Indented Naturals

[Bebe2015]

Can anyone help me with questions regarding indented naturals and if it causes the diamond to be more fragile? Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

See link here!
http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD05638119

 

[FancyIntense]

Not an expert here, but I've never heard of that being an issue as far as durability in any post or otherwise.

 

[FancyIntense]

The link does not show your diamond maybe because you have it on hold or already bought it? I looked up the diamond number, it says not available.

Can you post the GIA report with the plot of inclusions to see where the natural is located?

I'm curious to hear what the experts have to say.

 

[Bebe2015]

Thanks for your input! Im curious to say that the experts have to say as well! I've attached the GIA report.

file:///Users/JHLOVETT/Downloads/2171059568%20(1).pdf

 

[solgen]

http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=2171059568&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

Given the inclusions and the the size of the stone I'd want to see pics to see what effect those inclusions might have.

It's also a fairly deep stone that was purposely cut to retain the 3ct weight. You want some reflector images to see if this compromises light performance.

 

[Bebe2015]

 

[Bebe2015]

Thank you Slogan! Very helpful information!

 

[16ocean]

http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=2171059568&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

It's also a fairly deep stone that was purposely cut to retain the 3ct weight. .

This would be be too deep for me . . . .

 

[anne_h]

My stone is an antique stone that has an indented natural... never had any issues with it, and I accept that this is just part of this stone's character. I actually kind of like knowing that it has part of its original 'skin' still on it. lol

That said, each inclusion is unique so would need to be assessed on its merits.

Hope this helps!

Anne

 

[Bebe2015]

http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=2171059568&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

It's also a fairly deep stone that was purposely cut to retain the 3ct weight. .

This would be be too deep for me . . . .

Hmm… Could you please elaborate please, this would be my first diamond purchase and I'm very new to everything I'm hearing. Does the depth interfere with clarity?

 

[Bebe2015]

My stone is an antique stone that has an indented natural... never had any issues with it, and I accept that this is just part of this stone's character. I actually kind of like knowing that it has part of its original 'skin' still on it. lol

That said, each inclusion is unique so would need to be assessed on its merits.

Hope this helps!

Anne

Anne! Thank you for your input, I never really looked at it this way

 

[miraj]

I have read that indented naturals are not a durability concern, but might be a cosmetic/maintenance one. The indentation might gather dust/dirt and appear dark. The dirt would need to be cleaned out.

 

[FancyIntense]

http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=2171059568&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

It's also a fairly deep stone that was purposely cut to retain the 3ct weight. .

This would be be too deep for me . . . .

Hmm… Could you please elaborate please, this would be my first diamond purchase and I'm very new to everything I'm hearing. Does the depth interfere with clarity?

This diamond will face up smaller than 3 ct because of hidden weight in the depth and girdle.

John Pollard addressed this for you in your other post. He is one of the most knowledgeable people on Pricescope.

Here is what you should look for in terms of depth etc.

https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-cut

https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds

 

[FancyIntense]

http://www.solomonbrothers.com/DiamondDetail.aspx?sku=8F8Y6754&affiliate=9318613A-AD0C-4530-A456-0409DFEFB8DE&utm_source=PriceScope

This stone is similar, but less deep and faces up a 3 ct. size. It has a good HCA score too.

 

[Bebe2015]

http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?reportno=2171059568&childpagename=GIA%2FPage%2FReportCheck&pagename=GIA%2FDispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

It's also a fairly deep stone that was purposely cut to retain the 3ct weight. .

This would be be too deep for me . . . .

Hmm… Could you please elaborate please, this would be my first diamond purchase and I'm very new to everything I'm hearing. Does the depth interfere with clarity?

This diamond will face up smaller than 3 ct because of hidden weight in the depth and girdle.

John Pollard addressed this for you in your other post. He is one of the most knowledgeable people on Pricescope.

Here is what you should look for in terms of depth etc.

https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds/diamond-cut

https://www.pricescope.com/wiki/diamonds

It is just slightly a tiny bit smaller than the average 3ct correct? I was looking at the width and it falls into the 3ct zone.

 

[John P]

John Pollard addressed this for you in your other post. He is one of the most knowledgeable people on Pricescope.

Thanks for the kind words, FancyIntense. I was contacted and pointed to this thread to make comment.

Indented naturals are areas where the original rough crystal dipped beneath the planned girdle-outline. While there's nothing physically wrong with the diamond, think of it like a cookie where a mouse took a tiny bite and it's not correctly round. Indented naturals are associated with producing diamonds with a plan that holds weight at the expense of a pristine outline. That's certainly the case here.

It is just slightly a tiny bit smaller than the average 3ct correct? I was looking at the width and it falls into the 3ct zone.

I would debate that, Bebe. The "width" is the average girdle diameter, which = 9.04 mm. That diameter is more in line with well-cut diamonds in the high 2-carat range. More importantly, the proportions of the 3.01 you're considering are predicted to be AGS 6 in light performance... So in addition to being physically smaller than well-cut 3-carat diamonds, the overall brightness, dispersion and sparkle of the 3.01 will not have the same quality level of well-cut diamonds in the high 2-carat range.

Some illustrations I found quickly:

2.75ct J SI2 GIA XXX - Has a "width" of 9.14 mm (larger, and with proportions that facilitate more light return).
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?rep...ename=GIA/Dispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

2.71ct J SI1 GIA XXX - Has a "width" of 9.00 mm (about same, but with proportions that facilitate more light return).
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?pag...&c=Page&cid=1355954554547&reportno=2186815447

With the above said:

In following your conversation, it sounds like you like the idea of owning a "3 carat" diamond. As I recall, the price for this one is quite low, which I hope is making sense, given the comments you've received from informed forum members.

The bottom line is that, visually, this diamond is comparable in physical size to high 2-carat diamonds, and comparable in performance to average commercially produced diamonds. That's why the price is low. No problem. Pricescope is about education. As long as you go into the purchase informed and with eyes wide-open; if you like it and feel it's worth the cost it's entirely up to you. What makes you happy is what's important.

 

[Bebe2015]

John Pollard addressed this for you in your other post. He is one of the most knowledgeable people on Pricescope.

Thanks for the kind words, FancyIntense. I was contacted and pointed to this thread to make comment.

Indented naturals are areas where the original rough crystal dipped beneath the planned girdle-outline. While there's nothing physically wrong with the diamond, think of it like a cookie where a mouse took a tiny bite and it's not correctly round. Indented naturals are associated with producing diamonds with a plan that holds weight at the expense of a pristine outline. That's certainly the case here.

It is just slightly a tiny bit smaller than the average 3ct correct? I was looking at the width and it falls into the 3ct zone.

I would debate that, Bebe. The "width" is the average girdle diameter, which = 9.04 mm. That diameter is more in line with well-cut diamonds in the high 2-carat range. More importantly, the proportions of the 3.01 you're considering are predicted to be AGS 6 in light performance... So in addition to being physically smaller than well-cut 3-carat diamonds, the overall brightness, dispersion and sparkle of the 3.01 will not have the same quality level of well-cut diamonds in the high 2-carat range.

Some illustrations I found quickly:

2.75ct J SI2 GIA XXX - Has a "width" of 9.14 mm (larger, and with proportions that facilitate more light return).
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?rep...ename=GIA/Dispatcher&c=Page&cid=1355954554547

2.71ct J SI1 GIA XXX - Has a "width" of 9.00 mm (about same, but with proportions that facilitate more light return).
http://www.gia.edu/cs/Satellite?pag...&c=Page&cid=1355954554547&reportno=2186815447

With the above said:

In following your conversation, it sounds like you like the idea of owning a "3 carat" diamond. As I recall, the price for this one is quite low, which I hope is making sense, given the comments you've received from informed forum members.

The bottom line is that, visually, this diamond is comparable in physical size to high 2-carat diamonds, and comparable in performance to average commercially produced diamonds. That's why the price is low. No problem. Pricescope is about education. As long as you go into the purchase informed and with eyes wide-open; if you like it and feel it's worth the cost it's entirely up to you. What makes you happy is what's important.

I'm definitely learning so much! I want to thank you John for your time and kind words Now with this new knowledge I can continue searching for the right diamond for me! I'm interested in the 3 carat because I tried on several sizes and the 3 carat fit my chunky fingers and sits very nicely.

I'm also looking at this, what are your thoughts and opinion on this loose diamond? Sorry Im not sure how to add the link for the GIA report but the report number is listed below. Thanks so much everyone for helping me, much appreciated!!!!

January 08, 2015
GIA Report Number ........................................ 1188702266
Shape and Cutting Style ............................ Round Brilliant
Measurements ................................ 9.40 - 9.44 x 5.62 mm
Carat Weight ......................................................... 3.03 carat
Color Grade .......................................................................... J
Clarity Grade .......................................................................SI1
Cut Grade .............................................................. Very Good
Polish ...................................................................... Excellent
Symmetry .............................................................. Excellent
Fluorescence .................................................. Medium Blue
Inscription(s): GIA 1188702266
Comments: Additional pinpoints are not shown.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, we can help you better if we give you some parameters to help you start searching rather than have you shopping blindly.

First, look only at GIA Excellent cut diamonds. Within that broad category, you will want to narrow it down further to the better stones.

Look for:

table: 54-58

depth: 60-62.3

crown angle: 34-35.0

pavilion angle: 40.6-40.9

Are you open to antique round stones (Old European Cut)? What is your preference for color? What is your budget?

 

[John P]

I'm definitely learning so much! I want to thank you John for your time and kind words Now with this new knowledge I can continue searching for the right diamond for me! I'm interested in the 3 carat because I tried on several sizes and the 3 carat fit my chunky fingers and sits very nicely.

I'm also looking at this, what are your thoughts and opinion on this loose diamond? Sorry Im not sure how to add the link for the GIA report but the report number is listed below. Thanks so much everyone for helping me, much appreciated!!!!

January 08, 2015
GIA Report Number ........................................ 1188702266
Shape and Cutting Style ............................ Round Brilliant
Measurements ................................ 9.40 - 9.44 x 5.62 mm
Carat Weight ......................................................... 3.03 carat
Color Grade .......................................................................... J
Clarity Grade .......................................................................SI1
Cut Grade .............................................................. Very Good
Polish ...................................................................... Excellent
Symmetry .............................................................. Excellent
Fluorescence .................................................. Medium Blue
Inscription(s): GIA 1188702266
Comments: Additional pinpoints are not shown.

Bebe,

By the numbers that will be an extremely bright diamond. It's a 60-60 make (meaning table and depth both near 60). It was cut with nice preservation of maximum spread; with one possible caveat below. There won't be as much visible fire in this type of make as a traditional ideal, but it's still a candidate for AGS 1 in light performance where 0 is the top grade, 10 is the bottom. In terms of general proportions/performance potential I find this much better than the prior 3.01 option, although without an ideal-scope or ASET image we don't know how consistently it's cut within those average numbers.

As mentioned, the one cut-feature you need to inquire about is the girdle. It runs to "Very-Thin" and is the reason this diamond received VG in cut rather than EX. If it's only "very-thin" at one spot on the girdle things may be just fine. If it runs to "very-thin" in many places around the girdle it could pose a durability/chipping risk. The only way to know is to have an expert assess it. I would first examine the indented natural which appears at 6:30 on the pavilion plot. It's there because the plan was to maximize the spread of this diamond. If the VT only happens in one small area a skilled stone-setter will know how to mount it so that no undue pressure is exerted there. If the VT happens around the clock of the diamond you'll want to be sure to insure it right away, as the risk of a chip down the road during normal wear increases (although any diamond can chip if it takes a knock the wrong way).

The clarity grade is set by the crystal under the edge of the table at 9:00. Check out whether that crystal is dark or transparent. If it's dark it might be visible; don't know how important that is to you. Some people want absolutely clean. Others are okay with cleanish, or don't mind a small "birthmark" visible.

"Medium Blue" fluorescence should be benign in this case. As with any diamond, have your jeweler check to be sure there is no undue haze or over-density of the "pinpoints not shown" as noted on the grading report.

 

[John P]

Look for:
table: 54-58
depth: 60-62.3
crown angle: 34-35.0
pavilion angle: 40.6-40.9

This is also sound advice. These numbers will identify diamonds which perform more like traditional "ideal" makes (as opposed to 60-60 described above). In broad terms an ideal make will have slightly smaller spread than a 60-60. But when consistently cut they have more fire accompanying the brightness seen in their performance qualities.

They're also more rare as you rise to higher "magic" carat weights, because producers will use whatever numbers produce the geometry needed to make the scale read "3.0X" or "4.0X" carats as their priority.

 

[Bebe2015]

Thanks again so much for all your help! Would you advise purchasing a loose diamond from one and having it set/mounted with a different vendor?