Fluorescence Opinions

[FalleN]

I plan on purchasing a D color, SV1 .61 carat ideal cut round stone within the next couple of weeks.

My question is...how "strong" is strong blue in a stone of the above mentioned quality? It will be set in platinum...

I''m looking for any and all advice concerning fluorescence in an ideal cut, colorless stone...





Also, should I expect to be able to spot ANY inclusions at the SV1 level? A couple of the certs I''ve looked at show inclusions smack in the middle of the stone, but I figure if they are not visible to the nake eye, it shouldn''t matter where they are.....



Thanks for the advice!

 

[Madam Bijoux]

Hello and welcome.
One of my diamonds (E color) has strong blue flourescence. It isn't noticeable in my stone (which is set in platinum). It does make some stones look milky in certain light conditions. Some stores won't sell flourescent diamonds, but I look on it as an extra added attraction.

 

[belle]

do you mean SI1 or VS1? i think you''ve combined the two, and there can be quite a difference. depending on the lab that grades the diamond, you should not be able to see inclusions at the vs level. there is a chance that there would be inclusions that can be seen at the si level, but it would depend on the type and size.

as for fluorescence, strong blue is noticable in a ''d'' color stone, but that doesn''t mean it is a bad thing. i actually prefer med/strong blue fluoro.

for the record, sometimes strong blue fluor. can cause the stone to have a hazy appearance, but it is pretty unusual.

 

[Demelza]

A VS1 should definitely be eyeclean, particularly in that size stone. In very large stones, it might be possible to see inclusions at the VS2 level, but I believe that is unusual. Technically speaking, VS quality stones are eyeclean by definition. I would be very surprised if this stone was an exception. If you're worried, though, ask the vendor to be sure.

ETA -- Belle brings up a good point. I assumed you meant VS1. SI1 should still be eyeclean if it's a true SI1. Depends on the lab (GIA and AGS are considered the most accurate).

 

[FalleN]

It will definately be a VS1, I was just making sure the inclusions on the cert will not be visible to the naked eye. I wouldn''t expect them to be...

I''m torn between no fluorescence and strong blue!

 

[FalleN]

Also, it will be graded by the GIA....

 

[rocks&purses]

Hello! I am also new here. I currently have a .63 carat center stone(looking to upgrade) and it is graded by the GIA as I color and SI2 and it is absolutely eye clean, shiny, and colorless in my view. So, if yours is VS1 at .61 then you really should not be able to see inclusions with the naked eye if I can''t see any in mine. It is true that the size plays a role in seeing these inclusions too. But I''m telling you, I am getting cross-eyed now looking into mine and I can''t see any.

Questions for the experts: Would an ideal cut more likely show inclusions more than a non-ideal cut? Thanks!

Good luck!

 

[Lorelei]

One of the regular posters said a while back that fluoresence can give a diamond a bit more "oomph" and make it a bit more "plugged in." IMO that is a great explanation and I can see exactly what she means with my brand new diamond - fluoresence is an added bonus.

Of course as it is Ideal Cut doesn't hurt either

There is an old thread called - I think - Meet Big Blue Anniversary Upgrade. If I remember rightly that diamond is a D and there are some great pictures showing fluoresence in action. I think it may be found in Show Me The Ring or the engagement ring folder in the above forums.

 

[DiamondExpert]

"Would an ideal cut more likely show inclusions more than a non-ideal cut?"...No.

Fallen - it would be necessary to see the stone, particularly in direct, full sunlight. It''s possible that, if there is an effect, it might be subtile, and you would need to know if it concerns you or if it''s a non issue. There may also be a slight discount (a few %) for stones with strong fluorescence.

 

[ecf8503]

I have a 0.74ct D color with strong blue fluoresence, and I love it. Here's the link to mine.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Hey everyone!
Regarding Strong Blue Fluorescence: There are no hard fast rules- but here''s a few guidelines....

Fluorescence can help the look of a diamond in the H-I-J-K-L range to look whiter.
ANY stone with strong blue fluorescence may exhibit a milky appearance- this occurs in 20% +- of strong blue and even a smaller percentage of Medium blue
In D-E-F colors fluorescence is not a positive thing- although it may be neutral as far as the appearance of a D-E-F color diamond- it will affect the price.

Again- there''s nothing neccesarily wrong woht a D-E-F color stong blue, but it should be priced accordingly.
On stones in the H-I-J-K-L range, there''s no price differential as long as it''s not a "milky" diamond.

Imperfection in Ideal cut diamonds: Depends on location and nature of imperfection.
Some people feel that a better cut hides imperfection, I don''t agree with that.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 9/12/2005 2:57:02 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

Again- there's nothing neccesarily wrong woht a D-E-F color stong blue, but it should be priced accordingly.

If you dig through Pricescope a bit, than you may find a nice story behind these priceing habits - not much to do with how the stones look, but with an old (and now quiet, as much as I can tell) debate of wha lighting should be used for grading and such.

I really doubt you will find anything wrong with the stone. Strong sunlight brings about some effect of fluorescence, but that's rarely hazyness. Some describe it as 'more blue in the diamond's fire'. I am not sure what works - it is something rather subtle. 'Very strong' fluorescence is itself a range of intensity and some extreme case may turn out a rather interesting exibit.

Is there a return policy? IMO, it is worth trying this one out by all means.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Ana- the way I see it is like this:
On average, a buyer for a D/VS1 is far more particular than a J/VS1 shopper- after all, in a one carat size,a J/VS1 is half the price (or less) of a D/VS1. The difference grows as you get larger- by the time we reach 5 carat sizes a J is about 1/3 the price of a D.
Add this to the fact that lower colors are more likely to benefit and that''s why I see strong blue D and E color stones trading as much as 10% below those with faint or none.

As far as if any given particular strong blue diamond its dull....it''s a case by case basis. There are stones which are noticably blue ( in a bad way) in any lightuing situation.

 

[perry]

There are two factors to consider:

1) Does the flouresence cause a "milky" look in the diamond in sunlight (or other high UV light).

If so, then it would likely distract from the look of the diamond.

2) Do you like a diamond that would glow slightly blue in sunlight, and definetely blue in some nightclub settings?

The second factor is a personal choice.

Long ago people in fact preferred "Blue - White" diamonds. This is typically a D or E, or perhaps an F diamond with Stong Mediurm Blue to Strong Blue fluoresence. The best ones also do not have the milky look. These diamonds had a preimium price due to the demand and rarity.

However, it turned out there was a lot of fraud - a lot of diamonds were sold as "Blue-White" that wern''t.

Big scandle, and eventually the Federal Goverment steped in and wrote a regulation on what could be called a "Blue-White" diamond (yes, it is still legal to use the term - but only if you actually have such a diamond).

However, by then the scandal had destroyed the public desire for "Blue-whites" (most people associated the term "Blue White" with a rip off) and very few jewlers will even mention the name today (even if they actually have one).

Personally, I think they are cool.

I think you problaby are looking at one.

If it doesn''t turn milky it may be an amazing stone - if you like the effect. If you don''t like the effect - then it''s not the stone for you.

The jeweler should be able to put it under a UV and tell you if there is any milkyness. Altenately, send it to an appraiser and ask them to check that.


Perry

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Hi Perry,
I''d be interested in seeing the Federal regulations you speak of.

Viewing under a UV lamp is not going to answer the question of desirability- any diamond with fluorescence will react to a UV light source- it''s the ones that look milky under normal light that we need to watch out for.

 

[Marlene]

This is facinating,

I thought that blue/white was a good thing.

I suppose ''D'' being perfectly white is pretty unbeatable. Is it posssible to have an excellent looking medium flourecense even nicer then the ''D'' assuming you like a blue tinge.

M

 

[perry]

David:

It is part of 16 CFR part 23:

§23.14 Misuse of the term “blue white.”

It is unfair or deceptive to use the term “blue white” or any representation of similar meaning to describe any diamond that under normal, north daylight or its equivalent shows any color or any trace of any color other than blue or bluish.

For full details here is a good link to 16 CFR part 23. Anyone in the jewerly business - and any "educated" consumer should be aware of what it says.
www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/cfr/title16/part23.html

Note that there are currently proposed revisions for changes related to the the definition of "Platuinum." Anyone interested should do a search on the CFR Homepage for proposed regulations - and you probably still have time to comment.

Concerning the determination of "milkyness." I have been told many times by many people (who should know) that this can be determined under artificial lighting - that has a high UV content.

The UV content of sunlight can vary substaintially depending on the time of day, where you are on earth (somewhat related to latitude), and the season of the year. there is a lot of very good information on the web about this (search under UV); but I don''t have the websites handy.

Perry

 

[FalleN]

Well, considering what has been said here I think I will go with an all white, No fluorescence diamond...While I think that the Blue would be a neat feature, since I''m buying the diamond sight unseen I think I will stick with the basics....

 

[Richard Sherwood]

Date: 9/12/2005 2:57:02 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

ANY stone with strong blue fluorescence may exhibit a milky appearance- this occurs in 20% +- of strong blue and even a smaller percentage of Medium blue

Dave, I believe you're a little high on your estimate here.

The "overblues" which exhibit haziness, oiliness or a milky appearance are almost always found in the "very strong" category. Many could be more correctly characterized as having "extremely strong" fluorescence.

GIA has estimated that less than 3% of "very strong" blue fluorescent diamonds exhibit the negative characteristic of haziness.

I point it out so people will understand how very rare this negative characteristic actually is.

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 9/13/2005 10:05:28 AM
Author: Richard Sherwood

Date: 9/12/2005 2:57:02 PM
Author: diamondsbylauren

ANY stone with strong blue fluorescence may exhibit a milky appearance- this occurs in 20% +- of strong blue and even a smaller percentage of Medium blue

Dave, I believe you''re a little high on your estimate here.

The ''overblues'' which exhibit haziness, oiliness or a milky appearance are almost always found in the ''very strong'' category. Many could be more correctly characterized as having ''extremely strong'' fluorescence.

GIA has estimated that less than 3% of ''very strong'' blue fluorescent diamonds exhibit the negative characteristic of haziness.

I point it out so people will understand how very rare this negative characteristic actually is.

yeah, I thought that was high.

 

[Giangi]

I''ve seen very few stones with such a strong fluorescence to make them look hazy or dull. As Rich said, I think the 3-5% figure is correct. Most of the times fluorescence has an helpful effect on the looks of the stone (especially on H colors or loewr), or, at very least, a funky effect

. I, for one, love the look of a medium or strong fluorescence diamond.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Perry: Thanks for showing me the FTC guidelines- interesting!

I have not seen people using the term "Blue White" in quite a while.

Rich- Of course I would defer to GIA''s figure. I was using the 20+- based on personal experience- but I''ve never actually plotted this out. I guess the "bad " fl stones stick out in my mind.
The small percentage of fluorscent stones which are a problem- and I have seen stones graded "Strong Blue" which fall into this category - are immediately apparent- no special UV lighting is neccesary on the stones which are milky. Of course it''s really apparent under a UV light.
But the larger percentage of non problem strong blue fluorescent diamonds will look just like the milky ones in a dark room under a UV light.

 

[ecf8503]

Date: 9/13/2005 9:01:19 AM
Author: FalleN
Well, considering what has been said here I think I will go with an all white, No fluorescence diamond...While I think that the Blue would be a neat feature, since I''m buying the diamond sight unseen I think I will stick with the basics....

Noooooooooooooo! Seriously this info hasn''t convinced you that fluoresence isn''t a bad thing 97% of the time? Can you see this stone? Is it from a vendor with a return policy? That''s what I did with mine - I too was hesitant about the SB in my D, but once I saw it in person I found I actually loved it! Don''t let the fluoresence turn you off if you haven''t even seen it yet!

 

[perry]

I should probably clarify one other item in relation to the Federall guidelines on the use of "Blue white" diamonds.

The issue is how much UV is in "North Daylight" (or equivelent).

Entier threads have been written on this. Marty Haske is a proponent of "very little" UV; GIA seems to have changed the standards on this over the years (and I have seen documentation to this effect).

So other than the obviouis that "north daylight" should have some UV - otherwise there would be no possibility of a "Blue White" diamond at all, it is not obvious at all how much UV should be in north daylight at all.

I personally expended a lot of research time and effort on the subject. The UV content varies hugely depending on location, time of year, time of day, and weather.

In the end; I personally feel that a formal definition of "north daylight" really needs to be made at some level. I also believe that it would be best to define it without any UV such that all diamond grading is unifiorm as it is very easy to block all UV from any lightsource (on some diamonds the presence of UV will color shift the diamond to a better grade).

Perry