Feedback on Specs please

[bluejays1]

Hi there - been searching and researching online and was recommended to a 1.71 RB GIA EXEXEX that has the following specs.

The HCA is 1.4 and my concern is with the VS2 rating - there are a couple twinning wisps in the table - they look clear but uncertain if they will have impact.

Dimensions:
Table: 58%
Depth: 60.8%
PA: 40.8
CA: 34.5

Given the dimensions the seller was recommending this, over upgrading to a VS1 or VVS2 to reduce the inclusions. any thoughts?

thx for your help!

 

[lovedogs]

Vs2 should be safely eye clean, but of course there are always exceptions. Do you have any videos of the stone? IS/ASET images?

 

[tyty333]

Numbers look good...ditto @lovedogs on video/images.

 

[kmoro]

Yup, those numbers look great but need to be proven with images. With the VS2 clarity, I think you need some good pictures as well. Can you post the inclusion plot?

 

[sledge]

Is the stone on hold/reserve? If so, can you post a link so you can view the video, pictures and also look at the clarity plot on the certification?

Generically speaking, a VS2 is eye clean to the vast majority of people. So odds are greatly in your favor a VS2 is eye clean. Getting the other information would help us confirm it.

 

[bluejays1]

 

[bluejays1]

here is the characteristics map. I am just concerned with the table being impacted as the inclusions are right in the middle of the diamond... i am trying to locate the video or picture to upload. thx for the feedback.

 

[bluejays1]

it looks like there are some darker spots around the 10pm section on the table.

 

[bluejays1]

 

[lovedogs]

it looks like there are some darker spots around the 10pm section on the table.

I see what you mean, but remember this image is VERY magnified. IRL my guess is that it won't be noticible. If it's from JA, zoom out to real world size. Sometimes I think the hugely magnified pics can scare people unnecessarily bc everything looks so big.

 

[tyty333]

Those inclusions are so small...at VS2 with those inclusions, I would think it is eye-clean. I dont think you have anything to worry about.

 

[sledge]

I understand your concerns @bluejays1. I'm not a fan of inclusions on the table either, as many here aren't. And while I have seen some SI1's that would meet my own "mind clean" issues, most the time I prefer a VS2+ clarity stone even though I realize it's overkill.

I would agree in the fact the images you are viewing are extremely magnified, and is likely causing unnecessary concern. However, I too think you are suffering from similar mind clean issues like I also have.

Have you asked the vendor to pull the stone, and confirm it's eye clean? Keep in mind, there is no universally accepted definition of eye clean. Many vendors consider eye clean to mean no inclusions visible within 10" of the top of the diamond using 20/20 vision under good lighting conditions.

If you or your other half tends to have great vision, you can modify this definition as long as the vendor understands it clearly. For instance, when I was shopping I narrowed my definition to mean: no inclusions visible from within 6" of the top or sides of the diamond using 20/20 vision under good lighting conditions.

Assuming the vendor provides an acceptable answer, I would then request an ASET or idealscope (IS) image to confirm light performance. Assuming those check out, then I'd be familiar with the return policy and order the diamond loose for visual inspection before you have the expense of setting it and presenting to your other half.

Also, read this thread, as the OP of that thread had a stone with similar proportions (which are fantastic) but the IS image picked up oddities in light performance.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-is-this-ideal-scope-image.247367/