Opinions On RB: Should I be Concerned?

[Sparkle524]

Hi Everyone-
My goal was to get an AGS Ideal Cut H & A F color VS1/VS2 but I as well as my vendor have not been able to locate one. I did see the diamond below in person (G VS2 H & A) and it is beautiful but I was wondering if this was priced appropriately as well as the side note on the inclusion. Any thoughts or advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Sparkle524]

Continuation of photos.

 

[Dancing Fire]

a very nice stone wish i can afford it...

 

[Amys Bling]

I would not be concerned with a VS2 stone It looks lovely- I can get some pricing comparables using the PS search function...

 

[Amys Bling]

here is a comparable stone from Whiteflash

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2763542.htm

 

[Sparkle524]

AmysBling - the stone I posted is the same stone you posted a link to. I read somewhere on the forum under tools I think that said that one should not pick a stone that says "additional clouds not shown." The reason that they put "additional clouds not shown" is because if they plotted it on the diamond it would be so ugly that no one would buy the diamond. Is there some truth to that and do clouds affect the brillance or performance of the stone? TIA.

Also the part that I was concerned about was on the ASET on the left hand side (with the blue arrow) where it states "clarity grade of this diamond is partly based on clouds that are not shown."

 

[LizH]

Clouds are only a problem if they cover a large surface area of the diamond to make the diamond appear milky. If AGS has graded it a VS2, you should be just fine. If still worried, you can call Whiteflash and have them pull the diamond and have someone tell you exactly what they see. If you are really concerned, just let them know. They will either put your fears to rest by telling you it is beautiful with nothing to worry about, or point you in the direction of another suitable stone.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

No you don't need to worry about the clouds in a VS2. And WF wouldn't put a bad stone in it's ACA category, either. It will be a gorgeous stone! Lucky you if you can get it!

 

[Dreamer_D]

If the clouds affected the clarity grade they would have been plotted or the note would have said "clarity grade based on clouds not shown". When neither of those is the case, then it means the clouds were NOT plentiful/noticable enough to affect the clarity grade. So in a VS2, that means you do not need to worry at all.

 

[Sparkle524]

If the clouds affected the clarity grade they would have been plotted or the note would have said "clarity grade based on clouds not shown". When neither of those is the case, then it means the clouds were NOT plentiful/noticable enough to affect the clarity grade. So in a VS2, that means you do not need to worry at all.

Thank you everyone for your response.

Dreamer D - it does say "clarity grade based on clouds not shown." If you look at the pic right after the hearts pic, pic #6, on the left hand side I drew a blue arrow pointing to where it says that. Hmm. I'm confused now.

 

[Sparkle524]

Found a new diamond: 2.61 E VS2. Will I be able to see the inclusions in real life? I know the pic of the diamond is magnified but should I be concerned? I just didn't want to have it shipped down here and then have to ship it back. The asking price is $63,000. Does this sound like a fair price? Lastly of the 2 diamonds listed here which one would you go with? TIA

 

[Sparkle524]

continuation

 

[Sparkle524]

I'm thinking that the first diamond might be a better choice. There are no pics of the hearts. I will have to check with the vendor. Also I don't know if I'm interpreting the reports correctly but on the second diamond is there more light leakage in the center of the second diamond than the first diamond? Sorry so many questions.

 

[ccuheartnurse]

I wouldnt be concerned with a VS-2 at all for clarity. The 1st stone looks super nice though. I would most likely go for #1. Just my opinion of course. I am of the school of thought that if you cant see any inclusions with your "eyes" then its eye clean. I am not of the "mind clean" set despite my stone is a VVSI-1 (only thing avail at the time I was looking for a bigger stone).

Good luck to you..

J

 

[Sparkle524]

I wouldnt be concerned with a VS-2 at all for clarity. The 1st stone looks super nice though. I would most likely go for #1. Just my opinion of course. I am of the school of thought that if you cant see any inclusions with your "eyes" then its eye clean. I am not of the "mind clean" set despite my stone is a VVSI-1 (only thing avail at the time I was looking for a bigger stone).

Good luck to you..

J

Thank you for your input J. I was part of the "mind clean" group but I am slowly moving over to the other side. My first diamond 14 years ago was a VVS2.

 

[0-0-0]

If you saw the WF stone in person and you liked what you saw I really don't see any red flags. I seriously doubt that WF would give a stone the ACA label if the clouds are inhibiting the brilliance of the stone. My vote goes to the WF stone, especially considering the huge price gap between the two.

 

[Sparkle524]

If you saw the WF stone in person and you liked what you saw I really don't see any red flags. I seriously doubt that WF would give a stone the ACA label if the clouds are inhibiting the brilliance of the stone. My vote goes to the WF stone, especially considering the huge price gap between the two.

Yes it was very pretty. I was just hoping to find something as pretty in F color. They are still searching for me but haven't come back with anything yet.