Is it possible?

[Annachering]

Hi! I'm in the process of picking out my engagement ring (my husband and I did this whole thing backwards...), and I'm in the market for a 1.75-2 ct not crushed ice, elongated cushion. I'd like to err on the upper end of near colorless for the balance of savings/whiteness. Eye clean is what I'm looking for, I don't care about mind clean. I have lots of feelers out, but this diamond is throwing me for a loop...is it possible that this is eye-clean (as I was told several times)?? I can't really tell from a photo/video! While we're at it, any other observations or recommendations? I plan to see it in person on Monday, but I just wanted some opinions before then!

Cut - Cushion Modified Brilliant
Carat weight - 2.20
Color - G
Clarity - S12
Cost - $14,500



Thanks in advance!

 

[AprilBaby]

I don’t know anything about that shape but I don’t like the way the center looks like it has a big hole.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I agree with AprilBaby- the pics make the stone look pretty bad.
As a lover of stones with a lot of sparkle- which has been compared to a "bucket of crushed ice"- this stone looks like a horrible case of bad crushed ice ( from the pics)
A good example of "crushed ice" will have a consistent sparkle from one end of the stone to the other, with no static dark areas.
You'll spot this easily in person.
Generally speaking, to avoid "crushed ice", you'll need to look at "Cushion Brilliant" as opposed to cushion modified brilliant.

As to your questions about clarity: GIA plots are pretty much useless in determining how an imperfection (s) will look in person. The plot is 2 dimensional, while the actual diamond lives in 3
So, there's plenty of times a stone looks like it's been hit by a shotgun on the plot, while the stone is eye clean.
Also the opposite- stones that look like they should be totally eye clean, yet the imperfection is somehow located/oriented in a way that makes it easy to spot naked eye.
This is another aspect that an in-person viewing should answer.

 

[Annachering]

I agree with AprilBaby- the pics make the stone look pretty bad.
As a lover of stones with a lot of sparkle- which has been compared to a "bucket of crushed ice"- this stone looks like a horrible case of bad crushed ice ( from the pics)
A good example of "crushed ice" will have a consistent sparkle from one end of the stone to the other, with no static dark areas.
You'll spot this easily in person.
Generally speaking, to avoid "crushed ice", you'll need to look at "Cushion Brilliant" as opposed to cushion modified brilliant.

As to your questions about clarity: GIA plots are pretty much useless in determining how an imperfection (s) will look in person. The plot is 2 dimensional, while the actual diamond lives in 3
So, there's plenty of times a stone looks like it's been hit by a shotgun on the plot, while the stone is eye clean.
Also the opposite- stones that look like they should be totally eye clean, yet the imperfection is somehow located/oriented in a way that makes it easy to spot naked eye.
This is another aspect that an in-person viewing should answer.

Thanks for your opinion/response. I took those photos as screenshots from a video, so I'm not sure if the actual video would influence your opinion? Still going to see it, just wondering if I was THAT off, because I didn't see it as this terrible! Thanks again!

Here's the video: https://www.instagram.com/p/BZwQltIAQd-/?taken-by=parrisjewels

 

[AprilBaby]

I still see the hole in the center on the video.

 

[Winks_Elf]

If you can see it in the video, it would probably drive you crazy in person.

 

[Annachering]

I still see the hole in the center on the video.

Any idea why that is? I thought a hole in the middle was from a large culet, but this supposedly doesn’t have one?

 

[Matthews1127]

Any idea why that is? I thought a hole in the middle was from a large culet, but this supposedly doesn’t have one?

I believe that is a large culet.
Do you know how you will set it? The culet may influence how you set it, and your choice of metal...
There really isn't anything wrong with a large culet, as long as it's a well cut stone. Many people associate culet with leakage, but a well cut stone can sometimes benefit from a large culet...esp. with chunky facets. Lots of rainbow fire from those babies. I believe an in person examination of this diamond is necessary. From the video, it APPEARS eye clean, but you need an up close, 3D experience.
Can't wait to find out what you decide!!!
Best of luck!!

 

[Dee*Jay]

I also think the "hole" is a large culet (which I'm still trying to decide it it's off-center after watching the video several times), but the paper says none...? Regardless, that stone to my untrained eye does not look well cut at all culet or no culet.

 

[Karl_K]

blow ups always help, pink in the center is your finger below the diamond, large culet and some leakage. The grey around it is just poor light return.

 

[OoohShiny]

That looks a giant sand creature is about to try to eat Han Solo and Luke Skywalker... lol

 

[Rockdiamond]

There's virtually no way a stone cut that style has a large Culet. We are just seeing a reflection of something else

 

[AprilBaby]

Such as?

 

[Karl_K]

There's virtually no way a stone cut that style has a large Culet. We are just seeing a reflection of something else

If it doesn't have a flat culet it has super shallow facets in that area giving the same effect and poor light return around it.
Its not a reflection of anything it is leakage in the center.

 

[Rockdiamond]

We all agree the video makes the stone look poor. I can't comment on the stone as I have not seen it and the vendor has been identified. We're looking at a frozen close up from a video. It could be reflecting skin, or it could be leakage.
Whatever the cause, that type of stone virtually never has a large culet. Stones that do have large culets will not look like the video