Help With Ideal Scope Image

[brs1804]

Here is an ideal scope view I received from James Allen.

Table 59
Depth 60.9
Crown 35.5
Pavilion 40.8

How does it look to people with more experience looking at these? The stone is a GIA excellent. Based on this image, are there any concerns?

Thank you!

 

[brs1804]

Based on a chart I found online, it looks like maybe: Very Good light return and symmetry and good proportions?

The stone is $4,130 with PS discount, 1.27/J/I1

It seemed like a pretty good deal to me, but what do veteren PS'ers think?

 

[midorimonsta]

According to the HCA, this scored a 3.0 with vg-vg-vg-vg which is rated as "worth buying if the price is right". Having looked at tons of ideal scope images so far, it looks like this one has visible light leakage under the table as well as along the edges. Also, since it is an I1, it looks like a lot of the inclusions are showing up on the ideal scope, which I think means that they are probably visible, and do affect light return (correct me if I'm wrong!).

If I were you, I wouldn't like this stone.

 

[brs1804]

Here is another image I got on the other stone I liked. It appears to me to have the same light leakage around the middle?

There is a big difference in the color of the pinks, is this significant or just the lighting used to take the picture?

 

[Ravinmad]

Table is alot cleaner on stone #2, the one inclusion area can be covered with a prong, and the small feather is on the edge at 3 o clock, is a possible concern depending on several factors, which DS and others can comment on. I definately like stone 2 better and I wouldnt get into a I inclusion if i could help it at all, unless its that 1 in 100,000 stone

 

[brs1804]

Thanks for the help!

I had high hopes for the first stone, it would have been great to fit an excellent cut 1.27ct into my budget, but it kinda seemed like a pipe dream.

The second is a "True Hearts" cut, .94ct that is roughly $800 more. I was hoping for a better ideal scope from the premier cut. It doesn't seem to compare to WF's "A Cut Above" stones.

 

[slg47]

just fyi, the HCA does not matter when you have an idealscope image. the idealscope image is an actual picture of the diamond, where the HCA is a model using only 4 numbers.

If you really want to get a larger diamond in your budget, the first one might be a good option. I am betting there are visible inclusions, but if you are OK with that you might want to get it shipped to you to check it out. there does appear to be some small amount of leakage but probably not too noticeable in real life.

how do you plan to set the stone?

 

[brs1804]

Here is what the gemologist had to say about the larger stones inclusions:

The inclusions in diamond 1466185 are visible to the unaided eye but they blend well and are not offensive. It has comparable light performance to your other selections and will be your best option if you are less concerned about its inclusions and more concerned about the size of the diamond.

And here is an image of the stone
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/J-I1-Very%20Good-Cut-Round-Diamond-1466185.asp

I thought that the inclusions were reasonable in the magnified view, and thought they might not be bad in person. I am thinking of having it shipped, but will feel bad if I need to send it back.

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/18k-White-Gold-Thin-French-Cut-Engagement-Ring.html
http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/2mm-Knife-Edge-18k-White-Gold-Solitaire-Ring.html

These are the two settings I liked best, and I was leaning towards the first.

If you had some suggestions on how to set a stone like this it would be much appreciated!

Thank you!

 

[tyty333]

Anyway to ask your GF if she would rather have a larger stone with an inclusion or a smaller stone that is eye-clean.

If its the kind of inclusion that only I know its there but others wouldnt notice, I could be ok with that but there
are a lot of people here on PS that would not be ok with it.

 

[brs1804]

I was kinda hoping for a surprise....she knows even less than I do about diamonds (probably about equal to what I knew at the start of looking a hundreds of these things and reading PS ) but she has said she liked at least 1ct (I am taking it with a grain of salt, because she also thought a good 1ct cost about $2k).

I do know that she likes round cut and traditional settings, based on comments she has made about friends rings.

I think I will go ahead with this one, if it passes my inspection then I will use it for the proposal and then make sure she knows we can trade it if she wants something a little different. Does the value at least look ok at $4,130?

 

[slg47]

can you propose with a loose stone so you can tell her that you can return it?

if it is a surprise...I might go with a stone with fewer inclusions.

ETA the first setting is only 1.6 mm...I would not go below 2 mm because of durability issues.

this one might be a good choice? 0.90 ct
http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/J-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1445258.asp

 

[brs1804]

Can I not return a mounted stone? From the return policy:

Special orders:
Special orders cannot be returned. A ring plus center diamond that we mount together - such as the Design your Own rings - is not considered a special order.

I will make sure to clarify that though. And thank you for the information on the 1.6mm setting! I hadn't considered the durability, I was judging only by look.

 

[ChrisES]

I think the issue is that once the setting is customized for your stone and ring size and all that the setting itself can't reused, meaning that even if you return the ring you would be charged for the setting.

 

[brs1804]

I ended up totally changing directions.

Just ordered:

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/J-VS1-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1458710.asp

with this setting:

http://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/pave/-18k-White-Gold-Pave-Set-Diamond-Engagement-Ring.html

Thanks for all the help!

 

[brs1804]

Came in today! And yes, that is a basil leaf. Didn't have anything else in the house with a vibrant color.

Trying to get a good picture of these things really makes you appreciate how good the pictures on White Flash are!

 

[Sparkle524]

Very pretty! Congrats!