Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclusion?

katrobinson1

katrobinson1

Rough_Rock
Joined
May 20, 2013
Messages
38
Hey Guys,

First off: Good Old Good is the MOST AMAZING diamond vendor I have come across -- they are the absolute epitome of customer service, kindess, integrity and expertise. I would never imagine visting a local jeweler -- or any other for the matter -- because GOG sets the bar so high. I am truly grateful for PriceScope's recommendations without which I would have never found GOG.

So.

There is an emerald that has caught my eye for good and bad reasons and I can't decide if it's worth putting on my list of serious potential stones.

Emerald
1.74
H
SI1
$9800

QUESTION: Is there a scuff/inclusion right smack in the center of the table? Am I seeing things? Is it dust? Can it be polished out?


GOG sent me the below pictures -- it's in-house -- and I need some of PriceScope's famous feedback (GOG is currently closed otherwise I'd just email them back. This clarity issue is driving me crazy...I need to talk to someone about it lol).

I don't see the middle scuff identified in the magnification pic and I don't see it listed in the GIA report (or maybe it's there and I just don't know what I'm looking at).

The price is very competitive and I am happy with the overall look of the diamond's shape and color. I'm not too particular on clarity -- of course I'm happy with a more flawless stone -- but my main concern is that the diamond looks clean to the naked eye in daily wear since I wear a 7.5 ring finger and feel like I need a bigger stone "look right" on my finger.

I really want a stone between 1.5 and 2.0 carats and think I'm going to need to spend about $11-$12k for anything over 1.6 with F/G color and VVS/VS clarity to ensure no yellow tinge or visible inclusions. But this stone -- while obviously not a F/G or VVS/VS may be be a great value.

Here the link to the entire diamond profile on GOG: http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/10027/

Is this too good to be true? Is it clean to the eye?

Let me know your thoughts!

kat1.jpg

kat3.jpg

kat2.jpg

screen_shot_2013-05-23_at_6.png
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

The "scuff" that your arrow is pointing to appears to be the large feather indicated on the report inclusion plot. It cannot be polished out. It is also probably what makes this stone an SI1. Will you be able to see it in real life? Probably. At what distance? Hard to say. You'll get the best info from GOG when the are open.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Thanks for the reply.

The magnification with arrows are from GOG and the first picture is the one they sent me of the stone in natural light to see if I was interested (didn't meet my color/clarity specs but exceeds my carat wants for my budget).

The scuff I'm talking about is only visible in the first, natural light picture.

The feather is on the far side of the stone but this mark is literally dead center.

Like when I look straight down the middle of the stone I see a dot/mark or something. But I don't see anything marked at the center of the GIA report or the see anything of the magnification pictures.

If it's an inclusion, wouldn't it show up there?
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

I cannot in good conscience recommend this EC.
1. Don't like the facet pattern
2. Large rectangular obstruction that stands out to me
3. Not much fire
4. Very very low crown
5. Huge table = large glare
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

My monitor isn't big enough to see detail. But diamonds are graded face-up. There's a crystal on the inclusion plot. If it's a dark colored crystal and the diamond is tilted or rocked back and forth, you might see the crystal. It's also possible that the camera is focusing on some other part of the diamond and it's just making the crystal look larger than it is irl. Also possible for the facets to reflect the crystal elsewhere in the stone which would account for 2 specks, not one. All questions to ask GOG.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Sorry, I'm on my phone and can't get a clear image of the first pic but do now see the dead center spot you are referring to. Its probably not an inclusion but my guess is that it is due to the issues Chrono mention.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Ah makes sense.

I just thought I was seeing something wrong when there was "nothing" there -- but like you guys said, could be a dead spot, an inclusion reflection, or what Chrono suggested.

Thanks -- now I know I'm not seeing things and will follow-up with GOG :)

Chrono -- are you able to elaborate on the points you mentioned so I can have that knowledge in the future? None of the things you suggested occurred to me so I want to make sure I take this stone as a learning example.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

You know they will call in some stones for you, right? That way they can find 2 or 3 that might better meet your specs and budget. I think it would be very hard to find a good SI1 in an emerald cut. I think VS2 would be about the minimum and V1+ even better.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Oh yes, GOG and I currently reviewing stones in the F/G and VS/VVS range. It was just an option they posited sine they already have it in house and it was in line with my upper carat size.

I thought the diamond look promising after reviewing the specs (the table size seemed high at 73) but other than that and the scuff I didn't notice the drawbacks that Chrono did and just wanted to get some more information on what that user saw to take with me for future evaluations.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

I agree with Chrono, that there are better options available. I suppose it's possible to find an eye clean SI1 EC, but I personally wouldn't consider going lower than a VS2, but as was mentioned, I think that there are other issues going on with this stone then just the clarity and would ask Jon to provide you with a couple other options so that you can compare.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

katrobinson1|1369372947|3452911 said:
Oh yes, GOG and I currently reviewing stones in the F/G and VS/VVS range. It was just an option they posited sine they already have it in house and it was in line with my upper carat size.

I thought the diamond look promising after reviewing the specs (the table size seemed high at 73) but other than that and the scuff I didn't notice the drawbacks that Chrono did and just wanted to get some more information on what that user saw to take with me for future evaluations.
Click to expand...


you decided to stay that high of color? because if your considering this H he might be able to find you a better H in your budget. Or of course an I
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

everyones already decided you on this stone but i just wanted to chuck in my 2 cents. i think ec stones are the leat compatible with a lower clarity personally. I'm very open to lower clarity stones for other cuts but i think ecs have to be perfectly eye clean
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

The 2 rectangular shapes drawn in red is what I term "gappy" and is not an official term. :bigsmile: There are P3 cut issues here which affects the light performance of the EC negatively. You must be able to see each step clearly, evenly and finely. You should not see huge gaps or steps.

Generic starter stats to look for and why:

1. Table around 60 to 65% - Some say this is a personal preference but I strongly believe that even if you prefer a larger table, the rest of the cut should have a good angle combination and should not go beyond 70%. You get to see the steps within the EC more clearly with a larger table but the drawback is the huge table glare and less fire under certain lighting conditions. It is a trade-off. Some don't mind this but most people do.

2. Depth around 60 to 65% - EC lovers fight this one all the time due to the limited choices we are given. This is not to say that there are no beautiful stones outside this range, but that your chances of getting a beautiful EC is much lower. Lower depth generally equates to a bigger face up size but going lower than 60% has other issues such as tilt windowing showing up far more easily and a higher likelyhood of leakage and loss of fire. A deeper stone, if well cut, just means that the stone faces up smaller for its carat weight aka paying for ct weight you don't see.

3. At least VG polish and symmetry.

4. Even girdle, avoiding the extreme thin and extremely thick, and those with a large variation ( very thin to very thick). The girdle is another area where you pay for weight you don't see but sometimes this is something that is unavoidable with the limited number of good ECs.

5. I love cold and icy coloured ECs and if well cut, even an I faces up white. For the budget conscious, G-H-I is about where I would stay. J starts to show tint.

6. ECs indeed show everything so clarity is very important. I have not seen any eye clean SIs but there are some that you can only see when it moves / tilted (the inclusion catches the light, so to speak). If this is going to bother you, staying with a VS1-2 is your best bet.

7. Almost forgot to mention crown height. In general, a higher crown isn't only more pleasing to look at from the side view but helps the stone appear more fiery. If all the other angles are cut correctly, a flatter crown is akin to a single large mirror - one giant reflection back. A higher crown will have larger side facets and behaves like multiple mirrors for more reflections back to the eye.

_6609.jpg
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Awesome Chrono! I have those numbers down from my earlier research but your explanation adds much needed context.

In your (or any one else's opinion) what is the trade off between table/depth and polish/symmetry?

I think I am going to prob come down in carat size and focus more finding the most beautiful stone than on nabbing a 1.5+. In answer to Niel's question: I think so. I think the colorless stones look beauitful but I'm remain open. It all depends on the stone itself.

1.3 G VVS1
P and S: VG/VG
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.30-carat-g-color-vvs1-clarity-sku-30507

1.31 E VVS2
P and S: VG/VG
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.31-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-98885

1.07 E VS2
P and S: E/VG
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.07-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-146561


AND I know some say IF is overkill but this stone looks beautiful. *Drool*
1.02
E IF
P and S: VG/VG
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.02-carat-e-color-if-clarity-sku-53752

I think I might email these to GOG for reference depending on your guys' feedback.

Thanks again for all the help. I really appreciate it. I will not be trading up my engagement ring stone (I'm too sentimental) so I want this purchase to last a lifetime
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

What do you mean by trade off between table/depth?
A VG polish and symmetry will give you a more pleasing looking stone - A better polish diamond means better mirror like finish of the facets and better symmetry means that the facets are aligned properly (no lopsided culet, off-centered lines, etc).

www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.30-carat-g-color-vvs1-clarity-sku-30507
Not keen on this one. I suspect P3 angle issues.

www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.31-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-98885
Has potential

www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.07-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-146561
Could have potential too - will be a bright stone but may have less fire with a large table.

www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.02-carat-e-color-if-clarity-sku-53752
If you have the funds, I'd check this one out. Looks very promising, good pattern, good crown height, faces up correctly for a 1 ct EC (notice that it faces up the same size as the other 1.2 ct ECs) and I think the ASET should be good too.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Niel you are tempting me with carat size! :) The H's you mentioned look a little yellow to me. Maybe it's the JA lighting or maybe I'm just high maintenance :D

What is P3 (pavilion?) and how can you tell?

53752 is within my budget -- a little high but workable.

Is IF worth it?
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Carat size sounds big but when you look at the mm size, they face up as big / small as the other ECs you are considering. Don't look at the ct weight, focus on the physical dimension.

IF.....what a touchy issue. I think IF is definitely overkill but when the pickings are slim, what is a girl to do, you know?

P3 angles
https://www.pricescope.com/journal/performance-and-p3-facets-discussion-about-step-cut-diamonds

Lula's quest to understand ECs
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/role-of-leakage-obstruction-in-step-cut-facet-patterns.189243/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/role-of-leakage-obstruction-in-step-cut-facet-patterns.189243/[/URL]
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

katrobinson1|1369427531|3453238 said:
Niel you are tempting me with carat size! :) The H's you mentioned look a little yellow to me. Maybe it's the JA lighting or maybe I'm just high maintenance :D

What is P3 (pavilion?) and how can you tell?

53752 is within my budget -- a little high but workable.

Is IF worth it?
Click to expand...
That's strange. The deck d one I figured would have too much tint for you but the first one (though chrono doesn't like it). Looked super colorless to me. Oh well. I guess I find those colors (and the size they get you) more flattering. Have you tried on a 1.2 ct ec in person? But to each her own! I'm sure fog will find you something amazing and white.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Reading those links now.

How do I focus on the physical dimension? Is there a ratio to look for? Is this different than the lw ratio?

What do you mean by face up big or small?

Also, why does the center look so weird on this stone? Like an obstruction of the facets
1.5
E VVS2
P and S VG/VG
Table and Depth within 60-65
http://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/emerald-cut/1.50-carat-e-color-vvs2-clarity-sku-22406

Oh do you want the table smaller than the depth or vice-versa? You're saying to keep them both between 60 and 65 but should the table always be larger than the depth?

Okay hopefully I'm not pestering you guys!

I've been researching for weeks -- I suppose I'm trying to cram years of knowledge and expertise.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Just posting to say I am so happy to see Chrono posting! We have our emerald cut expert onboard .. woo hoo!
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

CharmyPoo|1369442302|3453360 said:
Just posting to say I am so happy to see Chrono posting! We have our emerald cut expert onboard .. woo hoo!
Click to expand...

No, definitely not an expert as I am learning along with everyone else. It's just that I had a bit more of a head-start. :bigsmile:
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

What do you mean by face up big or small?
Click to expand...

she means a stone can have the same ctw but have different mm sizes. ct just means how much diamond there is, not how its distributed. A stones thats very deep hides the ctw in the base, so when you look at it from the top, the LxW ratio will be smaller than a stone with less depth and a larger LxW ratio. Meaning essentially, you can buy a 1.3 ct stone that "faces up" the LxW of a 1.5, which can be a good way to save money and get the same "look', or conversely you can get a 1.5 stone thats too deep and face up like a 1.3, so youre paying for something you dont see when set


of course you want it to be a good performer first, but this would be the next thing you look at
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

So helpful!!!

How do you determine that?

I assume it's based off the depth and table and then diamond's LWH but what exactly should I be looking for to have an idea if it's dimensions are promising?
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

For dimensions, look at the listed LxWxD or length x width x depth listed. For the 1.5 ct E VVS2, it is 7.71 x 5.84 x 3.58 mm. This means that the face up size on your finger is around 7.7 x 5.8 mm. This is how big the stone is when worn.

The LW ratio is almost the same thing but not quite. LW is the comparison of the length to the width. In this case, take 7.71 and divide it by 5.84 to give a ratio of 1.32:1. So it isn't a thin and long EC (1.5 is considered thin) and it isn't a fat and squarish EC (1.2 is considered fat). 1.3 to 1.4 is considered classic or traditional. The ratio is a personal preference as to whether one prefers a longer or fatter appearance. There is also a slight difference in the light performance but not by a huge margin, even when both are well cut.

Because the stones listed on JA are not perpendicular to the camera, the tilt causes the facets to look a bit funky to the point where I sometimes have trouble reading their pictures and videos. I have to stop and pause the video often to study the EC and then take the tilt angle into account. Their picture where the stone is straight on helps a lot.

Yes, in general, as long as both the table and depth stays between 60 and 65 is recommended. It doesn't really matter if one is larger than the other as long as the other facets are aligned correctly. Remember that it is more than just the table and depth % that makes an EC sparkle beautifully.

You aren't pestering at all. I'm so happy to meet other step cut lovers on Pricescope. ECs just don't get much appreciation compared to rounds and cushions.

ETA
I saw that you asked about sizes. The below is just an approximation of what ct weights should correspond to what size, presuming a traditional 1.4 ratio. The measurement will differ slightly if the stone is thinner or fatter.
1 ct 7 x 5 mm
1.25 ct 7.5 x 5.5 mm
1.5 ct 8 x 6 mm
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Based on my search I tend to like EC's in the 1.3 to 1.43 range. The ones where I've fallen in love with the shape tend to be around 1.39-1.4

So I have now that my depth and tables should be both be in the 60-65 range.

How do I analyze the mm dimensions to the table and depth percentages. If a stone falls in the 1.3-1.4 ratio with the "right" table/depth ranges is that what determines a "face up" or "face down"

Or wait, are your just saying that although the stone may have a bigger carat weight, it's proportions determine how much bigger it looks "face up?" Sometimes it could just be that the extra carat weight is carried in the depth meaning I pay for weight I don't see?

If that's the case -- do I just go off the lw ration and table/depth ranges or is there something else? In the ones we were discussing, it seems this 1.0 carat has roughly the same dimensions (7mm x 5mm) as the 1.3 carat yet bc it weighs less I'm likely going to see "more" of the 1.0 stone than the 1.3 stone.

Is that right?

If so -- are their ideal dimensions for the ECs at different carat weights or is the above a useful took when comparing individual stones. (ETA: you answered this already! Thank you!)

One last thing: is it better to have a larger table and shallower depth (but still within range)? An worst case, should I go over on the table versus the depth (like say 62 depth and 67 table)?

I still need to research fire, brilliance and scintillation...

I absolutely love emerald cuts. Of course rounds and princesses are so beautiful, especially the ones GOG specializes in-- but just seeing the steps and the mirror effects feels like such understated glamour to me :)
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

All right, knowing that you like a 1.3 to 1.4 ration is great and doable.

Yup, a 1.3 ct and 1.5 ct EC could measure exactly the same in the length and width mm measurement. Why? The 1.5 ct EC could be deeper (higher depth %). Perhaps the girdle is thicker. Perhaps the weight is distributed more to the shoulders so it has fatter windmills (this can be a good thing though). This is exactly what we mean when we say that you are paying for weight you don't see. To figure this out, just compare the measurements given. If the 1.3 ct EC and 1.5 ct EC both measure 7 x 5 mm, that means they are equally big to your eye. 7 x 5 mm is what you will see once the stone is set.

I wish it were all that simple but there isn't any magic formula, hence why I stressed that these are just starting points. Do not sweat it if it veers slightly off course. It still has to be a stone by stone basis, sorting through each individual picture and video. It is painstaking and time consuming but there isn't any choice. When I was shopping at JA for my EC, I input pretty much the same parameters but since I prefer a smaller table, my selection was table between 50 to 65% and depth between 60% to 67%. From there, I looked through pages and pages of ECs, throwing out those that looked wonky right off the bat until I was down to a dozen ECs. Round 2 of elimination brought it down to 3 ECs, which is the limit JA will do ASET testing for me. Based on their recommendation, video, picture and ASET, I chose what I deem as the prettiest of the 3. If lucky, the EC will be under 65% but I would not dismiss a beautifully cut EC that has a depth of 67% either.

The ASET will help you determine brightness and scintillation. The picture will help with the pattern and scintillation. The video gives some idea of all three.

I understand that the learning curve is very steep and not everyone has the time nor interest to dig through so many stones. This is where GOG comes in. Their stones are more expensive than JA but it is because they do the legwork for you.
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Thank you so much!

You helped me make serious progress in understanding what I am looking for (and at) with specs.

Now I'm onto pavilion angles and critical angles :)
 
Re: Going crazy! GOG Emerald Cut 1.7 H/SI1 -- Phantom Inclus

Crown and pavilion angles are never listed on the GIA reports. Even if they are, there is no formulation like rounds that say X crown and Y pavilion will give you a pretty stone. :blackeye:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top