Opinion on interpreting idealscope images

[Gav]

so some of you may have seen my previous post, and I have received a couple of mixed opinions on the IS image of this particular 1.3 G VS2 . I’ve been reading and trying to interpret the ideal scope chart on the ideal scope (thanks Sledge and Karl) website and to my beginner eyes this image looks like it’s at the excellent end of the scale. Though there are patches of black and some lighter red near the arrows. Is my interperation close? How do I interpret the varying clouds of black and lighter red?

Further, is cloudy or haziness of a stone detectable using an ideal scope? My main concern is the specs on this stone - is this something that can only be seen with expert eyes in person rather than by interpreting the IS?

Thanks!

 

[Karl_K]

The lighter areas that match the center are caused by an over bright back light.
The best cut MRB in the world will have some very minor leakage like below in these virtual images with a bright and very bright back light and no front lighting.
.

 

[Karl_K]

As far as the clarity the best bet is to have someone eyeball it and tell you about it.

 

[HappyNewLife]

it looks like a nice diamond, but I'd ask about eye-cleanliness. All those white dots kind of make the diamond look dirty

 

[Gav]

Yes my concern was the specks that look like dandruff

The dealer has said it is eye clean.. but I guess that’s a subjective term...

Have stones with such white specs known to cause issues?

 

[HappyNewLife]

I just wonder if it would block some sparkle, since there are so many of them

 

[Gav]

Thanks happynewlife
I share the same concern otherwise it’s syome ticks my boxes for stats and for budget...I just wonder if there’s any way to tell...

I have also got an IS for the 1.31 I was asking for in another post

@Karl_K is this a bad stone?

 

[Gav]

Thanks yes that’s my main concern too
I have received and Is for another stone 1.31

Is this showing massive light leakage at 2oclock?

 

[Karl_K]

I cant say if the stone is bad or good all I can do is help with the interpretation of the IS.
Yes, its leakage and its a sign of widely ranging pavilion facets and twisted lowers. Not a good thing.

 

[Gav]

Thanks Karl

On paper this stone looked good but seems the IS is quite revealing

So with the previous IS where you mentioned there was a bright back light, what does that mean? So are you saying that the IS is in fact good?

 

[Karl_K]

Thanks Karl

On paper this stone looked good but seems the IS is quite revealing

So with the previous IS where you mentioned there was a bright back light, what does that mean? So are you saying that the IS is in fact good?

Yes the 1st IS would rate as excellent, when the over bright back light is taken into account.

 

[Gav]

Is any sign of a cloudy or non transparent diamond revealed through an IS image? Or is this a completely different thing that can only be seen in person? Given the first IS was quite good, should the cloudy inclusions (particularly the specks) be less of an issue?

Thabks
Gavin

 

[Karl_K]

IS doesn't help to answer if a diamond is cloudy or not.

 

[Gav]

Thanks Karl
So it all feels like a guessing game

 

[sledge]

If I were in your shoes...

• Keep the first stone as a possibilty. @Karl_K is more experienced at reading these IS images and has confirmed that light ring is due to extreme backlighting. Adjusting for that, the IS image passes.
• Have the retailer verify eye cleanliness. It is a subjective matter; however, one common standard is no inclusions visible from 10" looking at the top of the diamond with 20/20 vision. My vision is more sensitive and I prefer to use 6" from top or side views with 20/20 vision.
• Also confirm what specks are. Maybe dirt? Or maybe worse? Retailer needs to confirm with his supplier. Ensure it isn't affecting the stone in a negative manner.
• If retailer has good return policy and since the IS image passes, it might be worth buying and having inspected by a local trusted jeweler or appraiser to confirm everything.
• Reject the 2nd stone. Too much leakage.

 

[Gav]

Thanks Sledge! Does the term eye clean cover no milky or
Hazy appearance? As the retailer has said
It is eye clean..

 

[sledge]

IMO it should as grade setting cloud inclusions with that "additional clouds not shown" note can be detrimental.

And I think most reputable dealers would disclose stuff like this. But this comes back to knowing and trusting that vendor to make a judgment call on your behalf.

I've had some unusual experiences where trust meant living or dying so it isn't freely given and its easily broken.

With my life experiences in consideration, I'd point blank ask the vendor to confirm no milky or hazy appearance as it seems obvious to me there is still doubt and until they confirm you cannot find peace with the decision. Rather you trust that information is another matter but if the vendor says eye clean and not milky or hazy it's worth a shot IMO as long as you.are willing to return, fight for a refund, etc if it's not all that the vendor promised.