GIA VS2 NOT Eye Clean

[CUSH]

Recently I saw a GIA VS2 2ct Cushion stone at a store. To my surprise I could see a small black dot in the middle of the stone through the table. This was marked on the diagram of the certificate, but I was very surprised that I could see it with my naked eye. You had to look closely, but it was there. The rest of the stone was completely clean even with a 10x Loupe.

I thought VS2 was 100% eye clean.

Could GIA have made a mistake grading this stone?

What makes a black mark?

 

[AndyRosse]

No, not all VS2s are eye clean. And remember, that some people have eagle eyes, but many don''t.

 

[Mara]

grading is very subjective, it''s done by humans.

someone could be having a strict or bad day and give a VS1 stone a VS2 grade for something small.

on the flip side, you could have someone who feels fairly lenient and gives a SI1 a VS2 grade.

that said, also diamond grading is done from TOP DOWN. that means if an inclusion is not visible from the top of the diamond down (aka looking down into the table of the stone), then it may not be taken into consideration.

that is why sometimes on VS stones you can see inclusions from the SIDE or bottom of the stones if they are unset (or sometimes even set).

this is why I am a huge fan of SI stones because if you can find one that had a strict grader and white inclusions or all white and one very very tiny black inclusion then you can save alot of $$ from a VS grade which does not guarantee anything anyway!

hope this helps!

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 6/10/2005 6:42:18 PM
Author:CUSH
Recently I saw a GIA VS2 2ct Cushion stone at a store. To my surprise I could see a small black dot in the middle of the stone through the table. This was marked on the diagram of the certificate, but I was very surprised that I could see it with my naked eye. You had to look closely, but it was there. The rest of the stone was completely clean even with a 10x Loupe.

I thought VS2 was 100% eye clean.

Could GIA have made a mistake grading this stone?

What makes a black mark?

RE: What makes a black mark?


Most likely it is that the inclusion is a crystal, and in the face up view it appears dark in that the crystal is oriented in a position where the critical angle is viewed face up. To check this you turn the diamond and see if it dark in other positions.

RE: VS = Eyeclean

GIA doesn''t grade based on "eye clean". They grade on how easy it is to see the inclusion using proper dark field illumination and by someone who is skilled in clarity grading of diamonds.

If the mark is "Obvious" at 10 x, then it should be an SI. But.... if the inclusion is small, GIA will consider than in giving the stone the benefit of doubt. Also GIA & AGS grades stones that weight over 1.50 in a method that is more "forgiving" than stones that are less then that carat weight. The industry assumes that an SI or VS stone potentially eye clean. But GIA doesn''t really grade based on eye clean, they grade based on location, size, and ease of seeing the inclusion.

This reply is very BASIC, there are more complex issues concerning this subject.


Rockdoc

 

[CUSH]

Hey Mara,
Doesn''t GIA have 3 pros grade the stone to prevent the "I''m having a bad day" effect? I thought I heard that somewhere.

I am begining to think that I have looked at so many stones that I can catch many inclusions that most would not see. I want eye clean but cant afford VVS. Maybe I am being too critical.

 

[Mara]

I don't know about the 3 pro's thing..but maybe someone else can chime in.

However I do know that people with really good eyes can pick out inclusions so I am not shocked you see something in a VS stone or two.

Honestly, my best suggestion is to start looking for VS stones with WHITE inclusions which are definitely harder to pick out than black carbon inclusions...my last stone was a SI1 that my vendor said should have been VS2 and had all white inclusions. I could never see a darn thing in that stone, even under a loupe!!!

So don't throw out the baby with the bathwater....but further narrow down the VS search!

 

[Drewgasm]

This is probably why in the next couple of weeks when I get my engagement ring for my soon to be wife, I will get an "IF" clarity diamond so I leave no doubt....even if I have to get a "G" color instead of "F" or "E"......+ "IF" diamonds are more rare and I like to be the opposite of everyone else.....lol......everyone says clarity is the LEAST important......the way I look at it...if it wasnt important, "IF" would be the same price as a VS1.......which its clearly NOT........I know Im in the minority......but just thought Id throw in an opinion thats not so popular among most diamond experts.........this is why Im NOT an expert .....


Andrew

 

[AChiOAlumna]

Andrew...

IF is definitely pushing it and will be hard to locate. I have an EC diamond E/VS1 and there is NOTHING that you can see as far as inclusions. Look at the original post.

Date: 6/10/2005 6:42:18 PM
Author: CUSH
Recently I saw a GIA VS2 2ct Cushion stone at a store. To my surprise I could see a small black dot in the middle of the stone through the table. This was marked on the diagram of the certificate, but I was very surprised that I could see it with my naked eye. You had to look closely, but it was there. The rest of the stone was completely clean even with a 10x Loupe.

She says that her certificate SHOWS an inclusion in the same place as the "black dot" that she is now seeing. On my diamond, I made sure that my EC diamond had NO plotted inclusions on the table. Was this a difficult task? Somewhat, but I finally found my VS1 with NO plots on the table and a small inclusion within the "steps," but even that was easily able to be covered by the prongs as they were towards the corner...

When looking at my EC, you cannot see any inclusions from any side...I guess I''m just letting you know that if you look for a diamond that doesn''t have plotted inclusions on the table, then you''ll more than likely have a very "eye clean" and "mind clean" diamond...

 

[moremoremore]

The grading system has nothing to do with eye visibility. Only the amount and nature etc of inclusions.
Welcome to the real world of inclusions! I turned down quite a few vs2 and my current vs2 has a small black dot that is visible. I think that it's the biggest misrepresentation out there...that vs2 can't be seen with the naked eye. YEAH RIGHT. You could have one nice juicy black grader located in the middle of a stone and that makes the grade. Heck ya, you can see it!

A white inclusion may certainly be your friend! It just seems that everyone else finds stones with them. I sure don't.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

As RockDoc says- GIA does not grade on the basis of "eye clean".
In my experience GIA considers only the size and number of imperfections when clarity grading.
For example, I''ve seen SI2, and even I1 stones that required very close examination with a 10X loupe to find the imperfection.
Say a stone has a large feather which is positioned and oriented so that it can only be seen from the side if you hold the stone at an angle.
Such a stone could be a completely eye clean I1.

Conversely, a small percentage of stones with tiny spots are simply unlucky in that the exact position of th teeny spot allows you to see it.
I''ve even seen a VS1 which could be seen without a loupe.
Black ( carbon) spots, or white feather, or imperfection- one is not neccesarily better or worse than the other.

Sometimes black hides better, sometimes white hides better.
It all depends on location and general characteristics of a stone.
After looking at a lot of stones, I would say that only a small percentage of diamonds graded VS2 will have imperfections which can be seen without a loupe.

 

[GFORCE100]

Date: 6/10/2005 11:04:39 PM
Author: Drewgasm
This is probably why in the next couple of weeks when I get my engagement ring for my soon to be wife, I will get an ''IF'' clarity diamond so I leave no doubt....even if I have to get a ''G'' color instead of ''F'' or ''E''......+ ''IF'' diamonds are more rare and I like to be the opposite of everyone else.....lol......everyone says clarity is the LEAST important......the way I look at it...if it wasnt important, ''IF'' would be the same price as a VS1.......which its clearly NOT........I know Im in the minority......but just thought Id throw in an opinion thats not so popular among most diamond experts.........this is why Im NOT an expert .....


Andrew

You may want to drop down to a VVS1-VVS2 which is still a very rare and extremetly high quality clarity. I say this due to the fact that with IF you''ll have much less choice in finding the "right" diamond.

 

[lostdog]

Also, sometimes the same inclusion can go from hard-to-see to hard-to-miss depending on the direction of lighting, from front or back. You might find some that look black with low angle backlighting, but white with the lighting coming from above the girdle plane. When mounted, that's usually where most of the light comes from, so it could be eyeclean for ring purposes.

 

[Drewgasm]

AChiOAlumna and GFORCE100......

I know an "IF" is harder to find and I have to be picky........Im going with BlueNile......they have a lot of good choices on there......Ive thought about dropping down in clairty because of the importance of color......but like I said, an "IF" if is very rare and I really doubt I would be able to see any inclusions........Im between 2 diamonds....(both Princess) one is



Carat weight: 1.28
Cut: Very Good
Color: E
Clarity: VS1
Depth %: 73.3%
Table %: 69%
Symmetry: Excellent
Polish: Very good
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.19x5.95x4.36 mm
Length/width ratio: 1.04



2nd one is........




Carat weight: 1.32
Cut: Signature Princess
Color: G
Clarity: IF
Depth %: 69.5%
Table %: 69%
Symmetry: Very good
Polish: Excellent
Girdle: Medium to slightly thick
Culet: None
Fluorescence: None
Measurements: 6.21x5.97x4.15 mm
Crown height: 12.8%
Length/width ratio: 1.04



Im just not sure if the the "E" is that much greater than the "G"........from what I can gather.....they are pretty close in every other category except color and clarity......Im might just be stubborn with the "IF" because it is more rare....but more important, I want the one that LQQKS the best and has the most brilliance with the naked eye.....

Thanks,

Andrew

 

[icekid]

Date: 6/11/2005 7:22:09 AM
Author: Drewgasm


Im just not sure if the the ''E'' is that much greater than the ''G''........from what I can gather.....they are pretty close in every other category except color and clarity......Im might just be stubborn with the ''IF'' because it is more rare....but more important, I want the one that LQQKS the best and has the most brilliance with the naked eye.....

Thanks,

Andrew

well, looking the best has NOTHING to do with being IF. the brilliance of the stone will be due to the CUT. but if IF is what floats your boat, then go for it. just know that the fact that the clarity is IF does not insure that it will be a nice stone.

 

[GFORCE100]

I've attached some color comparison images to assist you, my eyes do see a difference between a G and and an E and even a G and a F.

It does get hard however between the E-F range to tell them apart.

Cut should be your primary concern, strive for the best and nothing less, satisfaction guaranteed,

As for the clarity, it's like this.......do you prefer size over quality or quality over size? I myself prefer quality over size so I say VVS1-2 but a lot of people are quite happy recommending VS1-VS2 and SI1's. It all depends on a) how much a perfectionist you are and b) the nature of and where the inclusions exist within the given diamond.

Also, if you want the most brilliance then a round diamond will offer the most.

At the end of the day cut should be your first factor for choosing the diamond, and then clarity/color/carat you can pick and choose depending on your preference/budget.

 

[JessesGrl]

I have a VS2 stone that you can see a black dot that gets bigger or smaller as you move the diamond up or down...it is VERY visible from all sides equally...go figure

 

[Drewgasm]

Gforce and Icekid........

Thanks for the response......I just want to say that I "DID" make cut my first priority.....I do agree, cut is the most important....as you can see by my two choices, one is a signature ideal and the other is a very good cut.....the pictures you posted helped out a great deal......thanks for posting them......I just have to admit, buying a stone online (which I am doing) it scares me to hear about people saying about seeing flaws in VS1''s -2''s and SI1''s and 2''s........Im just simply not going to take a chance and hope it MIGHT be eye clean.....I know an "IF" will be......+ its more rare like I said earlier.......thats why Im leaning more towards that one than the E VS1 stone.......If I knew for sure the E VS1 was eyeclean, I would probably get it.....I think both stones will be equally beautiful......but the "IF" and the signature cut might be to hard to pass on....and I can live with the G color....which as others have said, maybe a little more warmer......


Andrew

 

[valeria101]

Well... as you wish.

You are buyin "paper grading" though... neither IF not the "signature" cut grades have much to show for themselves. IF is clear why, and BN doesn''t quite care to explain what makes the signature diamonds special, aside their reputation - either you buy in or not. Most diamonds look nice by themselves - signature or no signature. Unless you have some opportunity to choose, the chance that Blue Nile''s merchandise might dissapoint is slim. I wish they had a way of showing those diamonds.

Just my 0.2

 

[RockDoc]

Date: 6/11/2005 8:58:31 AM
Author: GFORCE100
I''ve attached some color comparison images to assist you, my eyes do see a difference between a G and and an E and even a G and a F.

It does get hard however between the E-F range to tell them apart.

Cut should be your primary concern, strive for the best and nothing less, satisfaction guaranteed,

As for the clarity, it''s like this.......do you prefer size over quality or quality over size? I myself prefer quality over size so I say VVS1-2 but a lot of people are quite happy recommending VS1-VS2 and SI1''s. It all depends on a) how much a perfectionist you are and b) the nature of and where the inclusions exist within the given diamond.

Also, if you want the most brilliance then a round diamond will offer the most.

At the end of the day cut should be your first factor for choosing the diamond, and then clarity/color/carat you can pick and choose depending on your preference/budget.

G Force....

While I certainly do respect the effort in attempting to show color comparisons, the photos you posted ( at least on my monitor) are not even close to how those color should look.

There is a yellow color (even though it''s less than the lower colors in the other photos) that just simply isn''t there on D-F color stones.

Additionally, I don''t know if you''ve just copied images from someone else''s site or if the stones imaged are actually COLOR MASTER SET DIAMONDS. We also don''t know what the lighting source is, which is also critical.

I am not sure it is possible to produce a really accurate depiction of how color actually appears that appear the same on everyone''s monitor.

Color grading is far more complex, than most people realize, and a great majority of jewelers and appraisers do not have ACTUAL GIA / AGS graded Color Comparison Diamonds. The great majority have Cubic Zirconia Master Sets ( because having a comprehensive set of Diamond Color Master Comparison Sets are very expensive to acquire) - CZ''s just aren''t the same material as diamond - and as such are not accurately reliable for grading color.

I do give you credit for the attempt to help others on the forum, but unfortunately I believe it is more misleading than helpful.

Rockdoc

 

[icekid]

Drewgasm- like Ana mentioned, "blue nile signature" doesn''t really mean much. they won''t disclose the angles of the stones; they won''t give you an idealscope picture. so we really have no idea how well cut those stones are. and i personally would not drop to anything with "very good" cut, especially something that has been labeled by blue nile as such. we don''t know where they come up with these designations.

i understand that you are very concerned about inclusions, which is a good reason to work with someone who can give you more information about the stones. this is not blue nile''s niche. if you are so worried about visible inclusions, perhaps it would be wise to buy from a B&M store where you can easily look at many diamonds and check out the inclusions with your own eyes. otherwise, i think it would be wise to work with a vendor who will give you their honest opinion as to whether a stone is eye clean or not. also, they can provide magnified pictures (x40!) so you can see just what the inclusions look like. it sounds like this is something that would make you happy.

or if you want an IF b/c it''s rare, well that is fine too! but i would not buy one because you''re worried about seeing inclusions in VVS2.

Rockdoc- the D-F stones look yellow on my screen too! something definitely is not quite right with the pics.

 

[Rank Amateur]

Hey Mara

A minor point and please correct me if I''m wrong.

Clarity graders look from all sides for inclusions, not just from the top down. The final grade is assigned by the top-down appearance, but it''s not aginst the rules for the grader to check the stone out at all angles including through the pavillion.

R/A

 

[moremoremore]

Well, isn't the whole point of the second image on the GIA cert to show inclusions that break the surface and which are not 'visible' from face up? (if I recall correctly) so the answer would be yes...

p.s. my modern cushion is freakishly brilliant so not only the round is king...and don't forget the jubilee and other h&a fancy cuts GForce that are equally brilliant!


Cush- like the others mentioned, you can totally find a completely eye and mind clean Vs2. But do you love the cushion you've found so much as to overlook the little dot that no one will ever see but you? If not, keep looking..

 

[GFORCE100]

Date: 6/12/2005 4:51:35 AM
Author: RockDoc

Date: 6/11/2005 8:58:31 AM
Author: GFORCE100
I''ve attached some color comparison images to assist you, my eyes do see a difference between a G and and an E and even a G and a F.

It does get hard however between the E-F range to tell them apart.

Cut should be your primary concern, strive for the best and nothing less, satisfaction guaranteed,

As for the clarity, it''s like this.......do you prefer size over quality or quality over size? I myself prefer quality over size so I say VVS1-2 but a lot of people are quite happy recommending VS1-VS2 and SI1''s. It all depends on a) how much a perfectionist you are and b) the nature of and where the inclusions exist within the given diamond.

Also, if you want the most brilliance then a round diamond will offer the most.

At the end of the day cut should be your first factor for choosing the diamond, and then clarity/color/carat you can pick and choose depending on your preference/budget.

G Force....

While I certainly do respect the effort in attempting to show color comparisons, the photos you posted ( at least on my monitor) are not even close to how those color should look.

There is a yellow color (even though it''s less than the lower colors in the other photos) that just simply isn''t there on D-F color stones.

Additionally, I don''t know if you''ve just copied images from someone else''s site or if the stones imaged are actually COLOR MASTER SET DIAMONDS. We also don''t know what the lighting source is, which is also critical.

I am not sure it is possible to produce a really accurate depiction of how color actually appears that appear the same on everyone''s monitor.

Color grading is far more complex, than most people realize, and a great majority of jewelers and appraisers do not have ACTUAL GIA / AGS graded Color Comparison Diamonds. The great majority have Cubic Zirconia Master Sets ( because having a comprehensive set of Diamond Color Master Comparison Sets are very expensive to acquire) - CZ''s just aren''t the same material as diamond - and as such are not accurately reliable for grading color.

I do give you credit for the attempt to help others on the forum, but unfortunately I believe it is more misleading than helpful.

Rockdoc

One tries their best and we cannot always achieve perfection. Reasons why the colors may not look exactly as they would in real-life:

1) Bad monitor settings (contrast, temperature, brightness etc.)
2) 16bit color depth setting in Windows or other OS (use 24/32bit color for 16.7m colors)
3) Shadow mask tube Vs Aperture grill tube (only applies to CRT monitor), the latter produces more life-like colors than the former
4) Poor LCD screen not being able to show true 24/32 bit color and shades or white (various LCD technologies perform differently and what you pay is what you get)
5) People forgetting to degauss their CRT monitor every so often.
6) It''s a JPG image which as many will already know is compressed hence lacks some detail, i.e. it''s never going to be the same as an image used in the media where the TIF (raw image, not compressed) format is widely used. Due to bandwidth considerations a JPG provides a very good trade-off for images on the WWW.

In short there are too many variables to make things "perfect".

Yourself and others are free to post further images should you believe they are better. I for one would love to see more of them. These days it''s easy for anyone and everyone to take photos and then transfer them onto their computer.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 6/12/2005 11:13:28 AM
Author: GFORCE100

Yourself and others are free to post further images should you believe they are better. I for one would love to see more of them.

Just a suggestion... I do not have the material for such a display to create original photographs.

I have yet to see photos eitehr online or off getting anywhere close to showing D-I diamond color grades realistically. The variation is easily swamped by the rough color senzitivity of the medium and then, the color correction of various monitors - what not.

These seems to be one happy exception to this rule: colors show somewhat better in the rough, especially if a dozen or so stones are piled up to show a grade. Individual grades do not show even then, IMO, but the color groups (D-F colorless, G-I near and not quite) do in a suggestive manner. Since color grades represent a quality of the material not conditional on the optical effects of cut diamonds, perhaps presenting color grades in the rough would also be a more fare representation, not just practical.

Obviously, I do not have a pile of dimond rough in the closet to give an example of what I am trying to say. There are several on the site of Kenneth Glasser (diamondrough.com) - definitely along this line, but not taylored to GIA color groups and... under copyright, of course.

 

[lostdog]

BR>

One tries their best and we cannot always achieve perfection. Reasons why the colors may not look exactly as they would in real-life:

1) Bad monitor settings (contrast, temperature, brightness etc.)

2) 16bit color depth setting in Windows or other OS (use 24/32bit color for 16.7m colors)

3) Shadow mask tube Vs Aperture grill tube (only applies to CRT monitor), the latter produces more life-like colors than the former

4) Poor LCD screen not being able to show true 24/32 bit color and shades or white (various LCD technologies perform differently and what you pay is what you get)

5) People forgetting to degauss their CRT monitor every so often.

6) It's a JPG image which as many will already know is compressed hence lacks some detail, i.e. it's never going to be the same as an image used in the media where the TIF (raw image, not compressed) format is widely used. Due to bandwidth considerations a JPG provides a very good trade-off for images on the WWW.


In short there are too many variables to make things 'perfect'.


Yourself and others are free to post further images should you believe they are better. I for one would love to see more of them. These days it's easy for anyone and everyone to take photos and then transfer them onto their computer. [/quote]

It's not that you need perfection (which by definition cannot be achieved if you want to slice things finely enough).

Your pictures, though they do demonstrate that as the grades progress through the alphabet the colors become yellower, may be somewhat misleading as to the actual colors those grades possess. And it's not my monitor or the Joint Photo Experts Group algorithm at work.

I think the comment earlier was that if it's not a master set, it is probably a misleading just on that basis. And if they are not diamonds, even more so.

I don't think anybody doubts your intentions as being good. Still, if you can get that much color into the photo of a D, it seems reasonable to conclude that the G comes across exaggerated in color, too. And the rest. Maybe it's the lighting. Maybe it's the color of the ceiling or walls in the room where the pictures was taken, or even the shirt somebody was wearing. Is I relatively more yellow than E, as you show? Yes. Is it that yellow? Well, the E isn't that yellow, either, so how can anyone tell what color and H or an I would be?

So, the caution being offered is that the colors on "live" stones don't seem to match very well with how your examples came through, admittedly on my screen (where I can assure you photos of D diamonds have, in the past, looked noticeably more colorless), or via the retinas (which are not subject to most of the technical perfection issues you raised).

The differences in color can be very subtle, enough to be overwhelmed by the process of photographing them and the chain by which they are displayed over the internet. It's not whether they are "perfect" or "perfectly accurate" (which being grownups we all know isn't going to happen), it's whether they reasonably represent the colors you would see in person.

Nobody with knowledge of the subject seems to think diamond color can under normal casual conditions be shown with full accuracy over the web, and the reasons are as much on the displaying end (for reasons pointed out) as on the image creation end.

Almost any set of photos runs the same risk. It's not that anyone wants to pick on you personally. Some people, (not as expert as you in how your photos and all others are not perfect) will come along trying to select diamonds, view those photos, and in the absence of statements to the contrary, take the images as being "perfect" (or at least "good enough") displays of the actual colors. The colors in those images, on ideal calibrated degaussed monitors even, would still be misleading to a significant degree. Not entirely, but significantly.