Down To Two Round Diamonds... Thoughts?

[Anjaani3]

Some of you may remember my last few posts where I was debating between a 1.84 J Si1 and a 2.01 J Si2. They were both beautiful but not exactly eye-clean since I could spot the inclusions. I thought about them a lot and showed them to a GIA certified jeweler who commented that while they were beautiful stones but they were on the "heavy" side of the clarity rating and if I could see them with my naked eye and it bothered me, I could probably do a bit better. I knew that although they were "eye clean" from about 8-10 inches, my eyes would always search for the inclusions and I could always bring it up a little closer.. because I'd know that I could find it.

I thought about it a lot and decided I'd rather start over and search again than spend so much money on something that didn't 100% feel right. So the search began again and I'm down to two diamonds. My vendor unfortunately doesn't have the best pictures or idealscope, but since they are really great to work with (B2CJewels) and have prices that I can afford and free return shipping. Hoping these are gorgeous bc my wedding is 2 months away and I need to find my rock!!

I'm turning to trusty PS for some opinions on these stones so I'm sure I've considered everything. Here we go!

Diamond #1: The only issue I could see in the specs is that the crown angle is .5 less than ideal and therefore the HCA comes out to 2.3. If the crown angle were 34 degrees, it would fall under 2. Is that .5 degrees that big of a deal in terms of brilliance? I recalled reading a thread where Gary Holloway mentioned that he himself considers diamonds that fall in the 2-3 range because sometimes the 2 cutoff can be a little strict and the diamonds could still be beautiful.

After seeing the image (which they admit could have been taken much better) I'm a little concerned/curious about what I assume is "surface graining". It's my first time seeing small tiny crystals or grains (or whatever the technical term to describe this is?) Is that what it is? Is such graining usually still eye clean since it's not black? I was also told the fluorescence doesn't have a negative impact, so I'm hoping it makes my J appear whiter. There's also a small cavity but since it isn't on the girdle, I don't think it's a big durability risk and can easily be covered by a prong.

Anyway, are there any other red flags I'm not paying attention to?

ROUND BRILLIANT
Measurements: 8.08 - 8.12 x 4.91 mm
Carat Weight: 1.94 carat
Color Grade: J
Clarity Grade: SI1
Cut Grade: Excellent

PROPORTIONS
Depth: 60.6%
Table: 56%
Crown Angle: 33.5°
Crown Height: 14.5%
Pavilion Angle: 41.2°
Pavilion Depth: 43.5%
Star Length: 50%
Lower Half: 80%
Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted (2.5%)
Culet: None

FINISH
Polish: Very Good
Symmetry: Excellent
Fluorescence: Strong Blue

COMMENTS
Additional twinning wisps are not shown. Surface graining is not shown.






Diamond #2: The specs on this diamond seem pretty ideal, it scores below a 2 on the HCA and is said to be eye clean. Although it appears pretty eye clean in the picture, I guess I'm always wary of SI2's so waiting to see it in person. The girdle thickness isn't an issue either, is it? Any red flags I'm missing?

ROUND BRILLIANT
Measurements 8.06 - 8.08 x 5.02 mm
Carat Weight 2.01 carat
Color Grade J
Clarity Grade SI2
Cut Grade Excellent

PROPORTIONS
Depth 62.1 %
Table 56 %
Crown Angle 34.0°
Crown Height 14.5%
Pavilion Angle 41.0°
Pavilion Depth 43.5%
Star Length 50%
Lower Half 80%
Girdle Slightly Thick, Faceted, 4.0%
Culet None

FINISH
Polish Excellent
Symmetry Excellent
Fluorescence None

COMMENTS
Additional twinning wisps, clouds, internal graining and surface graining are not shown.




So what do you guys think?

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

the 2nd diamond looks to be a better choice. that said, personally, i'm not a fan of these 2 diamonds.

 

[JulieN]

Too much tilt in IS. I suspect that the first one doesn't leak and the second one does, based on both the gray background pictures. Usually when the arrows go white it is sign of leakage, also looks like it has leakage in IS, but the tilt is pretty bad. Also, you know, not uncommon for a 2.01 ct to have symmetry problems (arrows on left side are white.) 1.94 cts, on the other hand, is a less suspicious weight.

 

[Anjaani3]

diamonds-are-friends: would you mind explaining what you don't like about the diamonds? I actually thought they had pretty good specs so I'd love some insight on what I'm failing to consider. Always learning on this forum!

JulieN: As great as B2C has been to work with, they really do take the worst idealscope images So i'm a bit new to understanding idealscopes, light leakage I assume means that the light coming in isn't reflected? And what problems do 2.01 ct's commonly tend to have?

 

[JulieN]

Means light coming in the top goes out the bottom. Stones that have to hit critical marks like 1 ct or 2 ct sometimes have symmetry problems, that is, the angles have high variance. So something with a really safe HCA score like #2 can still have leakage if the angle variance is high. I don't know if the leakage that is in Ideal Scope #2 would go away if the stone wasn't tilted. Maybe, maybe not. Better pictures might not be feasible. I would ask B2C to ship me whichever one had less leakage.

 

[Anjaani3]

Got it. I do wonder though, if the angles had high variance, would they still fall into a GIA Excellent Symmetry rating?

I guess what I'm trying to understand is, I know there will always be minor flaws or undesirable inclusions in most diamonds (unless you're paying top dollar for the creme de la creme) but for diamonds that are ex/ex/ex with angles within the ideal parameters, are they still really so susceptible to poor performance?

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

assuming that the vendor had cleaned the diamond carefully before taking the pictures, the diamond looks cloudy and hazy with very noticeable inclusions. Inclusions aside, proportions aren't appealing in pavilion angles.

the SI2 diamond looks suspiciously clean face up. Having gone through and attain a diploma from GIA in diamond grading, I know the process on how diamonds are graded. the si2 diamonds that I had seen at 10x will Usually have noticeable inclusions. In other cases , clean looking diamonds with hazy issues or have durability concerns will also be assigned the si2 grade. For a 2 carat size, inclusions should be even more obvious.

From both idealscope images and the magnified pictures, i do see inclusions but those don't warrant an SI2 rating. Its suspicious, but i can't rule out that it is still a nice SI2. Without seeing the diamond for myself, i wouldn't commit my money on it.

While you can usually won't get a dud with GIA excellent cut grading, the bottomline for me when i choose a diamond is, why settle for less when there are other stones that will be better choices than these 2?

 

[Anjaani3]

Thanks diamonds-are-friends, I appreciate you taking the time to break down your thoughts for me

In terms of the SI1, I agree, the inclusions or what I'm assuming are surface graining is pretty prominent and the angles are off just a tad from ideal. I've kept it in consideration because based on the report, it was one of the few diamonds I came across that didn't have dark inclusions and instead just had twinning wisps which to my understanding are generally eye clean. Do you think the slight haziness might be the result of the SBF?

The SI2 however is one i'm really hopeful for. I understand that SI2's are generally more included but is it possible this is one of those stones that has more white inclusions than black? What kind of durability issues could be behind the SI2 rating? And can haziness only be seen in person or can that be assessed from magnified images as well? I just remembered I have one more picture of the Si2 stone, maybe you can chime in on if you detect haziness from this picture.



Appreciate the feedback from you and JulieN! It's so great to get help from people with such a wealth of knowledge

 

[diamonds-are-friends]

the grade setter is the feather. You can tell as the Inclusions are placed in order of severity on the inclusion plot. However, there are several feathers plotted on the inclusion plot. Which one is serious or are they all ok? i can't tell from pictures and definitely cannot advice you constructively on this.

Haziness is best seen with extreme spotlighting when the diamond becomes totally dark. it can also be detected with a trained eye under normal lightings but pictures won't help much in this case.

The red flag is that inclusions aren't immediately clear even when magnified. this shouldn't happen at si2 which leaves me with reservations.

While others may disagree, i feel that when making a diamond purchase, one needs to be super sure before making a payment.

 

[Anjaani3]

Thanks for the feedback, I'll take the diamonds to a jeweler and see if they can detect the inclusions that would designate this stone to an si2.It's very possible that these pictures just don't show it, they're not the best pictures to be honest. But if they have mostly white inclusions or tiny dark inclusions, could it be considered an Si2++? I've come across this ++ thing lately where certain stone are described to be at the very top of their category.

Any else have any thoughts on these diamonds?