is this true??? need help

[fongrx7]

hi, I have been looking into some SI2 stones, and I got suggestions from vendors that about 90% of SI2 are not eye-cleaned. is it true? should I upgrade my search to SI1 if I want eye-cleaned stone?

thanks

 

[dimonbob]

I don't know about 90% but most SI2 diamonds are not eye-clean. If you want eye-clean, I recommend SI1 or VS2. If you are looking at an emerald cut, I recommend a VS2 or VS1.

 

[pqcollectibles]

Eye clean, round brilliant SI2's are just like J's that face up white in platinum. They're out there and you're lucky if you find one. Don't close your mind to the possibility, but shop carefully.

 

[Griffin]

What?!?!? About 90% of I1 stones don't face up eye-clean, but I have plenty that do. I would not accept a stone as being an SI that DIDN'T face up clean.

If I'm not mistaken, doesn't the very definition of an SI mean NO visible inclusions???? (For RB cuts, at least)
If you can see it without a loupe, it's supposed to be an I1, right?

Any help from the GIA Certified people to clarify this one?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 2/3/2004 3:35:39 AM Griffin wrote:

What?!?!? About 90% of I1 stones don't face up eye-clean, but I have plenty that do. I would not accept a stone as being an SI that DIDN'T face up clean.
----------------

Blessed be! Hope this thread gets long enough to clarify expectations about the look of these grades.

There are quite a few posts around here with buyers scared away by the "huge" inclusion in a VS... I guess I'd have to go to another checkup to downgrade my 20:20 vision diagnostic, oh well.

It seems that most of the dispute about the clean-ness of SIs comes from the various descriptions and expectations about the grade around here. "Eye clean" is more often interpreted on Pricescope (please correct me if wrong) as "inclusions completely invisible without magnification from any angle and under any lighting". From this point of view, I would agree that someone looking hard into SI2 stones would pick up something through the pavilion facets or some other angle a mounted stone is never seen from. No wander GIA based it's grades on 10X magnification instead of the look of the stone without: they'd be facing war by now otherwise. I could only imagine what nightmare would result if the same logic would be applied to say, rubies...

This leaves aside the expectations of "eye clean-ness" under some inexperienced use of 10X

This may explain some of the divergence in the perception of SI grades. Leaving colored or black inclusions alone, I could not agree more that SIs are vastly eye clean, face up and under wearing conditions. Right?

Not to mention the respective stigma on ECs... those need serious rehabilitation from the "D-G, VS only of bust light loosers" reputation. I almost feel guilty for wanting one by now. Oh well...

 

[mike04456]

Honest to goodness, can we get this straight once and for all?

Clarity grades are determined by what is visible under 10x magnification.​

They are not determined by what is visible with the naked eye. Believe it or not, under GIA definitions, you can have even a VS-clarity stone with an eye-visible inclusion, and an eye-clean I1. The grade is an overall score determined by the number, size, nature, and location of the inclusions, in addition to their visibility. Visibility is only one of the factors that contribute to the clarity grade.




(This is straight out of my GIA Diamond Grading Manual, by the way, and it's one of the first things they teach you when you learn how to grade diamonds.)

 

[hoorray]

Yeahhhh Lawgem!

Maybe Leonid can put this in the FAQ section for reference.