How clean should a VS2 emerald cut be? 3.44 Emerald Update

[abbey]

Well, I went and visited the emerald cut that I posted about in this thread. https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/3-44-emerald-cut.92625/ and I promised an update.

It is beautiful. SUPER bright, even the appraiser said that it had excellent brillance. Also I had absolutely no issues with the "H" color in this particular diamond. Even next to my round "ICY WHITE" "D"....

it was gorgeous. Maybe BECAUSE it was a different cut I didn''t mind the subtle warmth that I only noticed when it was next to the D. Anyway, it also looked huge on my hand. (no problem with that)

Ok, so why am I hesitating... When I first got there the appraiser put it in one of those ring holder things for me to try on. First thing on my hand and I can spot the inclusion with my naked eyes at about 20" in a fairly dimly lit environment. I hadn''t even looked at the cert or looped it yet and I could clearly see one of the inclusions. Granted, it was small, but I really don''t want to see anything especially with my 41 year old eyes. I walked around in various types of light and I found one other that was sometimes easy to spot. It was interesting that I think it was the easiest to spot in the dimly lit room....maybe because in every other room it was just too BRIGHT and hid them well.

Anyway, so I sent it back to whiteflash who I would be having mount it probably anyway and told Katie I would give her my decision today. I''m still on the fence this morning...

So... after all that (sorry for so long)... my question for those experts out there and owners of emerald cuts....
Am I too picky -- is it normal to see "Some" inclusions in a VS2 Emerald Cut???

Thanks again for all your help!
Here''s one photo in her office. Wow is it hard to photo diamonds!

 

[canuk-gal]

HI:

What a stunner--close up's would be fabu!!!

You've got a large flat surface area and no "fancy" faceting pattern like an RB to "clutter/distract" your viewing and potentially "hide" inclusions that might otherwise be visiable. Hence you simply see "everything" in this cut. KWIM?

For what it is worth, I have a relatively large radiant and cannot see the VS1 inclusion to save my life (granted I am a few years older than you......

), so what it comes down to is how much you can tolerate given the location of the inclusion.

cheers--Sharon

 

[Lorelei]

LOL! I can definitely see you are an old timer PSer Abbey with your use of caps for ICY WHITE DIAMONDS!!

The diamond looks gorgeous and I was interested to see what you thought. With an EC that size, it is possible you could see a small inclusion, but only you can answer whether it would bother you or not. It wouldn't worry me if I loved everything about the diamond and it was like an unobtrustive birthmark, but if it bothers you then maybe you need to seriously consider whether it is the right stone.

 

[abbey]

Thanks Lorelei & C-Girl.
Yes, I couldn''t resist the "ICY-WHITE" comment-I''ve been lurking for a LONG time.
I''ll try to move some more close ups over to this thread later.. I have to run kids in to San Francisco for Swimming right now. Darn-it!
Anyway, I am torn right now. I haven''t decided if I''d always be trying to spot the inclusions or ignore them and enjoy the beautiful diamond that it is.
With my current diamond I just loving looking at it''s symmetry and it so perfect. I just don''t know if I''d obsess about the little pinpoints.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 8/21/2008 12:45:38 PM
Author: Lorelei
LOL! I can definitely see you are an old timer PSer Abbey with your use of caps for ICY WHITE DIAMONDS!!

The diamond looks gorgeous and I was interested to see what you thought. With an EC that size, it is possible you could see a small inclusion, but only you can answer whether it would bother you or not. It wouldn''t worry me if I loved everything about the diamond and it was like an unobtrustive birthmark, but if it bothers you then maybe you need to seriously consider whether it is the right stone.

I have to agree, regardless of whether you should or shouldn''t be able to see anything, the fact is you do. The question is, can you live with it. And only you can answer that.

Just remember, well cut stones in this size don''t grow on trees, and, your eyesight will be worse in a few years.

Oh, and btw, it looks gawgeous!!

 

[goobear78]

I wouldn't buy an emerald that wasn't at least in the VVS category, because with emerald cuts you can see everything. I was looking at a very pretty 1.5 ideal cut, G color, emerald cut with a VS1 and I could spot the feather and other inclusions with my naked eyes. I know that I wouldn't have seen it in a different kind of cut.

Seeing an inclusion with naked eyes would bother me, but that's just my opinion...how does it feel to you? Would it bother you? I think it might otherwise you wouldn't ask the question.

Good luck with your decision. It does look stunning on your hand!

 

[purrfectpear]

It certainly looks beautiful on your hand in the picture. If the inclusion is teensy-tiny, no one else will notice it. To find a completely flawless "looking" EC will either take some protracted searching or else an expensive step up to a VVS, in the carat size you are looking for IMO.

How do you feel about it?

 

[cara]

At the end of the day, all that matters is if it bothers you. I think it is reasonable that a VS2 3+ ct emerald would not be eyeclean, as the cut is unforgiving and the inclusions might be in an unfortunate location.

So does it bother you enough to not want to own it? Are you prepared to wait for another stone to come along that meets your standards and would such a stone be too much $$$?

Some people are eagle-eyed and it doesn''t bother them to be able to spot the inclusions (or at least not enough to cough up more dough for a cleaner stone) while others find that they are best paying more for something that is higher clarity.

 

[IluvEmeralds]

I agree with everything that''s been said so far. For what its worth that stone looks BEAUTIFUL in the picture..it''s SO HUGE..

.but with that, I''m sure it might be easier to spot an inclusion. I love EC''s too and I''ve been searching for a long time before I found one that was just right. Sometimes the numbers matter, sometimes they don''t. What I found is that more often than not in a VS1 you can spot inclusions if you are looking for them (or if you''re just really picky like me). For my own EC I ended up with a 1.56 VVS2 in F, because it had to be both mind and eye clean for me in ALL kinds of lights. I guess it comes down to are you willing to wait to find another stone that size, or does it really not bother you? I can''t imagine how hard it must have been to find a clean EC that size. It took me FOREVER to find a clean 1.5 or above.

In the end though the journey is half the fun! Happy Hunting. Keep us updated!!

 

[Beacon]

It looks huge and it looks great. What is your ring size?

ECs show everything much more than other cuts so I would not think your stone is misgraded just because you can see an inclusion. Can you live with it? Will you be worried that you'll show it to a friend and they will see that inclusion? What if you went into a high end jewelry store - would you feel at all self conscious of the inclusion if they wanted to look at your gorgeous ring?

I ask these questions because they are the questions I ask myself when evaluating jewelry. If it causes me any anxiety, then I know it's not for me. Only you can decide on that.

However, the photo you posted is certainly gorgeous!!

 

[Diamond Confused]

I just LOVE emerald cuts. THey are amazing and unique

 

[abbey]

Ok, I''m back. Thank you for all the comments. I''ll try to answer everyone''s questions then I''ll post a couple of more photos ''cause that''s the best part anyway.

Ellen- I think that you hit the nail on the head with there not being many available in this size range. In fact there really aren''t ANY others in the right ratio that I''d consider at this point. The problem I''m having is that the owner of the stone is asking TOP dollar for this stone and I''m not sure if it is a borderline SI1. There are, I think, 7 other stones on pricescope with these specs (all relative since it''s a fancy of course) but this is the MOST expensive one.

goobear- I guess I AM having a hard time with being able to see the inclusion.

purrfectpear-yes...it''s actually the protracted search that I''m not looking forward to. Shipping this size stone is very expensive and I''d really rather not do this too many times. Though I do think that my vendor has a good idea now how well I can see and probably won''t send anymore to me unless they are really eyeclean.

ILuvemeralds- Thank you for your reply. I really was curious if any one else has had this problem with VS2 stones. The appraiser really felt that once it was mounted I wouldn''t be bothered, but she admitted that she has to use her magnifier for everything.

Beacon-I wear a size 5.5.... For some reason it does really look huge in the photos. You asked some really valuable questions. For me, I knew this stone wasn''t going to be "perfect" due to the color etc and I''m really ok with that. Since it''s just a "fun" ring and not one meant to represent our love-I''ll probably still wear my original engagement ring .... I don''t need it to be so mentally perfect. My goal was really to get the biggest, cleanest, emerald cut that showed little color within my budget. I just need to decide if it''s clean enough. OH NOOO decision time argh-yikes.

Anyway, thanks for all the great comments. I''ll let you all know what I end up with. Have a great day!

 

[strmrdr]

Personally I don''t like paying vs2 price with easily seen inclusions.

 

[abbey]

in different lighting....

 

[abbey]

I couldn't take any close ups myself.... You can't see the inclusions in this close up at all.... I think because it lines up with one of the black bars. Photos are so deceiving.... The diamond is not Yellow or Blue and my hands may be getting a little wrinkly but they really aren't orange! You also don't see nearly this much tint in person. I think the flash creates a lot of color where there is none in real life.

 

[abbey]

again from whiteflash...

 

[Ellen]

Abbey, just follow your gut, whatever that may be. Good luck!

 

[IluvEmeralds]

I agree...in the end the diamond really has to SPEAK to YOU since you are the one who will be wearing it for life. VS2''s can be a little ify, but in the end if you LOVE it than GO FOR IT!! I only went with VVS2 b/c I had the option in my budget going with a 1.56, and I wanted to have a mind clean stone as well. Emeralds are tricky no matter which way you go. That''s why I say if you fall in love, go with it. Trust your eyes.

Let us know what you decide...either way EC''s are ALWAYS YUMMY to me!!

 

[AprilBaby]

It sure looks lovely in the pictures!

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 8/21/2008 12:54:41 PM
Author: goobear78
I wouldn''t buy an emerald that wasn''t at least in the VVS category, because with emerald cuts you can see everything

Hi goobear, I think you are absolutely right that emerald cuts and step cuts in general show inclusions more than brilliant cuts. And I totally understand and appreciate your preference for VVS stones. However, in order to clarify for others reading this post: I have a VS1 square EC (generic asscher) and many jewelers I have taken the diamond to can''t find the inclusions with a 5x or 10x loupe. It takes a high powered mag to see them without the GIA plot telling you where specifically to look. Clarity is very stone specific. There have been (in rare cases, grant you) completely eye-clean SI ECs on here. Clarity also depends on an individuals eye sight. So, while you may not buy a step cut stone that is not VVS, other have and have been very happy with the clarity.

 

[goobear78]

Date: 8/21/2008 8:04:35 PM
Author: Gypsy

Date: 8/21/2008 12:54:41 PM
Author: goobear78
I wouldn''t buy an emerald that wasn''t at least in the VVS category, because with emerald cuts you can see everything

Hi goobear, I think you are absolutely right that emerald cuts and step cuts in general show inclusions more than brilliant cuts. And I totally understand and appreciate your preference for VVS stones. However, in order to clarify for others reading this post: I have a VS1 square EC (generic asscher) and many jewelers I have taken the diamond to can''t find the inclusions with a 5x or 10x loupe. It takes a high powered mag to see them without the GIA plot telling you where specifically to look. Clarity is very stone specific. There have been (in rare cases, grant you) completely eye-clean SI ECs on here. Clarity also depends on an individuals eye sight. So, while you may not buy a step cut stone that is not VVS, other have and have been very happy with the clarity.

Thank you Gypsy for your comments, but if you notice, my post says that I wouldn''t buy an emerald that wasn''t at least a VVS, not that there is anything wrong with an EC below that clarity. It is a personal preference. My preference is that I wouldn''t do so with that specific cut. In my experience EC''s that I''ve looked at in the vs range can be easy to spot inclusions, not that all are. I had an beautiful EC ER before it was stolen and let me tell you, I''ve looked at a ton of EC cuts. In fact, it is one of, if not my all time favorite cut. I''m also 30 and have great eyesight. I also prefer my EC''s to be more square than rectangular. Again, a personal preference that I know not everyone shares. I was answering Abbey''s question of "is it normal to see "some" inclusions in an VS2 Emerald cut", not stating that people who have EC cuts below VVS wouldn''t be happy with the clarity.

I also understand that clarity is stone specific. I''m actually looking for a fancy (not an EC and AC) and I''m looking in the VS1&2 range, because with a cushion or radiant, I have found that inclusions are not that noticeable to me.

 

[bgray]

Abbey:

I bought a 4 plus carat EC- Vs2 fom Whiteflash a while back. I was such a snob about clarity etc. I think that those of us educated and knowledge see EVERYTHING. And I did. But-once my stone was set I really couldnt see anything. Unset its much easier to see every little things...................I love my stone and have never regretted it. This stone is STUNNING. My opinion is go for it--

 

[Ellen]

Date: 8/22/2008 12:20:40 AM
Author: bgray
Abbey:

I bought a 4 plus carat EC- Vs2 fom Whiteflash a while back. I was such a snob about clarity etc. I think that those of us educated and knowledge see EVERYTHING. And I did. But-once my stone was set I really couldnt see anything. Unset its much easier to see every little things...................I love my stone and have never regretted it. This stone is STUNNING. My opinion is go for it--

bgray, intetresting. Thanks for the info, I'll remember this! (hopefully)

But more importantly, are there pictures of this beauty anywhere??

 

[elmo]

But, this was set. Temp setting but set. Did the seller say it was eyeclean? Immediately spotting the inclusion at 20" in dim light wouldn't be eyeclean by any definition.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 8/22/2008 9:22:25 AM
Author: elmo
But, this was set. Temp setting but set. Did the seller say it was eyeclean? Immediately spotting the inclusion at 20'' in dim light wouldn''t be eyeclean by any definition.

I think comparing those temp settings to a regular setting might not be totally fair.

But I could be wrong!

 

[elmo]

I thought it was about as fair as suggesting that it could suddenly become eyeclean after it's set

. Yes certainly possible but also unreliable to predict, even if you already know exactly what setting you're getting. And by the time you get to find out for sure, the stone is yours, and the money on the setting is spent. I think you need to be happy with the stone in its current state. (Looks nice by the way! Add some traps for a three-stone ring and I'll be envious.)

 

[abbey]

Date: 8/22/2008 9:22:25 AM
Author: elmo
But, this was set. Temp setting but set. Did the seller say it was eyeclean? Immediately spotting the inclusion at 20'' in dim light wouldn''t be eyeclean by any definition.

So, I''ve decided it''s not the diamond for me-as much as I want it to be. I am hesitant to post about the whole eye-clean thing as I think it MUST be very subjective. I even started to question myself (really wanting to believe that it''s clean), but I keep coming back to the moment I put it on my finger. I really wasn''t "looking" for an inclusion, just wanting to appreciate the diamond, but seeing the inclusion immediately, then confirming it with the loop and cert. I do have a hard time believing that once it''s set (I plan on a simple solitaire mounting) I won''t see the inclusions, though this was also suggested by the appraiser.

From the seller, initially it was reported as very clean, but if you looked really hard you might be able to see the feather... Then when I questioned it more, it was reported that the feather could only be seen with the loop so I decided to ship it in. I just asked Katie again to look at it and see if it truly met with their definition of eye-clean. She said she would have Lindsay look at it again. I''m thinking that lighting really made a difference to the "eye-cleaness" of this particular diamond as it was really masked in some other lighting environments.

Anyway, thanks again for all your help! Have a great weekend everyone.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 8/22/2008 3:58:26 PM
Author: Abbey

Date: 8/22/2008 9:22:25 AM
Author: elmo
But, this was set. Temp setting but set. Did the seller say it was eyeclean? Immediately spotting the inclusion at 20'' in dim light wouldn''t be eyeclean by any definition.

So, I''ve decided it''s not the diamond for me-as much as I want it to be. I am hesitant to post about the whole eye-clean thing as I think it MUST be very subjective. I even started to question myself (really wanting to believe that it''s clean), but I keep coming back to the moment I put it on my finger. I really wasn''t ''looking'' for an inclusion, just wanting to appreciate the diamond, but seeing the inclusion immediately, then confirming it with the loop and cert. I do have a hard time believing that once it''s set (I plan on a simple solitaire mounting) I won''t see the inclusions, though this was also suggested by the appraiser.

From the seller, initially it was reported as very clean, but if you looked really hard you might be able to see the feather... Then when I questioned it more, it was reported that the feather could only be seen with the loop so I decided to ship it in. I just asked Katie again to look at it and see if it truly met with their definition of eye-clean. She said she would have Lindsay look at it again. I''m thinking that lighting really made a difference to the ''eye-cleaness'' of this particular diamond as it was really masked in some other lighting environments.

Anyway, thanks again for all your help! Have a great weekend everyone.

You are doing what you think is right for you, it is a shame but you want to find the right diamond, no point if something about that diamond is going to gnaw away at you. I hope you find what you are looking for!

 

[cara]

Good choice!! I could tell this one was not for you - at least not in its loose state. It is unknowable if YOU would have been OK with it once set. It may be a long search to find another contender, but at least now you know your clarity standards and you must certainly must have some budget to play with in your search (which must help at some level)! Good luck-