need opinions/ideas about stone i have been looking at

[bac281]

I've been looking at a diamondfrom whiteflash that is a 1.8ct G, Si1. I've included the pictures they sent to me and the specs. What do you guys think? THe main thing i'm concerned about is that this should be totally eye clean even when looked at closely with the naked eye. Anything else i should be weary of?

 

[stone-cold11]

Images looks good. No way to tell if it is eye-clean or not from the image, you will have to ask WF.

 

[axiochris]

Does the large variation in the crown angle as shown by the SARIN chart be the reason why some of the arrows are crooked?
i

 

[bac281]

do those inclusions on the left side of picture 3 concern you at all? What about the symmetry?

 

[antelope1]

When you say symmetry, are you talking about the cuteness (I heard that term from an appraiser, it's legit) of the culet? It's slightly assymetrical, to be sure. The arrows at 12 and 6 o'clock (in the photos) bother me too.

But, having said that, this is magnified 100x what it would be in real life. Do you think that you would not notice the very slight assymetry in real life? With a stone this well cut...maybe you would just be blinded by the sparkles?

Eye clean...you're going to have to ask. Those needle inclusions look really long, but they're white. It's a hard call.

 

[axiochris]

When you say symmetry, are you talking about the cuteness (I heard that term from an appraiser, it's legit) of the culet? It's slightly assymetrical, to be sure. The arrows at 12 and 6 o'clock (in the photos) bother me too.

But, having said that, this is magnified 100x what it would be in real life. Do you think that you would not notice the very slight assymetry in real life? With a stone this well cut...maybe you would just be blinded by the sparkles?

Eye clean...you're going to have to ask. Those needle inclusions look really long, but they're white. It's a hard call.

Interesting. Would you actually consider this stone well cut based on that large deviation in crown angles. Ive actually never seen that before.

 

[bac281]

Here is the GIA report if that helps.

 

[antelope1]

Hm. The maximum deviation in the crown angles is 1.2%, which is bigger than 1%, but only by 0.2%. It still gets an AGS 0 from the Sarin. HCA score is 0.9, which definitely makes it a contender.

The ASET has a good mix of red and green, and the Idealscope doesn't show leakage...

OP, why do you think this is *not* well cut?

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

What is not to like?
I have seen diamonds with hearts and arrows patterns with a lot mor variance in scan angles
the symmetry is way better than anything you can see with a naked eye
a very hard to find ct wt too.

 

[bac281]

Here is another stone i was looking at. How does it compare to the original i posted?

 

[bac281]

Should i be worried about the darker circle formed by the triangles in the middle of the idealascope image?

 

[antelope1]

No. This one is slightly more symmetrical, but not so much that you would notice without a loupe, IMO.

The darker area is just the culet -- it reflects light differently than the arrows or the area around the arrows. It will look fine in person. This one has a particularly symmetrical culet, which I personally really like.

If you have any doubts, why not put a deposit on the diamond (or both diamonds) and have them sent to an appraiser near you? So you can examine the diamonds before purchase?

 

[imsommer]

What is the clarity for the second diamond??

Im definitely no expect and have just been doing ALOT of research for "my perfect diamond", but the second one is much better. You dont see all the "twinned wisps that you see with the other 1.8carat and overall seems more symmetrical. I dont think the triangles are that much darker in the second one versus the first one, I think if anything they appear a little more prominent because in the first stone the light is bouncing off off other imperfections within the stone and cand causing it too look lighter.. lol.. thats probably all wrong.. hehe but it made sense to me.. I would get the second one.. yeah its a small loss in carat weight but worth it.. Do you mind saying what the price difference is? Am i even allowed to ask that on here?..I just checked off a bunch of boxes agreeing to stuff just so I could speak my mind on this post, i hope that wasnt one of the rules..lol. Also I would note that while both stones have the exact same cutlet size 0.3mm (0.04%), you can see the opening in the first stone and the second stone looks like there is no cutlet at all. I believe that the second stone has the apperance of a cutlet size of the 0.3mm (0.04%) (very small), and the 1.8carat look sto me larger than that. When the cutlet is being graded, the grader also considers the presence of any clarity characteristics in their assessment. A chip or a natural indent or any other opening in the surface is present at the cutlet only the remaining portion of the cutlet is considered in the cutlet grade, and the other characteristics is considered in diamonds clarity grade. Likewise.. but not like these stones.. if a cutlet is at more than a slight angle to the table, the cutlet size is reported as none, and considered an "extra facet", yet to my untrained eye, appears to be a hole at the bottom, just not completely round!.. Ughhh the symantics are enough to drive me crazy.. If someone just gave me a diamond then I would be happy with it but knowing I have to pay for it, I want the best. (to clarify: my man is going to give me a diamond, but his money is my money, so in effect, im paying for it)..lol

 

[imsommer]

Oh my, I sounded like a retard. I definitely should have re-read my message before I sent it. I am a typo machine, and my thoughts seemed scattered.. sorry about that. Darn.. I blew my first post

 

[yssie]

"symmetry" on both stones is just fine. Both are lovely stones.

If you want the optical symmetry that produces hearts you need a hearts image. Any visible "asymmetry" is far more likely due to photography than to any characteristic of the stone itself.

Culets are fine - even if the second's is slightly bigger, you're not going to be able to see the ring bottom through that tiny little facet IRL... if you even consider a large culet a bad thing, which I personally do not

Ask vendors if the stones are eyeclean to your specifications - which means you must first decide what eyeclean means to you.

 

[bac281]

the second is the VS2.

 

[bac281]

Just to be clear, what i mean by dark ring is the dark area betweek these two yellow circles.

 

[axiochris]

The second looks better to me. Also its VS2 so in terms of eye cleanliness you shouldnt have any issues.

Any other experts want to chime in?

 

[bac281]

I ended going with the second of the two diamonds. It looks great! Thanks to everyone for their comments.

 

[Laila619]

Congrats!

The area you circled is very slight leakage, but nothing to worry about at all.