HELP - Is this stone worth it?

[xilli]

Hi everyone,

Currently looking at purchasing an engagement ring and have a few concerns as I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to diamonds. I initially went into a jeweler with my partner and she loved a ring made by Scott K which I am now in negotiations over. The jeweler stated the center diamond had the following specs -

STYLE - ROUND BRILLIANT
CARAT - 1.95
COLOR - F
CLARITY - SI 1

I placed a deposit on the condition that the report more or less reflected what they claimed the stone would be and it has come back with the following IGI report -

ROUND BRILLIANT
7.75 X 7.78 X 4.94MM
1.95 CARAT
SI2 CLARITY
COLORLESS (F)
FLUORESCENCE MEDIUM BLUE
DEPTH 63.6%
TABLE 60%
GIRDLE MEDIUM TO EXTREMELY THICK
CULET NONE
POLISH GOOD
SYMMETRY GOOD

I have looked up the 'ideal' specs for a RBC diamond and some of the specs are ideal and others are not so, I'm really just after some advice on whether these proportions / specs are good or not. The stone looked amazing to our naked eye but through the microscope you could see black carbon spots, three or four of them.

The rest of the ring has some small diamonds on the band and is white gold, price is around 13700 + TAX. Wondering whether I should search for a slightly better stone to replace the current one with better dimensions etc (if this one isn't very good) or whether this stone is actually good for the money.

Any help / advice is appreciated, thanks everyone.

 

[krisjon]

You really need a lot more information before making a purchase, but I'd pass on that one just based on the depth alone. It's not a good cut. A medium to extremely thick girdle is another giveaway. You're hiding carat weight there.
This stone is a pass on many levels.

 

[Gypsy]

A) You don't list the crown and pavilion angles (normally we need this. That said don't bother with this stone. We don't need it, the depth alone disqualifies it)
B) Stone is WAY too deep. Try to stick to 62.4 and above.
C) Please read and study the below:

The entire purpose of faceting a diamond is to reflect light.
How well or how poorly a diamond does this determines how beautiful it is.
How well a diamond performs is determined by the angles and cutting. This is why we say cut is king.
No other factor: not color, not clarity has as much of an impact on the appearance of a diamond as its cut. An ideal H will out white a poorly cut F. And GIA Ex is not enough. And you must stick to GIA and AGS only. EGL is a bad option: [URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/egl-certification-are-any-of-them-ok.142863/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/egl-certification-are-any-of-them-ok.142863/[/URL]
So how to we ensure that we have the right angles and cutting to get the light performance we want?
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-cut
Well one method is to start with a GIA Ex, and then apply the HCA to it. YOU DO NOT USE HCA for AGS0 stones.
https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/holloway-cut-advisor
The HCA is a rejection tool. Not a selection tool. It uses 4 data points to make a rudimentary call on how the diamond may perform.
If the diamond passes then you know that you are in the right zone in terms of angles for light performance. Under 2 is a pass. Under 2.5-2.1 is a maybe. 2.6 and over is a no. No score 2 and under is better than any other.
Is that enough? Not really.
So what you need is a way to check actual light performance of your actual stone.
That's what an idealscope image does. https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/firescope-idealscope
It shows you how and wear your diamond is reflecting light, how well it is going at it, and where you are losing light return. That is why you won't see us recommending Blue Nile, as they do not provide idealscope images for their diamonds. BGD, James Allen, GOG, HPD, ERD and WF do.

The Idealscope is the 'selection tool'. Not the HCA.
So yes, with a GIA stone you need the idealscope images. Or you can buy an idealscope yourself and take it in to the jeweler you are working with to check the stones yourself. Or if you have a good return policy (full refund minimum 7 days) then you can buy the idealscope, buy the stone, and do it at home.


Now if you want to skip all that... stick to AGS0 stones and then all you have to do is pick color and clarity and you know you have a great performing diamond. Because AGS has already done the checking for you. That's why they trade at a premium.

 

[WinkHPD]

Hi everyone,

Currently looking at purchasing an engagement ring and have a few concerns as I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to diamonds. I initially went into a jeweler with my partner and she loved a ring made by Scott K which I am now in negotiations over. The jeweler stated the center diamond had the following specs -

STYLE - ROUND BRILLIANT
CARAT - 1.95
COLOR - F
CLARITY - SI 1

I placed a deposit on the condition that the report more or less reflected what they claimed the stone would be and it has come back with the following IGI report -

ROUND BRILLIANT
7.75 X 7.78 X 4.94MM
1.95 CARAT
SI2 CLARITY
COLORLESS (F)
FLUORESCENCE MEDIUM BLUE
DEPTH 63.6%
TABLE 60%
GIRDLE MEDIUM TO EXTREMELY THICK
CULET NONE
POLISH GOOD
SYMMETRY GOOD

I have looked up the 'ideal' specs for a RBC diamond and some of the specs are ideal and others are not so, I'm really just after some advice on whether these proportions / specs are good or not. The stone looked amazing to our naked eye but through the microscope you could see black carbon spots, three or four of them.

The rest of the ring has some small diamonds on the band and is white gold, price is around 13700 + TAX. Wondering whether I should search for a slightly better stone to replace the current one with better dimensions etc (if this one isn't very good) or whether this stone is actually good for the money.

Any help / advice is appreciated, thanks everyone.

I have marked in red some of the red flags. Someone tried REAL hard to cut this to a two carat, but were not quite able to. It is basically a semi lifeless lump of crystallized carbon and to add injury to the insult it has been toilet papered with a worthless and unreliable laboratory. (In this country, IGI has excellent credibility in China, but NOT in the USA.)

Go get your deposit back and then RUN, not walk, away from this diamond and from the jeweler who tried to convince you it is in your best interest to buy such drek.

Wink

 

[Andelain]

Run, Forrest, run!

 

[Gypsy]

Oy I missed the IGI thing.
Yeah, forgot about the numbers. the lab report itself is a flag.

Stick to GIA or AGS only.

 

[krisjon]

Oy I missed the IGI thing.
Yeah, forgot about the numbers. the lab report itself is a flag.

Stick to GIA or AGS only.

Especially an SI2 by IGI standards. Most likely an I2-I3.

Again, so many reasons to pass on this stone.

 

[Bailey_Lou]

Run, Forrest, run!

+1 to this ^^

 

[SirGuy]

Iffy numbers, borderline weight attempt, and IGI grading? A pass, I'd say!

 

[xilli]

Appreciate all the help everyone will definitely pass on this one. Thanks