Opinion on these crafted by Infinity diamonds

[JackBauer]

Hi Guys,

As mentioned on some other threads, I have decided to buy a Crafted by Infinity diamonds. I have the following diamonds on hold and will be seeing them tomorrow midday. I know all Crafted by Inifinity diamonds are meant to be amazing but if you could pick one, which would it be and why? I can't read ASET or IdealScope images so any opinions would be most welcome. Thanks!

0.56 ct E VS2
https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD9391

0.60 ct E VS2
https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD10085

0.64 ct E VS2
https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD10494

 

[hypermom]

You certainly are in good hands with HPD. I just got my upgrades and my diamond just glows and looks much bigger than its stated weight.

I would chose the largest one. The difference in size between the largest and the smallest stones should be visible to you.

But I would look at the 3 in person and see which one your eye favors. That's great you can see them in person. Try to look at them not knowing which one is which.

 

[EncikG]

Note this are all mind clean issues. I’m sure they perform great.
Personally, I would take out the 0.60.
Would the crystal on the table of the 0.64 bother u?

So that leaves 0.56 as my pick.

 

[tyty333]

I would choose the .64. All are well cut, all are eye-clean, and all have good asets/idealscopes. Most people appreciate a small bump in size especially
under the 1 carat mark where it will be more obvious.

Here is a relative size difference between the .64 and the .56 on a size 6 finger with 2mm shank.

 

[John P]

I wanted to provide some photo clarity (pun intended). The camera lens was not parallel with the stage and diamond table when the 0.60 ct photo was made. That caused the distortions seen in the reflective pattern. You can examine it live in the technical viewers, in-person, for a proper impression.

That photo was also made in an older setup. We have since shifted to third-party professional imaging. They produced the photos for the 0.56 ct and 0.64 ct posted above.

Hope that is helpful.

 

[lovedogs]

I would choose the largest one since all will be fantastic stones in terms of performance. That size jump is noticible!

 

[chamois]

You are in the best of hands with HPD, I also just upgraded with them. I would go with the largest if you are intent on going for an E. Personally, if it were me I would go down in colour and get a larger CBI. If you are going to be viewing the diamonds in person then add some lower colour (F maybe G?) larger CBI’s to the mix.
Good luck!

 

[Dancing Fire]

I wanted to provide some photo clarity (pun intended). The camera lens was not parallel with the stage and diamond table when the 0.60 ct photo was made.

JP, That's what I thought. I didn't think those hearts would pass as a CBI stone.

 

[whitewave]

Note this are all mind clean issues. I’m sure they perform great.
Personally, I would take out the 0.60.
Would the crystal on the table of the 0.64 bother u?

So that leaves 0.56 as my pick.

You aren’t going to see the crystal at that size and all CBI are eye clean.

Pick the largest one.

The two CBI’s in my avatar are a .56 G si2 and a .58 F si 1. I wore the G as a solitaire for a year and it was perfect and wonderful.

All things equal, I’d go with the largest one.

 

[whitewave]

What size finger?


Oh a few more things, I can’t tell the difference between the F and G and I have never been able to find the inclusions in either.

 

[cflutist]

What size finger?


Oh a few more things, I can’t tell the difference between the F and G and I have never been able to find the inclusions in either.

With or without a 10x loupe?

 

[bmfang]

I love that 0.64 cut wise but that carbon crystal is way too noticeable magnified. At 5.5mm in diameter, that’s where I don’t think I’d be able to notice it but your eyes (and more importantly, those of your fiancée) might be able to notice it at standard eye clean viewing distances.

The cut on the 0.56 I like even more than the 0.64. So assuming that the crystal is an issue, I’d prefer the 0.56.

The 0.60 is a bit of a mixed bag for me. Hearts imagery definitely looks wonky, but it does somewhat correlate with the AGS computer generated hearts image based on Sarine data that is shown on the lab report.

@John Pollard, assuming that the OP does not purchase the 0.60, are there any plans to update the listing with GCAL imagery?

 

[whitewave]

With or without a 10x loupe?

With, lol.

 

[whitewave]

I love that 0.64 cut wise but that carbon crystal is way too noticeable magnified. At 5.5mm in diameter, that’s where I don’t think I’d be able to notice it but your eyes (and more importantly, those of your fiancée) might be able to notice it at standard eye clean viewing distances.

The cut on the 0.56 I like even more than the 0.64. So assuming that the crystal is an issue, I’d prefer the 0.56.

The 0.60 is a bit of a mixed bag for me. Hearts imagery definitely looks wonky, but it does somewhat correlate with the AGS computer generated hearts image based on Sarine data that is shown on the lab report.

@John Pollard, assuming that the OP does not purchase the 0.60, are there any plans to update the listing with GCAL imagery?

It’s a clear inclusion.

 

[bmfang]

It’s a clear inclusion.

Totally agree that it’s a clear inclusion. However, where it is placed under the table is good when looking at the stone directly above it (should be masked by obstruction in an arrow shaft).

Unfortunately we don’t look at stones from ONLY one angle. I’m sure that the reflections out girdle way can be pronged over but there may be other reflections of the crystal that may still be visible under the table at a multitude of viewing angles.

 

[whitewave]

Totally agree that it’s a clear inclusion. However, where it is placed under the table is good when looking at the stone directly above it (should be masked by obstruction in an arrow shaft).

Unfortunately we don’t look at stones from ONLY one angle. I’m sure that the reflections out girdle way can be pronged over but there may be other reflections of the crystal that may still be visible under the table at a multitude of viewing angles.

Not at that size.

 

[lovedogs]

Totally agree that it’s a clear inclusion. However, where it is placed under the table is good when looking at the stone directly above it (should be masked by obstruction in an arrow shaft).

Unfortunately we don’t look at stones from ONLY one angle. I’m sure that the reflections out girdle way can be pronged over but there may be other reflections of the crystal that may still be visible under the table at a multitude of viewing angles.

I honestly would be SHOCKED if a clear inclusion were visible in a sub 1-ct stone. I really think that this stone is the best option given the bump in size.

 

[Lykame]

Hi @JackBauer. I'm delighted you're seeing CBIs, you're in for a great experience. Who are you seeing them with? Durham Rose or Diamond House? Super exciting! Please take lots of photos!

I would recommend seeing them all without being told which is which. Ask to see them in as many lighting settings as you possible can (outside, under the table, inside under different types of lights, next to the window etc).

Get up close and personal with your eyes.

Decide based on that.

I would also wonder whether there are any F options that might float your boat. I've just had a look, I can see in your budget there is only one... But oh my god this would be my choice. Look at the crown and pavilion angles!

https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD10158

Good luck!

 

[whitewave]

Ok, I JUST found the clear inclusion on my .56G si2 with a 30x loupe

 

[tyty333]

Ok, I JUST found the clear inclusion on my .56G si2 with a 30x loupe

Are you cross-eyed now?

(that's what happens to me when I try too hard to focus for too long)

 

[bmfang]

Btw, when I used the term “clear” inclusion above in reference to the 0.64ct CBI stone, I wasn’t meaning that it was clear in colour. I meant clear as in it was an obvious inclusion. Just to be clear. Lol.

 

[bmfang]

Hi @JackBauer. I'm delighted you're seeing CBIs, you're in for a great experience. Who are you seeing them with? Durham Rose or Diamond House? Super exciting! Please take lots of photos!

I would recommend seeing them all without being told which is which. Ask to see them in as many lighting settings as you possible can (outside, under the table, inside under different types of lights, next to the window etc).

Get up close and personal with your eyes.

Decide based on that.

I would also wonder whether there are any F options that might float your boat. I've just had a look, I can see in your budget there is only one... But oh my god this would be my choice. Look at the crown and pavilion angles!

https://www.hpdiamonds.com/en-us/diamonddetail/HPD10158

Good luck!

That F VS1 is stunning @Lykame !!!!!!

I wonder if there was debate within AGS about whether to call it a VS1 or a VVS2 given how clean that inclusion plot is.

 

[whitewave]

Are you cross-eyed now?

(that's what happens to me when I try too hard to focus for too long)

At 30x I was like DAMN there is it, huge, lol (but not huge because it’s 30x and it’s only a .56)

Eye strain, yes lol

 

[whitewave]

Btw, when I used the term “clear” inclusion above in reference to the 0.64ct CBI stone, I wasn’t meaning that it was clear in colour. I meant clear as in it was an obvious inclusion. Just to be clear. Lol.

It’s clear in color. CBI doesn’t have black carbon inclusions.

 

[whitewave]

Oh no!!! I think it’s grime! Lol. I ran it through the us and now it’s hard to find. Let me clean real well and see after if I can find the SI2 inclusion

 

[whitewave]

Wait, I’m back to thinking it’s the inclusion. I can only see it if I hold it a certain way. But let me clean some more....

I mean, this is what it takes to see a SI2 inclusion on a .56 CBI diamond!!! Isn’t this impressive?

 

[bmfang]

It’s clear in color. CBI doesn’t have black carbon inclusions.

Not sure if you can call this clear @whitewave

 

[whitewave]

Not sure if you can call this clear @whitewave

It’s a reflection off the light box. @John Pollard could you explain how and why this happens? Thanks

 

[EncikG]

I wanted to provide some photo clarity (pun intended). The camera lens was not parallel with the stage and diamond table when the 0.60 ct photo was made.

That photo was also made in an older setup. We have since shifted to third-party professional imaging. They produced the photos for the 0.56 ct and 0.64 ct posted above.

Thanks for the explanation.
So would I be correct in saying black background - older setup
White background - more accurate newer setup

 

[John P]

@John Pollard, assuming that the OP does not purchase the 0.60, are there any plans to update the listing with GCAL imagery?

Yes and no (I can explain why there are two answers).

Historical context first: Crafted by Infinity is a cutting producer. We supply a network. Most of our diamonds have sold in retail showrooms, not online. In that situation live performance speaks for itself up-front (in e-commerce the live experience comes last). So photos are not needed. And diamonds at the counter are shown in pro-quality ASET and precision viewers. That transcends the fallibility and flatness of any 2D photos.

So we made nominal photos as a courtesy. Most never got used. And it made no sense for our online sellers to attempt photographing the entire inventory, since it was spread among many sellers.

<--- I know.

That was then. This is now. The answer is yes and no.

Yes: Going forward we are funding professional imaging... The earthquake you felt in Idaho was @Wink Jones jumping for joy when we informed him ...Rather than producing and editing these in-house, a professional diamond lab is making them using a standardized platform. We feel they become an objective extension of independent grading this way.

No: We aren't cycling every diamond for new imaging. Partially because we don't want to bump prices even a penny. But mainly because of my introductory context paragraph above. Photos still aren't needed in live showings.

Thank you for asking, @bmfang

And... @JackBauer : Thank you for saving the world so many times. I'm a big fan.