I'm confused...?

[act1980]

The diamond that I am interested in scores 1.1 TIC in the HCA tool. However, when discussing this stone with members on here they have suggested that it will give off more white light due to it's 32.5 crown. Surely this stone should then score a BIC rather than TIC? I'm confused

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Why are you posting another thread on the same diamond? We’ve already given you feedback that the stone is okay but you could get a better cut stone. I’d personally rather have an E or F with ideal cut proportions over a D with this cut. We explained why on the other thread. I don’t care about BIC TIC, etc. The stone scores vg on scintillation and I’d want excellent. I wouldn’t go under 34 on the crown angle and would want close to 15% on the crown height. I believe I already said most of that on the other thread.

 

[act1980]

Why are you posting another thread on the same diamond? We’ve already given you feedback that the stone is okay but you could get a better cut stone. I’d personally rather have an E or F with ideal cut proportions over a D with this cut. We explained why on the other thread. I don’t care about BIC TIC, etc. The stone scores vg on scintillation and I’d want excellent. I wouldn’t go under 34 on the crown angle and would want close to 15% on the crown height. I believe I already said most of that on the other thread.

Because I don't understand why this diamond scored a TIC and not BIC if it gives off more white light.

 

[act1980]

This was one I found but some people put me off as the GIA is dated October 2019 so they said it could be a resale. This has the proportions you talk about though but still scores TIC and not FIC even though there is more fire. This is what I'm not understanding about the HCA tool.

 

[Karl_K]

There is a lot of grey zones and a lot of overlap in BIC TIC and FIC and its not very precise.
They are just general descriptions that can be changed by variables the hca does not take into account.
In not a fan of a 32.5 ca because unless the table is small it creates flat tops which while they can be bright are not as lively as other combos.

 

[act1980]

There is a lot of grey zones and a lot of overlap in BIC TIC and FIC and its not very precise.
They are just general descriptions that can be changed by variables the hca does not take into account.
In not a fan of a 32.5 ca because unless the table is small it creates flat tops which while they can be bright are not as lively as other combos.

I see, thank you for the explanation

Can I ask your opinion on the above stone please? I was put off when some people said it could be resale due to the GIA being last year.

 

[Karl_K]

I see, thank you for the explanation

Can I ask your opinion on the above stone please? I was put off when some people said it could be resale due to the GIA being last year.

I can help with technical questions but not that one asked that way.
I can comment on the grading report age and technical details of the report you partially posted.


You can ask them and see what they say, but anything under 2 years is considered current.
It is not unexpected to see a "new" stone with a 1 year old report.
Higher color stones DEF tend to turn over slower so is even more common for them.

Is that comment clouds not shown?
Grade setting clouds need to be checked that they do not affect transparently and clouds not shown makes that more so.
They can be fine, they just need to be checked.

Do you have any images? IS/ASET?

 

[act1980]

I can help with technical questions but not that one asked that way.
I can comment on the grading report age and technical details of the report you partially posted.


You can ask them and see what they say, but anything under 2 years is considered current.
It is not unexpected to see a "new" stone with a 1 year old report.
Higher color stones DEF tend to turn over slower so is even more common for them.

Is that comment clouds not shown?
Grade setting clouds need to be checked that they do not affect transparently and clouds not shown makes that more so.
They can be fine, they just need to be checked.

Do you have any images? IS/ASET?

Thank you!

Yes it states Additional clouds are not shown. Does that matter? The supplier has told me that the stone is eye clean. I don't have an ASET but you can view the diamond here: https://www.adiamor.com/Diamonds/2....Cut-Round-Diamond/D45067597?&refer=pricescope

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would have no problem with a GIA report of October 2019. If it said 2017, then I might question why it doesn’t have a newer report. This stone doesn’t hit your aim of 2.25, though. I’d seriously look at E and F, personally. You could likely reach your size target in that case. I think this stone has potential as far as cut goes. I’d be a little cautious about the clouds, though.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

I can help with technical questions but not that one asked that way.
I can comment on the grading report age and technical details of the report you partially posted.


You can ask them and see what they say, but anything under 2 years is considered current.
It is not unexpected to see a "new" stone with a 1 year old report.
Higher color stones DEF tend to turn over slower so is even more common for them.

Is that comment clouds not shown?
Grade setting clouds need to be checked that they do not affect transparently and clouds not shown makes that more so.
They can be fine, they just need to be checked.

Do you have any images? IS/ASET?

I agree with others here - I would request an independent appraisal of a diamond that has clouds as the grade maker in VS2 and below - and even more not marked.
I always prefer to see some inclusions under magnification in VS2 diamonds than one where there are potential transparency issues.

 

[act1980]

Thanks for the replies. I have no way of being able to physically see that stone and the supplier hasn’t and won’t provide a video. I was only able to see it on that site so I have no idea why they have it yet the supplier doesn’t ‍♀
Think I will stick to VS1 or higher to stay in the safe zone as I won’t be able to view any of these stones physically

 

[Ionysis]

I’m confused too... why does it make a difference if someone has owned it before? Or how many owners it has had? It’s not a used car. It’s irrelevant to the quality of the stone.

 

[OoohShiny]

Thanks for the replies. I have no way of being able to physically see that stone and the supplier hasn’t and won’t provide a video. I was only able to see it on that site so I have no idea why they have it yet the supplier doesn’t ‍♀
Think I will stick to VS1 or higher to stay in the safe zone as I won’t be able to view any of these stones physically

VS1+ F+ should be totally colourless, eye-clean and 'mind-clean', so is 'safe' if you are sensitive to these things.

 

[yssie]

I’m confused too... why does it make a difference if someone has owned it before? Or how many owners it has had? It’s not a used car. It’s irrelevant to the quality of the stone.

The concern - when there is a concern - isn’t whether or not the stone has had previous owners - you’re right, that doesn’t affect quality in any way. It’s that an older report might not reflect the current condition of the stone.

When stones are worn, especially for many years, they’ll often show some evidence of that wear - facet wear, nicks, scratches, chips - all possible. In some cases the stone may have been repolished or even recut... If the report is old, there’s a higher probability (not a guarantee, but more likelihood) that it doesn’t accurately represent the state of the stone right now, for whatever reason(s).

All that said, here’s the specific stone that OP is referencing:

Does the date of the GIA mean anything?

I know that the date indicates the date the diamond was graded but why is a diamond still available when it was graded a year or so ago? The diamond I'm looking at ticks all the boxes so I'm not sure why it's not sold?

www.pricescope.com

And I agree with everyone who responded in that thread - this report’s age is not concerning at all, and doesn’t indicate any likelihood of prior ownership.

 

[yssie]

HCA is a tool.
It takes in a number of proportions and outputs a designation and description based on those proportions.
It is a tool that is designed first and foremost for convenience.
In reality, light return is a continuum. If you put a “TIC-esque BIC” and a “BIC-esque TIC” next to each other you may or may not see any character differences in performance across various lighting types.
If you put an “extremist TIC” next to an “extremist BIC” next to each other, you probably will see character differences in performance across various lighting types.
But what’s creating those differences isn’t the HCA type designation - it’s the stone’s proportions.

I’m also going to clarify your statement of “give off more white light”:
RBs with certain proportions will be more likely to show more white light return (and less coloured light) across a variety of lighting environments.
Other RBs with alternate proportions will be more likely to show more coloured light return (and less white light) across that same variety of lighting environments.
The key to how any diamond looks at any time is mostly determined by the lighting environment. Look through @Karl_K’s posts.