I am sorry but I have found another diamond... again.

[blingblingdiamond]

So I had decided to go with the 1.58 J. But I was worried about the haziness. I know I am very indecisive.
I am sorry Then I found another stone with similar specs that is just a bit more expensive. The JA representative recommended the 1.58J more as he said 1.60 J may be cloudy based on the comment section.

What do you think about this 1.6 comparing with the 1.58?

1. 1.6J
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3191959



2. 1.58J
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...j-color-si1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3071055




Thanks a lot in advance!

 

[LLJsmom]

I would stick with the 1.58. With an SI1, I wouldn't risk the cloudiness.

 

[tyty333]

I like the 1.58 better. Any chance you could order both and return the one you dont like?

 

[blingblingdiamond]

I would stick with the 1.58. With an SI1, I wouldn't risk the cloudiness.

I actually don't quite understand why would he said it would be cloudy. Cloud inclusion is in the comments section which means it's not the inclusion that determine the clarity grade? I thought the 3 listed inclusion under "key to symbols" should be the inclusions I should be more concerned of.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

I like the 1.58 better. Any chance you could order both and return the one you dont like?

I can't I have to return 1.58 today or tomorrow. But I haven't bought the 1.6 Just yet. Could you explain why you like 1.58 better? On the other hand, do you think the 1.6J passed the IS image test and is a solid PS quality stone even it's not super ideal cut? Thank you.

 

[rockysalamander]

Of these, I also prefer the 1.58 much more. The 1.6 has stuff going all all over the stone and much of it as the surface. Those inclusions will be highly visible -- it almost looks like sand was dropped all over the surface. Those inclusions also are reflected making them look like many more. The only view where the inclusions are masked is when looking steeply from the size.

The 1.58 inclusions are more subtle and better masked in the cutting.

If size if your priority, than the 1.58 is great. I personally sacrifice size for better clarity, but perhaps your gf and budget don't (I did not read over your previous threads). I would personally drop the size and get this one, but you do you...

https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-j-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3005825

 

[ac117]

The 1.6 is nicely cut but I too prefer the 1.58. From what I understand (and I could be wrong)....I think 'additional clouds not shown' under the comments section means the clouds are too small to plot but if it says 'clouds not shown', then it could mean that the cloud(s) take up a large portion of the plot and would make it look too busy so they put it in the comments section instead. I also think the 1.6 has more inclusions under the table and less likely to be as eye clean as the one you already have.

What's your budget again? I'll take another look.

 

[ac117]

@blingblingdiamond I don't want you to be unhappy with the 1.58 every time you look at it. It seems like you have doubts so I think you should return it. There are other diamonds out there. I don't know how much you can stretch but....

https://enchanteddiamonds.com/diamonds/view/R153-0Z5429174? (the one small area of green is due to the smaller heart but shouldn't be a glaring issue in person).
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...j-color-vs2-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3086271 - a nice 60/60 but won't be as fiery
https://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD08715667 - very nice and clarity won't be an issue

 

[blingblingdiamond]

Thanks ac117,

I also think that If I have doubt I should return it but I want to make sure I wont regret so I want to find a diamond now before I return it!

I have found this diamond:
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...j-color-vs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-3125170

This diamond is totally over my budget - it is 8850 before any PS/bank wire discount. Do you think this 1.52J is worth the extra $1,000+ comparing with 1.58J?

how about this one 1.47J Rockslamander compare to this 1.52J/
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...rat-j-color-vs2-clarity-ideal-cut-sku-3005825
Thank you!

 

[ac117]

Did you see the stones I recommended above? I personally don't think you should blow your budget that you seemed adamant about (and isn't it more like $2k more? You paid ~$6800 for the 1.58?) but yes the stones you and rockysalamander posted are very nice. So is this one: https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-di...-color-vvs1-clarity-excellent-cut-sku-2680806

Weren't you working with IDJ? If you're increasing your budget, maybe they can source some new stones for you.

 

[rockysalamander]

Setting?

I'll be interested in another person's comparison between the 1.47J and 1.52J. The two were lite slightly differently with the 1.47J being less brightly lit and with more warm light (look at the grey background color). To me, the 1.52J is a whiter J than the 1.47J.

Do you think upgrade to a larger stone is important in the future? JA requires the new stone be twice the price, while WF and HPD allow any upgrade within their branded stones. This kind of policy has allowed several PS member to increase the size or clarity over time.

This is smaller, but super-ideal and would allow a generous upgrade in the future. Zero clarity issues and stunning performance.
https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3857538.htm {1.383J}


JA 1.52 left, 1.47 right


JA 1.52 left, WF 1.38 right

 

[rockysalamander]

Ok. I thought your stone budget was around $8k or I would not have posted stones so far above. I thought I nailed it right at $8k with the JA1.47J and the WF1.382J. I did not mean to confuse you. If your budget is firm than it is firm. What I see in this thread is that you need to compromise somewhere and it seems clarity needs to be raised (eyeclean SI1 or VS2 and above). So, if you want to get over 1.5 carats, you need more budget. If you can lower the size, you can select from the stones posted above. For super-ideal, you need to be sub-1.3c to avoid clarity issues with a $7k budget, but you gain the better trade-up options (which I value).

I hope what the fingers above showed was that all of these are very close in size (even comparing the 1.52J to the 1.382J). Not identical, but really close.

So, you have to tell us what you can spend.

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I want to be careful here as it is not proper for a trades person to recommend or criticize another vendor’s stone. And it is also explicitly against forum rules, for good reason.

But to help the OP with the cloudiness quandry, I would offer these comments. First, there are stones that have already been recommended by other posters in the thread that would alleviate this concern. Second, cloudiness is better thought of as a continuum, not as a yes/no proposition.

The cloudiness continuum is not directly aligned with clarity grade. That is, there could be Si2 grades that would not have this issue and VS2 grades that could possibly have it. It’s more about the type of inclusion and degree to which they are present. Features like clouds, twinning wisps, and certain types of graining can diminish transparency by scattering light and leaving the stone slightly less crisp. BUT, the mere presence of these types of inclusions does NOT necessarily mean the stone will be affected in this way. Stones in the Si range are more likely to have an issue with transparency, but certain VS2 grades should also get extra scrutiny for this issue.

There are a number of indicators on a lab report that together can inform about potential transparency issues. There is a bit of ‘art’ to reading a report. Under ‘keys” to the plot, features are listed in order of their impact on the clarity grade. It’s important to understand that not all features are necessarily plotted. Only those necessary to identify the stone and to support the clarity grade are plotted. The comments section is used to give mention to features not plotted. In most cases they are not in and of themselves an indication of visual impacts. An exception is the comment (particularly in Si grades) that the clarity grade is ‘based’ on clouds.

Haziness due to strong fluorescence likewise should be considered on a continuum. However, that impact is ONLY an issue when fluorescence is activated. As opposed to a clarity feature that is always present. Good news here is that in the majority of real world viewing environments there is insufficient UV or VV present to activate the fluoro effect or the haziness which sometimes accompanies it.

So you can see that there are a number of factors that could diminish light performance, even in the best cut diamonds. It’s all a matter of type and degree. And a profile can be developed by reading the tea leaves of the lab report!

But it is always a good idea to have a qualified, independent gemologist review a diamond with potential issues of this nature. They can be very subtle and not obvious to an untrained observer.

 

[ac117]

Great post and lots of very helpful information @Texas Leaguer! I am grateful to be able to learn from them!

 

[rockysalamander]

Thanks @Texas Leaguer . Great information on how to better read the tea leaves.

@blingblingdiamond - If your budget is at $7k, I really like @ac117's BN stone and the ED one. The ED one is showing unavailable, hopefully that was you...?

ED & BN have the has the same trade-up policy as JA...new stone must be 2x value of old stone.

 

[Akalahab]

If you don't think you'll upgrade, you might consider this one https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/gia-j-si1-vsbf.232560/

 

[ryan23]

blingbling, for what it's worth I've seen that 1.52 J VS1 from JA in person. It is quite fiery/brilliant and I almost chose it, if I didn't happen to find a larger stone for a few hundred more that was almost as fiery. But side to side to my stone the 1.52 was more fiery than the one I chose. It was my easy #2.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

Thanks everyone, the one AC117 posted, I talked to someone in enchanteddiamonds and they didn't recommend that for some reaons.

 

[blingblingdiamond]

I am looking thinking about this diamond, it looks nice. But one of the things I concerned is that are the arrows too skinny? do you think it is a nice diamond? Also, the comments says clouds are not shown. But it is a VS1 diamond. would it be cloudy?

 

[msop04]

I am looking thinking about this diamond, it looks nice. But one of the things I concerned is that are the arrows too skinny? do you think it is a nice diamond? Also, the comments says clouds are not shown. But it is a VS1 diamond. would it be cloudy?

A VS1 will not be cloudy... period. The arrow thing is totally a preference. If you think they are too skinny, then they are. Although I love fat arrows, I don't think these are too skinny at all.

 

[Karl_K]

Super magnified pics can be misleading.
I have seen stones with a 1 to 3 inclusion that looks tiny in pictures but they were clearly eye visible.
I have seen other stones that the plot looked like a mess, the magnified pictures showed inclusions that was totally eyeclean even to those with sharp vision from the top and modest tilt, not hazy and rocked.
The only way to know is eyeballs and even that will vary from person to person.