shape
carat
color
clarity

Opinions on this diamond

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
Hey everyone,
I found this diamond on blue Nile and was hoping to get your opinions. It is for my gfs engagement ring :)

it grades a 1.1 on hca


I can’t tell if the image is just very magnified or if I can see the inclusions in the table and it isn’t eye clean
 

LoveMeDo

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
230
Hey everyone,
I found this diamond on blue Nile and was hoping to get your opinions. It is for my gfs engagement ring :)

it grades a 1.1 on hca


I can’t tell if the image is just very magnified or if I can see the inclusions in the table and it isn’t eye clean

That definitely looks like a black inclusion on the table, which to me would be a deal breaker. I’m also not crazy about the numbers on this stone personally. If you provide your budget and details about what you’re looking for I bet this group could find something even better for you!
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
Thanks for the feedback.

my budget on a stone is up to $14,500.

id like the size to be in the 1.65-1.80 range.

E-G range color

si1-vs2 clarity. I do not want si2

like you say I would prefer the inclusions not be under the table, but if it’s eye clean I’m ok with it. I know I’m asking for a lot within my budget but I’ll take all the help I can get
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
Triple excellent or ideal cut, symmetry and polish

originally I wanted little to none fluorescence, but maybe I need to stretch to medium. Just prefer no blue tinge
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,127
The video is definitely magnified so regardless of diamond all inclusions will look worse on the computer than to the naked eye (assuming you don’t have super hero eagle eyes).

The location, size and black color of this crystal is what gives me pause. I would want additional verification from the vendor the stone is eye clean. Also I would want to understand their definition of eye clean. Many are 10-12” looking at top of diamond only with good lighting and 20/20 vision. If you are more particular, you may want to ask:

1. Is that a casual glance or hard observation?

2. What if we move as close to 6”?

3. What about from the sides and/or tilted position?

As far as the proportions I also don’t like, despite a passing HCA score. I will take a peek to see if I can find something better within your parameters.

Are you married to BN, or open to alternate vendors? Any other special conditions? Are you US based or international? If the latter, do we have to consider VAT and duties? Is an upgrade policy important to you? Would a better or more generous upgrade policy have additional value over a standard one?
 

Tourmaline

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
2,025

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
The video is definitely magnified so regardless of diamond all inclusions will look worse on the computer than to the naked eye (assuming you don’t have super hero eagle eyes).

The location, size and black color of this crystal is what gives me pause. I would want additional verification from the vendor the stone is eye clean. Also I would want to understand their definition of eye clean. Many are 10-12” looking at top of diamond only with good lighting and 20/20 vision. If you are more particular, you may want to ask:

1. Is that a casual glance or hard observation?

2. What if we move as close to 6”?

3. What about from the sides and/or tilted position?

As far as the proportions I also don’t like, despite a passing HCA score. I will take a peek to see if I can find something better within your parameters.

Are you married to BN, or open to alternate vendors? Any other special conditions? Are you US based or international? If the latter, do we have to consider VAT and duties? Is an upgrade policy important to you? Would a better or more generous upgrade policy have additional value over a standard one?

Thanks. I’m located in Miami,Florida
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
Pressed reply by mistake.

upgrade policy isn’t a deal killer for me. Of course it would be nice to have some kind of upgrade policy though.

I’m not sticking with blue Nile, that one had popped up in a general search I did that happened to be on BN
 

Natylad

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
2,524
I checked out the video and as the stone turned I saw that the black inclusion on the table was being reflected to most facets of the diamond. Definitely a no for me.
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
what are some good proportions I should be looking for?

one thing I notice when I went to look in person is that I have an eye for color. I can tell between a E or G, so I’d like it to have minimum a G
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
23,823
That (rather large) dark inclusion on the table would make that stone a no-go for me.

Here are a few worth looking at (found through the PS search tool underneath the menu bar). Some a little over budget

Smaller inclusion on table


Beautiful stone
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,127
what are some good proportions I should be looking for?

I like to start here:

54-57 table
60-62 depth
34-35 crown
40.6-40.8 pavilion
75-80 lower girdle facets (LGF's)
GIA or AGS lab report

This is my preference & a little tighter than some will advise. My reasoning is pretty simple.

1. GIA gross rounding. There are 8 actual crown & 8 actual pavilion angles in a round diamond. GIA measures each crown angle individually, then averages AND rounds them to the nearest 0.5 degrees. Similar thing happens with pavilion angles, except they are rounded to the nearest 0.2 degrees. When you factor in this variation between reported & actual values, it could push select areas of the diamond in unwanted territory. So by keeping the parameters a little tighter is an act of hedging risk.

2. Lack of advanced images. Most virtual inventory vendors like JA, BN and similar aren't going to provide a full array of advanced images like ASET, ideascope & hearts images. These images are important because they confirm light performance & symmetrical precision of the stone being considered. Think of it this way, good proportions help get us in the ballpark but these images help confirm something didn't go awry and the proportions are behaving as expected.

In short, the more information we can uncover & ensure are within ideal ranges, the less risk we take as a buyer.
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
I like to start here:

54-57 table
60-62 depth
34-35 crown
40.6-40.8 pavilion
75-80 lower girdle facets (LGF's)
GIA or AGS lab report

This is my preference & a little tighter than some will advise. My reasoning is pretty simple.

1. GIA gross rounding. There are 8 actual crown & 8 actual pavilion angles in a round diamond. GIA measures each crown angle individually, then averages AND rounds them to the nearest 0.5 degrees. Similar thing happens with pavilion angles, except they are rounded to the nearest 0.2 degrees. When you factor in this variation between reported & actual values, it could push select areas of the diamond in unwanted territory. So by keeping the parameters a little tighter is an act of hedging risk.

2. Lack of advanced images. Most virtual inventory vendors like JA, BN and similar aren't going to provide a full array of advanced images like ASET, ideascope & hearts images. These images are important because they confirm light performance & symmetrical precision of the stone being considered. Think of it this way, good proportions help get us in the ballpark but these images help confirm something didn't go awry and the proportions are behaving as expected.

In short, the more information we can uncover & ensure are within ideal ranges, the less risk we take as a buyer.

I took a screenshot so I can take these numbers with me while I look. Thank you. That sounds pretty logical to me.
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
That (rather large) dark inclusion on the table would make that stone a no-go for me.

Here are a few worth looking at (found through the PS search tool underneath the menu bar). Some a little over budget

Smaller inclusion on table


Beautiful stone

That last stone is on my list now to check out. Looks nice.

I might have to stretch my budget more so I can get more into the mid 6’s close to 7
 

distracts

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
5,797
what are some good proportions I should be looking for?

one thing I notice when I went to look in person is that I have an eye for color. I can tell between a E or G, so I’d like it to have minimum a G

Were the diamonds you were looking at all GIA graded? Or were they graded by other labs - AGS, EGL, IGI, etc?

There have been people here who have bought diamonds they thought were G color, graded so by EGL or IGI, that were GIA J color.

So what lab graded the stones you were looking at is important. Because it could be that you can tell between and E and a J, or a G and a J, or something like that. Or it could be that you can easily see the color in a GIA-graded G.
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
2E503B74-1157-4362-B05D-F9553F36D964.jpeg
Im supposed to go see this stone in person. The proportions don’t align with what a lot of you recommend. Should I bother?
 

Attachments

  • E9B1CFFB-30E6-4EA7-BD70-B5E16C65C115.jpeg
    E9B1CFFB-30E6-4EA7-BD70-B5E16C65C115.jpeg
    115.2 KB · Views: 8

distracts

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
5,797
2E503B74-1157-4362-B05D-F9553F36D964.jpeg
Im supposed to go see this stone in person. The proportions don’t align with what a lot of you recommend. Should I bother?

Yeah, you can tell from this picture that while this may be an E, it will look darker/grayer than a well-cut gem even several color grades lower.
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
It has been rejected.
How about this one?
Gia5201428867 5F91DB59-F6F3-4689-832A-5A9589DB622C.png
 

Attachments

  • F0F28DE9-8525-4905-B99B-5676C8876FE6.png
    F0F28DE9-8525-4905-B99B-5676C8876FE6.png
    149.8 KB · Views: 5

ringo865

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 14, 2014
Messages
2,621
This stone ^ does not meet the criteria for a well-cut diamond

54-57 table
60-62 depth
34-35 crown
40.6-40.8 pavilion
75-80 lower girdle facets (LGF's)
GIA or AGS lab report
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,127
Thoughts on this? Clarity is a downgrade but numbers seem well cut 344FC892-2FE2-48DF-A02A-C30CF7BF304A.jpeg

I hate to keep rejecting stuff, but I would not buy this one either.

First off, when it comes to clarity, size matters. Generally speaking, the larger you go the higher clarity you want. VS2 is pretty safe for being eye clean up to 2 carats. Some SI1 stones will make it also. However, very few SI2's are going to be eye clean in this size.

On top of that concern, I see this stone has a big knot that is on the table! It's the grade setting inclusion to boot. Huge clouds on the outside edges with additional clouds, pinpoints & surface graining not shown. That knot alone would make me reject this stone. But I suspect you also have transparency issues as well.

Also I noticed it's not a 3x. Both the polish & cut is only very good (VG). The knot is likely contributing to the downgraded cut quality as the knot is a problem.

If I ignore all the above, technically the proportions work a little better, but I would reject with a very shallow 40.4 pavilion combined with a shallow 34 crown. Generally speaking you want an inverse relationship between the crown & pavilion. So steep crown/shallow pavilion, or vice versa. Some popular combos would be 35/40.6, 34.5/40.8 or 34/40.8.

While not technically a 60/60 stone (meaning table & depth both equal 60%), it is nearing that style. All things considered, it's going to size well because of the proportions but it's going to have a much different personality than using the proportion set I gave you earlier. If the stone didn't have the other issues already pointed out, then it would be better fitted for earrings or a pendant.


1368469109.png
 

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
Thank you all. Don’t worry about the rejections, it has helped immensely. hope I made a good choice. I’ve come down to this diamond and put a deposit at the shop.
 

Attachments

  • B600C989-D02C-4F2C-968E-9FF0431D77E2.png
    B600C989-D02C-4F2C-968E-9FF0431D77E2.png
    169 KB · Views: 6
  • E6AEA3E3-AEC3-401C-879C-6CD0F6BE9DAD.png
    E6AEA3E3-AEC3-401C-879C-6CD0F6BE9DAD.png
    180.9 KB · Views: 6
  • F5646166-6D7B-496F-8878-36EB1E1AA365.png
    F5646166-6D7B-496F-8878-36EB1E1AA365.png
    160.8 KB · Views: 5

newshopper88

Rough_Rock
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Messages
17
Under loupe it was actually one of the cleanest SI I have checked, even more so than a vs2 I posted earlier which had black specs on the table
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,127
Short Version:
This is the best stone you've presented and I think it's worth consideration. I think you could be very happy if the price is right and meets all your other requirements.

I would want to check the edge to edge brightness in the store. This can easily be done by inspecting the stone in the bright lighting and then moving the stone under the counter where it is more dim. If you aren't getting light return edge to edge, the diamond will "shrink". I will link a video that shows you what I mean. FYI, before doing this test, advise/ask your sales rep so they don't freak out.

Long/Nerd Version:
Sounds like you have some positives going for this stone. It's actually a triple excellent (3x), whereas some of the others weren't. Also, it sounds like it's an eye clean SI1, which is great and helps you boost the other C's with your available dollars.

Although this steeper 36 crown falls outside the recommended range, it does have an inverse relationship and pairs well with the shallow 40.6 pavilion. Looking further at the pavilion I see the pavilion depth is listed as 42.5%.

Mathematically, the pavilion depth on a perfect averaged 40.6 comes up to 42.86% depth, which gets rounded to 43% on the GIA report. When you consider culet, any value > 0 will decrease that 42.86 depth. However, the GIA report of this stone says "none" and I am taking at face value that it equals 0 exactly. So the 42.86 depth would hold -- again, assuming it was a perfect averaged 40.6, which we know is extremely unlikely because of GIA gross rounding.

My point of nerding out on you is I think some of the actual pavilion angles are < 40.6 which would compliment the 36 crown a little nicer, and consequently I am speculating this is why we are seeing the pavilion depth reported at 42.5% as opposed to the typical 43% on the GIA report.

I do wish the table was a smaller, as it's holding the crown height to 15% overall when you consider the crown/pavilion relationship. A higher crown height is nice because the upper girdle facets will be larger and this is where rainbow light is produced. Without getting to geeky, higher crowns can equal bigger fire. An advantage to a 36 crown on a smaller table would be a 16%+ crown height. Still 15% is respectable.

Overall, the stone is pulling a 1.8 on the HCA which is a good score. The spread comes back as very good, which is expected. Ideally, we'd like to see the other 3 categories excellent but I still think this is a nice stone and definitely the best that you have presented thus far.

If you want to go deeper in the rabbit hole:
https://www.pricescope.com/education/diamond-cut/diamond-performance
https://www.diamond-cut.com.au/09_brill.htm

For grins, when shopping for my wife's stone I considered a 36/40.6 stone, but with a 56 table and more depth (due to smaller table). It came back as a 1.7 HCA with EX light return & fire, but VG on scintillation & spread. Granted, it was very, very well cut. It was offered by WF and while not an ACA, it was a "near miss". Advanced images were great. The video reveals a total sparkle bomb. Reviews with the WF staff had them scratching their heads as they said it was very firey and did well even when put next to ACA's.

Obviously I cannot guarantee the stone you are looking at will be exactly this way as there are so many variables we don't know. However, I wanted to share so you'd have an idea what it could potentially look like, or at least be close to looking like.

https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-3945630.htm?a_aid=PS


Screen Shot 2021-05-08 at 2.14.05 PM.png
 

sledge

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
5,127
I might add the spread difference between the JA TH and WF ACA stones that @tyty333 presented in post #11 are very minimal, despite some carat weight difference.

I'm not sure how those compared price wise to this last stone you presented but based on the initial information it seems like they would still be strong contenders.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    The Jewelry of Disney's Cruella
    The Jewelry of Disney's Cruella
    He Said, "Yes!"
    He Said, "Yes!"
    Father's Day Jewelry: 2021
    Father's Day Jewelry: 2021

Need expert help finding that diamonds?

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top