inclusions or cracks? - calling experts and appraisers

[dianabarbara]

As some of you know, I have been considering the purchase of a low clarity diamond, for various reasons. The first being, it is a stunning stone. A few weeks ago, I have seen the stone in person and found it really beautiful, very very lively. Of course I could see the inclusions upclose, but it was still very brilliant and attractive. The second being, it is really cheap for its size.

I have done my thinking and decided I do want a large included stone. No concerns on this.

However, after reading more about inclusions and watching the picture again, I started doubting whether some of these inclusions are actually cracks (or feathers).. The one in the center really looks like a crack to me, and I am wondering about the two parallel inclusions on the low left side. Moreover, since they are parallel to each other, I am worried these could be cleavage planes. Looking at the stone from the side, it looks like these imperfections point towards the culet rather than the table, moving from the girdle to the center of the stone.

Please ignore the thin white lines all around the table. These are scratches in the plastic case in which the stone was stored when the picture was taken.

The stone has been graded by a local independent lab as an I1 - how precise this is, I do not know.

Do these look like carbon inclusions or crystals, or do they look like feathers and cracks?
How dangerous would the setting process be, if I decide to go with a bezel to protect the stone during normal wear?

I am having trouble trying to find a proper appraiser in the city I have to purchase the stone, but I will take it to another professional (albeit of less recognized qualification as compared with many on this board). So any feedback would be very appreciated!

 

[diamondloveaffair]

there's no way anybody can give you constructive advice based on this image. Why don't you send it to GIA or have the seller send it for grading?

 

[dianabarbara]

diamondloveaffair, thanks for your suggestion.

I do not live in the US. The seller already sent it to a local lab and is not willing to have it sent somewhere else. I wish I could do that, but it is simply not an option, unfortunately. Only in case I purchase, I could send to EGL, at my expenses and with no returns.

So I understand it's hard to tell from a picture, but I was hoping some people with long experience could have a feeling of what these inclusions are anyways.

 

[Rockdiamond]

It's true that no one can properly assess a diamond from a photos- and the one you've posted is in a scratched case- so it obscures the diamond even more.
A few things I can see are areas of damage along the girdle. There's two large areas ( chips?) at 10:00, and about 6:30 - and it looks a bit chewed up at around 4:30 as well.
This type of damage makes bezel setting more dangerous.

Unfortunately the best any professional can tell you is a guess.
Even if you sent it to GIA they won't tell you if the stone will do ok in a bezel.
I'd probably have a cutter clean up those areas......but that may not be possible in your case.
Hopefully the stone is very reasonably priced, as you have some risk here......

 

[dianabarbara]

It's true that no one can properly assess a diamond from a photos- and the one you've posted is in a scratched case- so it obscures the diamond even more.
A few things I can see are areas of damage along the girdle. There's two large areas ( chips?) at 10:00, and about 6:30 - and it looks a bit chewed up at around 4:30 as well.
This type of damage makes bezel setting more dangerous.

Unfortunately the best any professional can tell you is a guess.
Even if you sent it to GIA they won't tell you if the stone will do ok in a bezel.
I'd probably have a cutter clean up those areas......but that may not be possible in your case.
Hopefully the stone is very reasonably priced, as you have some risk here......

Hi Rockdiamond. Thank you for your feedback. The are indeed some chips along the girdle. Is the inclusion in the center the reason why the chips might not be corrected via re-cut, or would that be the inclusions at 6:30?

The stone is very well priced - I think - over 2 carats and approx 3k. Does this sound about right?

Would it be safer to have it prong set? And is it true that once bezel set the setting would take all the stress, so that the stone would be very unlikely to break?

I am assuming the chances of breaking it in daily wear are larger than the chances of breaking it while setting, but I could be really wrong here.

 

[Rockdiamond]

You're more than welcome, my pleasure!
1) about the nature of the inclusions- I can;t make any comment whatsoever without looking at the stone firsthand.
The damage at the girdle is only visible at all due to the nature of girdles- and the angle the photo was taken at.

2) $3k for a two carat stone is indeed cheap- however I can't say it's "right"...again, without actually looking at the diamond.

3) damage likelihood......you know how you can drop a glass on the floor ten times and it does not break. Then you accidentally touch it with a fork and it shatters.
Point is, trying to figure out random events is useless. A bezel does stress a stone in certain circumstances- just like a prong will.
Setting stresses are generally greater than the type of stress a ring undegoes when you're wearing it- but as mentioned- this is random- we can't predict

 

[dianabarbara]

You're more than welcome, my pleasure!
1) about the nature of the inclusions- I can;t make any comment whatsoever without looking at the stone firsthand.
The damage at the girdle is only visible at all due to the nature of girdles- and the angle the photo was taken at.

2) $3k for a two carat stone is indeed cheap- however I can't say it's "right"...again, without actually looking at the diamond.

3) damage likelihood......you know how you can drop a glass on the floor ten times and it does not break. Then you accidentally touch it with a fork and it shatters.
Point is, trying to figure out random events is useless. A bezel does stress a stone in certain circumstances- just like a prong will.
Setting stresses are generally greater than the type of stress a ring undegoes when you're wearing it- but as mentioned- this is random- we can't predict

Thank you very much for the information

I guess it all makes sense, and I will have to trust the opinion of my appraiser on the stone, and eventually also on the best way to set it.

 

[kenny]

First of all ... feather is the diamond industry's word for crack.

I realize you want a large diamond for a small price but I'd not buy that one.
The odds of it failing are too high for me.
I'd even be nervous about a 1 ct diamond that was only $2,000 because of feathers.

I'd feel like I was wearing a $2,000 hand grenade with the pin pulled.

$2,000 may sound cheap but it is very expensive for what has a good chance of shattering into pieces.

Yes even a diamond graded flawless by GIA can shatter if struck just right with enough force and an I3 may last forever, but the chances of a diamond being mechanically unstable increase as the clarity decreases and this one was not even sent to a lab, plus the seller would send it to EGL, a soft lab.

Too many red flags here.

I'd ask myself it I got a few weeks enjoyment before it explodes for my $2,000 how would I feel?
Perhaps a few weeks of enjoying a 2 ct diamond is worth $2,000 to you.

 

[dianabarbara]

First of all ... feather is the diamond industry's word for crack.

I realize you want a large diamond for a small price but I'd not buy that one.
The odds of it failing are too high for me.
I'd even be nervous about a 1 ct diamond that was only $2,000 because of feathers.

I'd feel like I was wearing a $2,000 hand grenade with the pin pulled.

$2,000 may sound cheap but it is very expensive for what has a good chance of shattering into pieces.

Yes even a diamond graded flawless by GIA can shatter if struck just right with enough force and an I3 may last forever, but the chances of a diamond being mechanically unstable increase as the clarity decreases and this one was not even sent to a lab, plus the seller would send it to EGL, a soft lab.

Too many red flags here.

I'd ask myself it I got a few weeks enjoyment before it explodes for my $2,000 how would I feel?
Perhaps a few weeks of enjoying a 2 ct diamond is worth $2,000 to you.

kenny, thank you for your help.

I was indeed asking *whether* these inclusions are cracks, because if they are, I doubt I would purchase.

For sure 2k is too much for a stone that is bound to crack. Aside of this, I just got my e-ring (well, techically I still have to get to wear it! ) that is just about the same size, perfectly clean and beautiful, so I do not have a compelling need for bling.

this stone is/was meant for a side - totally unexpected - project for which I will need an antique, slightly rough looking stone of approximately 2 carats. If the inclusions above are feathers - and I have the impression you think they are - then.. it does not need to be this stone.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I'm not suggesting you buy the diamond- but in the interest of accurate info, feathers are not cracks in diamonds.
Again- I can't say the stone is sound based on looking at a picture- but I can say that feathers in a diamond, unless incredibly severe will generally not affect durability

 

[dianabarbara]

I'm not suggesting you buy the diamond- but in the interest of accurate info, feathers are not cracks in diamonds.
Again- I can't say the stone is sound based on looking at a picture- but I can say that feathers in a diamond, unless incredibly severe will generally not affect durability

rockdiamond, I was reading somewhere else on PS that feathers result from strain in the stone, mostly before its extraction, during the extraction, or during the cutting process. my understanding is that only some feathers have a real impact on durability depending on their size, position in the stone (e.g., close to the girdle/the table), and orientation (along a cleavage (sp?) plane).

it also seems that some of the feathers that reach the surface of the stone can be wide enough to let some air in. maybe those imperfections belonging to this second type can be more properly defined as 'cracks' rather than feathers?

Aside of what matters for this particular stone, I feel it's important to clarify and understand the difference and whether the level of risk associated with the two is different.
Intuitively, I would expect cracks along the girdle to be more dangerous, but perhaps a feather right in the center, even if it does not reach the surface, is just as bad.

 

[Rockdiamond]

There's a tremendous amount of stuff written on the web. Unfortunately it's sometimes hard to figure out what is what.
Remember that to become a polished diamond, that rock has undergone tremendous pressure, friction and heat.
If a cutter damages a stone, they damage that stone.
That is a damaged diamond, not a feather.

It's true that feathers reaching the surface are of more concern- but even that aspect does not guarantee any sort of structural problem.

In general- and again, I can't speak of the diamond in the photo- and I'm not suggesting you should ( or shouldn't) buy it.

In general on older stones I'd be concerned about girdle damage- and surface abrasions.
Unless there are very large feathers, I would not be concerned of durability regarding feathers.
Put another way: If there were feathers that caused me concern about durability, they'd be so distinct and large you'd see them from 10 feet way.

 

[Hera]

Can the seller provide you with the lab information? Is there paperwork? Can they send you a scanned pdf of the paperwork? There might be additional information about the stone that could be useful.

 

[dianabarbara]

There's a tremendous amount of stuff written on the web. Unfortunately it's sometimes hard to figure out what is what.
Remember that to become a polished diamond, that rock has undergone tremendous pressure, friction and heat.
If a cutter damages a stone, they damage that stone.
That is a damaged diamond, not a feather.

It's true that feathers reaching the surface are of more concern- but even that aspect does not guarantee any sort of structural problem.

In general- and again, I can't speak of the diamond in the photo- and I'm not suggesting you should ( or shouldn't) buy it.

In general on older stones I'd be concerned about girdle damage- and surface abrasions.
Unless there are very large feathers, I would not be concerned of durability regarding feathers.
Put another way: If there were feathers that caused me concern about durability, they'd be so distinct and large you'd see them from 10 feet way.

interesting information, rockdiamond! thank you for clarifying these issues

The 'marks' in this stone are visible but not very much so at normal arm's lenght for the wearer. Even in up-close observation, in person I would have never thought this little guy could break. On the picture, it's a different story. Thanks a lot again!

 

[dianabarbara]

Can the seller provide you with the lab information? Is there paperwork? Can they send you a scanned pdf of the paperwork? There might be additional information about the stone that could be useful.

Hi hera! This is a good suggestion. I did receive a picture of the certificate and I have also inspected it in person. Unfortunately it says very little The only information it reports regarding the clarity is that the stone is classified as I1. no description of why so whatsoever.

The only other useful thing here is that it reports that the girdle is 'bruted - very thin - thick', so possibly exposed to further chipping.