I know that its my diamond. Really depends on the inclusion though I don''t like seeing black specs all over

That ''I know it is my diamond'' is part of the reason why I find an included (even very slightly included) stone to be romantic.

 

[kenny]

I don't like inclusions but don't want to pay for IF diamonds.
My sweet spot is VVS1 to VS1. (Actually the inclusion in my VS1 diamond bothers me a bit.)

Actually the ACA is VVS1 with one single itsy bisty pinpoint near the girdle.
I like having it there to verify the stone is mine.

An IF would make me nervous; it could be swapped it with a fake and I'd never know.
It is reassuring to look into my VVS1 and see that one tiny dot.
I think for this reason I actually prefer VVS1 to IF.

So I guess I DO like inclusions.

 

[AdiS]

Date: 9/1/2009 1:43:36 PM
Author: szh07

Date: 9/1/2009 1:13:23 PM
Author: kenny
I think most people who say they like inclusions or low color actually just like getting a larger diamond for a given price.


Reasoning that they like/prefer inclusions or low color is a way of rationalizing their purchase, turning a negative into a positive.


I didn''t say everyone.

I said most.

I don''t think its a ''most''. I think different people have different preferences. Sure, some like colorless or near colorless diamonds, but others like yellows, pinks, or other colors. I wouldn''t call a low color a negative; same goes for inclusions. I also wouldn''t call a larger size a positive.

However, if a person sees a diamond as a status symbol, and is trying to get the most ''status'' for his/her buck, I do think that you are correct.

Agreed. With most of my diamond purchases I just fell in love with the particular diamond - colour, inclusions and all.

 

[kenny]

I'm all for respecting diversity - but you can't argue with supply and demand and how it affects prices.

If every diamond D through Z or IF through I3 was equally desirable then they would all be priced the same.

Again I'm all for respecting diversity, but to imply that all diamonds are equally desirable is putting political correctness above logic.

 

[lyra]

Date: 9/1/2009 1:13:23 PM
Author: kenny
I think most people who say they like inclusions or low color actually just like getting a larger diamond for a given price.

Reasoning that they like/prefer inclusions or low color is a way of rationalizing their purchase, turning a negative into a positive.

I didn''t say everyone.
I said most.

Lol. Sweeping generalization there.

 

[kenny]

Date: 9/1/2009 3:30:35 PM
Author: lyra

Date: 9/1/2009 1:13:23 PM

Author: kenny

I think most people who say they like inclusions or low color actually just like getting a larger diamond for a given price.



Reasoning that they like/prefer inclusions or low color is a way of rationalizing their purchase, turning a negative into a positive.


I didn''t say everyone.

I said most.

Lol. Sweeping generalization there.

Well not really, since I used the word most, not all.

 

[Black Jade]

I don''t like inclusions.
I would make an exception for the ruby included diamond, but i don''t like inclusions if I can see them and I would agree with Kenny that most people don''t unless a) they are looking to get something that would otherwise be out of budget or b)they don''t know better, never having seen a diamond with no eye visible inclusions.

If you''ve only seen diamonds with black spots in them, or diamonds that look cloudy and dull, you could assume that that was diamonds were supposed to be like, and then not mind, but I can''t imagine that the moment you saw a sparkly stone, you wouldn''t prefer that.

I don''t fault people for being in category #1--I have considered buying an I1 stone myself after seeing some of the pretty examples on Pricescope BUT would consider it the way I am thinking that most would consider it. On the condition that the inclusion could be pronged, or was underneath the stone and not obvious, and on the condition that the diamond was still sparkly and lively and well-cut. And the reason I was considering it was solely because of price. And I was not considering it for an e-ring, but for a pendant. I didn''t end up buying it.

Honestly, if I wanted to be sure I could identify my stone, I could do that with an SI stone or a VS stone using a loupe, which is the way I''d prefer it.

I am sure there are exceptions to this general rule, but I''m sure that this is a general rule--the selling points of SI stones are the better price and then only if the inclusions are not ''eye visible''.

 

[Black Jade]

Some stones on eBay do look interesting--I''m looking at some, too, but only from sellers I''ve seen people on Pricescope say they like.

 

[gemgirl]

LOL! I had to make sure I read the question right.

The only inclusions I''ll tolerate are the ones you have to go on a search mission with a 10X loupe to find in a VS2 stone or an impeccably clean SI1.

Do I like inclusions?

 

[kenny]

I would like a diamond with an inclusion that looks just like ELVIS!

Seriously I HAVE seen pics of diamond crystals within diamonds or garnets in diamonds.
Now, those ARE cool!
I wonder if they sell for a premium, or how GIA would grade the clarity of a 6 mm round diamond with a beautiful 1 mm red garnet right in the middle.

 

[jewelerman]

I own a few colored stone gems for no other reason then I like how they look because of their heavy flaws through out the body of the stone.EXAMPLE...there are some major flawed emeralds and rubies that are made into beads that are very interesting to look at when the light hits them!

 

[movie zombie]

color stones, yes.
diamonds, no.

mz

 

[beaujolais]

A few inclusions are fun. If I wanted perfect, I''d get a cz/synthetic.

In a diamond a few are fine, a dot of pepper (carbon) or two is fine (makes it easy to ID your stone) and a few or even many in colored stones are fine and add interest.

I don''t like feathers, though. They are not safe.

 

[beaujolais]

-- I think most people who say they like inclusions or low color actually just like getting a larger diamond for a given price. ---

Totally, totally, totally, totally Incorrect.

 

[Beacon]

I like inclusions as long as I can only see them with a loupe. I do not want an IF stone at all. I like using the inclusions to ID my stone.

Last reset my stone looked so different that I was not sure at first if it was the same stone. Seriously. Even though I totally trusted the jeweler, the look was totally different. We put the stone on the microscope and sure enough, there were all the inclusions, just like they should be. This made me feel very good as I knew it was my same diamond.

 

[Abril]

I do. Black ones are the best.

 

[Lisa Loves Shiny]

Date: 9/1/2009 1:13:23 PM
Author: kenny
I think most people who say they like inclusions or low color actually just like getting a larger diamond for a given price.

Reasoning that they like/prefer inclusions or low color is a way of rationalizing their purchase, turning a negative into a positive.

I didn''t say everyone.
I said most.

I don''t think so Kenny. I saw two M/P color diamonds this year that took my breath away. It wasn''t what I expected, but darn they were hot. One was a 2 ct. RB and the other a 1 carat OMC. You have to realize that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We can be instructed that white, inclusion free diamonds are what beauty really is, but when you see a diamond that makes you take a quick breath, and your pulse beats faster then to heck with marketing, and the status quo. But then again I adore tall lean men with "Polish" noses. lol

Lisa

 

[MichelleCarmen]

I''m not a fan of visable inclusions. I''m a perfectionist with OCD and it would bug the crap out of me to see a fleck of something inside my diamond(s) every time I looked down upon it.

 

[AdiS]

Date: 9/1/2009 2:02:23 PM
Author: kenny
I''m all for respecting diversity - but you can''t argue with supply and demand and how it affects prices.

If every diamond D through Z or IF through I3 was equally desirable then they would all be priced the same.

Again I''m all for respecting diversity, but to imply that all diamonds are equally desirable is putting political correctness above logic.

I think no one said all diamonds are equally desirable. At least I don''t know anyone who''s greatest dream in life is to own an I3 ball of frozen spit.

What I''m saying is that yes, price and size do matter in our decision what to buy and what to compromize with (colour, clarity, etc.) But sometimes the personality of a diamond means more. As we say in Bulgaria "There are passengers for each train", meaning what you find undesirable might seem irresistible to someone else.

 

[DiamanteBlu]

If a stone is faceted, I don't like to see inclusions [unless it is an emerald, in which case I can tolerate a few]. In a cabochon, however, I think inclusions can look cool and give the stone character.